Глава 6

1–8. Exposing the carelessness, luxury and arrogance of Israeli nobles. 9–14. Proclamation of punishment. Am.6:1. Woe to those who are careless in Zion and to those who trust in Mount Samaria, the eminent preeminent people, to whom the house of Israel comes! Ch. VI-th contains a new accusatory speech of the prophet against those who considered the day of the Lord to be far off and drove away from themselves any thought of the upcoming judgment. In this speech, the prophet addresses the nobles of Samaria, placing along with them the nobles of Zion. – Woe to the careless in Zion: according to the translation of LXX – τοῖς ὲξουθενοῦσι Σιών, glory. "Fierce to those who humiliate Zion." According to Greek In the translation, therefore, the prophet addresses only the nobles of Samaria, which is quite consistent with the context, although not confirmed by other translations. - “Eminent people of the first people”, Heb. nekuvejreschith haggoim: “primary people” or more precisely from Hebrew. The prophet calls Israel “the firstborn of the nations”; this name was given to the people by the Lord himself through Moses (Ex. 4:22; Num. 24.20). The Prophet uses this name in an ironic sense, wanting to indicate that Israel is more aware of its rights than remembers its responsibilities. LXX euro nekuvej (eminent), apparently, was considered a form of ch. jakar and by analogy with creatures. jekev sharpened, gave it the meaning - ἀποτρυγάω - I collect in a sharpened; the word reschith (beginning, firstborn) LXX was read as reschim and translated ἀρχάς - heads, firstfruits; from here to glory “obimasha” (gathered in a winepress) the beginnings of tongues. Greek thought -glory. The text is unclear in itself and does not stand in any connection with the context. - “To whom the house of Israel comes,” glory. “and the house of Israel came down to them (i.e., to the nobles)”: the expression is unclear; It is usually assumed that the verb ubau (come) should be supplemented: “for judgment.” Am.6:2. Go to Kalneh and see, from there go to Hamath the great and go down to Gath of the Philistines: are they not better than these kingdoms? Are not their borders greater than your borders? Kalne is a city mentioned in Gen. 10.10; Isa 10.9 and Eze 27.23 (Kanneh). Its location is suggested either in Babylonia (Gen. 10.10) or in northern Syria (Winkler). In the latter case, Kalne, mentioned by the prophet Amos and in Isaiah 10.9, is identified with the city of Kallani or Gullani, conquered by Sargon (Novak). LXX euro kalneh, apparently, mistakenly read kulchem ​​(from kol all) and translated - διαβητε πάντες, go everyone; in our glory. t. withheld and Greek. translation and reading of the original, as a result of which it turned out: “Mimoidite Khalanu all.” – “Hemath the Great” – (in LXX ' Εματραββά) a city on the banks of the Orontes River, which later bore, according to the testimony of the blessed. Jerome, the name is Antioch, and then Ammas. “Geth” is a famous Philistine city, very often mentioned in the Bible (1 Samuel 6.17; 2 Chronicles 26.6); in the word ἀλλόφυλοι, foreigners, LXX conveys Heb. pelischthim - Philistines. As to the meaning of the question addressed by the prophet in v. 2nd to his listeners, it is not entirely clear and is understood differently by exegetes. According to Keil et al., the prophet in v. 2nd gives the rationale for what he used in Art. The first title in relation to Israel is the firstborn (first) of the nations, showing that, indeed, Israel is better than neighboring kingdoms, and its borders are greater than their borders. But the prophet's listeners hardly needed to justify the position that Israel is the first of the nations. Moreover, if the prophet had meant in v. 2nd goal attributed to him, he would have mentioned Assyria and Egypt, and not about Gath. According to other commentators (Jungers), the prophet wants to point out that the pagan kingdoms best known to the people “enjoyed less prosperity, power and importance than Israel and Judah (at the time of Jeroboam II and Uzziah), and that their borders were less extensive than those of the kingdom of Israel.” But special prosperity was granted by Jehovah to Israel on the condition that they observe the laws. However, the nobles of Israel do not keep the law. Another interpretation is similar to the above, according to which the prophet’s train of thought should suggest the following: the nobles of Samaria and Zion hoped for their past. But if it were true that the past is also a guarantee for the future, then Kalneh, Hamath and Gath would currently be at a higher level of power than Israel. But is it really so? Are they better than these kingdoms and are their borders greater than your borders? Therefore, Israel should not rely on its glorious past (Gonaker). The stated interpretations, art. The second can hardly be satisfied, since they give the train of thought in the prophet’s speech unclear and strained. According to the Russian translation of Art. On the 2nd, the prophet here does not point out the advantage of the kingdom of Israel over the neighboring pagan ones, but, on the contrary, the advantage of these latter. The prophet is supposed to want to say that if such kingdoms as Kalneh, Hamath and Gath are destroyed, then even more so the kingdom of Israel or Judah can be destroyed and therefore it is unreasonable to be carefree in Zion or rely on Mount Samaria. This interpretation of Art. The 2nd is held by most of the new commentators on the book of the prophet Amos (Wellhausen, Valeton, Novak, Harner, etc.). This interpretation gives a clear thought and corresponding to the context of the prophet’s speech. The confusion among some commentators arises only because Hamath, according to the inscriptions, fell in 720 under Sargon, and Kalne, if identified with Kulanu or Kullani of the inscriptions, was conquered by Sargon after 710 (Novak). Thus, it turns out that the proposed Art. 2nd events took place after the time of Amos and that v. 2 must be considered a later insertion, as the newest commentators think. But there is no need to assume that in Art. 2nd refers specifically to the facts of the conquest of Hamath and Kalne by Sargon, noted in cuneiform. The prophet could also have been referring to the conquest of Gath by Hazael, king of Syria, and the capture of Hamath by Jeroboam II (2 Kings 12:17, 14:25, 28). In relation to Kalna, the prophet could understand the general decline of the kingdom. Am.6:3. You, who consider the day of disaster far away and bring the triumph of violence closer, - Art. 3–6 represent an expansion of the general idea expressed in vv. 1st, and give a detailed description of the luxury of the Samarian nobles. - “You who consider the day of disaster to be far off”: in Hebrew. hamenaddim lejom ra, removing the day of disaster. LXX euro hamenaddim (from niddah) was apparently read as harrawnaderim and translated by the word ευχόμενοι (cod. Alexander., Sirogens., 26), which was later corrected to ἐρχόμενοι; the particle ל in the word jom (day), denoting, as in Hosea 10.12, blames. pad., LXX was taken as a pretext; hence the unclear reading o ί ἐρχόμενοι εἰς ἡμέραν κακὴν slav. "he who comes in the day of evil" Second half of Art. 3rd from EUR read; “and bring closer the triumph of violence”, vaththagischun scheveth chamas. In the LXX, these words are conveyed o ι εγγιζοντες και εφαπτομενοι σαββατον ψευδων, in the glory: “those approaching and touching the lying Sabbaths.” Apparently the word εφαπτομενοι, representing a surplus against the original, was originally a marginal note and then found its way into the text; the word σαββάτον appeared in the LXX due to the fact that they punctuated scheveth (throne, triumph) as schabbath (Saturday). According to the meaning of the Greek. -glory. text in the second half of the article. On the 3rd, the prophet condemns the Israelites for their hypocritical execution of the laws on Saturdays and holidays (Blessed Theodoret). Some of the new commentators (Gonaker) Heb. scheveth (Russian triumph) is understood to mean peace (for example, from jaschav), the prophet’s expression in this case will take the form: “you consider the day of disaster far away, and now you indulge (bring closer) criminal peace.” With this understanding of Art. 3 will stand in close connection with the following verses, which more often characterize the “criminal peace” of the Samarian nobles. Am.6:4. you who lie on couches of ivory and luxuriate in your beds, eat the best rams from the flock and bulls from the fat pasture, In Art. 4–6, the prophet denounces the feasts of the Samarian nobles, and precisely, as (Jungers) believe, the religious feasts that took place in the churches. - “Eat the best rams of the flock”, Heb. karim mizzon, LXX ἐπίφους ἐκ ποιμνίων , slav. "goats from the flocks". “Calves from the fat pasture”: from Hebrew. vaagalim mithoch marbek, calves from the stall (for fattening); in LXX - καὶ μοσχάρια ἐκ μέσου βουκολίῶν γαλαθηνα, in Slav. “And the calves are fed with milk from the midst of the herds.” Am.6:5. you sing to the sound of the harp, thinking that you wield a musical instrument like David, Text of Art. 5th is unclear and is conveyed in our translation tentatively. - “You sing to the sound of the harp”, happortim al pi hannayel: the meaning of ch. parat (sing) is not known exactly; happartim is translated - οι ἐπικροτουντες (LXX: in Slavic “splashers”), qui canitis (Vulg.), “you sing absurdly” (Yungerov), “worried” (Goonaker), etc.; nevel - harp, harp - a special twelve-stringed instrument (Ancient Jude 7:12, 3), called in the LXX ὄργανον (in Glav. T.: “splashing to the voice of squeaks”). “Thinking that you own a musical instrument like David,” the words of the original kedavid chaschvu lahem kelej – schir are transferred into Russian. i.e. freely. Kelej – schir is understood to mean “musical instruments”, instruments for accompanying a song (schir), or, considering kelej to mistakenly arise from kol all, everyone, they translate: every song, all kinds of songs (Novak). Second half of Art. On the 5th, more precisely from the Hebrew it should be conveyed: “like David they invented musical instruments” or: “like David they invent all sorts of songs.” The prophet's expression is ironic. But it follows from it that already in ancient times the name of David was known in Israel as the name of a singer and musician. The part of verse 5 we are considering in LXX is conveyed completely differently from the original, namely: ὡς ἑστηκότα ἐλογίσαντο καὶ οὐκ ὡς φεύγοντα, glory. “like a standing mnesha, and not like a running one.” How this reading of the LXX arose is difficult to say. Greek thought translation is not clear. According to the explanation of Blessed Theodoret and Cyril of Alexandria, Greek. the text indicates the oblivion by the Israeli sensualists of the transience of earthly pleasures, which they imagined as “worthwhile,” i.e., permanent. Am.6:6. drink wine from cups, anoint yourself with the best ointments, and do not worry about Joseph’s misfortune! “You drink wine from cups (bemizrkrej)”, mizrak - a cup of enormous capacity, used during worship (Numbers 4:14, 7:13, 19; Exodus 38.3); the prophet, i.e., indicates drinking too much wine. LXX, instead of bemizrkej jain, they apparently read bimzukkek jain, which was rendered by the word διυλισμένοι οῖνον, “strained wine.” Since the prophet denounces in v. 4–6 for refinement in pleasures, then reading the LXX is more consistent with the context and is preferred by some to reading the original (Goonaker). “Don’t worry about Joseph’s misfortune”, glory. “and I suffered nothing for Joseph’s contrition”; The prophet names the people of Israel by the name of Joseph. Perhaps with this name the prophet wanted to remind the nobles of Samaria that their attitude towards the people’s disasters was similar to the attitude towards Joseph of his brothers: the latter, having lowered Joseph into the well, calmly sat down to eat and drink (Gen. 37.25), not thinking about the suffering of their brother; So do the nobles of Samaria. Am.6:7. Therefore, now they will go into captivity at the head of the captives, and the rejoicing of the pampered will end. From Art. On the 7th the announcement of the punishment of captivity begins. “At the head of the captives,” that is, ahead of other peoples captured by the conquerors, as an example of punishment. LXX instead of Heb. berosch golim (“at the head of the captives”) they apparently read merosch gedolim and translated ἀπ´ ἀρχῆς δυναστῶν, Slav. “from the beginning of the strong,” meaning, according to the explanation of Blessed Jerome, as conquerors - the leaders of the strong, that is, the Assyrians. “And the rejoicing of the effeminate will end”: Heb. vesar mirzach seruchim is transmitted differently. Heb. mirzach (r. t. rejoicing) Symmachus translates ἑταιρεία, blessed Jerome – factio, – society, commonwealth; In view of this, Goonaker conveys the entire expression: “and the society of debauchees will disappear.” In Jeremiah 16.5 mirzach is used in the sense of a cry, a plaintive cry; therefore, the expression in question is also translated: “the luxurious ones will leave with weeping” (Yungerov). LXX has the second half of Art. The 7th contains a thought completely different from the thought of the original: καὶ ἐξαρθήσεται χρεμεισμὸς ᾿ίππων ἐξ ἡφραίμ, glory. “And the neighing of the horses will be taken away from Ephraim.” The origin of the LXX reading is unclear. Cyril of Alexandria explains it in the sense that the prophet is talking about the removal into captivity of princes who were proud of their expensive horses and their pleasant neighing. The original's message is more in keeping with the context. Am.6:8. The Lord God swears by Himself, and thus says the Lord God of hosts: I abhor the arrogance of Jacob and hate his palaces, and I will betray the city and all that fills it. With the words the Lord swears, the prophet indicates the immutability of the divine determination about the punishment of Israel. And I will betray the city, that is, the city of Samaria. - In gr. -glory. in the text, instead of the words and I hate his palace (veamnothaj) it reads: “and the villages hated him”; LXX is generally Hebrew. Armon palace is conveyed variously and speculatively (cf. Am 1.4; Am 3.9; Jer 17.27). Am.6:9. And it will happen: if ten people remain in any house, they will also die, Art. 9–11 more often depict the coming disaster for the people. In Art. The 9th talks about the extreme impoverishment of the population. “And it will happen: if in any house (bebaith echad) ten people remain, then they will also die.” Since the prophet speaks of an extreme decrease in population, the number of ten remaining in the house (i.e., those who escaped the war) seems too large, and the newest commentators (Wellhausen, Novak) believe that the word asarah (ten) appeared by mistake of copyists. Based on the same considerations, Marty understands the number ten as an indication of the maximum (and not the minimum) of those remaining: at least ten remain, then they too will die. The understanding offered by Marty does not correspond to the context of the speech, from which it is clear that the prophet wants to point out precisely the small number of those remaining. But on the other hand, there is no need to correct the word asarah as erroneous. Apparently, the prophet is talking about the ten who remained not in the house, but in the city. The prophet’s thought can be more fully expressed as follows: if at least one house (bebaith ehad in one house) in the city survives, and if only ten people from the entire population of the city are saved, then they too will die (Gonaker). The prophet means, no doubt, death from pestilence. At the end of verse LXX they have the addition καὶ ὑπολειφθήυονται οί κατὰλοιποι, in glory. “and there will be remnants.” Am.6:10. and their relative or the burner will take them to carry their bones out of the house, and will say to him who is at the house, “Do you have anyone else?” He will answer: there is no one. And this one will say: be silent! for the name of the Lord must not be mentioned. In Art. On the 10th, the idea of ​​extreme depletion of the population continues to be revealed. Beginning of Art. 10th is unclear and raises doubts among modern commentators about the integrity of the text. “And their relative (dodo) or burner (umesarfo) will take them (unesao) to carry their bones (azamim without suff.) out of the house”: in Hebrew. i.e. pronouns are singular. number (his relative will take it), and it is not clear what they refer to (one can hardly think that they refer to the noun of Art. 9 osarah ten (Jungers), because in this case one would have to expect a plural number); in addition, in Heb. t. Art. On the 10th, the word mesaref raises eyebrows. LXX translated it with the verb παραβιωνται, into glory. “and they will be forced.” Usually mesaref is understood to mean burner. But the existence of the Jewish custom of burning corpses seems doubtful (cf. Am 2.1). Jews usually buried their dead (Vincent Canaan. 1907. pp. 212, 262), and if the Bible speaks of burials “with burning,” then in these cases only the burning of various fragrant substances is understood (Jer 34.5; 2 Chr. 16.14). In view of these difficulties, recent commentators propose amendments to Art. 10th. Zeidner and Valeton instead of unesao dodo umesarfo lehozi (Russian) “and their relative or burner will take them to carry them out”) they suggest reading venischear mesared, “and there will be one survivor (fugitive) left to carry them out.” According to Goonaker, the beginning of Art. On the 10th it was originally read venischearu nodedei miseppar, a small number of fugitives (that is, those who escaped) will remain to take the bones out of the house. In Russian translation beginning of Art. The 10th is understood as an indication of the burning of corpses, perhaps out of fear of infection (Yungerov). “And this one will say: Be silent! for it is impossible to mention the name of the Lord”: “the only member of the house remaining alive will naturally call upon the name of God in response to the buryer. The funeral director will warn this intention with the remark: be silent because you should not call on the name of God at this terrible time. The Prophet Amos, through the mouth of a burial man, even forbids calling on the name of the Lord and concentrating on prayer. No, and then prayer will not be needed, but only deathly silence” (Yungerov, 127). It is better, however, to understand the above words simply in the sense of a prohibition to pronounce the name of God; the prophet wants to express the idea of ​​​​God's extreme wrath on the criminal city - that the city will be like an unclean place in which even the name of God cannot be uttered. Instead of the words for, one cannot mention the name of the Lord in Greek. and glory reads: “not naming for the sake of the name of the Lord”: LXX understood the words of the prophet as an indication of the reason for the punishment of the people, that the people did not call on the Lord. Am.6:11. For behold, the Lord will command and will smite the great houses with clefts, and the little houses with cracks. Blessed Jerome sees an allegorical meaning in the words of the prophet: large houses are the kingdom of Israel, small houses are the kingdom of Judah. But there is hardly any reason to understand the prophet’s speech in this way, because he speaks only about the kingdom of Israel. Big houses are the houses of the rich, small houses are the huts of the poor. Am.6:12. Do horses run on rocks? Is it possible to plow it with oxen? Meanwhile, you turn judgment into poison and the fruit of truth into bitterness; The Prophet points out in v. 12 the basis for God's judgment on Israel. The reason for this is that in Israel the entire order of life has been disrupted and something strange and incomprehensible is happening, contrary to common sense. The Prophet expresses this thought with two questions: “Do horses run on the rock? Is it possible to plow it (Tacharosch) with oxen” (babekarim)? Heb. bakar is a collective name meaning: a herd of cattle, bulls; therefore its use in Art. 12th in plural. the number is unclear; in addition, with verb. jacharosch (are they plowing open) there is no addition (Russian translation adds presumably – her). These perplexities are eliminated if we allow a different word division in the sentence under consideration and instead of jacharasch babekarim we read: jacharasch babbakar jam, do oxen plow the sea (Michaedis, Novak, Goonaker). LXX words charasch was taken to mean silent, which it has, and translated into words. παρασιωπήσονται; euro babokarim LXX translated – ἐν θηλείαις (maybe mixed with banekevim from nekebah chena); it turned out to be a little understood expression, which in glory. conveyed: “And if they remain silent in the female sex?” . “Meanwhile, you turn judgment into poison (glorified “in anger”, Greek, εἰς θυμόν) and the fruit of righteousness into bitterness”: i.e. the court, which should serve as a means of protecting safety, you make a source of danger; instead of good, it brings only bitterness. Am.6:13. you who admire insignificant things and say: “Has it not been through our own strength that we have acquired power for ourselves?” For the reason stated in Art. On the 12th disruption of the order of life, the temporary success that Israel enjoys will prove fragile. The word lo dabar, rendered in our text by the expression insignificant things, is considered by the latest commentators to be the proper name of the city of Ladebar, mentioned in 2 Samuel. 9:4–5, 17:27. The word karnaim, translated into Russian, is also considered the proper name of the city. t.s. "power". Carnaim is mentioned in 1 Mac 5.43. Both named cities were in Gilead and could have been taken by the Israelites during the wars with Syria under Jeroboam II. The mention of these insignificant cities would well express the prophet’s thought about the insignificance of the success of the Israelites in comparison with the disaster ahead of them. There is a basis in the text for understanding the words lo dabar and karnaim in the sense of proper names: if we understand karnaim in the sense of naritsat. force, then in the last assumption of Art. On the 13th it turns out mobmohorin - “didn’t it be through our own strength that we acquired strength for ourselves?” Am.6:14. Behold, says the Lord God of hosts, I will raise up a people against you, O house of Israel, and they will oppress you from the entrance of Hamath to the brook in the wilderness. Jeroboam II expanded the borders of the kingdom of Israel from the entrance to Hamath to the sea of ​​the desert, that is, to the Dead Sea (2 Kings 14.25). Now throughout this entire space the people raised up by the Lord will oppress Israel. The prophet speaks, of course, about the Assyrians. “Before the stream in the desert” (ad nahal haarabah): by this stream they mostly mean the current Wadi el-Ahzi, the Arabian stream (haarabim), mentioned by the prophet Isaiah (Isaiah 15.7) and which served as the border between Moab and Edom (Novak, Goonaker). The Prophet, in contrast to 2 Kings 14.25, where only the Dead Sea is indicated as the border of the Kingdom of Israel, continues this border further. Other commentators believe that by nahai haarabah the prophet means the Dead Sea (Hoffmann) or some Egyptian stream (Junger). In glory i.e. the end of the verse reads: “And they will crush you before you can get into Hamath, even to the waters of the West.” You might be interested in: