HHMI Newsgroup Archives
From: heb_roots_chr@mail.geocities.com
To: "Hebraic Heritage Newsgroup"<heb_roots_chr@geocities.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 23:09:48 +0000
Subject: The Prophets Amos and Jeremiah
>From JUICE Administration juice at INTERNET
juice@jer1.co.il
To: prophecy at INTERNET
prophecy@jer1.co.il
Subject: JUICE Prophecy 10
Sender owner-prophecy@jer1.co.il
************************************************************************
WZO Student and Academic Department
Jewish University In CyberspacE (JUICE)
juice@wzo.org.il birnbaum@wzo.org.il
http://www.wzo.org.il
***********************************************************************
Course: Of Prophecy and Prophets
Lecture: 10/12
Lecturer: Ruth Walfish
email: walfish@shani.net
Elisha represents the last of the great "early" prophets. After him, we are told little about the lives of the later
prophets, their personal histories, and the miracles that they may have performed. Why is there an abrupt change between the
early and latter prophets? In what ways are they truly different from each other? Do they represent contradictory
points of view, or possibly different approaches to the purpose of prophecy?
Let us begin by noting that the latter prophets rarely prophecy to individuals, but rather relate to groups of
people, be it a particular class or sect of society, or to the nation as a whole. On occasion, they may address other
nations, who usually, though not always, have some connection to b`nei yisrael. The underlying assumption regarding b`nei
yisrael is that they are bound by a covenant to Hashem, which they must uphold. The nations of the world , on the other
hand, are held to a standard of basic morality, and the God of Israel is a universal Being, who is their judge, as well.
Clearly, then, the Israelite prophet is adopting a more public and universal role. In addition, the prophet writes down his
prophecies, or has his disciples do so. One of the most important intellectual changes taking place in this period is
the recognition that prophecy has ramifications not just for its own time, but for future generations as well. As the
rabbis put it, an oracle that was significant only in its own historical context was not recorded, but one with enduring
importance was written down and saved for posterity. Some scholars maintain that little prophecy was written down before
this period, and only now, in the eighth century B.C.E., do prophets, or their disciples, write down the contents of the
prophecies. While there was still oral communication (and some of the rhetorical devices of the prophecies indicate that they
were spoken), the emphasis has shifted to the writing and preservation of the content.
It would seem that the prophet is taking on a grander role. He reaches out to larger numbers of people, and he is not
constrained by the moment, but understands his message to be timeless. What was the cause of this shift? There is reason to
ascribe it in part to the historical context in which the prophets lived. The eighth century was a time of great turmoil
in both the northern and southern kingdoms. Aram posed a serious threat to them both, but was defeated by the new
rising star, Assyria. But before Assyria held sway, both Israelite kingdoms enjoyed victories against their enemies,
and conquered additional lands. Jeroboam, son of Joash, greatly extended the boundaries of his kingdom, and accrued
much wealth. His counterpart in Judea, Uziah, also succeeded in his conquests. As a result, the ruling classes were greatly
enriched, but the new-found wealth did not filter down to the poor. The prophets decried the widening of the gap between
rich and poor, and accused the wealthy of indifference, and even cruelty, to their less fortunate brethren. The prophets
no longer turned primarily to kings to redress wrongs; perhaps the prophets had given up on them. They now addressed the
people directly, emphasizing their responsibility to their fellow Israelites. The prophets also referred to the political
and military situation, warning their people that current events were directly related to their moral behavior. Were
they to persist in abusing the poor and weak, they would be punished by God, who would use the enemy as his instrument of
wrath. This idea is not necessarily bound to one moment in history, or to one geographical area. It goes beyond the here
and now, and therefore must be recorded, so that the message does not dissipate with the passage of time. In other words,
the prophets themselves understood that their prophecies had an intrinsic importance; this was not a characteristic of the
prophecies of the early prophets, such as Samuel, Nathan, and Elijah, who waged their religious battles in very specific
historical contexts, and related to the immediate contemporary issues.
The man who is considered by scholars to be the first of the "classic" prophets (a term first coined by Yehezkel Kaufman,
alluding to the timelessness of the prophetic message) is Amos, from Tekoa. Though he lived in Judea, he prophesied in
the northern kingdom. We will analyze some of his writings, with an eye to his perspective on prophecy and its functions.
His first words are, "The Lord roars from Zion, and utters his voice from Jerusalem; and the pastures of the shepherds shall
mourn, and the top of the Carmel shall wither" (Amos 1, 2). What is the meaning of this opening statement? God is compared
to a lion who roars, an image that we will see amplified in chapter 3. The roar comes forth from Jerusalem. The result of
that roar is desolation, extending from the pastureland to the top of the green mountains. The roar of God has been
understood by commentators to be prophecy, meant to warn of destruction and doom, if its message goes unheeded.
Furthermore, it emerges from Jerusalem, underscoring the latter`s centrality as a religious site. (Isaiah, too,
emphasizes Jerusalem, in his initiatory revelation.) In Amos` initial oracle, prophecy evokes associations of destruction
and death. In addition, it hints at Amos` intention to do battle against those sites in Israel that were set up to rival
Jerusalem.
As stated above, Amos continues to use the image of the roaring lion, in the framework of a series of rhetorical
questions (3, 3-8):
"Will two walk together, Except they have agreed? Will a lion roar in the forest, When he has no prey? Will a young lion
give forth his voice out of his den, If he has taken nothing? Will a bird fall in a snare upon the earth, Where there is no
lure for it? Will a snare spring up from the ground, and have taken nothing at all? Shall the horn be blown in the city, And
the people not tremble? Shall evil fall a city, and the Lord has not done it? For the Lord God will do nothing, But He
reveals His counsel to His servants the prophets. The lion has roared, who will not fear? The Lord God has spoken, Who can
but prophesy?"
Most of the images employed by Amos resound ominously. Traps are being laid, and the prey will be hunted and caught. Evil
is awaiting the city. There is a grand cause of all these events, and the wise man will see reality for what it is (some
of these questions are similar to sayings of the Proverbs). Just as the prophet must obey the divine command, and transmit
God`s words to the people, so must the people be open to his message, and heed the word of the prophets. Despite the dour
message, there is comfort; God cares about His people, and sends His prophets to warn them of what awaits them in the
future. They can avoid the dire consequences of their deeds if they change their ways.
In an earlier oracle, Amos lists the loving deeds that God has done for His people, such as taking them out of Egypt. Among
them, he includes, "And I raised up of your sons for prophets, and of your young men for Nazirites" (2, 11). But the
people`s reaction was one of ingratitude and rebelliousness: "But you gave the Nazirites wine to drink; And commanded the
prophets, saying:`Prophesy not`" (2, 12). Rather than hearing the warnings of the prophets, and their words of rebuke, the
audience prefers to send them packing. This is precisely what happens to Amos himself, based on a brief biographical section
in 7, 10-17. Amos prophecies the downfall of the improperly chosen sites of Israel for ritual purposes, and the fall of
the house of Jeroboam. Amaziah, the priest of Beth-el, orders Amos to go back to Judea, where he can earn his bread by
prophesying to the Judeans. Amos rejoins by saying that he is not "a prophet, neither was I a prophet`s son .. and the Lord
took me from following the flock, and the Lord said to me, `Go prophesy to my people Israel.`" It is not that Amos is denying
the fact that he is a prophet; rather, he wishes to point out that prophesying is not his chosen occupation. He has better
ways of making a living. When God designated him to be his prophet, he had no choice but to accept the commission. Men
like Amaziah cannot appreciate the self-sacrifice involved in becoming a prophet. They view everything from the perspective
of vested interests. Amos` conviction in his own chosenness gives him the strength to stand up to so powerful and well-
placed an individual as Amaziah (see vrs. 16-17).
It is interesting to compare Amos` presention of prophecy with that of a later prophet, Jeremiah. The latter is hounded much
more severely than the former, to the point where he is imprisoned and even threatened with death. He turns to God,
describing to Him the tortuous path that he must take. On the one hand, he is an object of derision, mocked by the public
who make light of his pessimistic sayings. On the other hand, if he tries to contain the prophecy, "Then there is in my
heart as it were a burning fire shut up in my bones" (Jeremiah 20, 9). Later on (23, 29), Jeremiah quotes God as saying, "Is
not My word like fire?...And like a hammer that breaks the rock in pieces?" He describes himself as in a state of
drunkenness, "all my bones shake... because of the Lord, and because of His holy words" (23, 9).
Both Amos and Jeremiah speak of the experience of being chosen as a messenger by God. Both confront animosity and resistance
to their missions. Both feel compelled to continue, despite the threats, or veiled threats, made against them. But their
perspectives on prophecy itself differ somewhat. Amos describes prophecy in an almost deterministic way. There is a
cause and there is an effect. If there is imminent danger, God will surely inform His loyal servants, the prophets, who will
dutifully hand over the message. Jeremiah, on the other hand, describes an inner turmoil, a struggle within the prophet
himself, who tries to withold the divine message. Prophecy is so powerful an experience, so overwhelming, that it consumes
and conquers the prophet, who must succumb to it. Even if the word of the Lord "is made a reproach" (20, 8), he cannot hold
it in.
Perhaps we can relate the differences between the two to the circumstances in which they are operating. Jeremiah is
designated from birth to be a prophet (see Jeremiah 1, 4-5). He is living in a time of impending destruction, with the very
existence of the Temple in danger. As a priest, he is especially sensitive to the part that the Temple plays in the
life of the nation. In addition, he is prophesying among the people with whom he lives, and it is his own friends who are
slandering him (20,10). Amos, on the other hand, is prophesying in the northern kingdom, far from home. While his
message is also one of destruction, the Temple and the southern kingdom are not in mortal danger. By his own
admission, he was not a prophet from birth; he engaged in agriculture until his calling. Prophecy would seem to be less
inherent in his personality, and the challenges that he faces are less threatening. This may explain his more
straightforward and less emotional view of prophecy. We have dedicated much space to the issue of prophecy in the
writings of Amos. It is equally as important to note the most prevalent themes that appear in them. Amos is a prophet who
decries the exploitation of the poor and needy, and who mocks the insatiability of the rich and powerful. Not only do the
latter spend their days seeking pleasure and revelry, but they also have a stranglehold on the judiciary, so that the weak
have no recourse to justice. Amos also rebukes the people for their attitude to sacrifices and ritual. Instead of caring for
the destitute, the established classes engage in sacrifices, putatively atoning for their sins. But the real atonement is
first and foremost in healing social ills; only after having done that, will God receive their sacrifices with grace.
Amos is a prophet of doom, but he is also a prophet of comfort and consolation. He predicts the ingathering of the exiles,
the rebuilding of the house of David, and the renewed prosperity of the land. He promises, in the name of Hashem,
that the land will not be lost again. His words have served as a comfort throughout the years of exile, and they come alive
in the modern state of Israel. It is interesting how the message of the prophet from Tekoa, containing both
chastisement and love, has not lost its timeliness.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hosted by Virtual Jerusalem (www.virtual.co.il). The Jewish SuperSite
with 8+ million hits monthly, 150+ email lists and 180,000 subscribers.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Return to
Newsgroup Archives Main Page
Return to our Main Webpage
�2011
Hebraic Heritage Ministries International. Designed by
Web Design by JB.