CHAPTER 4 Shifting Emphasis: Examples of Early and Modern Reception of the Book of

Göran Eidevall

1 Introduction

The has been read and interpreted during more than two thou- sand years, within diverse branches of Judaism and , as well as within academic contexts. Time and again, new historical situations and new interpretive communities have engendered new ways of reading.1 In some cases, indeed, the differences are so great that one may ask: Have these inter- preters really been reading the same book? In my opinion, the differing, and at times strongly divergent, interpretations that have been produced during the centuries are best explained in terms of shifting emphasis. On a closer exami- nation, the book of Amos contains a variety of topics and perspectives. As a consequence, it lends itself to more than one line of interpretation. It depends on how you define the book’s centre, or its core message. Due to social and ideological changes, passages that were previously regarded as central may become marginal, and vice versa. I shall discuss some examples of such shifts in emphasis below. It is, of course, not possible to cover two thousand years of reception history in a short article. However, Amos has not always belonged to the most pop- ular or most extensively commented books in the Hebrew . During the medieval era, one may in fact speak of a relative neglect of the book of Amos, among both Jewish and Christian scholars.2 As suggested by Donald Gowan,

1 For helpful surveys of the entire history of Amos’ reception and interpretation, see J. Barton, The Theology of the Book of Amos ( Theology; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012), pp. 161–177, and R. Martin-Achard, Amos: l’homme, le message, l’influence (Genève: Labor et Fides, 1984), pp. 163–242. 2 See L. Markert, “Amos, Amosbuch,” Theologische Realenzyklopädie (Berlin: W. de Gruyter, 1978), vol. 2, pp. 484–485. Cf. also Martin-Achard, Amos, pp. 186–206. The book of Amos was of course not overlooked by the rabbis or the early Christian theologians. A guide to the refer- ences to Amos in the Talmud and in other parts of the rabbinical literature has been provided by J. Neusner, Amos in Talmud and Midrash (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 2007). For a discussion on the patristic commentaries on Amos, see J. G. Kelly, “The Interpretation

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���6 | doi ��.��63/9789004324541_005 32 Eidevall this was probably to a large extent due to the book’s rather harsh message: “Both Jewish and Christian interpreters typically sought messages of comfort and hope in the Old Testament, and there is little of that to be found in Amos.”3 In the following, I shall therefore concentrate on what I take to be an especially intriguing and illuminating comparison: between the most ancient and the most recent stages within the history of Amos interpretation. The earliest known explicit reference to this prophetic book is found in Tobit 2:6, which features a quotation from :10.4 Here Amos is remem- bered as a of doom, who had spoken about disasters and hardships similar to those experienced by Tobit and his family. The words from Amos 8:10, announcing that feasts will be turned into occasions of lamentation, are cited as a fitting comment on the situation described in the narrative.5 However, there is no indication that this oracle was quoted for theological reasons. The author does not provide an interpretation of Amos 8:10. For the purpose of this paper, the attestations of Amos reception in the and the New Testament are of greater interest.

2 Amos in Qumran

Unfortunately, an Amos pesher has not been discovered in the caves at Qumran. However, there is no doubt that this prophetic book was studied by the Qumran community.6 This is attested by three writings among the Dead Sea Scrolls. To begin with, an unmarked quote from Amos 8:11 (a prophecy con- cerning hunger and thirst for the divine word) occurs in an exegetical text,

of :13 in the Early Christian Community,” in R. McNamara (ed.), Essays in Honor of P. Brennan (Rochester, NY: Saint Bernard’s Seminary, 1977), pp. 60–77. 3 D. E. Gowan, “The Book of Amos: Introduction, Commentary, and Reflections,” in L. E. Keck et al. (eds.), New Interpreter’s Bible (Nashville: Abingdon, 1996), vol. 7, pp. 337–431 esp. 340. 4 The book of Tobit is commonly dated to the third or the second century BCE See C. A. Moore, Tobit: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (Anchor Bible 40A; New York: Doubleday, 1996), pp. 40–42. 5 Similarly Barton, The Theology, p. 164. 6 For a more detailed discussion of the use of the book of Amos in the Dead Sea scrolls and in the Qumran community, see H. von Weissenberg, “The Twelve Minor at Qumran and the Canonical Process,” in N. Dávid et al. (eds.), The in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls (Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 239; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2012), pp. 357–375. Cf. also A. Park, The Book of Amos as Composed and Read in Antiquity (Studies in Biblical Literature 37; New York: P. Lang, 2001), pp. 178–191.