English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The Amaziah narrative (Am 7,10–17) has often been dated late in recent research, which would exclude its use as evidence for the historical Amos. In the analysis it is shown that the underlying text comprises an originally independent narrative, which was later joined to the third and fourth visions by the addition of 7,9 and 7,17bß. Since Amos in 7,14 denies any relation to a charismatic profession and in 7,11 a military catastrophe for the northern kingdom in the time of Jeroboam II is announced, the narrative must have originated before the death of Jeroboam II or at the latest very soon afterwards. Thus it is, although not direct evidence, nevertheless indirect evidence for the historical Amos. It confirms that he was active under Jeroboam II in the northern kingdom. He was expelled from there by the priest Amaziah and returned to Judah. As indicated by 7,14f. and 3,8, Amos understood himself as neither seer nor prophet. Although the announcement of doom in 7,11 was formulated by the narrators, it is clear from it that the prophecies of a military defeat and a deportation should not, in contrast to recent scholarship, be denied to Amos. The Amaziah tradition is thus, in my view, an example of the fact that at present historical criticism of the tradition is sometimes pushed much too far.

Die Amazja-Erzählung (Am 7,10–17) und der historische Amos