TEXT [Commentary]

black diamond   VI.   Epilogue: The Restoration of Israel (9:11-15)

11 “In that day I will restore the fallen house[*] of David.

I will repair its damaged walls.

From the ruins I will rebuild it

and restore its former glory.

12 And Israel will possess what is left of Edom

and all the nations I have called to be mine.[*]”

The LORD has spoken,

and he will do these things.

13 “The time will come,” says the LORD,

“when the grain and grapes will grow faster

than they can be harvested.

Then the terraced vineyards on the hills of Israel

will drip with sweet wine!

14 I will bring my exiled people of Israel

back from distant lands,

and they will rebuild their ruined cities

and live in them again.

They will plant vineyards and gardens;

they will eat their crops and drink their wine.

15 I will firmly plant them there

in their own land.

They will never again be uprooted

from the land I have given them,”

says the LORD your God.

NOTES

9:11 In that day. The expression is prophetic shorthand for “the day of the LORD,” an indeterminate period of divine activity that includes the judgment of Israel and the nations, as well as the ultimate restoration of Israel (cf. Hos 12–14; Zech 12–14; see note on 5:18).

I will restore. The repetition of the verb qum [TH6965, ZH7756] in 9:11 calls attention to Yahweh’s role as the agent of Israel’s restoration. The word can mean “establish” in the sense of following through on a promise in contexts containing oath formulas or covenant language. This is the connotation Amos had in mind.

house of David. Lit., the word translated “house” (sukkah [TH5521, ZH6109]) denotes a “tent” or a “hut,” a temporary shelter made of vines and branches associated with the Festival of Shelters, or Sukkot. In context, the reference is to a restored Davidic empire with emphasis on both the reunification of the northern and southern kingdoms into one nation and on the shepherd-king figure like David who will rule the people in righteousness (Jer 23:5-6; Ezek 34:22-23).

9:12 Edom and all the nations. “Edom is a synecdoche for the phrase ‘all the nations’ which parallels it” (Stuart 1987:398). Amos anticipates the global sovereignty of the Davidic ruler during the messianic age (cf. Mal 1:11).

he will do these things. The statement of divine intention appended to the oracle formula (“the LORD has spoken”) is a unique construction in the OT. Hubbard (1989:242) suggests the line may be a hymn fragment taken from another source (cf. Mal 4:3).

9:14 I will bring my exiled people. The Hebrew expression shabti eth-shebuth [TH7622, ZH8654] is ambiguous (cf. NJB, NRSV, “I will restore the fortunes of my people”). How one understands the noun shebuth (either “exiles” or “fortunes”; cf. HALOT 4:1386) in this context determines the meaning of the expression. In either case, Yahweh is responsible for the reversal of circumstances depicted in 5:11. Implicit in the references to the security of rebuilt homes and cities and the prosperity of agricultural endeavors is the renewal of covenant relationship with Yahweh (cf. Ezek 28:25-26; Mic 4:4).

9:15 I will firmly plant. Amos unequivocally acknowledged Yahweh as the one who restores, rebuilds, and replants his people as their covenant-making and covenant-keeping God. “Yahweh is the hero, the prime mover of the events” (Stuart 1987:399).

land. This is the land of Canaan, the land granted to Abraham and his descendants as part of God’s covenant agreement with Abraham as Israel’s patriarch (Gen 12:1-3). The NT understands the “land” as a symbol of the “rest” that results from right relationship with God through Christ Jesus (Heb 4:5-11).

never again be uprooted. God’s forgiveness is complete and his restoration permanent. The future Israel in view has paid the price for covenant trespasses and is assured continual occupation of the land of covenant promise. Yet the subsequent history of Israel shows that the people were displaced from the land again and again by foreign invaders. Some commentators identify the ultimate fulfillment of Amos’s promises of God’s restoration of Israel with the promises fulfilled in the church as the “Israel of God” (so Smith and Page 1995:170). Others view Amos’s salvation oracles as a later stage of development in an eschatology that culminates in the kingdom of the Messiah (distinct from the church or church age; cf. Matt 24; Rev 20; cf. Smith 1989:283-284).

COMMENTARY [Text]

The stark contrast between the judgment pronounced in the sermons and visions of Amos and the two salvation oracles (9:11-12, 13-15) promising deliverance and restoration in the epilogue have prompted many scholars to question the authenticity of the book’s conclusion and assign these salvation oracles to a later writer or editor (e.g., Mays 1969:166). This need not be the case, however, as the oracle structure of Amos’s message fits the basic speech pattern found in prophetic literature in the Old Testament. This speech pattern commonly includes the following:

Hubbard (1989:236) aptly notes that the timing of the events is another key to understanding how a book dominated by doom could end with such brilliant hope. The eschatological phrase “in that day” (9:11) indicates an interval of time during which both divine judgment and divine restoration will take place. Finally, the genuineness of the concluding salvation oracles is supported by the continued thread of God’s covenant commitment to sustain his people Israel not because of their justice and righteousness but on the basis of his love (Deut 4:37; Hubbard 1989:236; cf. Stuart 1987:397).

The reference to the “house of David” (9:11) is usually understood as some variation on the theme of prophecy about the messianic age. Typically the rebuilding of the “house of David” is interpreted as the restoration of the Davidic monarchy as a result of God’s reinstatement of the covenant he made with David (2 Sam 7). The installation of Zerubbabel, a Davidic descendant, as governor of post-exilic Judah is often cited as the fulfillment of this prediction (so McKeating 1971:70).

Hubbard (1989:239-240) is enamored with the idea that the restored “hut of David” prefigures a return to the pre-monarchic days of Hebrew history when David championed the cause of the peasantry of Israel prior to his kingship. The passage thus describes a future era of simple lifestyle, egalitarian relationship, and dependence upon God similar to the days when Israel trusted God and lived in “huts” during the days of desert wandering after the Exodus (cf. Isa 11).

Others have a different view of what this revitalized “tabernacle of David” will be. They equate it with the tent David erected to temporarily house the Ark of the Covenant until a suitable Temple could be constructed (1 Chr 15:1). And they see the daily worship of the Hebrew priests before the ark with offerings and songs of praise as foreshadowing an anointing of God’s Holy Spirit that would revitalize worship and worship music in the “last days”—days the church is now beginning to experience (see Conner 1986).

Stuart (1987:398) more correctly identifies the restoration of David’s dynasty with the great King David to come—the shepherd of God’s people Israel (Isa 9:7; Jer 33:17; Ezek 37:24): The messianic age would witness the rise of a “new” David who would shepherd the people of Israel and restore their former glory—the glory of God’s people rightly reunited in covenant relationship with him (cf. Jer 23:5-6).

According to the New Testament, Jesus the Messiah is the fulfillment of Amos’s promise of a restored house of David (cf. Acts 2:29-36). Beyond this, James quotes Amos 9:11-12 in his arguments to the Jewish leaders assembled in Jerusalem at the first church council (Acts 15). James considered Israel’s possession of the remnant of Edom and the nations as forecasted by Amos (9:12) as being fulfilled in the preaching of the gospel of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles and their inclusion as the people of God in the church of Jesus Christ (Acts 15:13-18).

The title “Son of David” was one of the epithets ascribed to Jesus by the crowds who followed his ministry (cf. Matt 9:27; 15:22; 20:30-31). The pattern of type and antitype that is characteristic of biblical typology demonstrates numerous parallels between King David and Jesus as the Son of David:

For this reason, like Israel of old, the church still shouts,

Praise God for the Son of David!

Blessings on the one who comes in the name of the LORD!

Praise God in highest heaven! (Matt 21:9//Pss 118:25-26; 148:1)