Help PreviousNext

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia

AM


AMAD

a'-mad (`am`adh): A town in northern Palestine, which fell to the tribe of Asher in the division of the land (Josh 19:26). The modern ruin `Amud near Accho may be the site.


AMADATHA; AMADATHUS

a-mad'-a-tha, a-mad'-a-thus (Additions to Esther 12:6).

See AMAN ;HAMMEDATHA .


AMAIN

a-man' (translated from the Greek eis phugen hormesan, "they rushed to flight"): The word is composed of the prefix "a" and the word "main," meaning "force." The expression is used by Milton, Parker, et al., but in Biblical literature found only in 2 Macc 12:22 where used to describe the flight of Timotheus and his army after he suffered defeat at the hands of Judas Maccabee ("They fled amain," i.e. violently and suddenly).


AMAL

a'-mal (`amal, "toiler"): A son of Helem of the tribe of Asher (1 Ch 7:35).


AMALEK

am'-a-lek (`amaleq): The son, by his concubine Timna, of Eliphaz, the eldest son of Esau. He was one of the chiefs (the King James Version dukes) of Edom (Gen 36:12,16).

See AMALEKITE .


AMALEK; AMALEKITE

am'-a-lek, a-mal'-e-kit, am'-a-lek-it (`amaleq, `amaleqi): A tribe dwelling originally in the region south of Judah, the wilderness of et-Tih where the Israelites came into conflict with them. They were nomads as a people dwelling in that tract would naturally be. When they joined the Midianites to invade Israel they came "with their cattle and their tents" (Jdg 6:3-5). They are not to be identified with the descendants of Esau (Gen 36:12,16) because they are mentioned earlier, in the account of the invasion of Chedorlaomer (Gen 14:7) and in Balaam's prophecy (Nu 24:20) Amalek is called "the first of the nations," which seems to refer to an early existence. We are uncertain of their origin, for they do not appear in the list of nations found in Gen 10. They do not seem to have had any relationship with the tribes of Israel, save as, we may surmise, some of the descendants of Esau were incorporated into the tribe. It is probable that they were of Semitic stock though we have no proof of it.

The first contact with Israel was at Rephidim, in the wilderness of Sinai, where they made an unprovoked attack and were defeated after a desperate conflict (Ex 17:8-13; Dt 25:17,18). On account of this they were placed under the ban and Israel was commanded to exterminate them (Dt 25:19; 1 Sam 15:2,3). The next encounter of the two peoples was when the Israelites attempted to enter Canaan from the west of the Dead Sea. The spies had reported that the Amalekites were to be found in the south, in connection with the Hittites, Jebusites and Amorites (Nu 13:29). The Israelites at first refused to advance, but later determined to do so contrary to the will of God and the command of Moses. They were met by Amalek and the Canaanites and completely defeated (Nu 14:39-45). Amalek is next found among the allies of Moab in their attack upon Israel in the days of Eglon (Jdg 3:13). They were also associated with the Midianites in their raids upon Israel (Jdg 6:3), and they seemed to have gained a foothold in Ephraim, or at least a branch of them, in the hill country (Jdg 5:14; 12:15), but it is evident that the great body of them still remained in their old habitat, for when Saul made war upon them he drove them toward Shur in the wilderness toward Egypt (1 Sam 15:1-9). David also found them in the same region (1 Sam 27:8; 30:1). After this they seem to have declined, and we find, in the days of Hezekiah, only a remnant of them who were smitten by the Simeonites at Mount Seir (1 Ch 4:41-43). They are once mentioned in Psalms in connection with other inveterate enemies of Israel (Ps 83:7). The hatred Inspired by the Amalekites is reflected in the passages already mentioned which required their utter destruction. Their attack upon them when they were just escaped from Egypt and while they were struggling through the wilderness made a deep impression upon the Israelites which they never forgot, and the wrath of David upon the messenger who brought him news of the death of Saul and Jonathan, declaring himself to be the slayer of Saul, was no doubt accentuated by his being an Amalekite (2 Sam 1:1-16).

H. Porter


AMAM

a'-mam ('amam): An unidentified town in southern Palestine, which fell to Judah In the allotment of the land; occurs only in Josh 15:26.


AMAN

a'-man (Aman; Codex Vaticanus reads Adam): Tobit 14:10; Additions to Esther 12:6; 16:10,17, probably in each case for Haman, the arch-enemy of the Jews in the canonical Book of Esther (compare Est 3:1 with Additions to Esther 12:6). In Additions to Esther (16:10) Aman is represented as a Macedonian, in all other points corresponding to the Haman of the Book of Esther.


AMANA

a-ma'-na, ('amanah): A mountain mentioned in Song 4:8 along with Lebanon, Senir and Hermon. The name probably means the "firm," or "constant." "From the top of Amana" is mistranslated by the Septuagint apo arches pisteos. The Amana is most naturally sought in the Anti-Lebanon, near the course of the river Abana, or Amana (see ABANAH ). Another possible identification is with Mt. Amanus in the extreme north of Syria.


AMARIAH

am-a-ri'-a ('amaryah and 'amaryahu, "the Lord has said"; compare HPN , 180, 285). (1) A Levite in the line of Aaron-Eleazar; a son of Meraioth and grandfather of Zadok (1 Ch 6:7,52) who lived in David's time. Compare Zadok (2 Sam 15:27, etc.) also Ant, VIII, i, 3 and X, viii, 6. (2) A Levite in the line of Kohath-Hebron referred to in 1 Ch 23:19 and 24:23 at the time when David divided the Levites into courses. (3) A Levite in the line of Aaron-Eleazar; a son of Azariah who "executed the priest's office in the house that Solomon built" (1 Ch 6:10 f). Compare Ezr 7:3 where in the abbreviated list this Amariah is mentioned as an ancestor of Ezra. See AMARIAS (1 Esdras 8:2; 2 Esdras 1:2) and number (4) of this article (4) Chief priest and judge "in all matters of Yahweh" appointed by Jehoshaphat (2 Ch 19:11). Possibly identical with Amariah, number (3). (5) A descendant of Judah in the line of Perez and an ancestor of Ataiah who lived in Jerusalem after the Babylonian exile (Neh 11:4). Compare Imri (1 Ch 9:4) and number (7) of this article, which Amariah seems to be of the same family, (6) A Levite and an assistant of Kore who was appointed by Hezekiah to distributed the "oblations of Yahweh" to their brethren (2 Ch 31:15). (7) A son of Bani who had married a foreign woman (Ezr 10:42). See number (5) of this article (8)A priest who with Nehemiah sealed the covenant (Neh 10:3); he had returned to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel (Neh 12:2) and was the father of Jehohanan (compare Hanani, Ezr 10:20), priest at the time of Joiakim (Neh 12:13). Compare Immer (Ezr 2:37; 10:20; Neh 7:40) and also Emmeruth (the King James Version "Meruth," 1 Esdras 5:24). (9) An ancestor of Zephaniah, the prophet (Zeph 1:1).

A. L. Breslich


AMARIAS

am-a-ri'-as (A, Amarias; B, Amartheias) = Amariah number 3: An ancestor of Ezra (1 Esdras 8:2; 2 Esdras 1:2).


AMARNA, TELL EL-

tel-el-a-mar'-na.

See TELL EL-AMARNA .


AMASA

a-ma'-sa (`amasa', or read `ammishai, i.e. `am yishai, "people of Jesse"): The form `amasa', is based upon a mistaken etymology (from = `amac "to burden").

(1) According to 2 Sam 17:25, Amasa is the son of Abigail, the sister of Zeruiah and David, and Ithra, an Israelite; but another source, 1 Ch 2:17, calls his father Jether the Ishmaelite. He was a nephew of David and a cousin of Absalom, who made him commander of the army of rebellion. When the uprising had been quelled, David, in order to conciliate Amasa, promised him the position held by Joab; the latter had fallen from favor (2 Sam 19:13 ff). When a new revolt broke out under Sheba, the son of Bichri (2 Sam 20), Amasa was entrusted with the task of assembling the men of Judah. But Joab was eager for revenge upon the man who had obtained the office of command that he coveted. When Amasa met Joab at Gibeon, the latter murdered him while pretending to salute (2 Sam 20:8-10; 1 Ki 2:5).

(2) Son of Hadlai, of the Bene 'Ephrayim ("Children of Ephraim"), who, obeying the words of the prophet Oded, refused to consider as captives the Judeans who had been taken from Ahaz, king of Judah, by the victorious Israelites under the leadership of Pekah (2 Ch 28:12).

H. J. Wolf


AMASAI

a-ma'-si (`amasay, perhaps rather to be read `ammishay; so Wellhausen, IJG, II, 24, n.2):

(1) A name in the genealogy of Kohath, son of Elkanah, a Levite of the Kohathite family (compare 1 Ch 6:25; 2 Ch 29:12).

(2) Chief of the captains who met David at Ziklag and tendered him their allegiance. Some have identified him with Amasa and others with Abishai, who is called Abshai in 1 Ch 11:20 m (compare 1 Ch 18:12). The difficulty is that neither Amasa nor Abishai occupied the rank of the chief of thirty according to the lists in 2 Sam 23 and 1 Ch 11, the rank to which David is supposed to have appointed into (compare 1 Ch 12:18).

(3) One of the trumpet-blowing priests who greeted David when he brought back the Ark of the Covenant (compare 1 Ch 15:24).


AMASHSAI

a-mash'-si `amashcay, probably a textual error for `amashay; the ("s") implies a reading `-M-C-Y, based on a mistaken derivation from `-M-C. The original reading may have been `ammishay; compare AMASAI ): Amashsai is a priestly name in the post-exilic list of inhabitants of Jerusalem (Neh 11:13; Maasai, 1 Ch 9:12); the reading in Chronicles is ma`asay, the King James Version "Maasiai," the Revised Version (British and American) "Maasai."


AMASIAH

am-a-si'-a (`amacyah, "Yah bears"): One of the captains of Jehoshaphat (compare 2 Ch 17:16).


AMATH; AMATHIS

a'-math, am'-a-this (1 Macc 12:25).

See HAMATH .


AMATHEIS

am-a-the'-is.

See EMATHEIS .


AMAZED

a-mazd': A term which illustrates the difficulty of expressing in one English word the wide range of startled emotion, wonder, astonishment, awe, covered, in the Old Testament, by four Hebrew words and in the New Testament by as many Greek words. Its Scripture originals range in meaning from amazement accompanied with terror and trembling to an astonishment full of perplexity, wonder, awe and joyous surprise. It is the word especially used to show the effect of Christ's miracles, teaching, character and Divine personality on those who saw and heard Him, and were made conscious of His supernatural power (Mt 12:23: "All the multitudes were amazed"). The miracles of Pentecost and the Holy Spirit's bestowal of the gift of tongues produced the same universal wonder (Acts 2:7: "They were all amazed and marveled").

Dwight M. Pratt


AMAZIAH

am-a-zi'-a ('amatsyah, 'amatsyahu, "Yahweh is mighty"; 2 Ki 14:1-20; 2 Ch 25). Son of Jehoash, and tenth king of Judah. Amaziah had a peaceable accession at the age of 25. A depleted treasury, a despoiled palace and temple, and a discouraged people were among the consequences of his father's war with Hazael, king of Syria. When settled on the throne, Amaziah brought to justice the men who had assassinated his father. Amaziah verbal citation of Dt 24:16 in 2 Ki 14:6, forbidding the punishment of children for a father's offense, shows that the laws of this book were then known, and were recognized as authoritative, and, in theory, as governing the nation. His accession may be dated circa 812 (some put later).

1. The Edomite War:

The young king's plan for the rehabilitation of his people was the restoration of the kingdom's military prestige, so severely lowered in his father's reign. A militia army, composed of all the young men above 20 years of age, was first organized and placed upon a war footing (2 Ch 25:5; the number given, 300,000, is not a reliable one). Even this not being considered a large enough force to effect the project, 100 talents of silver were sent to engage mercenary troops for the expedition from Israel. When these came, a man of God strongly dissuaded the king from relying on them (2 Ch 25:7 ff). When this was communicated to the soldiers, and they were sent back unemployed, it roused them to "fierce anger" (2 Ch 25:10).

2. Its Occasion:

Amaziah's purpose in making these extensive preparations for war, in a time of profound peace, is clear to the Southeast of Judah lay the Edomite state, with its capital at Petra. For many years Edom had been subject to Jehoshaphat, and a Hebrew "deputy" had governed it (1 Ki 22:47). In the reign of his son and successor, Jehoram, a confederacy of Philistines, Arabians and Edomites took Libnah and made a raid on Jerusalem. A band of these penetrated the palace, which they plundered, abducted some women, and murdered all the young princes but the youngest (2 Ch 21:17; 22:1). The public commotion and distress caused by such an event may be seen reflected in the short oracle of the prophet Obadiah, uttered against Edom, if, with some, Obadiah's date is put thus early

3. The Victory in the Valley of Salt:

From that time "Edom .... made a king over themselves" (2 Ch 21:8), and for fifty years following were practically independent. It was this blot on Jerusalem and the good name of Judah that Amaziah determined to wipe out. The army of retaliation went forward, and after a battle in the Valley of Salt, south of the Dead Sea, in which they were the victors, moved on to Petra. This city lies in a hollow, shut in by mountains, and approached only by a narrow ravine, through which a stream of water flows. Amaziah took it "by storm" (such is Ewald's rendering of "by war," in 2 Ki 14:7). Great execution was done, many of the captives being thrown from the rock, the face of which is now covered with rock-cut tombs of the Greek-Roman age.

4. Apostasy and Its Punishment:

The campaign was thus entirely successful, but had evil results. Flushed with victory, Amaziah brought back the gods of Edom, and paid them worship. For this act of apostasy, he was warned of approaching destruction (2 Ch 25:14-17). Disquieting news soon came relating to the conduct of the troops sent back to Samaria. From Beth-horon in the south to the border of the northern state they had looted the villages and killed some of the country people who had attempted to defend their property (2 Ch 25:13). To Amaziah's demand for reparation, Jehoash's answer was the contemptuous one of the well-known parable of the Thistle and the Cedar.

5. Battle of Beth-shemesh:

War was now inevitable. The kings "looked one another in the face," in the valley of Beth-shemesh, where there is a level space, suitable to the movements of infantry. Judah was utterly routed, and the king himself taken prisoner. There being no treasures in the lately despoiled capital, Jehoash contented himself with taking hostages for future good behavior, and with breaking down 400 cubits of the wall of Jerusalem at the Northwest corner of the defense (2 Ki 14:13,14; 2 Ch 25:22-24).

6. Closing Years and Tragical End:

Amaziah's career as a soldier was now closed. He outlived Jehoash of Israel "fifteen years" (2 Ki 14:17). His later years were spent in seclusion and dread, and had a tragical ending. The reason for his unpopularity is not far to seek. The responsibility for the war with Jehoash is by the inspired writer placed upon the shoulders of Amaziah (2 Ki 14:9-11). It was he who "would not hear." The quarrel between the kings was one which it was not beyond the power of diplomacy to remedy, but no brotherly attempt to heal the breach was made by either king. When the results of the war appeared, it could not be but that the author of the war should be called upon to answer for them. So deep was his disgrace and so profound the sense of national humiliation, that a party in the state determined on Amaziah's removal, so soon as there was another to take his place. The age of majority among the Hebrew kings was 16, and when Amaziah's son was of this age, the conspiracy against his life grew so strong and open that he fled to Lachish. Here he was followed and killed; his body being insultingly carried to Jerusalem on horses, and not conveyed in a litter or coffin (2 Ki 14:19,20; 2 Ch 25:27,28). He was 54 years old and had reigned for 29 years. The Chronicler (2 Ch 26:1) hardly conceals the popular rejoicings at the exchange of sovereigns, when Uzziah became king.

In 2 Ch 25:28 is a copyist's error by which we read "in the city of Judah," instead of "in the city of David," as in the corresponding passage in Kings. The singular postscript to the record of Amaziah in 2 Ki 14:22 is intended to mark the fact that while the port of Elath on the Red Sea fell before the arms, in turn, of Amaziah and of his son Uzziah, it was the latter who restored it to Judah, as a part of its territory. Amaziah is mentioned in the royal genealogy of 1 Ch 3:12, but not in that of Mt 1. There is a leap here from Jehoram to Uzziah, Ahaziah, Jehoash and Amaziah being omitted.

W. Shaw Caldecott


AMBASSADOR

am-bas'-a-dor (mal'akh, "messenger"; 'luts, "interpreter"; tsir, "to go"; hence a messenger; presbeuo, "to act as an ambassador," literally, to be older): An ambassador is an official representative of a king or government, as of Pharaoh (Isa 30:4); of the princes of Babylon (2 Ch 32:31); of Neco, king of Egypt (2 Ch 35:21); of the messengers of peace sent by Hezekiah, king of Judah, to Sennacherib, king of Assyria (Isa 33:7). The same Hebrew term is used of the messengers sent by Jacob to Esau (Gen 32:3); by Moses to the king of Edom (Nu 20:14). For abundant illustration consult "Messenger" (mal'akh) in any concordance. See CONCORDANCE . The inhabitants of Gibeon made themselves pretended ambassadors to Joshua in order to secure by deceit the protection of a treaty ("covenant") (Josh 9:4).

In the New Testament the term is used in a figurative sense. As the imprisoned representative of Christ at Rome Paul calls himself "an ambassador in chains" (Eph 6:20); and in 2 Cor 5:20 includes, with himself, all ministers of the gospel, as "ambassadors .... on behalf of Christ," commissioned by Him as their sovereign Lord, with the ministry of reconciling the world to God. The Bible contains no finer characterization of the exalted and spiritual nature of the minister's vocation as the representative of Jesus Christ, the King of kings, and Saviour of the world.

Dwight M. Pratt


AMBASSAGE

am'-ba-saj (presbeia, "an embassy," a body of ambassadors on the message entrusted to them): Twice used by Christ (1) in the parable of the Pounds, of the citizens who hated the nobleman and sent an ambassage, refusing to have him reign over them, thus illustrating those who willfully rejected His own spiritual sovereignty and kingdom (Lk 19:14); (2) of a weak king who sends to a stronger an ambassage to ask conditions of peace (Lk 14:32). Not used elsewhere in the Bible.


AMBER

am'-ber.

See STONES ,PRECIOUS .


AMBITIOUS

am-bish'-us (philotimeomai, "to be strongly desirous," "strive earnestly," "make it one's aim"): Given as a marginal reading in Rom 15:20 ("being ambitious to bring good tidings"), 2 Cor 5:9 ("We are ambitious, whether at home or absent, to be well-pleasing unto him"), and 1 Thess 4:11 ("that ye be ambitious to be quiet").


AMBUSH

am'-boosh ('arabh, "to set an ambush"; ma'arabh, "an ambush"): A military stratagem in which a body of men are placed in concealment to surprise an enemy unawares, or to attack a point when temporarily undefended. This stratagem was employed successfully by Joshua at Ai (Josh 8). Jeremiah calls upon the Medes to "set up a standard against the walls of Babylon, make the watch strong, set the watchmen, prepare the ambushes" (Jer 51:12).


AMBUSHMENT

am'-boosh-ment (as above) has now disappeared in 2 Ch 20:22, where the Revised Version (British and American) gives for "ambushment" "liers-in-wait." It still remains in 2 Ch 13:13 where both the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American) render the Hebrew noun "ambushment."


AMEN

a-men' (in ritual speech and in singing a-men', a'men) ('amen; amen, = "truly," "verily"): Is derived from the reflexive form of a verb meaning "to be firm," or "to prop." It occurs twice as a noun in Isa 65:16, where we have (the King James Version, the Revised Version (British and American)) "God of truth." This rendering implies the pointing 'omen or 'emun i.e. "truth," or "faithfulness," a reading actually suggested by Cheyne and adopted by others. "Amen" is generally used as an adverb of assent or confirmation--fiat, "so let it be." In Jer 28:6 the prophet endorses with it the words of Hananiah. Amen is employed when an individual or the whole nation confirms a covenant or oath recited in their presence (Nu 5:22; Dt 27:15 ff; Neh 5:13, etc.). It also occurs at the close of a psalm or book of psalms, or of a prayer.

That "Amen" was appended to the doxology in the early church is evident both from Paul and Rev, and here again it took the form of a response by the hearers. The ritual of the installation of the Lamb (Rev 5:6-14) concludes with the Amen of the four beasts, and the four and twenty elders. It is also spoken after "Yea: I come quickly" (Rev 22:20). And that Revelation reflects the practice of the church on earth, and not merely of an ideal, ascended community in heaven, may be concluded from 1 Cor 14:16, whence we gather that the lay brethren were expected to say "Amen" to the address. (See Weizsacker's The Apostolic Age of the Christian Church, English translation,II , 289.)

James Millar


AMERCE

a-murs': Found in the King James Version only in Dt 22:19, "And they shall amerce him in an hundred shekels of silver." Amerce is a legal term derived from the French (a = "at"; merci = "mercy," i.e. literally, "at the mercy" (of the court)). Here it is used of the imposing of a fine, according to the Law of Moses, upon the man who has been proven by the Elders to have brought a false charge against the virginity of the maid he has married by saying to the father, "I found not thy daughter a maid."


AMERICAN REVISED VERSION

a-mer'-i-kan re-vizd' vur'-shun.

1. History:

On July 7, 1870, it was moved in the Lower House of the Convocation of Canterbury that in the work of revision the cooperation of American divines be invited. This resolution was assented to, and on December 7, 1871, the arrangements were completed. Under the general presidency of Dr. Philip Schaff, an Old Testament Company of fifteen scholars was formed, with Dr. W. H. Green as chairman, and a New Testament Company of sixteen members (including Dr. Schaff), with Dr. T. D. Woolsey as chairman. Work was begun on October 4, 1872, and took the form of offering criticisms on the successive portions of the English revision as they were received. These criticisms of the American Companies were duly considered by the English Companies during the second revision and the decisions were again sent to America for criticism. The replies received were once more given consideration and, finally, the unadopted readings for which the American Companies professed deliberate preference were printed as appendices to the two Testaments as published in 1881 and 1885. These lists, however, were not regarded by the American Companies as satisfactory. In the first place, it became evident that the English Companies, on account of their instructions and for other reasons, were not willing to make changes of a certain class. Consequently the American Companies insisted on only such readings as seemed to have a real chance of being accepted. And, in the second place, the English presses hurried the last part of the work and were unwilling to allow enough time for adequate thoroughness in the preparation of the lists. But it was hoped that the first published edition of the English Revised Version would not be considered definitive and that in the future such American proposals as had stood the test of public discussion might be incorporated into the text. This hope was disappointed--the English Companies disbanded as soon as their revision was finished and their work stood as final. As a result the American Companies resolved to continue their organization. They were pledged not to issue or endorse any new revision within fourteen years after the publication of the English Revised Version, and so it was not until 1900 that the American Standard Revised Version New Testament was published. The whole Bible was issued in the following year.

2. Differences from English Revised Version:

As the complete editions of the American Standard Revised Version give a full list of the changes made, only the more prominent need be mentioned here. A few of the readings printed in the appendices to the English Revised Version were abandoned, but many new ones were introduced, including some that had been adopted while the English work was in progress but which had not been pressed. (See above.) Still, in general appearance, the American Standard Revised Version differs but slightly from the English. The most important addition is found in the page-headings. Some changes have been made in shortening the titles of the New Testament books. The printing of poetical passages in poetical form has been carried through more consistently. The paragraphs have been altered in some cases and (especially in the Old Testament) shortened. The punctuation has been simplified, especially by the more frequent use of the semi-colon. The removal of obsolete words ("magnifical," "neesings," etc.) has been effected fairly thoroughly, obsolete constructions ("jealous over," etc.) have been modernized, particularly by the use of "who" or "that" (instead of "which") for persons and "its" (instead of "his") for things. In the Old Testament "Yahweh" has been introduced systematically for the proper Hebrew word, as has "Sheol" ("Hades" in the New Testament). Certain passages too literally rendered in the English Revised Version ("reins," "by the hand of," etc.) are given in modern terms. In the New Testament, the substitution of "Holy Spirit" for "Holy Ghost" was completed throughout (in the English Revised Version it is made in some twenty places), "demons" substituted for "devils," "Teacher" for "Master," and "try" for "tempt" when there is no direct reference to wrongdoing. And so on.

3. Criticism:

It may be questioned whether the differences between the two Revisions are great enough to counterbalance the annoyance and confusion resulting from the existence of two standard versions in the same language. But, accepting the American Standard Revised Version as an accomplished fact, and acknowledging a few demerits that it has or may be thought to have in comparison with the English Revised Version (a bit of pedantry in Ps 148:12 or renderings of disputed passages such as Ps 24:6), these demerits are altogether outweighed by the superiorities--with one exception. In the Psalter, when used liturgically, the repetition of the word "Yahweh" becomes wearisome and the English Revised Version which retains "The Lord" is much preferable. Most to be regretted in the American Standard Revised Version is its extreme conservatism in the readings of the original texts. In the Old Testament the number of marginal variants was actually reduced. In the New Testament, only trivial changes are made from the so-called Revisers' Greek Text, although this text did not represent the best scholarly opinion even in 1881, while in 1900 it was almost universally abandoned (Today--in 1914--it is obsolete.) It is very unfortunate that the American Revisers did not improve on the example of their English brethren and continue their sessions after the publication of their version, for it is only by the successive revisions of published work that a really satisfactory result can be attained.

4. Apocrypha:

No American Standard Revised Version Apocrypha was attempted, a particularly unfortunate fact, as the necessity for the study of the Apocrypha has become imperative and the English Revised Version Apocrypha is not a particularly good piece of work. However, copies of the American Standard Revised Version can now be obtained with the English Revised Version Apocrypha included.

See ENGLISH VERSIONS .

Burton Scott Easton


AMETHYST

am'-e-thist.

See STONES ,PRECIOUS .


AMI

a'-mi, a'-me ('ami): Ancestor of a family among "Solomon's servants" in the Return (Ezr 2:57); the same as Amon in Neh 7:59.


AMIABLE

a'-mi-a-b'-l (yedhidh, "beloved"): Applied to the tabernacle or tent of meeting "How amiable ("lovely" the Revised Version, margin) are thy tabernacles" (Ps 84:1), the plural having reference to the subdivisions and appurtenances of the sanctuary (compare Ps 68:35). The adjective is rendered "amiable" in the sense of the French amiable, lovely; but the usage of the Hebrew word requires it to be understood as meaning "dear," "beloved." Compare "so amiable a prospect" (Sir T. Herbert), "They keep their churches so cleanly and amiable" (Howell, 1644). "What made the tabernacle of Moses lovely was not the outside, which was very mean, but what was within" (John Gill).

See TABERNACLE .

M. O. Evans


AMINADAB

a-min'-a-dab (Aminadab): the King James Version: Greek form of Amminadab (which see). Thus the Revised Version (British and American) (Mt 1:4; Lk 3:33).


AMISS

a-mis': There are two words translated "amiss" in the New Testament, atopos, referring to that which is improper or harmful (Lk 23:41; Acts 28:6), while kakos, refers to that which is evil in the sense of a disaster, then to that which is wicked, morally wrong. This latter is the use of it in Jas 4:3. The purpose of the prayer is evil, it is therefore amiss and cannot be granted (compare 2 Ch 6:37 ff).


AMITTAI

a-mit'-i ('amittay, "faithful"): The father of the prophet Jonah. He was from Gath-hepher in Zebulun (2 Ki 14:25; Jon 1:1).


AMMAH

am'-a ('ammah, "mother" or "beginning"): A hill in the territory of Benjamin (2 Sam 2:24), where Joab and Abishai halted at nightfall in their pursuit of Abner and his forces after their victory over him in the battle of Gibeon. It "lieth before Giah by the way of the wilderness of Gibeon"; but the exact location has not been identified. The same Hebrew word appears as the second part of Metheg-ammah in 2 Sam 8:1 the King James Version, but rendered "mother city" in the Revised Version (British and American), probably however not the same place as in 2 Sam 2:24.


AMMI

am'-i (`ammi, "my people"): A symbolic name given to Israel by Hosea (2:1; 2:3 in Hebrew text), descriptive of Israel in the state of restoration, and in contrast to sinful and rejected Israel, represented by Hosea's son, who was called Lo-ammi, "not my people," when born to the prophet (Hos 1:9,10). This restoration to the Divine favor is more fully described in Hos 2:21,23 in words quoted by Paul (Rom 9:25,26). The use of such figurative and descriptive names is frequent in the Old Testament; compare Isa 62:4,12.


AMMIDIOI; AMMIDOI

a-mid'-i-oi, am'-i-doi (the King James Version Ammidioi, (also with aspirate); occurring only in 1 Esdras 5:20): One of the families returning from the Babylonian Captivity in the First Return, under Zerubbabel, in 537 BC. This name is not found in the corresponding lists of the canonical books, Ezr 2 and Neh 7. Their identity is uncertain.


AMMIEL

am'-i-el (`ammi'el, "my kinsman is God"; Ameiel)): A name borne by four men in the Old Testament.

(1) One of the twelve spies sent into Canaan by Moses; son of Gemalli, of the tribe of Dan (Nu 13:12).

(2) A Benjamite, the father of Machir, a friend of David, living at Lodebar in Gilead (2 Sam 9:4,5; 17:27).

(3) Father of Bathshua (or Bathsheba), one of David's wives, who was mother of Solomon (1 Ch 3:5). In the parallel passage, 2 Sam 11:3, by transposition of the two parts of the name, he is called Eliam, meaning "my God is a kinsman."

(4) The sixth son of Obed-edom, a Levite, one of the doorkeepers of the tabernacle of God in David's life-time (1 Ch 26:5).

Edward Mack


AMMIHUD

a-mi'-hud (`ammihudh, "my kinsman is glorious"; variously in the Septuagint, Emioud or Semioud or Amioud): The name of several Old Testament persons.

(1) Father of Elishama, who in the wilderness was head of the tribe of Ephraim (Nu 1:10; 2:18; 7:48,53; 10:22; 1 Ch 7:26).

(2) Father of Shemuel, who was appointed by Moses from the tribe of Simeon to divide the land among the tribes after they should have entered Canaan (Nu 34:20).

(3) Father of Pedahel, who was appointed from the tribe of Naphtali for the same purpose as the Ammihud of (2) (Nu 34:28).

(4) In the King James Version and the Revised Version, margin for the Ammihur (`ammichur,"my kinsman is noble"), who was father of Talmai of Geshur, a little Aramaic kingdom East of the Lebanon mountains, to whom Absalom fled after the murder of his brother Amnon. The weight of evidence seems to favor the reading Ammichur (2 Sam 13:37).

(5) A descendant of Judah through the line of Perez (1 Ch 9:4).

Edward Mack


AMMIHUR

a-mi'-hur (the King James Version and the Revised Version, margin; `ammichur, "my kinsman is noble"; Emioud).

See AMMIHUD (4).


AMMINADAB

a-min'-a-dab (`amminadhabh = "my people (or my kinsman) is generous or noble"): Three persons bearing this name are mentioned in the Old Testament.

(1) In Ruth 4:19,20 and 1 Ch 2:10 Amminadab is referred to as one of David's ancestors. He was the great-grandson of Perez, a son of Judah (Gen 38:29; 46:12) and the great-grandfather of Boaz, who again was the great-grandfather of David. Aaron's wife, Elisheba, was a daughter of Amminadab (Ex 6:23), while one of the sons, namely, Nahshon, occupied an important position in the Judah-clan (Nu 1:7; 2:3; 7:12; 10:14).

(2) In the first Book of Chronicles (1 Ch 6:22) Amminadab is mentioned as a son of Kohath (and therefore a grandson of Levi) and the father of Korah. But in other genealogical passages (Ex 6:18; Nu 3:19; 1 Ch 6:2) the sons of Kohath are Amram, Izhar, Hebron and Uzziel, and in two places (Ex 6:21; 1 Ch 6:38) Izhar is mentioned as the father of Korah.

(3) According to 1 Ch (15:10,11) Amminadab was the name of a priest who took part in the removal of the ark to Jerusalem. He was the son of Uzziel, and therefore a nephew of Amminadab, son of Kohath (= Izhar).

Thomas Lewis


AMMINADIB

a-min'-a-dib (`amminadhibh): The name occurs in the King James Version and the Revised Version, margin only in one passage (Song 6:12, "the chariots of Amminadib"). In King James Version margin and the Revised Version (British and American) text, however, it is not regarded as a proper name, and the clause is rendered, "among the chariots of my princely people." Interpretations widely vary (see COMMENTARIES ).


AMMISHADDAI

am-i-shad'-i, am-i-shad-a'-i (`ammishadday, "Shaddai is my kinsman"): The father of Ahiezer, a Danite captain or "head of his fathers' house," during the wilderness journey (Nu 1:12; 2:25, etc.).


AMMIZABAD

a-miz'-a-bad (`ammizabhadh, "my kinsman has made a present"): The son of Benaiah, one of David's captains for the third month (1 Ch 27:6).


AMMON; AMMONITES

am'-on, am'-on-its (`ammon; `ammonim): The Hebrew tradition makes this tribe descendants of Lot and hence related to the Israelites (Gen 19:38). This is reflected in the name usually employed in Old Testament to designate them, Ben `Ammi, Bene `Ammon, "son of my people," "children of my people," i.e. relatives. Hence we find that the Israelites are commanded to avoid conflict with them on their march to the Promised Land (Dt 2:19). Their dwelling-place was on the east of the Dead Sea and the Jordan, between the Arnon and the Jabbok, but, before the advance of the Hebrews, they had been dispossessed of a portion of their land by the Amorites, who founded, along the east side of the Jordan and the Dead Sea, the kingdom of Sihon (Nu 21:21-31). We know from the records of Egypt, especially Tell el-Amarna Letters, the approximate date of the Amorite invasion (14th and 13th centuries, BC). They were pressed on the north by the Hittites who forced them upon the tribes of the south, and some of them settled east of the Jordan. Thus, Israel helped Ammonites by destroying their old enemies, and this makes their conduct at a later period the more reprehensible. In the days of Jephthah they oppressed the Israelites east of the Jordan, claiming that the latter had deprived them of their territory when they came from Egypt, whereas it was the possessions of the Amorites they took (Jdg 11:1-28). They were defeated, but their hostility did not cease, and their conduct toward the Israelites was particularly shameful, as in the days of Saul (1 Sam 11) and of David (2 Sam 10). This may account for the cruel treatment meted out to them in the war that followed (2 Sam 12:26-31). They seem to have been completely subdued by David and their capital was taken, and we find a better spirit manifested afterward, for Nahash of Rabbah showed kindness to him when a fugitive (2 Sam 17:27-29). Their country came into the possession of Jeroboam, on the division of the kingdom, and when the Syrians of Damascus deprived the kingdom of Israel of their possessions east of the Jordan, the Ammonites became subjects of Benhadad, and we find a contingent of 1,000 of them serving as allies of that king in the great battle of the Syrians with the Assyrians at Qarqar (854 BC) in the reign of Shalmaneser II. They may have regained their old territory when Tiglath-pileser carried off the Israelites East of the Jordan into captivity (2 Ki 15:29; 1 Ch 5:26). Their hostility to both kingdoms, Judah and Israel, was often manifested. In the days of Jehoshaphat they joined with the Moabites in an attack upon him, but met with disaster (2 Ch 20). They paid tribute to Jotham (2 Ch 27:5). After submitting to Tiglath-pileser they were generally tributary to Assyria, but we have mention of their joining In the general uprising that took place under Sennacherib; but they submitted and we find them tributary in the reign of Esarhaddon. Their hostility to Judah is shown in their joining the Chaldeans to destroy it (2 Ki 24:2). Their cruelty is denounced by the prophet Amos (1:13), and their destruction by Jer (49:1-6), Ezek (21:28-32), Zeph (2:8,9). Their murder of Gedaliah (2 Ki 25:22-26; Jer 40:14) was a dastardly act. Tobiah the Ammonites united with Sanballat to oppose Neh (Neh 4), and their opposition to the Jews did not cease with the establishment of the latter in Judea.

They joined the Syrians in their wars with the Maccabees and were defeated by Judas (1 Mac 5:6).

Their religion was a degrading and cruel superstition. Their chief god was Molech, or Moloch, to whom they offered human sacrifices (1 Ki 11:7) against which Israel was especially warned (Lev 20:2-5). This worship was common to other tribes for we find it mentioned among the Phoenicians.

H. Porter


AMMONITESS

am-on-i'-tes, a-mon'-i-tes (`ammonith): A woman of the Ammonites, Naamah, the mother of Rehoboam (1 Ki 14:21,31; 2 Ch 12:13; 24:26).


AMNON

am'-non ('amnon, "faithful"; compare 'aminon, 2 Sam 13:20, which is probably a diminutive. Wellhausen (IJG, II, 24, note 2) resolves 'amiynown into 'immi, and nun, "my mother is the serpent"; compare NUN ):

(1) The eldest son of David and Ahinoam, the Jezreelites (compare 2 Sam 3:2). As the crown prince and heir presumptive to the throne, he was intensely hated by Absalom, who was, therefore, doubly eager to revenge the outrage committed by Amnon upon his sister Tamar (2 Sam 3:2; 13:1 ff, 1 Ch 3:1).

(2) A name in the genealogy of Judah (1 Ch 4:20).


AMOK

a'-mok (`amoq, "deep"): A chief priest who came to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel (Neh 12:7) and the forefather of Eber, who was priest in the days of Joiakim (Neh 12:20).


AMON

a'-mon ('amon): A name identical with that of the Egyptian local deity of Thebes (No); compare Jer 46:25. The foreign name given to a Hebrew prince is remarkable, as is also the fact that it is one of the two or three royal names of Judah not compounded with the name of Yahweh. See MANASSEH . It seems to reflect the sentiment which his fanatical father sought to make prevail that Yahweh had no longer any more claim to identification with the realm than had other deities.

(1) A king of Judah, son and successor of Manasseh; reigned two years and was assassinated in his own palace by the officials of his household. The story of his reign is told briefly in 2 Ki 21:19-26, and still more briefly, though in identical terms, so far as they go, in 2 Ch 33:21-25. His short reign was merely incidental in the history of Judah; just long enough to reveal the traits and tendencies which directly or indirectly led to his death. It was merely a weaker continuation of the regime of his idolatrous father, though without the fanaticism which gave the father positive character, and without the touch of piety which, if the Chronicler's account is correct, tempered the father's later years.

If the assassination was the initial act of a revolution the latter was immediately suppressed by "the people of the land," who put to death the conspirators and placed Amon's eight-year-old son Josiah on the throne. In the view of the present writer the motive of the affair was probably connected with the perpetuity of the Davidic dynasty, which, having survived so long according to prophetic prediction (compare 2 Sam 7:16; Ps 89:36,37), was an essential guarantee of Yahweh's favor. Manasseh's foreign sympathies, however, had loosened the hold of Yahweh on the officials of his court; so that, instead of being the loyal center of devotion to Israel's religious and national idea, the royal household was but a hotbed of worldly ambitions, and all the more for Manasseh's prosperous reign, so long immune from any stroke of Divine judgment. It is natural that, seeing the insignificance of Amon's administration, some ambitious clique, imitating the policy that had frequently succeeded in the Northern Kingdom, should strike for the throne. They had reckoned, however, without estimating the inbred Davidic loyalty of the body of the people. It was a blow at one of their most cherished tenets, committing the nation both politically and religiously to utter uncertainty. That this impulsive act of the people was in the line of the purer religious movement which was ripening in Israel does not prove that the spiritually-minded "remnant" was minded to violence and conspiracy, it merely shows what a stern and sterling fiber of loyalty still existed, seasoned and confirmed by trial below the corrupting cults and fashions of the ruling classes. In the tragedy of Amon's reign, in short, we get a glimpse of the basis of sound principle that lay at the common heart of Israel.

(2) A governor of Samaria (1 Ki 22:26); the one to whom the prophet Micaiah was committed as a prisoner by King Ahab, after the prophet had disputed the predictions of the court prophets and foretold the king's death in battle.

(3) The head of the "children of Solomon's servants" (Neh 7:59) who returned from captivity; reckoned along with the Nethinim, or temple slaves. Called also Ami (Ezr 2:57).

John Franklin Genung


AMORITES

am'-o-rits; Amorites ('emori, always in the singular like the Babylonian Amurru from which it is taken; Amorraioi):

1. Varying Use of the Name Explained

2. The Amorite Kingdom

3. Sihon's Conquest

4. Disappearance of the Amorite Kingdom

5. Physical Characteristics of the Amorites

The name Amorite is used in the Old Testament to denote (1) the inhabitants of Palestine generally, (2) the population of the hills as opposed to the plain, and (3) a specific people under a king of their own. Thus (1) we hear of them on the west shore of the Dead Sea (Gen 14:7), at Hebron (Gen 14:13), and Shechem (Gen 48:22), in Gilead and Bashan (Dt 3:10) and under Hermon (Dt 3:8; 4:48). They are named instead of the Canaanites as the inhabitants of Palestine whom the Israelites were required to exterminate (Gen 15:16; Dt 20:17; Jdg 6:10; 1 Sam 7:14; 1 Ki 21:26; 2 Ki 21:11); the older population of Judah is called Amorite in Josh 10:5,6, in conformity with which Ezek (16:3) states that Jerusalem had an Amorite father; and the Gibeonites are said to have been "of the remnant of the Amorites" (2 Sam 21:2). On the other hand (2), in Nu 13:29 the Amorites are described as dwelling in the mountains like the Hittites and Jebusites of Jerusalem, while the Amalekites or Bedouins lived in the south and the Canaanites on the seacoast and in the valley of the Jordan. Lastly (3) we hear of Sihon, "king of the Amorites," who had conquered the northern half of Moab (Nu 21:21-31; Dt 2:26-35).

1. Varying Use of the Name Explained:

Assyriological discovery has explained the varying use of the name. The Hebrew form of it is a transliteration of the Babylonian Amurru, which was both sing. and plural. In the age of Abraham the Amurru were the dominant people in western Asia; hence Syria and Palestine were called by the Babylonians "the land of the Amorites." In the Assyrian period this was replaced by "land of the Hittites," the Hittites in the Mosaic age having made themselves masters of Syria and Canaan. The use of the name "Amorite" in its general sense belongs to the Babylonian period of oriental history.

2. The Amorite Kingdom:

The Amorite kingdom was of great antiquity. About 2500 BC it embraced the larger part of Mesopotamia and Syria, with its capital probably at Harran, and a few centuries later northern Babylonia was occupied by an "Amorite" dynasty of kings who traced theft descent from Samu or Sumu (the Biblical Shem), and made Babylon their capital. To this dynasty belonged Khammu-rabi, the Amraphel of Gen 14:1. In the astrological documents of the period frequent reference is made to "the king of the Amorites." This king of the Amorites was subject to Babylonia in the age of the dynasty of Ur, two or three centuries before the birth of Abraham He claimed suzerainty over a number of "Amorite" kinglets, among whom those of Khana on the Euphrates, near the mouth of the Khabur, may be named, since in the Abrahamic age one of them was called Khammu-rapikh and another Isarlim or Israel. A payment of a cadastral survey made at this time by a Babylonian governor with the Canaanite name of Urimelech is now in the Louvre. Numerous Amorites were settled in Ur and other Babylonian cities, chiefly for the purpose of trade. They seem to have enjoyed the same rights and privileges as the native Babylonians. Some of them were commercial travelers, but we hear also of the heads of the great firms making journeys to the Mediterranean coast.

In an inscription found near Diarbekir and dedicated to Khammu-rabi by Ibirum (= Eber), the governor of the district, the only title given to the Babylonian monarch is "king of the Amorites," where instead of Amurru the Sumerian Martu (Hebrew moreh) is used. The great-grandson of Khammu-rabi still calls himself "king of the widespread land of the Amorites," but two generations later Babylonia was invaded by the Hittites, the Amorite dynasty came to an end, and there was once more a "king of the Amorites" who was not also king of Babylonia.

The Amorite kingdom continued to exist down to the time of the Israelite invasion of Palestine, and mention is made of it in the Egyptian records as well as in the cuneiform Tell el-Amarna Letters, and the Hittite archives recently discovered at Boghaz-keui, the site of the Hittite capital in Cappadocia. The Egyptian conquest of Canaan by the kings of the XVIIIth Dynasty had put an end to the effective government of that country by the Amorite princes, but their rule still extended eastward to the borders of Babylonia, while its southern limits coincided approximately with what was afterward the northern frontier of Naphtali. The Amorite kings, however, became, at all events in name, the vassals of the Egyptian Pharaoh. When the Egyptian empire began to break up, under the "heretic king" Amenhotep IV, at the end of the XVIIIth Dynasty (1400 BC), the Amorite princes naturally turned to their more powerful neighbors in the north. One of the letters in the Tell el-Amarna correspondence is from the Pharaoh to his Amorite vassal Aziru the son of Ebed-Asherah, accusing him of rebellion and threatening him with punishment. Eventually Aziru found it advisable to go over openly to the Hittites, and pay the Hittite government an annual tribute of 300 shekels of gold. From that time forward the Amorite kingdom was a dependency of the Hittite empire, which, on the strength of this, claimed dominion over Palestine as far as the Egyptian frontier.

The second successor of Aziru was Abi-Amurru (or Abi-Hadad), whose successor bore, in addition to a Semitic name, the Mitannian name of Bentesinas. Bente-sinas was dethroned by the Hittite King Muttallis and imprisoned in Cappadocia, where he seems to have met the Hittite prince Khattu-sil, who on the death of his brother Muttallis seized the crown and restored Bente-sinas to his kingdom. Bente-sinas married the daughter of Khattu-sil, while his own daughter was wedded to the son of his Hittite suzerain, and an agreement was made that the succession to the Amorite throne should be confined to her descendants. Two or three generations later the Hittite empire was destroyed by an invasion of "northern barbarians," the Phrygians, probably, of Greek history, who marched southward, through Palestine, against Egypt, carrying with them "the king of the Amorites." The invaders, however, were defeated and practically exterminated by Ramses III of the XXth Egyptian Dynasty (1200 BC). The Amorite king, captured on this occasion by the Egyptians, was probably the immediate predecessor of the Sihon of the Old Testament.

3. Sihon's Conquest:

Egyptian influence in Canaan had finally ceased with the invasion of Egypt by the Libyans and peoples of the Aegean in the fifth year of Meneptah, the successor of Ramses II, at the time of the Israelite Exodus. Though the invaders were repulsed, the Egyptian garrisons had to be withdrawn from the cities of southern Palestine, where their place was taken by the Philistines who thus blocked the way from Egypt to the north. The Amorites, in the name of their distant Hittite suzerains, were accordingly able to overrun the old Egyptian provinces on the east side of the Jordan; the Amorite chieftain Og possessed himself of Bashan (Dt 3:8), and Sihon, "king of the Amorites," conquered the northern part of Moab.

The conquest must have been recent at the time of the Israelite invasion, as the Amorite song of triumph is quoted in Nu 21:27-29, and adapted to the overthrow of Sihon himself by the Israelites. `Woe unto thee,' it reads, `O Moab; thou art undone, O people of Chemosh! (Chemosh) hath given thy sons who escaped (the battle) and thy daughters into captivity to Sihon king of the Amorites.' The flame that had thus consumed Heshbon, it is further declared, shall spread southward through Moab, while Heshbon itself is rebuilt and made the capital of the conqueror: "Come to Heshbon, that the city of Sihon (like the city of David, 2 Sam 5:9) may be rebuilt and restored. For the fire has spread from Heshbon, the flame from the capital of Sihon, devouring as far as Moab (reading `adh with the Septuagint instead of `ar), and swallowing up (reading bale`ah with the Septuagint) the high places of Arnon." The Israelite invasion, however, prevented the expected conquest of southern Moab from taking place.

4. Disappearance of the Amorite Kingdom:

After the fall of Sihon the Amorite kingdom disappears. The Syrians of Zobah, of Hamath and of Damascus take its place, while with the rise of Assyria the "Amorites" cease to be the representatives in contemporary literature of the inhabitants of western Asia. At one time their power had extended to the Babylonian frontier, and Bente-sinas was summoned to Cappadocia by his Hittite overlord to answer a charge made by the Babylonian ambassadors of his having raided northern Babylonia. The Amorite king urged, however, that the raid was merely an attempt to recover a debt of 30 talents of silver.

5. Physical Characteristics of the Amorites:

In Nu 13:29 the Amorites are described as mountaineers, and in harmony with thins, according to Professor Petrie's notes, the Egyptian artists represent them with fair complexions, blue eyes and light hair. It would, therefore, seem that they belonged to the Libyan race of northern Africa rather than to the Semitic stock. In western Asia, however, they were mixed with other racial elements derived from the subject populations, and as they spoke a Semitic language one of the most important of these elements would have been the Semites. In its general sense, moreover, the name "Amorite" included in the Babylonian period all the settled and civilized peoples west of the Euphrates to whatever race they might belong.

LITERATURE.

Hugo Winckler, Mitteilungen der deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft (1907), No. 35, Berlin; Sayce, The Races of the Old Testament, Religious Tract Soc., 1890.

A. H. Sayce


AMOS (1)

a'-mos (`amoc, "burdensome" or "burden-bearer"; Amos):

I. THE PROPHET

1. Name

2. Native Place

3. Personal History

4. His Preparation

(1) Knowledge of God

(2) Acquaintance with History of His People

(3) Personal Travel

(4) Scenery of His Home

5. His Mission

6. Date

II. THE BOOK

1. Its Divisions

2. Its Outlook

3. Value of the Book

(1) As a Picture of the Social Condition

(2) As Picture of the Religious Condition

(3) Testimony to History

(4) Testimony to the Law

(a) The Ritual

(b) Ethical Teaching

(5) The Prophetic Order

(6) The Prophetic Religion

LITERATURE

I. The Prophet.

1. Name:

Amos is the prophet whose book stands third among the "Twelve" in the Hebrew canon. No other person bearing the same name is mentioned in the Old Testament, the name of the father of the prophet Isaiah being written differently ('amots). There is an Amos mentioned in the genealogical series Lk 3:25, but he is otherwise unknown, and we do not know how his name would have been written in Hebrew. Of the signification of the prophet's name all that can be said is that a verb with the same root letters, in the sense of to load or to carry a load, is not uncommon in the language.

2. Native Place:

Tekoa, the native place of Amos, was situated at a distance of 5 miles South from Bethlehem, from which it is visible, and 10 miles from Jerusalem, on a hill 2,700 ft. high, overlooking the wilderness of Judah. It was made a "city for defense" by Rehoboam (2 Ch 11:6), and may have in fact received its name from its remote and exposed position, for the stem of which the word is a derivative is of frequent occurrence in the sense of sounding an alarm with the trumpet: e.g. "Blow the trumpet in Tekoa, and set up a sign of fire in Beth-haccerem" (Jer 6:1 the King James Version). The same word is also used to signify the setting up of a tent by striking in the tent-pegs; and Jerome states that there was no village beyond Tekoa in his time. The name has survived, and the neighborhood is at the present day the pasture-ground for large flocks of sheep and goats. From the high ground on which the modern village stands one looks down on the bare undulating hills of one of the bleakest districts of Palestine, "the waste howling wilderness," which must have suggested some of the startling imagery of the prophet's addresses. The place may have had--as is not seldom the case with towns or villages--a reputation for a special quality of its inhabitants; for it was from Tekoa that Joab fetched the "wise woman" who by a feigned story effected the reconciliation of David with his banished son Absalom (2 Sam 14). There are traces in the Book of Am of a shrewdness and mother-wit which are not so conspicuous in other prophetical books.

3. Personal History:

The particulars of a personal kind which are noted in the book are few but suggestive. Amos was not a prophet or the son of a prophet, he tells us (Am 7:14), i.e. he did not belong to the professional class which frequented the so-called schools of the prophets. He was "among the herdsmen of Tekoa" (1:1), the word here used being found only once in another place (2 Ki 3:4) and applied to Mesha, king of Moab. It seems to refer to a special breed of sheep, somewhat ungainly in appearance but producing, an abundant fleece. In Am 7:14 the word rendered "herdman" is different, and denotes an owner of cattle, though some, from the Septuagint rendering, think that the word should be the same as in Am 1:1. He was also "a dresser of sycomore-trees" (Am 7:14). The word rendered "dresser" (Revised Version) or "gatherer" (the King James Version) occurs only here, and from the rendering of the Septuagint (knizon) it is conjectured that there is reference to a squeezing or nipping of the sycamore fig to make it more palatable or to accelerate its ripening, though such a usage is not known in Palestine at the present day.

4. His Preparation:

Nothing is said as to any special preparation of the prophet for his work: The Lord took me from following the flock, and the Lord said unto me, Go, prophesy unto my people Israel" (Am 7:15, the English Revised Version). In these words he puts himself in line with all the prophets who, in various modes of expression, claim a direct revelation from God. But the mention of the prophetic call in association with the mention of his worldly calling is significant. There was no period interposed between the one and the other, no cessation of husbandry to prepare for the work of prophesying. The husbandman was prepared for this task, and when God's time came he took it up. What was that preparation? Even if we suppose that the call was a momentary event, the man must have been ready to receive it, equipped for its performance. And, looking at the way in which he accomplished it, as exhibited in his book, we can see that there was a preparation, both internal and external, of a very thorough and effective character.

(1) Knowledge of God.

First of all, he has no doubt or uncertainty as to the character of the God in whose name he is called to speak. The God of Amos is one whose sway is boundless (Am 9:2 ff), whose power is infinite (Am 8:9 f), not only controlling the forces of Nature (Am 4; 5:8 f) but guiding the movements and destinies of nations (Am 6:1 ff,14; 9:7 ff). Moreover, He is righteous in all His ways, dealing with nations on moral principles (Am 1:3 ff; 2:1 ff); and, though particularly favorable to Israel, yet making that very choice of them as a people a ground for visiting them with sterner retribution for their sins (Am 3:2). In common with all the prophets, Amos gives no explanation of how he came to know God and to form this conception of His character. It was not by searching that they found out God. It is assumed that God is and that He is such a Being; and this knowledge, as it could come only from God, is regarded as undisputed and undisputable. The call to speak in God's name may have come suddenly, but the prophet's conception of the character of the God who called him is no new or sudden revelation but a firm and well-established conviction.

(2) Acquaintance with History of His People.

Then his book shows not only that he was well acquainted with the history and traditions of his nation, which he takes for granted as well known to his hearers, but that he had reflected upon these things and realized their significance. We infer that he had breathed an atmosphere of religion, as there is nothing to indicate that, in his acquaintance with the religious facts of his nation, he differed from those among whom he dwelt, although the call to go forth and enforce them came to him in a special way.

(3) Personal Travel.

It has been conjectured that Amos had acquired by personal travel the accurate acquaintance which he shows in his graphic delineations of contemporary life and conditions; and it may have been the case that, as a wool-merchant or flock-master, he had visited the towns mentioned and frequented the various markets to which the people were attracted.

(4) Scenery of His Home.

Nor must we overlook another factor in his preparation: the scenery in which he had his home and the occupations of his daily life. The landscape was one to make a solemn impression on a reflective mind: the extensive desert, the shimmering waters of the Dead Sea, the high wall of the distant hills of Moab, over all which were thrown the varying light and shade. The silent life of the desert, as with such scenes ever before him, he tended his flock or defended them from the ravages of wild beasts, would to one whose thoughts were full of God nourish that exalted view of the Divine Majesty which we find in his book, and furnish the imagery in which his thoughts are set (Am 1:2; 3:4 f; 4:13; 5:8; 9:5 f). As he is taken from following the flock, he comes before us using the language and figures of his daily life (Am 3:12), but there runs through all the note of one who has seen God's working in all Nature and His presence in every phenomenon. Rustic he may be, but there is no rudeness or rusticity in his style, which is one of natural and impassioned eloquence, ordered and regular as coming from a mind which was responsive to the orderly working of God in Nature around him. There is an aroma of the free air of the desert about his words; but the prophet lives in an ampler ether and breathes a purer air; all things in Nature and on the field of history are seen in a Divine light and measured by a Divine standard.

5. His Mission:

Thus, prepared in the solitudes of the extreme south of Judah, he was called to go and prophesy unto the people of Israel, and appears at Bethel the capital of the Northern Kingdom. It may be that, in the prosecution of his worldly calling, he had seen and been impressed by the conditions of life and religion in those parts. No reason is given for his mission to the northern capital, but the reason is not far to seek. It is the manner of the prophets to appear where they are most needed; and the Northern Kingdom about that time had come victorious out of war, and had reached its culmination of wealth and power, with the attendant results of luxury and excess, while the Southern Kingdom had been enjoying a period of outward tranquillity and domestic content.

6. Date:

The date of the prophet Amos can approximately be fixed from the statement in the first verse that his activity fell "in the days of Uzziah king of Judah, and in the days of Jeroboam the son of Joash king of Israel, two years before the earthquake." Both these monarchs had long reigns, that of Uzziah extending from 779 to 740 BC and that of Jeroboam II from 783 to 743 BC. If we look at the years when they were concurrently reigning, and bear in mind that, toward the end of Uzziah's reign, Jotham acted as co-regent, we may safely place the date of Amos at about the year 760 BC. In a country in which earthquakes are not uncommon the one here mentioned must have been of unusual severity, for the memory of it was long preserved (Zec 14:5). How long he exercised his ministry we are not told. In all probability the book is the deposit of a series of addresses delivered from time to time till his plain speaking drew upon him the resentment of the authorities, and he was ordered to leave the country (Am 7:10 ff). We can only conjecture that, some time afterward, he withdrew to his native place and put down in writing a condensed record of the discourses he had delivered.

II. The Book.

We can distinguish with more than ordinary certainty the outlines of the individual addresses, and the arrangement of the book is clear and simple. The text, also, has been on the whole faithfully preserved; and though in a few places critics profess to find the traces of later editorial hands, these conclusions rest mainly on subjective grounds, and will be estimated differently by different minds.

1. Its Divisions:

The book falls naturally into three parts, recognizable by certain recurring formulas and general literary features.

(1) The first section, which is clearly recognizable, embraces Am 1 and 2. Here, after the title and designation of the prophet in Am 1:1, there is a solemn proclamation of Divine authority for the prophet's words. "Yahweh will roar from Zion, and utter his voice from Jerusalem" (verse 2). This is notable in one who throughout the book recognizes God's power as world-wide and His operation as extensive as creation; and it should be a caution in view, on the one hand, of the assertion that the temple at Jerusalem was not more sacred than any of the numerous "high places" throughout the land, and, on the other hand, the superficial manner in which some writers speak of the Hebrew notion of a Deity whose dwelling-place was restricted to one locality beyond which His influence was not felt. For this God, who has His dwelling-place in Zion, now through the mouth of the prophet denounces in succession the surrounding nations, and this mainly not for offenses committed against the chosen people but for moral offenses against one another and for breaches of a law binding on humanity. It will be observed that the nations denounced are not named in geographical order, and the prophet exhibits remarkable rhetorical skill in the order of selection. The interest and sympathy of the hearers is secured by the fixing of the attention on the enormities of guilt in their neighbors, and curiosity is kept awake by the uncertainty as to where the next stroke of the prophetic whip will fall. Beginning with the more distant and alien peoples of Damascus, Gaza and Tyre, he wheels round to the nearer and kindred peoples of Edom, Ammon and Moab, till he rests for a moment on the brother tribe of Judah, and thus, having relentlessly drawn the net around Israel by the enumeration of seven peoples, he swoops down upon the Northern Kingdom to which his message is to be particularly addressed.

(2) The second section embraces Am 3 to 6, and consists apparently of a series of discourses, each introduced by the formula: "Hear this word" (Am 3:1; 4:1; 5:1), and another introduced by a comprehensive: "Woe to them that are at ease in Zion, and to them that are secure in the mountain of Samaria" (Am 6:1). The divisions here are not so clearly marked. It will be observed e.g. that there is another "Woe" at Am 5:18; and in chapter 4, though the address at the outset is directed to the luxurious women of Samaria, from 4:4 onward the words have a wider reference. Accordingly some would divide this section into a larger number of subsections; and some, indeed, have described the whole book as a collection of ill-arranged fragments. But, while it is not necessary to suppose that the written book is an exact reproduction of the spoken addresses, and while the division into chapters has no authority, yet we must allow for some latitude in the details which an impassioned speaker would introduce into his discourses, and for transitions and connections of thought which may not be apparent on the surface.

(3) The third section has some well-marked characteristics, although it is even less uniform than the preceding. The outstanding feature is the phrase, "Thus the Lord Yahweh showed me" (Am 7:1,4,7; 8:1) varied at Am 9:1 by the words, "I saw the Lord standing beside the altar." We have thus a series of "visions" bearing upon, and interpreted as applying to, the condition of Israel. It is in the course of one of these, when the prophet comes to the words, "I will rise against the house of Jeroboam with the sword" (Am 7:9) that the interposition of Amaziah, the priest of Bethel, is recorded, with the prophet's noble reply as to his Divine call, and his rebuke and denunciation of the priest, ending with a prophetic announcement of the downfall and captivity of Israel (Am 7:14-17).

2. Its Outlook:

If the discourses are put down in chronological order of their delivery, it would appear that Amos did not immediately take his departure, since more visions follow this episode, and there is a special appropriateness in the intervention of Amaziah just at the point where it is recorded. As to the closing passage of this section (Am 9:11-15) which gives a bright prospect of the future, there is a class of critics who are inclined to reject it just on this account as inconsistent with the severe denunciatory tone of the rest of the book. It is quite possible, however, that the prophet himself (and no succeeding later editor) may have added the passage when he came to write down his addresses. There is no reason to believe that any of the prophets--harsh though their words were--believed that the God of Israel would make a full end of His people in captivity: on the contrary, their assurance of God's faithfulness to His promise, and the deep-seated conviction that right would ultimately prevail, lead us to expect even in the sternest or earliest of the prophets the hope of a future glory--that hope which grew brighter and brighter as the nation's outlook grew darker, and attained intensity and clearness in the Messianic hope which sustained them in the darkest days of exile. It is difficult to believe that any of the prophets were prophets of despair, or to conceive how they could have prophesied at all unless they had a firm faith in the ultimate triumph of the good.

3. Value of the Book:

The Book of Amos is particularly valuable from the fact that he is certainly one of the earliest prophets whose writings have come down to us. It is, like the Book of Hosea which belongs to about the same time, a contemporaneous document of a period of great significance in the history of Israel, and not only gives graphic sketches or illuminating hints of the life and religious condition of the people, but furnishes a trustworthy standard for estimating the value of some other books whose dates are not so precisely determined, a definite starting-point for tracing the course of Israel's history.

(1) As a Picture of the Social Condition.

The book is valuable as embodying a contemporary picture of society and the condition of religion. From the abuses which the prophet denounces and the lifelike sketches he draws of the scenes amid which he moved, taken along with what we know otherwise of the historical movements of the period, we are able to form a fairly adequate estimate of the condition of the age and the country. During the reign of Jeroboam II the kingdom of Israel, after having been greatly reduced during preceding reigns, rose to a degree of extent and influence unexampled since the days of Solomon (2 Ki 14:25); and we are not astonished to read in the Book of Am the haughty words which he puts into the mouth of the people of his time when they spoke of Israel as the "chief of the nations" a first-class power in modern language, and boasted of the "horns" by which they had attained that eminence (Am 6:1,13). But success in war, if it encouraged this boastful spirit, brought also inevitable evils in its train. Victory, as we know from the Assyrian monuments, meant plunder; for king after king recounts how much spoil he had taken, how many prisoners he had carried away; and we must assume that wars among smaller states would be conducted on the same methods. In such wars, success meant an extension of territory and increase of wealth, while defeat entailed the reverse. But it is to be remembered that, in an agricultural country and in a society constituted as that of Israel was, the result of war to one class of the population was to a great extent disastrous, whatever was the issue, and success, when it was achieved, brought evils in its train which even aggravated their condition. The peasant, required to take up arms for offense or defense, was taken away from the labors of the field which, in the best event, were for a time neglected, and, in the worst, were wasted and rendered unproductive. And then, when victory was secured, the spoils were liable to fall into the hands of the nobles and leaders, those "called with a name" (Am 6:1), while the peasant returned to his wasted or neglected fields without much substantial resource with which to begin life again. The wealth secured by the men of strong hand led to the increase of luxury in its possessors, and became actually the means of still further adding to the embarrassment of the poor, who were dependent on the rich for the means of earning their livelihood. The situation would be aggravated under a feeble or corrupt government, such as was certainly that of Jeroboam's successors. The condition prevails in modern eastern countries, even under comparatively wise and just administration; and that it was the state of matters prevailing in the time of Amos is abundantly clear from his book. The opening denunciation of Israel for oppression of the poor and for earth-hunger (Am 2:6,7) is re-echoed and amplified in the succeeding chapters (Am 3:9,10; 4:1; 5:11,12; 8:4-6); and the luxury of the rich, who battened on the misfortune of their poorer brethren, is castigated in biting irony in such passages as Am 6:3-6. Specially noticeable in this connection is the contemptuous reference to the luxurious women, the "kine of Bashan" (Am 4:1), whose extravagances are maintained by the oppression of the poor. The situation, in short, was one that has found striking parallels in modern despotic countries in the East, where the people are divided into two classes, the powerful rich, rich because powerful and powerful because rich, and, the poor oppressed, men who have no helper, no "back" in the common eastern phrase, dependent on the rich and influential and tending to greater poverty under greedy patrons.

(2) As a Picture of the Religious Condition.

In such a social atmosphere, which poisoned the elementary virtues, religion of a vital kind could not flourish; and there are plain indications in the words of Amos of the low condition to which it had sunk. There was, indeed, as we gather from ins addresses, no lack of outward attention to the forms of worship; but these forms were of so corrupted a character and associated with so much practical godlessness and even immorality, that instead of raising the national character it tended to its greater degradation. The people prided themselves in what they regarded the worship of the national God, thinking that so long as they honored Him with costly offerings and a gorgeous ritual, they were pleasing Him and secure in His protection. Bethel, Dan, Gilgal, Beersheba, and we know not how many other places were resorted to in pilgrimage by crowds of worshippers. With all the accompaniments of ceremonious ritual which the newly found wealth put in their power, with offerings more than the legally prescribed or customary (Am 4:4,5) the service of these sanctuaries was maintained; but even these offerings were made at the expense of the poor (Am 5:11), the prevailing luxury forced its way even to the precincts of the altars (Am 2:8), and justice and mercy were conspicuously absent from the religious life. The people seemed to have settled down to a complacent optimism, nourished no doubt by national prosperity, and, though there had not been wanting reminders of the sovereignty of a righteous God, in convulsions of Nature--drought, famine, pestilence and earthquake (Am 4:6-11)--these had been of no avail to awaken the sleeping conscience. They put the evil day far from them (Am 6:3), for Yahweh was their national God and "the day of the Lord," the good time coming (Am 5:18), when God would come to their help, was more in their mind than the imperative duty of returning to Him (Am 4:6,8, etc.).

(3) Testimony to History.

The book is valuable for the confirmation it gives of the historical statements of other books, particularly for the references it contains to the earlier history contained in the Pentateuch. And here we must distinguish between references to, or quotations from, books, and statements or hints or indications of historical events which may or may not have been written in books or accessible to the prophet and his hearers. Opinions differ as to the date of composition of the books which record the earlier history, and the oldest Biblical writers are not in the habit of saying from what sources they drew their information or whether they are quoting from books. We can hardly believe that in the time of Amos copies of existing books or writings would be in the hands of the mass of the people, even if the power to read them was general. In such circumstances, if we find a prophet like Amos in the compass of a small book referring to outstanding events and stages of the past history as matters known to all his hearers and unquestionable, our confidence in the veracity of the books in which these facts are recorded is greatly increased, and it becomes a matter of comparatively less importance at what date these books were composed. Now it is remarkable how many allusions, more or less precise, to antecedent history are found in the compass of this small book; and the significance of them lies not in the actual number of references, but in the kind of reference and the implications involved in the individual references. That is to say, each reference is not to be taken as an isolated testimony to some single event in question, but involves a great deal more than is expressed, and is intelligible only when other facts or incidents are taken into consideration. Thus e.g. the reference to the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah (Am 4:11) is only intelligible on the supposition that the story of that catastrophe was a matter of common knowledge; and it would be a carping criticism to argue that the destruction of other cities of the plain at the same time and the whole story of Lot were unknown in the days of Amos because they are not mentioned here in detail. So, when we have in one passage a reference to the house of Isaac (Am 7:16), in another to the house of Jacob (Am 3:13), in another to the house of Joseph (Am 5:6) and in another to the enmity between Jacob and Esau (Am 1:11), we cannot take these as detached notices, but must supply the links which the prophet's words would suggest to his hearers. In other words, such slight notices, just because they are incidental and brief, imply a familiarity with a connected patriarchal history such as is found in the Book of Gen. Again, the prophet's references to the "whole family" of the "children of Israel" whom the Lord "brought up out of the land of Egypt" (Am 3:1), to the Divine leading of the people "forty years in the wilderness, to possess the land of the Amorite" (Am 2:10) are not odds and ends of popular story but links in a chain of national history. It seems to be on the strength of these and similar references in the books of Am and Hos, whose dates are known, that critics have agreed to fix the date of the earliest historical portions of the Pentateuch as they understand them, namely, the parts designated as Jahwist and Elohist, in the 8th and 9th centuries BC, i.e. at or shortly before the time of these prophets. It may be left to the unbiased judgment of the reader to say whether the references look like references to a newly composed document, or whether it is not more probable that, in an age when written documents were necessarily few and not accessible to the multitude, these references are appeals to things well fixed in the national memory, a memory extending back to the things themselves. Or, if the prophet's words are to be taken as sufficient proof of the existence of written sources, the fact that the matters are assumed as well known would rather encourage the conclusion that the written sources in question go back to a much earlier period, since the matters contained in them had by this time become matters of universal knowledge.

(4) Testimony to the Law.

(a) The Ritual.

And what about those other elements of the Pentateuch of a legal and ritual character which bulk so prominently in those books? The question whether the Book of Amos indicates an acquaintance with these or not is important because it is to a great extent on the silence of prophetical and historical writers that critics of a certain school relegate these legalistic portions of the Pentateuch to a late date. Now at the outset it is obvious to ask what we have a reasonable right to expect. We have to bear in mind what was the condition of the people whom Amos addressed, and the purpose and aim of his mission to the Northern Kingdom. It is to be remembered that, as we are told in the Book of Kings (1 Ki 12:25 ff), Jeroboam I deliberately sought to make a breach between the worship of Jerusalem and that of his own kingdom, while persuading his people that the worship of Yahweh was being maintained. The schism occurred some 170 years before the time of Amos and it is not probable that the worship and ritual of the Northern Kingdom tended in that interval to greater purity or greater conformity to what had been the authoritative practice of the undivided kingdom at the temple of Jerusalem. When, therefore, Amos, in face of the corrupt worship combined with elaborate ritual which prevailed around him, declares that God hates and despises their feasts and takes no delight in their solemn assemblies (Am 5:21), we are not justified in pressing his words, as is sometimes done, into a sweeping condemnation of all ritual. On the contrary, seeing that, in the very same connection (Am 5:22), he specifies burnt offerings and meal offerings and peace offerings, and, in another passage (Am 4:4,5), daily sacrifices and tithes, sacrifices of thanksgiving and free-will offerings, it is natural to infer that by these terms which are familiar in the Pentateuch he is referring to those statutory observances which were part of the national worship of united Israel, but had been overlaid with corruption and become destitute of spiritual value as practiced in the Northern Kingdom. So we may take his allusions to the new moon and the Sabbath (Am 8:5) as seasons of special sacredness and universally sanctioned. Having condemned in such scornful and sweeping terms the worship that he saw going on around him, what was Amos to gum by entering into minute ritual prescriptions or defining the precise duties and perquisites of priests and Levites; and having condemned the pilgrimages to the shrines of Bethel, Gilgal, Beersheba, Samaria and Dan (Am 4:4; 5:5; 8:14), what was he to gain by quoting the law of Deut as to a central sanctuary? And had one of his hearers, like the woman of Samaria of a later day, attempted to draw him into a discussion of the relative merits of the two temples, we can conceive him answering in the spirit of the great Teacher: "Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship" (Jn 4:22 the King James Version). A regulation of the form was of no avail while the whole spirit of the observance was corrupt; the soul of religion was dead, and the prophet had a higher duty than to dress out the carcass.

At the root of the corruption of the religion lay a rottenness of moral sense; and from beginning to end Amos insists on the necessity of a pure and righteous life. In this connection his appeals are in striking agreement with the specially ethical demands of the law books, and in phraseology so much resemble them as to warrant the conclusion that the requirements of the law on these subjects were known and acknowledged. Thus his denunciations of those who oppress the poor (Am 2:7; 4:1; 8:4) are quite in the spirit and style of Ex 22:21,22; 23:9; his references to the perversion of justice and taking bribes (Am 2:6; 5:7,10 ff, 6:12) are rhetorical enforcements of the prohibitions of the law in Ex 23:6-8; when he reproves those that "lay themselves down beside every altar upon clothes taken in pledge" (Am 2:8) we hear an echo of the command: "If thou at all take thy neighbor's garment to pledge, thou shalt restore it unto him before the sun goeth down" (Ex 22:26); and when he denounces those making "the ephah small, and the shekel great, and dealing falsely with balances of deceit" (Am 8:5) his words are in close agreement with the law, "Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment, in mete-yard, in weights, or in measure. Just balances, just weight, a just ephah, and a just hin shall ye have" (Lev 19:35,36, the King James Version).

(b) Ethical Teaching.

As a preacher of righteousness, Amos affirms and resists upon those ethical parts of the law which are its vital elements, and which lie at the foundation of all prophecy; and it is remarkable how even in phraseology he agrees with the most ethical book of the Pentateuch, Deuteronomy. He does not, indeed, like his contemporary Hosea, dwell on the love of God as Dt does; but, of sterner mould, in almost the very words of Deuteronomy, emphasizes the keeping of God's commandments, and denounces those who despise the law (compare Am 2:4 with Dt 17:19). Among verbal coincidences have been noticed the combinations "oppress" "crush" (Am 4:1; Dt 28:33), "blasting" and "mildew" (Am 4:9; Dt 28:22), and "gall" and "wormwood" (Am 6:12; Dt 29:18). Compare also Am 9:8 with Dt 6:15, and note the predilection for the same word to "destroy" common to both books (compare Am 2:9 with Dt 2:22). In view of all of which it seems an extraordinary statement to make that "the silence of Amos with reference to the centralization of worship, on which Dt is so explicit, alone seems sufficient to outweigh any linguistic similarity that can be discovered" (H. G. Mitchell, Amos, an Essay in Exegesis, 185).

(5) The Prophetic Order.

As Amos is without doubt one of the earliest writing prophets, his book is invaluable as an example of what prophecy was in ancient Israel. And one thing cannot fail to impress the reader at the very outset: namely, that he makes no claim to be the first or among the first of the line, or that he is exercising some new and hitherto unheard-of function. He begins by boldly speaking in God's name, assuming that even the people of the Northern Kingdom were familiar with that kind of address. Nay, he goes farther and states in unequivocal terms that "the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets" (Am 3:7, the King James Version). We need not search farther for a definition of the prophet as understood by him and other Old Testament writers: the prophet is one to whom God reveals His will, and who comes forward to declare that will and purpose to man. A great deal has been made of the words of Amaziah the priest of Bethel (Am 7:12), as if they proved that the prophet in those times was regarded as a wandering rhetorician, earning his bread by reciting his speeches; and it has been inferred from the words of Amos himself that the prophets of his day were so disreputable a class that he disdained to be named along with them (Am 7:14). But all this is fanciful. Even if we admit that there were men calling themselves prophets who prophesied for hire (Mic 3:5,11), it cannot be assumed that the expression here to "eat bread" has that meaning; for in other passages it seems simply to signify to lead a quiet or ordinary life, to go about one's daily business (see Ex 24:11; Jer 22:15). In any case we are not to take the estimate of a man like Amaziah or a godless populace in preference to the conception of Amos himself and his account of his call. It was not by man or by any college of prophets but by Yahweh Himself that he was appointed, and by whatever name he might be called, the summons was "Go, prophesy unto my people Israel" (Am 7:15). There is no trace here of the "prophets becoming conscious of a distinction between themselves and the professional nebhi'im, who were apt simply to echo the patriotic and nationalistic sentiments of the people, and in reality differed but little from the soothsayers and diviners of Semitic heathenism" (Ottley, The Religion of Israel, 90). Whoever the "professional nebhi'im" may have been in his day, or whatever he thought of them if they existed, Amos tells us nothing; but he ranges himself with men to whom Yahweh has spoken in truth (Am 3:7,8), and indicates that there had been a succession of such men (Am 2:11), faithful amid the prevailing corruption though tempted to be unfaithful (Am 2:12); in short he gives us to understand that the "prophetic order" goes back to a period long before his day and has its roots in the true and original religion of Israel.

(6) The Prophetic Religion.

Finally, from the Book of Am we may learn what the prophetic religion was. Here again there is no indication of rudimentary crudeness of conception, or of painful struggling upward from the plane of naturalism or belief in a merely tribal God. The God in whose name Amos speaks has control over all the forces of Nature (Am 4:6 ff; 5:8,9), rules the destinies of nations (Am 6:2,14; 9:2-6), searches the thoughts of the heart (Am 4:13), is inflexible in righteousness and deals with nations and with men on equal justice (Am 1 and Am 2; Am 9:7), and is most severe to the people who have received the highest privileges (Am 3:2). And this is the God by whose name his hearers call themselves, whose claims they cannot deny, whose dealings with them from old time are well known and acknowledged (Am 2:11), whose laws they have broken (Am 2:4; 3:10) and for whose just judgment they are warned to prepare (Am 4:12). All this the prophet enforces faithfully and sternly; not a voice is raised in the circle of his hearers to dispute his words; all that Amaziah the priest can do is to urge the prophet to abstain from unwelcome words in Bethel, because it is the king's sanctuary and a royal house; the only inference is that the people felt the truth and justice of the prophet's words. The "prophetic religion" does not begin with Amos.

LITERATURE.

W. R. Harper, "Amos and Hosea," in the ICC; S. R. Driver, "Joel and Amos" in Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges; H. G. Mitchell, Amos, an Essay in Exegesis (Boston); A. B. Davidson, two articles in The Expositor, 3rd ser, V, VI (1887); W. R. Smith, The Prophets of Israel; G. A. Smith, "The Book of the Twelve Prophets," in Expositor's Bible; J. J. P. Valeton, Amos und Hosea (1894); C. von Orelli, Die zwolf kleinen Propheten, 3. Aufl. (1908) and ET; Nowack, "Die kleinen Propheten," in Hand-commentar zum Altes Testament; Marti, "Das Dodekapropheton erklart," in Kurzer Hand-Commentar zum Altes Testament.

James Robertson


AMOS (2)

a'-mos (Amos): An ancestor of Jesus in Luke's genealogy, the eighth before Joseph, the husband of Mary (Lk 3:25).


AMOZ

a'-moz (amots, "strong"): The father of Isaiah the prophet (2 Ki 19:2,20; 20:1; 2 Ch 26:22; 32:20,32; Isa 1:1; 2:1; 13:1; 20:2; 37:2,21; 38:1).


AMPHIPOLIS

am-fip'-o-lis (Amphipolis): A town in Macedonia, situated on the eastern bank of the Strymon (modern Struma or Karasu) some three miles from its mouth, near the point where it flows out of Lake Prasias or Cercinitis. It lay on a terraced hill, protected on the North, West and South by the river, on the East by a wall (Thuc. iv.102), while its harbor-town of Eion lay on the coast close to the river's mouth. The name is derived either from its being nearly surrounded by the stream or from its being conspicuous on every side, a fact to which Thucydides draws attention (in the place cited). It was at first called Ennea Hodoi, Nine Ways, a name which suggests its importance both strategically and commercially. It guarded the main route from Thrace into Macedonia and later became an important station on the Via Egnatia, the great Roman road from Dyrrhachium on the Adriatic to the Hebrus (Maritza), and it was the center of a fertile district producing wine, oil, figs and timber in abundance and enriched by gold and silver mines and considerable manufactures, especially of woolen stuffs. In 497 BC Aristagoras, ex-despot of Miletus, tried to settle there, and a second vain attempt was made in 465-464 by the Athenians, who succeeded in founding a colony there in 437 under the leadership of Hagnon. The population, however, was too mixed to allow of strong Athenian sympathies, and in 424 the town fell away to the Spartan leader Brasidas and defied all the subsequent attempts of the Athenians to recover it. It passed under the protectorate of Perdiccas and Philip of Macedon, and the latter finally made himself master of it in 358. On the Roman partition of Macedonia after the battle of Pydna (168 BC) Amphipolis was made a free city and capital of Macedonia Prima. Paul and Silas passed through it on their way from Philippi to Thessalonica, but the narrative seems to preclude a long stay (Acts 17:1). The place was called Popolia in the Middle Ages, while in modern times the village of Neochori (Turkish, Yenikeui) marks the site (Leake, Northern Greece, III, 181 ff, Cousinery, Macedoine, I, 100 ff, 122 ff; Heuzey et Daumet, Mission archeol. de Macedoine, 165 ff).

Marcus N. Tod


AMPLIAS

am'-pli-as (Textus Receptus Amplias), the King James Version form: a contraction of AMPLIATUS (thus, the Revised Version (British and American); which see).


AMPLIATUS

am-pli-a'-tus (Ampliatos, Codex Sinaiticus, A,B,F, Ampliatus; Amplias, D,E,L,P, the Revised Version (British and American) form; the King James Version Amplias): The name of a member of the Christian community at Rome, to whom Paul sent greetings (Rom 16:8). He is designated "my beloved in the Lord." It is a common name and is found in inscriptions connected with the imperial household. The name is found twice in the cemetery of Domitilla. The earlier inscription is over a cell which belongs to the end of the 1st century or the beginning of the 2nd century. The bearer of this name was probably a member of her household and conspicuous in the early Christian church in Rome.


AMRAM

am'-ram (`amram, "people exalted"):

(1) Father of Aaron, Moses and Miriam (Ex 6:20; Nu 26:59; 1 Ch 6:3; 23:13); and a son of Kohath, the son of Levi (Ex 6:18; Nu 3:19, etc.). It is not certain that he was literally the son of Kohath, but rather his descendant, since there were ten generations from Joseph to Joshua

(1 Ch 7:20-27), while only four are actually mentioned from Levi to Moses for the corresponding period. Moreover the Kohathites at the time of the Exodus numbered 8,600 (Nu 3:28), which would therefore have been an impossibility if only two generations had lived. It seems best to regard Amram as a descendant of Kohath, and his wife Jochebed as a "daughter of Levi" in a general sense.

(2) One of the Bani, who in the days of Ezra had taken a foreign wife (Ezr 10:34).

(3) In 1 Ch 1:41 (the King James Version) for the properly read HAMRAN of the Revised Version (British and American) (chamran), a Horite, who in Gen 36:26 is called HEMDAN (which see).

Edward Mack


AMRAMITES

am'-ram-its (`amrami): The descendants of Amram, one of the Levitical families mentioned in Nu 3:27 and 1 Ch 26:23, who had the charge of the tabernacle proper, guarding the ark, table, candlestick, etc., called in 1 Ch 26:22 "the treasures of the house of Yahweh."


AMRAPHEL

am'-ra-fel, am-ra'-fel ('amraphel, or, perhaps better, 'ameraphel).

1. The Expedition Against Sodom and Gomorrah:

This name, which is identified with that of the renowned Babylonian king Hammurabi (which see), is only found in Gen 14:1,9, where he is mentioned as the king of Shinar (Babylonia), who fought against the cities of the plain, in alliance with Arioch king of Ellasar, Chedorlaomer king of Elam, and Tidal king of Nations (the Revised Version (British and American) GOIIM). The narrative which follows is very circumstantial. From it we learn, that Bera king of Sodom, Birsha king of Gomorrah, Shinab king of Admah, Shemeber king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela or Zoar, had served Chedorlaomer for 12 years, rebelled in the 13th, and in the 14th year Chedorlaomer, with the kings enumerated, fought with and defeated them in the vale of Siddim, which is described as being the Salt Sea. Previous to this engagement, however, the Elamites and their allies had attacked the Rephaim (Onkelos: "giants") in Ashtaroth-karnaim, the Zuzim (O: "mighty ones," "heroes") in Ham (O: Chamta'), the Emim (O: "terrible ones") in Shaveh-kiriathaim, and the Horites in their Mount Seir, by the Desert. These having been rendered powerless to aid the revolted vassals, they returned and came to Enmishpat, or Kadesh, attacked the country of the Amalekites, and the Amorites dwelling in Hazazontamar (Gen 14:2-7).

2. The Preparation and the Attack:

At this juncture the kings of the cities of the plain came out against them, and opposed them with their battle-array in the vale of Siddim. The result of the fight was, that the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah, with their allies, fled, and fell among the bitumen-pits of which the place was full, whilst those who got away took refuge in the mountain. All the goods and food (the camp-equipment and supplies) of the kings of the plain were captured by Chedorlaomer and his allies, who then continued their march (to their own lands) (Gen 14:8-11).

3. Abraham's Rescue of Lot:

Among the captives, however, was Lot, Abram's nephew, who dwelt in Sodom. A fugitive, having escaped, went and announced the result of the engagement to Abram, who was at that time living by Mamre's oak plantation. The patriarch immediately marched forth with his trained men, and pursued them to Dan, where he divided his forces, attacked the Elamite-Babylonian army by night, and having put them to flight, pursued them again to Hobah, on the left (or North) of Damascus. The result of this sudden onslaught was that he rescued Lot, with the women and people, and recaptured Lot's goods, which the allies of Amraphel had carried off (Gen 14:12-16).

4. Difficulties of the Identification of Amraphel:

There is no doubt that the identification of Amraphel with the Hammurabi of the Babylonian inscriptions is the best that has yet been proposed, and though there are certain difficulties therein, these may turn out to be apparent rather than real, when we know more of Babylonian history. The "l" at the end of Amraphel (which has also "ph" instead of "p" or "b") as well as the fact that the expedition itself has not yet been recognized among the campaigns of Hammurabi, must be acknowledged as two points hard to explain, though they may ultimately be solved by further research.

5. Historical Agreements:

It is noteworthy, however, that in the first verse of Gen 14 Amraphel is mentioned first, which, if he be really the Babylonian Hammurabi, is easily comprehensible, for his renown to all appearance exceeded that of Chedorlaomer, his suzerain. In 14:4 and 5, however, it is Chedorlaomer alone who is referred to, and he heads the list of eastern kings in verse 9, where Tidal comes next (a quite natural order, if Goiim be the Babylonian Gute, i.e. the Medes). Next in order comes Amraphel, king of Babylonia and suzerain of Arioch of Ellasar (Eri-Aku of Larsa), whose name closes the list. It may also be suggested, that Amraphel led a Babylonian force against Sodom, as the ally of Chedorlaomer, before he became king, and was simply crown prince. In that case, like Belshazzar, he was called "king" by anticipation. For further details see ARIOCH andCHEDORLAOMER , and compareERI-AKU andHAMMURABI ; for the history of Babylonia during Hammurabi's period, see that article.

T. G. Pinches


AMULET

am'-u-let (qemia, lechashim, mezuzah, tephillin, tsitsith; phulakterion): Modern scholars are of opinion that our English word amulet comes from the Latin amuletum, used by Pliny (Naturalis Historia, xxviii, 28; xxx, 2, etc.), and other Latin writers; but no etymology for the Latin word has been discovered. The present writer thinks the root exists in the Arabic himlat, "something carried" (see Dozy, Supplement aux Dictionnaires Arabes, I, 327), though there is no known example of the use of the Arabic word in a magical sense. Originally "amulet" denoted any object supposed to have the power of removing or warding noxious influences believed to be due to evil spirits, etc., such as the evil eye, etc. But in the common usage it stands for an object worn on the body, generally hung from the neck, as a remedy or preservative against evil influences of a mystic kind. The word "amulet" occurs once in the Revised Version (British and American) (Isa 3:20) but not at all in the King James Version.

1. Classes of Amulets:

The substances out of which amulets have been made and the forms which they have taken have been various.

(1) The commonest have consisted of Amulets of pieces of stone or metal, strips of parchment with or without inscriptions from sacred writings (Bible, Koran, etc.). The earliest Egyptian amulets known are pieces of green schist of various shapes--animal, etc. These were placed on the breast of a deceased person in order to secure a safe passage to the under-world. When a piece of stone is selected as an amulet it is always portable and generally of some striking figure or shape (the human face, etc.). The use of such a stone for this purpose is really a survival of animism.

(2) Gems, rings, etc. It has been largely held that all ornaments worn on the person were originally amulets. (3) Certain herbs and animal preparations; the roots of certain plants have been considered very potent as remedies and preservatives.

The practice of wearing amulets existed in the ancient world among all peoples, but especially among Orientals; and it can be traced among most modern nations, especially among peoples of backward civilization. Nor is it wholly absent from peoples of the most advanced civilization of today, the English, Americans, etc. Though the word charm (see CHARM ) has a distinct meaning, it is often inseparably connected with amulets, for it is in many cases the incantation or charm inscribed on the amulet that gives the latter its significance. As distinguished from talisman (see TALISMAN ) an amulet is believed to have negative results, as a means of protection: a talisman is thought to be the means of securing for the wearer some positive boon.

2. Amulets in the Bible:

Though there is no word in the Hebrew or Greek Scriptures denoting "amulet," the thing itself is manifestly implied in many parts of the Bible. But it is remarkable that the general teaching of the Bible and especially that of the Old Testament prophets and of the New Testament writers is wholly and strongly opposed to such things.

(1) The Old Testament.

The golden ear-rings, worn by the wives and sons and daughters of the Israelites, out of which the molten calf was made (Ex 32:2 f), were undoubtedly amulets. What other function could they be made to serve in the simple life of the desert? That the women's ornaments condemned in Isa 3:16-26 were of the same character is made exceedingly likely by an examination of some of the terms employed. We read of moonlets and sunlets (verse 18), i.e. moon and sun-shaped amulets. The former in the shape of crescents are worn by Arab girls of our own time. The "ear-drops," "nose-rings," "arm chains" and "foot chains" were all used as a protection to the part of the body implied, and the strong words with which their employment is condemned are only intelligible if their function as counter charms is borne in mind. In Isa 3:20 we read of lechashim rendered "ear-rings" (the King James Version) and "amulets" (Revised Version (British and American)). The Hebrew word seems to be cognate with the word for "serpent" (nechashim; "l" and "r" often interchange), and meant probably in the first instance an amulet against a serpent bite (see Magic, Divination, and Demonology among the Hebrews and Their Neighbours, by the present writer, 50 f, 81; compare Jer 8:7; Eccl 10:11; Ps 58:5). Crescent-shaped amulets were worn by animals as well as human beings, as Jdg 8:21,26 shows.

At Bethel, Jacob burned not only the idols ("strange gods") but also the ear-rings, the latter being as much opposed to Yahwism as the former, on account of their heathen origin and import.

In Prov 17:8 the Hebrew words rendered "a precious stone" (Hebrew "a stone conferring favor") mean without question a stone amulet treasured on account of its supposed magical efficacy. It is said in Prov 1:9 that wisdom will be such a defense to the one who has it as the head amulet is to the head and that of the neck to the neck. The words rendered in the Revised Version (British and American) "a chaplet of grace unto thy head" mean literally, "something bound to the head conferring favor," the one word for the latter clause being identical with that so rendered above (chen). The Talmudic word for an amulet (qemia`) denotes something tied or bound (to the person).

We have reference to the custom of wearing amulets in Prov 6:21 where the reader is urged to "bind them (i.e. the admonitions of father and mother) .... upon thy heart" and to "tie them about thy neck"--words implying a condemnation of the practice of trusting to the defense of mere material objects.

Underneath the garments of warriors slain in the Maccabean wars amulets were found in the shape apparently of idols worshipped by their neighbors (2 Macc 12:40). It is strange but true that like other nations of antiquity the Jews attached more importance to amulets obtained from other nations than to those of native growth. It is probable that the signet ring referred to in Song 8:6; Jer 22:24; Hag 2:23 was an amulet. It was worn on the heart or on the arm.

(2) The Phylacteries and the Mezuzah.

There is no distract reference to these in the Old Testament. The Hebrew technical term for the former (tephillin) does not occur in Biblical. Hebrew, and although the Hebrew word mezuzah does occur over a dozen times its sense is invariably "door-(or "gate-") post" and not the amulet put on the door-post which in later Hebrew the word denotes.

It is quite certain that the practice of wearing phylacteries has no Biblical support, for a correct exegesis and a proper understanding of the context put it beyond dispute that the words in Ex 13:9,16, Dt 6:8 f; 11:18-20 have reference to the exhortations in the foregoing verses: "Thou shalt bind them (the commands previously mentioned) for a sign upon thy hand, and they shall be for frontiers between thy eyes. And thou shalt write them upon, the door-posts of thy house, and upon thy gates" (Dt 6:8 f). The only possible sense of these words is that they were to hold the precepts referred to before their minds constantly as if they were inscribed on their arms, held in front of their eyes, and written on the door-posts or gate-posts which they daily passed. That the language in Ex 13:9,16 does not command the use of phylacteries is obvious, and that the same is true of Prov 3:3; 6:21; 7:3 where similar words are used is still more certain. Yet, though none of the passages enjoin the use of phylacteries or of the mezuzah, they may all contain allusions to both practices as if the sense were, "Thou shalt keep constantly before thee my words and look to them for safety and not to the phylacteries worn on head and arm by the heathen." If, however, phylacteries were in use among the Jews thus early, it is strange that there is not in the Old Testament a single instance in which the practice of wearing phylacteries is mentioned. Josephus, however, seems to refer to this practice (Ant., IV, viii, 13), and it is frequently spoken of in the Mishna (Berakhoth, i, etc.). It is a striking and significant fact that the Apocrypha is wholly silent as to the three signs of Judaism, phylacteries, the mezuzah and the tsitsith (or tassel attached to the corner of the prayer garment called Tallith; compare Mt 9:20; 14:36 the King James Version where "hem of the garment" is inaccurate and misleading).

It is quite evident that phylacteries have a magical origin. This is suggested by the Greek name phulakterion (whence the English name) which in the 1st century of our era denoted a counter charm or defense (phulasso, "to protect") against evil influences. No scholar now explains the Greek word as denoting a means of leading people to keep (phulasso) the law. The Hebrew name tephillin (= "prayers") meets us first in post-Bib. Hebrew, and carries with it the later view that phylacteries are used during prayer in harmony with the prayers or other formulas over the amulet to make it effective (see Budge, Egyptian Magic, 27).

See more fully underCHARM .

LITERATURE.

In addition to the literature given in the course of the foregoing article, the following may be mentioned. On the general subject see the great works of Tyler (Early History of Mankind, Primitive Culture) and Frazer, Golden Bough; also the series of articles under "Charms and Amulets" in Hastings' Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics and the excellent article "Amulet" in the corresponding German work, Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart. See further the article "Amulet" in Jewish Encyclopedia, and on Egyptian amulets, Budge, Egyptian Magic, 25 ff.

T. Witton Davies


AMZI

am'-zi (`amtsi, "my strength"): (1) A Levite of the family of Merari (1 Ch 6:46). (2) A priest of the family of Adaiah in the second temple. His father's name was Zechariah (Neh 11:12).



Placed in the public domain by SpiritAndTruth.org
Report corrections to contact@SpiritAndTruth.org
(Produced: Thu Nov 30 09:07:41 2000)

Help PreviousNext