Watch this on Rumble: https://rumble.com/v760bo2-part-twenty-eight-examination-of-amos-ethiopian-tewahedo-orthodox-and-king-.html
Synopsis
Amos speaks into a season of outward stability and inward corruption. The northern kingdom of Israel is economically strong and territorially secure, yet beneath prosperity lies injustice. The prophet, a shepherd from Tekoa, is sent not from palace or priesthood but from the fields. His message is not subtle. It is judicial.
The book opens with a series of oracles against surrounding nations. Each is introduced with the refrain, “For three transgressions, and for four.” The rhythm builds expectation. Damascus, Gaza, Tyre, Edom, Ammon, Moab, and even Judah are named. The circle tightens gradually until Israel stands exposed. The same standard applied to the nations now applies to the covenant people.
Amos indicts Israel for social injustice—selling the righteous for silver, trampling the poor, corrupting the courts, and practicing religious ritual without ethical integrity. Worship continues, feasts are observed, sacrifices are offered, yet righteousness is absent at the gate. The prophet declares that divine favor is not secured by ceremony. “Let justice roll down like waters” becomes the moral center of the book.
The day of the Lord, anticipated by many as vindication, is reframed as darkness for the unrepentant. Prosperity is revealed as fragile. Visions follow—locusts, fire, a plumb line, a basket of summer fruit—each narrowing the distance between warning and fulfillment. Measurement replaces assumption. Ripeness signals impending judgment.
Yet Amos does not end with desolation alone. The final promise speaks of the fallen booth of David being raised and the land restored. Judgment purifies. Restoration concludes.
The Ethiopian Tewahedo witness and the King James rendering preserve Amos’s courtroom structure and ethical intensity. Differences may appear in cadence and terminology, particularly in passages addressing social injustice and divine rejection of hollow worship, but the theological spine remains firm. Justice is demanded. Ritual without righteousness is rejected. Restoration follows judgment.
Monologue
Amos begins with thunder.
He names Damascus. Gaza. Tyre. Edom. Ammon. Moab. The refrain repeats: “For three transgressions, and for four.” The rhythm builds like a courtroom charge sheet. Fire is promised. Palaces will fall. The nations are judged for violence, cruelty, and betrayal.
Then the circle tightens. Judah is named. Israel is named. The listeners who nodded at foreign condemnation now feel the weight shift inward. Prosperity has not concealed corruption. The righteous are sold for silver. The poor are crushed at the gate. Courts are bent. Bribes speak louder than truth.
Worship continues. Feasts are celebrated. Songs are sung. Yet the prophet declares, “I hate your feasts.” The sound of music becomes noise when justice is absent. Let justice roll down like waters. Let righteousness flow like a mighty stream. The words cut sharply because they expose the gap between altar and marketplace.
The day of the Lord is not triumph. It is darkness. Those who long for it misunderstand its weight. Light expected becomes shadow. Security assumed becomes collapse.
Visions follow. Locusts threaten. Fire consumes. A plumb line measures crooked walls. A basket of summer fruit signals ripeness for judgment. The images move from possibility to inevitability. Measurement replaces illusion.
A priest confronts the prophet. Authority challenges authenticity. Amos answers simply: he was neither prophet nor prophet’s son. He was taken from the flock. The message did not originate in institution, but in calling.
Yet the book does not close in ruin alone. The fallen booth of David will be raised. Ruins will be rebuilt. Vineyards will be planted again. Judgment purifies; restoration follows.
Amos roars like a lion. Justice outweighs ritual. Prosperity without righteousness collapses. The Lord measures. And when the measuring is finished, restoration stands beyond the reckoning.
Part One – Oracles Against the Nations: “For Three Transgressions”
Amos opens not with Israel, but with surrounding nations. The tone is judicial and rhythmic. Translation must preserve the repeated formula that structures these opening chapters. The refrain builds expectation and sets the courtroom atmosphere before the covenant people are addressed.
Ethiopian Tewahedo Orthodox witness (representative portion):
“Thus says the Lord:
For three transgressions of Damascus, and for four,
I will not turn away its punishment,
because they have threshed Gilead with implements of iron.”
King James rendering (representative portion):
“Thus saith the Lord;
For three transgressions of Damascus, and for four,
I will not turn away the punishment thereof;
because they have threshed Gilead with threshing instruments of iron.”
The alignment is strong. The Ethiopian phrasing reads with clarity—“I will not turn away its punishment.” The King James cadence retains rhythmic structure—“the punishment thereof.” The repetition of “for three… and for four” signals accumulation. It conveys excess beyond measure.
The pattern continues with Gaza, Tyre, Edom, Ammon, and Moab. Each oracle names specific cruelty—exile, betrayal, violence against the vulnerable.
Ethiopian rendering (representative):
“For three transgressions of Gaza, and for four,
I will not turn away its punishment,
because they carried away captive the whole people.”
King James rendering (representative):
“For three transgressions of Gaza, and for four,
I will not turn away the punishment thereof;
because they carried away captive the whole captivity.”
The Ethiopian wording clarifies meaning in contemporary language. The King James preserves older phrasing—“the whole captivity.” Both maintain the charge: exploitation and cruelty provoke judgment.
Theologically, these opening oracles establish divine impartiality. The Lord judges nations beyond Israel. Covenant privilege does not exempt Israel from accountability, but neither does foreign identity shield others.
The formulaic repetition serves a rhetorical purpose. The audience likely agrees with condemnation of neighboring powers. Justice seems clear when directed outward. The structure prepares for reversal.
Tone determines whether the passage feels nationalistic or judicial. The Ethiopian phrasing emphasizes clarity and specificity. The King James cadence deepens solemn rhythm through repetition and archaic structure. Neither alters doctrine.
This section sets the courtroom stage. The lion roars from Zion. Fire is promised against injustice. The nations are measured first. The examination continues listening for whether translation preserves both rhetorical buildup and theological impartiality. In Amos, judgment begins beyond Israel—but it does not end there.
Part Two – Indictment of Judah and Israel
After the surrounding nations are named, the circle tightens. The same refrain that condemned Damascus and Gaza now turns toward covenant people. Translation must preserve the rhetorical shift. What began as agreement with foreign judgment becomes exposure of familiar guilt.
Ethiopian Tewahedo Orthodox witness (representative portion):
“Thus says the Lord:
For three transgressions of Judah, and for four,
I will not turn away its punishment,
because they have despised the law of the Lord,
and have not kept His commandments.”
King James rendering (representative portion):
“Thus saith the Lord;
For three transgressions of Judah, and for four,
I will not turn away the punishment thereof;
because they have despised the law of the Lord,
and have not kept his commandments.”
The alignment is close. The Ethiopian phrasing reads plainly—“despised the law.” The King James cadence retains formal rhythm. The theological emphasis shifts from cruelty against others to covenant infidelity. Judah is judged for rejecting revealed instruction.
The indictment intensifies when Israel is addressed:
Ethiopian rendering (representative):
“For three transgressions of Israel, and for four,
I will not turn away its punishment,
because they sell the righteous for silver,
and the poor for a pair of sandals.”
King James rendering (representative):
“For three transgressions of Israel, and for four,
I will not turn away the punishment thereof;
because they sold the righteous for silver,
and the poor for a pair of shoes.”
The structure remains firm. The Ethiopian wording clarifies economic injustice. The King James preserves older vocabulary—“shoes” rather than “sandals.” The theological weight is unchanged: human dignity is traded for profit.
The charges expand: oppression of the poor, corruption of justice, sexual immorality, misuse of sacred pledges. The covenant people mirror the violence previously condemned in foreign nations.
Theologically, this section reveals divine impartiality applied inward. Israel’s privilege does not exempt it from accountability. Covenant knowledge increases responsibility.
Tone determines whether the shift feels sudden or inevitable. The Ethiopian phrasing emphasizes clarity and ethical directness. The King James cadence deepens solemnity through repetition of the established formula. Neither alters doctrine.
This section completes the rhetorical turn. The lion roared against the nations. Now the roar confronts Judah and Israel. The same standard applies.
The examination continues listening for whether translation preserves the tightening circle of judgment. In Amos, agreement with foreign condemnation becomes personal reckoning. Justice does not stop at the border.
Part Three – Social Injustice and Corrupt Prosperity
With Israel now clearly in view, Amos exposes the social fabric beneath outward prosperity. The tone sharpens further. Translation must preserve the ethical force of the accusations without exaggeration. The prophet does not condemn wealth alone; he condemns wealth secured through oppression.
Ethiopian Tewahedo Orthodox witness (representative portion):
“They pant after the dust of the earth
which is on the head of the poor,
and pervert the way of the humble.
A man and his father go in to the same young woman,
to profane My holy name.”
King James rendering (representative portion):
“That pant after the dust of the earth
on the head of the poor,
and turn aside the way of the meek:
and a man and his father will go in unto the same maid,
to profane my holy name.”
The alignment is strong. The Ethiopian phrasing reads with clarity—“pervert the way of the humble.” The King James retains older diction—“turn aside the way of the meek.” Both preserve the image of exploitation.
The charges continue beyond individual immorality into systemic corruption.
Ethiopian rendering (representative):
“They lay themselves down beside every altar
on garments taken in pledge,
and drink the wine of the condemned
in the house of their god.”
King James rendering (representative):
“And they lay themselves down upon clothes laid to pledge by every altar,
and they drink the wine of the condemned
in the house of their god.”
The Ethiopian wording clarifies economic injustice—garments taken as pledge and not returned. The King James preserves parallel phrasing. The theological point is sharp: sacred spaces are used to celebrate exploitation.
Prosperity is visible, yet moral structure is collapsing.
Ethiopian rendering (representative):
“They oppress the poor,
they crush the needy,
and say to their masters, ‘Bring wine, let us drink!’”
King James rendering (representative):
“That oppress the poor,
which crush the needy,
which say to their masters, Bring, and let us drink.”
The language remains direct in both witnesses. Wealth and indulgence coexist with injustice. The imagery is not abstract. It is social and economic.
Theologically, this section establishes that covenant faithfulness is measured at the gate—in courts, markets, and homes. Ritual observance cannot compensate for systemic injustice. Prosperity without righteousness invites judgment.
Tone determines whether this passage is heard as moral outrage or covenant indictment. The Ethiopian phrasing emphasizes clarity and contemporary readability. The King James cadence deepens solemn force through repetition and archaic rhythm. Neither alters doctrine.
This section intensifies Amos’s central message. The issue is not scarcity but corruption. Israel’s affluence has masked oppression.
The examination continues listening for whether translation preserves the gravity of social injustice. In Amos, the Lord measures the marketplace as carefully as the altar. Justice is not optional.
Part Four – Rejection of Empty Worship
After exposing social injustice, Amos turns directly to Israel’s religious life. The tone becomes uncompromising. Worship continues—feasts are observed, offerings are made, songs are sung—yet the Lord declares rejection. Translation must preserve the severity of divine refusal without exaggerating beyond the text. The issue is not worship itself, but worship divorced from justice.
Ethiopian Tewahedo Orthodox witness (representative portion):
“I hate, I despise your feast days,
and I do not delight in your sacred assemblies.
Though you offer Me burnt offerings and grain offerings,
I will not accept them;
nor will I regard your peace offerings.”
King James rendering (representative portion):
“I hate, I despise your feast days,
and I will not smell in your solemn assemblies.
Though ye offer me burnt offerings and your meat offerings,
I will not accept them:
neither will I regard the peace offerings of your fat beasts.”
The alignment is strong. The Ethiopian phrasing reads with clarity—“I do not delight.” The King James retains older idiom—“I will not smell,” meaning He will not accept the aroma as pleasing. Both preserve divine rejection of hollow ritual.
The language intensifies:
Ethiopian rendering (representative):
“Take away from Me the noise of your songs,
for I will not hear the melody of your stringed instruments.”
King James rendering (representative):
“Take thou away from me the noise of thy songs;
for I will not hear the melody of thy viols.”
The Ethiopian wording clarifies musical reference. The King James retains “viols,” an older term for stringed instruments. The theological message remains intact: sound without righteousness becomes noise.
The climactic demand follows:
Ethiopian rendering (representative):
“But let justice run down like water,
and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
King James rendering (representative):
“But let judgment run down as waters,
and righteousness as a mighty stream.”
The Ethiopian rendering uses “justice,” emphasizing ethical equity. The King James uses “judgment,” which in its historical context carried similar judicial meaning. Both preserve the central demand: righteousness must flow continuously, not sporadically.
Theologically, this section clarifies Amos’s central thesis. Worship is not rejected because it is ritual, but because it lacks ethical integrity. The Lord measures devotion by justice at the gate.
Tone determines whether the passage feels anti-worship or anti-hypocrisy. The Ethiopian phrasing emphasizes clarity and ethical focus. The King James cadence deepens solemn force through repetition and poetic compression. Neither alters doctrine.
This section stands as the moral center of Amos. Feasts without justice are despised. Songs without righteousness are silenced.
The examination continues listening for whether translation preserves this uncompromising demand. In Amos, justice must flow like water. Worship without it collapses.
Part Five – The Day of the Lord Reframed
Amos now confronts expectation directly. Many in Israel long for “the day of the Lord,” assuming it will bring triumph over enemies and vindication of national identity. The prophet reverses that assumption. Translation must preserve the shock of this reframing without dramatizing beyond the text.
Ethiopian Tewahedo Orthodox witness (representative portion):
“Woe to you who desire the day of the Lord!
For what good is the day of the Lord to you?
It will be darkness, and not light.
It will be as though a man fled from a lion,
and a bear met him;
or as though he went into the house,
leaned his hand on the wall,
and a serpent bit him.”
King James rendering (representative portion):
“Woe unto you that desire the day of the Lord!
to what end is it for you?
the day of the Lord is darkness, and not light.
As if a man did flee from a lion,
and a bear met him;
or went into the house, and leaned his hand on the wall,
and a serpent bit him.”
The alignment is strong. The Ethiopian phrasing reads with clarity—“what good is the day… to you?” The King James cadence intensifies rhetorical challenge—“to what end is it for you?” Both preserve reversal of expectation.
The imagery is relentless. Escape from one threat leads directly into another. Refuge becomes exposure. The day once anticipated as deliverance becomes unavoidable reckoning.
The passage continues:
Ethiopian rendering (representative):
“Is not the day of the Lord darkness, and not light?
Is it not very dark, with no brightness in it?”
King James rendering (representative):
“Shall not the day of the Lord be darkness, and not light?
even very dark, and no brightness in it?”
The repetition intensifies the point. The Ethiopian phrasing clarifies finality. The King James retains rhythmic parallelism. The theological message is direct: covenant identity does not guarantee immunity from judgment.
Theologically, this section dismantles presumption. Israel assumed divine alignment would favor them against others. Amos insists that righteousness, not identity alone, determines outcome. The day of the Lord reveals rather than protects corruption.
Tone determines whether this passage is heard as apocalyptic dread or covenant correction. The Ethiopian phrasing emphasizes clarity and logical progression. The King James cadence deepens solemn weight through repetition and archaic emphasis. Neither alters doctrine.
This section sharpens Amos’s warning. The people who long for the day misunderstand its purpose. Light expected becomes darkness encountered.
The examination continues listening for whether translation preserves this reversal without distortion. In Amos, the day of the Lord does not flatter national confidence. It exposes it.
Part Six – The Call to Seek the Lord and Live
After dismantling false confidence in the day of the Lord, Amos issues a direct invitation. The tone shifts from denunciation to appeal, yet the urgency remains. Translation must preserve the simplicity of the command without softening its exclusivity. Life is tied to seeking the Lord—not ritual centers, not national security, not prosperity.
Ethiopian Tewahedo Orthodox witness (representative portion):
“For thus says the Lord to the house of Israel:
‘Seek Me and live;
but do not seek Bethel,
nor enter Gilgal,
nor pass over to Beersheba.’”
King James rendering (representative portion):
“For thus saith the Lord unto the house of Israel,
Seek ye me, and ye shall live:
but seek not Bethel,
nor enter into Gilgal,
and pass not to Beersheba.”
The alignment is strong. The Ethiopian phrasing reads plainly—“Seek Me and live.” The King James adds rhythmic emphasis—“Seek ye me, and ye shall live.” Both preserve the direct conditional relationship between seeking and life.
The named locations—Bethel, Gilgal, Beersheba—were religious centers. Amos warns against mistaking sacred geography for covenant faithfulness. Translation must preserve the contrast: seeking places is not the same as seeking the Lord.
The appeal intensifies:
Ethiopian rendering (representative):
“Seek the Lord and live,
lest He break out like fire in the house of Joseph,
and devour it.”
King James rendering (representative):
“Seek the Lord, and ye shall live;
lest he break out like fire in the house of Joseph,
and devour it.”
The imagery returns to consuming fire. The Ethiopian phrasing emphasizes clarity of consequence. The King James cadence reinforces inevitability through repetition. Both preserve urgency.
Amos ties seeking to ethical reform:
Ethiopian rendering (representative):
“Seek good and not evil,
that you may live;
so the Lord God of hosts will be with you.”
King James rendering (representative):
“Seek good, and not evil,
that ye may live:
and so the Lord, the God of hosts, shall be with you.”
The connection is explicit. Seeking the Lord is expressed through seeking good. Life and divine presence are linked to moral alignment.
Theologically, this section clarifies that judgment is not arbitrary. A path remains open. The Lord invites return. Yet the invitation requires abandonment of corrupted worship and pursuit of justice.
Tone determines whether this passage feels hopeful or conditional. The Ethiopian phrasing emphasizes clarity and directness. The King James cadence deepens solemn appeal through rhythmic repetition. Neither alters doctrine.
This section stands as Amos’s pivot. After thunderous indictment, a doorway remains: seek the Lord and live. The fire can be avoided. The presence of God can be restored.
The examination continues listening for whether translation preserves both warning and invitation. In Amos, life is not secured by ritual centers. It is found in seeking the Lord.
Part Seven – The Plumb Line: Measured Crookedness
Amos now moves from proclamation to vision. The tone becomes symbolic but precise. Translation must preserve both the simplicity of the image and the severity of its implication. The plumb line does not threaten randomly; it measures accurately.
Ethiopian Tewahedo Orthodox witness (representative portion):
“Thus He showed me:
Behold, the Lord stood on a wall made with a plumb line,
with a plumb line in His hand.
And the Lord said to me, ‘Amos, what do you see?’
So I said, ‘A plumb line.’
Then the Lord said:
‘Behold, I am setting a plumb line
in the midst of My people Israel;
I will not pass by them anymore.’”
King James rendering (representative portion):
“Thus he shewed me:
and, behold, the Lord stood upon a wall made by a plumbline,
with a plumbline in his hand.
And the Lord said unto me, Amos, what seest thou?
And I said, A plumbline.
Then said the Lord,
Behold, I will set a plumbline
in the midst of my people Israel:
I will not again pass by them any more.”
The alignment is strong. The Ethiopian phrasing reads with clarity—“I will not pass by them anymore.” The King James retains older cadence—“I will not again pass by them any more.” Both preserve finality.
The plumb line represents standard. A wall that once appeared straight is now measured. Crookedness becomes undeniable. The Lord does not compare Israel to surrounding nations; He measures them against covenant alignment.
The vision continues:
Ethiopian rendering (representative):
“The high places of Isaac shall be desolate,
and the sanctuaries of Israel shall be laid waste.”
King James rendering (representative):
“And the high places of Isaac shall be desolate,
and the sanctuaries of Israel shall be laid waste.”
The language is nearly identical. The measurement results in exposure and removal of corrupted worship centers.
Theologically, this section clarifies that judgment is not impulsive. It is measured. The Lord sets the standard and examines what stands. Israel’s structure has drifted from vertical alignment.
Tone determines whether this passage feels symbolic or surgical. The Ethiopian phrasing emphasizes clarity and measured action. The King James cadence deepens solemn gravity through repetition and formal rhythm. Neither alters doctrine.
This section intensifies Amos’s argument. The day of the Lord was reframed. The invitation to seek remained. Now the plumb line confirms the diagnosis.
The examination continues listening for whether translation preserves both precision and inevitability. In Amos, the Lord measures. What is crooked cannot remain unexamined.
Part Eight – The Basket of Summer Fruit: Ripeness for Judgment
Amos is shown another vision. The tone remains symbolic but grows more immediate. Translation must preserve both the simplicity of the image and the inevitability it conveys. The vision does not threaten future possibility alone; it signals present readiness.
Ethiopian Tewahedo Orthodox witness (representative portion):
“Thus the Lord God showed me:
Behold, a basket of summer fruit.
And He said, ‘Amos, what do you see?’
So I said, ‘A basket of summer fruit.’
Then the Lord said to me:
‘The end has come upon My people Israel;
I will not pass by them anymore.’”
King James rendering (representative portion):
“Thus hath the Lord God shewed unto me:
and behold a basket of summer fruit.
And he said, Amos, what seest thou?
And I said, A basket of summer fruit.
Then said the Lord unto me,
The end is come upon my people of Israel;
I will not again pass by them any more.”
The alignment is strong. The Ethiopian phrasing reads with clarity—“The end has come.” The King James retains solemn cadence—“The end is come.” Both preserve finality.
The image of summer fruit carries double meaning. It suggests ripeness and completion. What is ripe must be gathered. The play between “fruit” and “end” in the original Hebrew intensifies the symbolism. Translation may not replicate the wordplay fully, but the theological implication remains: the season of patience has reached its limit.
The vision is followed by stark consequence:
Ethiopian rendering (representative):
“The songs of the temple shall be wailing in that day…
There shall be many dead bodies in every place.”
King James rendering (representative):
“And the songs of the temple shall be howlings in that day…
and there shall be many dead bodies in every place.”
The Ethiopian phrasing clarifies the transformation from song to wailing. The King James preserves older diction—“howlings.” Both communicate reversal of joy.
Economic injustice resurfaces:
Ethiopian rendering (representative):
“Hear this, you who swallow up the needy…
saying, ‘When will the New Moon be past,
that we may sell grain?’”
King James rendering (representative):
“Hear this, O ye that swallow up the needy…
saying, When will the new moon be gone,
that we may sell corn?”
The alignment remains close. The Ethiopian wording reads plainly. The King James retains older agricultural terms. The theological thrust persists: worship observance is viewed as interruption to profit.
The section closes with another severe image:
Ethiopian rendering (representative):
“Behold, the days are coming…
that I will send a famine in the land,
not a famine of bread,
nor a thirst for water,
but of hearing the words of the Lord.”
King James rendering (representative):
“Behold, the days come…
that I will send a famine in the land,
not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water,
but of hearing the words of the Lord.”
The wording aligns almost exactly. The famine is spiritual rather than agricultural. Silence replaces warning.
Theologically, this section reveals culmination. The plumb line measured. The fruit is ripe. Patience has limits. The most severe judgment may not be destruction alone, but withdrawal of revelation.
Tone determines whether this passage is heard as apocalyptic drama or covenant consequence. The Ethiopian phrasing emphasizes clarity and immediacy. The King James cadence deepens solemnity through repetition and parallelism. Neither alters doctrine.
This section advances Amos toward inevitability. Ripeness has arrived. Songs become wailing. Words become scarce.
The examination continues listening for whether translation preserves both symbolism and finality. In Amos, the season has matured. The harvest of judgment stands ready.
Part Nine – Confrontation with Amaziah and Prophetic Authority
After visions of measurement and ripeness, Amos moves from symbol to confrontation. The tone shifts from visionary imagery to historical encounter. Translation must preserve the tension between institutional authority and prophetic calling without dramatizing beyond the text.
Ethiopian Tewahedo Orthodox witness (representative portion):
“Then Amaziah the priest of Bethel sent to Jeroboam king of Israel, saying,
‘Amos has conspired against you in the midst of the house of Israel;
the land is not able to bear all his words.’”
King James rendering (representative portion):
“Then Amaziah the priest of Bethel sent to Jeroboam king of Israel, saying,
Amos hath conspired against thee in the midst of the house of Israel:
the land is not able to bear all his words.”
The alignment is strong. The Ethiopian phrasing reads plainly—“the land is not able to bear.” The King James preserves rhythmic cadence. Both reflect institutional discomfort with prophetic rebuke.
Amaziah addresses Amos directly:
Ethiopian rendering (representative):
“Go, you seer!
Flee to the land of Judah.
There eat bread, and there prophesy;
but never again prophesy at Bethel.”
King James rendering (representative):
“O thou seer, go, flee thee away into the land of Judah,
and there eat bread, and prophesy there:
but prophesy not again any more at Bethel.”
The Ethiopian phrasing emphasizes dismissal. The King James retains archaic directness—“O thou seer.” The conflict is clear: the priest defends royal sanctuary and national stability.
Amos responds:
Ethiopian rendering (representative):
“I was no prophet, nor was I a prophet’s son;
but I was a herdsman and a dresser of sycamore trees.
Then the Lord took me as I followed the flock,
and the Lord said to me,
‘Go, prophesy to My people Israel.’”
King James rendering (representative):
“I was no prophet, neither was I a prophet’s son;
but I was an herdman, and a gatherer of sycomore fruit:
and the Lord took me as I followed the flock,
and the Lord said unto me,
Go, prophesy unto my people Israel.”
The alignment remains firm. The Ethiopian phrasing reads with clarity—“dresser of sycamore trees.” The King James preserves older agricultural vocabulary—“herdman,” “sycomore fruit.” The theological thrust is unchanged: Amos speaks by divine calling, not institutional lineage.
The confrontation concludes with renewed judgment declared against Amaziah’s household and Israel’s exile. Authority cannot silence revelation.
Theologically, this section clarifies that prophetic legitimacy derives from divine commissioning rather than priestly endorsement. The word of the Lord confronts political and religious structures alike.
Tone determines whether this passage feels like rebellion or obedience. The Ethiopian phrasing emphasizes clarity and narrative flow. The King James cadence deepens solemn gravity through formal dialogue structure. Neither alters doctrine.
This section grounds Amos’s visions in lived conflict. The plumb line measured the nation. Now the prophet himself is measured by institutional resistance.
The examination continues listening for whether translation preserves both confrontation and calling. In Amos, authority stands not in title, but in obedience to the Lord’s voice.
Part Ten – Restoration of the Fallen Booth of David
After relentless judgment, Amos closes with promise. The tone shifts decisively. Translation must preserve both the abruptness of hope and its covenant grounding. Restoration does not cancel the severity that preceded it; it follows it.
Ethiopian Tewahedo Orthodox witness (representative portion):
“On that day I will raise up
the fallen booth of David,
and repair its damages;
I will raise up its ruins,
and rebuild it as in the days of old,
that they may possess the remnant of Edom
and all the nations who are called by My name,”
says the Lord who does this.
King James rendering (representative portion):
“In that day will I raise up
the tabernacle of David that is fallen,
and close up the breaches thereof;
and I will raise up his ruins,
and I will build it as in the days of old:
that they may possess the remnant of Edom,
and of all the heathen, which are called by my name,”
saith the Lord that doeth this.
The alignment is strong. The Ethiopian phrasing reads clearly—“booth of David.” The King James uses “tabernacle of David,” retaining older covenant terminology. Both convey restoration of Davidic structure and covenant order.
The imagery expands:
Ethiopian rendering (representative):
“Behold, the days are coming…
when the plowman shall overtake the reaper,
and the treader of grapes him who sows seed;
the mountains shall drip with sweet wine.”
King James rendering (representative):
“Behold, the days come…
that the plowman shall overtake the reaper,
and the treader of grapes him that soweth seed;
and the mountains shall drop sweet wine.”
The language is lush and abundant. The Ethiopian phrasing clarifies agricultural imagery. The King James preserves poetic cadence—“drop sweet wine.” Both express reversal of former devastation.
The promise concludes with permanence:
Ethiopian rendering (representative):
“I will plant them in their land,
and no longer shall they be pulled up
from the land I have given them.”
King James rendering (representative):
“And I will plant them upon their land,
and they shall no more be pulled up
out of their land which I have given them.”
The wording aligns closely. The emphasis is stability after upheaval. Judgment purified; restoration secures.
Theologically, this closing affirms covenant continuity. The fallen structure is not abandoned. It is rebuilt. The Lord remains active—“who does this.” Restoration is divine initiative, not human recovery alone.
Tone determines whether this conclusion feels like national revival or covenant renewal. The Ethiopian phrasing emphasizes clarity and relational promise. The King James cadence deepens solemn assurance through repetition and archaic structure. Neither alters doctrine.
Amos ends where covenant hope resides. Justice was demanded. Judgment was declared. The plumb line measured. The fruit ripened. Yet beyond the reckoning, the fallen booth stands raised.
The Lord rebuilds.
Conclusion
Amos begins with fire and ends with rebuilding. The arc is deliberate. Nations are judged first. Judah is named. Israel stands exposed. Prosperity is measured. Worship without justice is rejected. The day of the Lord is reframed as darkness rather than triumph. Visions confirm inevitability. Authority resists the prophet. Yet the fallen booth of David is raised at the end.
Across both the Ethiopian Tewahedo witness and the King James rendering, the theological structure remains intact. The repeated formula—“for three transgressions, and for four”—establishes cumulative guilt. The call to “seek the Lord and live” leaves a path open. The plumb line measures crookedness precisely. The basket of summer fruit signals ripeness. The famine of hearing the word intensifies the warning. Restoration closes the book without erasing the severity that precedes it.
Where differences appear, they are tonal rather than doctrinal. The Ethiopian phrasing often provides contemporary clarity—“justice” where older English reads “judgment,” “booth” where the King James reads “tabernacle.” The King James preserves cadence and formal rhythm. Neither witness alters Amos’s central demand: covenant faithfulness must express itself in justice.
Amos does not condemn wealth alone. He condemns exploitation. He does not reject worship itself. He rejects worship severed from righteousness. The Lord measures both altar and marketplace.
The book ends with rebuilding, not because injustice was ignored, but because it was confronted. Judgment purifies. Restoration follows.
In Amos, the lion roars from Zion. The plumb line hangs straight. The fruit ripens. The fallen structure rises again. Justice stands uncompromised, and covenant hope remains.
Bibliography
- The Holy Bible: King James Version. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1769 edition (standard KJV text).
- The Holy Bible: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Canon. Translated from Geʽez into English. Addis Ababa: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church tradition; modern English rendering used for comparative examination.
- Brown, Francis, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs. The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996.
- Clines, David J. A., ed. The Dictionary of Classical Hebrew. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993–2011.
- Andersen, Francis I., and David Noel Freedman. Amos: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. Anchor Yale Bible 24A. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989.
- Mays, James Luther. Amos: A Commentary. Old Testament Library. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1969.
- Paul, Shalom M. Amos: A Commentary on the Book of Amos. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991.
- Hubbard, David Allan. Joel and Amos. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 1989.
- Stuart, Douglas. Hosea–Jonah. Word Biblical Commentary 31. Waco, TX: Word Books, 1987.
Endnotes
- The formula “for three transgressions, and for four” functions as rhetorical intensification rather than numerical precision. See Andersen and Freedman, Amos, 201–204.
- Amos 5:21–24 stands as the theological center of the book, linking worship and justice inseparably. See Mays, Amos, 95–102.
- The plumb line vision (Amos 7:7–9) conveys measured judgment rather than impulsive wrath. See Paul, Amos, 225–232.
- The famine of hearing the word (Amos 8:11–12) reflects covenant withdrawal rather than mere silence. See Stuart, Hosea–Jonah, 321–327.
- The restoration of the fallen booth of David (Amos 9:11–15) concludes the book with covenant renewal rooted in divine initiative. See Hubbard, Joel and Amos, 195–203.
#Amos #EthiopianCanon #EthiopianTewahedo #KingJamesBible #BiblicalComparison #SocialJustice #DayOfTheLord #PlumbLine #PropheticWarning #CovenantFaithfulness #MinorProphets #BiblicalTheology #OldTestamentStudy #CauseBeforeSymptom
Amos, EthiopianCanon, EthiopianTewahedo, KingJamesBible, BiblicalComparison, SocialJustice, DayOfTheLord, PlumbLine, PropheticWarning, CovenantFaithfulness, MinorProphets, BiblicalTheology, OldTestamentStudy, CauseBeforeSymptom