BIBLIOTHECA SACRA 156 (April-June 1999):160-74
ANALYSIS OF THE
STRUCTURE OF AMO5*
Stephen J. Bramer
The purpose of this article is to evaluate ways in which
scholars have seen the overall structure of the Book of Amos,
based on various literary forms and kinds of subject matter.
Sanderson finds that
the book can be outlined according to form or content. In form,
poetic oracles (1:2-6:14) are followed by four first-person vision
reports (7:1-9; 8:1-3) surrounding a third-person narrative (7:10-
17), which are followed in turn by poetic oracles (8:4-14; 9:7-15)
surrounding another first-person vision report (9:1-4). Hymn
fragments appear in 4:13; 5:8-9; and 9:5-6. In content, the book
opens with oracles against foreign nations, accusing them of a va-
riety of war crimes and climaxing with an oracle against Israel
(1:2-2:16). Most of the book is devoted to the evils within Israel
and the destruction God will bring as judgment (3:1-9:10), but it
concludes with a brief promise of restoration (9:11-15).1
The search for chiasmus or thematic patterning and other lit-
erary features is also helpful. Ignoring proposals that involve
redactional levels and formation,2 the following are some pro-
posals for the structure of Amos, grouped by the number of divi-
sions into which commentators divide the book.
Stephen J. Bramer is Associate Professor of Bible Exposition, Dallas Theological
Seminary, Dallas, Texas.
*This is article two in the three-part series "Studies in the Structure of the Book of
Amos."
1 Judith Sanderson, "Amos," in The Women's Bible Commentary, ed. Carol A.
Newsom and Sharon H. Ringe (London: S.P.C.K., 1992), 205.
2 Perhaps the most impressive presentation of Amos as "the overlaying of one
stage of redaction upon another" is that of Hans Walter Wolff (Joel and Amos, ed.
S. Dean McBride Jr., trans. Waldemar Janzen, S. Dean McBride Jr., and Charles A.
Muenchow, Hermeneia [Philadelphia: Fortress, 19771, 106-13). Others using pri-
marily redaction criticism to develop the structure of Amos include Robert B.
Coote, Amos among the Prophets: Composition and Theology (Philadelphia:
Fortress, 1981); J. Alberto Soggin, The Prophet Amos: A Translation and
Commentary, trans. John Bowden (London: SCM, 1987); and William J. Doorly,
Prophet of Justice: Understanding the Book of Amos (Mahwah, NJ: Paulist, 1989).
Analysis of the Structure of Amos 161
TWO-DIVISION STRUCTURES
Since about half the Book of Amos consists of oracles against the
nations and five visions, it is not surprising that these two forms
should occupy a prominent place in some writers' outlines of the
book. In fact for some these are the two sections around which the
rest of the book is constructed. For instance Weiser identifies a
"Book of Visions," consisting of only the five vision passages
(which he says occurred before Amos's call to be a prophet).
Weiser says this was a separate document composed at the time of
the earthquake that served to emphasize Israel's impending doom
(and to which, he says, Amos 8:4-14 was added later). The second
section, a "Book of Words," consisting of chapters 1-6, was origi-
nally collected at the close of the prophet's ministry to the North-
ernKingdom and concludes with the biographical section.3 Be-
sides noting many of Weiser's conjectures, such as the early dat-
ing of the visions and the idea that these two collections circulated
independently for a time, it should be noted that he failed to ac-
count satisfactorily for the two passages (7:10-17; 8:4-14) that
separate, respectively, the third, fourth, and fifth visions. In addi-
tion, as Harrison notes, the integration of the oracles and visions
is necessary to obtain a holistic picture of Amos's ministry.4
Gordis maintains that, aside from minor additions, the book
was the authentic work of Amos, but he too envisages a twofold di-
vision. The first portion consists of Amos 1:2-7:9 and records
Amos's speeches and visions before his Bethel encounter (7:10-
17). The second portion, 8:1-9:15, contains the prophet's subse-
quent speeches and visions.5 Gordis argues that the historical
material of 7:10-17 was added to the first collection before the sec-
ond was part of the book.6 This, he says, could explain the place-
ment of historical narrative between the third and fourth visions.
But to divide up the five visions merely on the basis of a recording
of a historical incident seems unnecessary.
Van der Wal also argues for a twofold structure, with chap-
ters 1-6 and 7-9 constituting the two sections.7 His arguments for
3 Artur Weiser, The Old Testament: Its Formation and Development, trans.
Dorothea M. Barton (New York: Association, 1961), 243-44.
4 Roland K. Harrison, Introduction to the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerd-
mans, 1969), 891.
5 Robert P. Gordis, "The Composition and Structure of Amos," Harvard Theolog-
ical Review 33 (1940): 239-51; reprinted in Poets, Prophets and Sages: Essays in
Biblical Interpretation (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1971): 217-29.
6 Gordis, Poets, Prophets and Sages, 222.
7 Adrian van der Wal, "The Structure of Amos," Journal for the Study of the Old
Testament 26 (1983): 107-13.
162 BIBLIOTHECA SACRA / April-June 1999
this arrangement may be summarized as follows.
First, Amos 1:1 suggests a twofold division with the concepts
of "words" ('7;i ) and "seeing" (rtrt ). These two ideas are subse-
quently picked up in Amos 1:2 and 7:1 respectively. In addition,
-=-T occurs in Amos 1-6 more than in chapters 7-9, and the verb
m-1, a synonym of rltrl, occurs most often in the last three chapters.
Second, metaphors-like "pastures of the shepherds dry up
and the top of Carmel withers" (1:2) and "let justice roll on like a
river, righteousness like a never-failing stream" (5:24)-do not
occur after Amos 6.8
Third, Amos addressed the Israelites as "sons of Israel,"
"people of Israel," "house of Israel," and "my people Israel." But
Amos used this latter wording with the first person pronoun only
in chapters 7-9. In Amos 1-6, God spoke solely of "them," using
the third person pronoun.
Fourth, in 1:2, Amos's words begin in narrative form with
1mi'i'1 ("and he said"), which implies that the following (chaps. 1-
6) is a story about Amos's words, whereas chapters 7-9 introduce
Amos in the first person as "I."
Fifth, van der Wal suggests, although without proof, that the
comparative frequency of the perfect consecutive in Amos 1-6
and 7-9 supports the twofold division.9
McComiskey is another careful exegete who divides the Book
of Amos into two main divisions, the prophetic oracles (1:3-6:14)
and the prophetic visions (7:1-9:15).10
Harrison agrees that a twofold division is possible. "As far
as form and content are concerned, it is possible to recognize the
presence of two groups, the visions in the first person singular
(Am. 7:1-9; 8:1-3; 9:1-4), and the oracles in chapters 1 to 6."11
However, stating that further division is necessary, Harrison di-
vides the oracles of Amos 1-6 into two divisions consisting of the
oracles against the nations (chaps. 1-2) and denunciations of Is-
rael (chaps. 3-6).12 Harrison writes that a twofold division of
Amos "rests necessarily upon extremely fragile foundations,
since there is no evidence that such a division, if indeed it ever
8 Quotations of Scripture are from the New International Version unless other-
wise noted.
9 Ibid., 108.
10 Thomas Edward McComiskey, "Amos," in The Expositor's Bible Commentary,
(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1985), 7:278. He sees 1:1 as a superscription and 1:2 as
an introduction to the prophecy.
11 Harrison, Introduction to the Old Testament, 889-90.
12 Ibid., 888-89.
Analysis of the Structure of Amos 163
existed, did not originate with the prophet himself, and that in any
event it was meant to indicate anything approaching the nature of
a bifid structure such as is evident in some other Old Testament
prophecies."13 Other features that may indicate an additional
major break within chapters 1-6 will be presented in the follow-
ing section on various threefold divisions.
THREE-DIVISION STRUCTURES
Stuart argues for a threefold structure, dividing the book as fol-
lows: the first group of oracles (1:2-6:14); the visions, with related
narrative (7:1-8:3); and the final group of oracles (8:4-9:15).14
Like the twofold divisions above, Stuart maintains that the first
six chapters are a unit, but then he separates the vision section
into two independent sections by subsuming the final vision into
the group of oracles starting in 8:4.
What Stuart identifies as "excerpts from an old Yahwistic
hymn" did not function independently, he says, even though he
agrees that they are distinctly recognizable in genre and are
neither oracles nor visions.15 Instead, they are seen as a means
of strengthening the impact of the respective oracles into which
they are inserted or attached. Though Stuart does not see the need
to make a break because of the third-person historical account of
opposition Amos experienced at Bethel (7:10-17), he does make a
break between 8:3 and 8:4 based on a change in the type of mate-
rial. For Stuart, the fifth and last vision is to be included in the
final section, which consists of a group of oracles; and so he ar-
gues that "though technically a vision, [the fifth vision] is in
function virtually another of the sayings."16 Stuart does not be-
lieve it is possible to infer either a strictly chronological or a
strictly thematic ordering for most of the oracles. "The structur-
ing of material in the first six chapters shows no special organiz-
ing principle." But he does recognize that the placement of the two
restoration promise oracles (9:11-15) at the end of the book is
"probably thematic."17
Noble also argues for a threefold division based on content.
After the superscription (1:1) part one consists of Yahweh's words
13 Ibid., 891.
14 Douglas K. Stuart identifies Amos 1:1 as the title and does not treat it as a sec-
tion (Hosea-Jonah, Word Biblical Commentary [Waco, TX: Word, 1987], 287).
15 Ibid., 286-87.
16 Ibid., 287.
17 Ibid., 287-88.
164 BIBUOTNECA SACRA / April-June 1999
to the nations (1:2-3:8), part two is a chiastic judgment oracle
(3:9-6:14), and part three addresses the destruction and recon-
struction of Israel (7:1-9:15).18
Smith's threefold structure is as follows: judgments on the
nations (1:1-2:16); the verification of God's warnings of pun-
ishment on Samaria (3:1-6:14); and visions and exhortations of
the end (7:1-9:15).19
Harper divides the book into oracles (1:3-2:16), sermons
(3:1-6:14), and visions (7:1-9:8b).2° However, he argues for the
existence of numerous secondary passages that did not originate
with the prophet Amos.21 These secondary passages are in addi-
tion to his excluded sections of 1:1-2 and 9:8c-15.
In contrast to those arguing strictly from content, Koch ar-
gues for a threefold division based on "principal markers." For
him, these include the fivefold occurrence of "Hear this" in 3:1,
13; 4:1; 5:1; and 8:4; the doxologies of 1:2; 4:13; 5:8; and 9:5-6;22
and the use of the expressions "people of Israel" (chaps. 3-4) and
"house of Israel" (5:1-9:6).23 Therefore the structure of the Book of
Amos includes a speech to the nations (chaps. 1-2), doom against
God's own people as a (divine) admonition (chaps. 3-4), and
doom against His own people as a (prophetic) funeral lament
(chaps. 5:1-9:6).24 Koch leaves 9:7-15 as a kind of appendix,
making his view a modified fourfold division.25
Both Driver26 and Keil27 hold to a three-division structure
18 Paul R. Noble, "The Literary Structure of Amos: A Thematic Analysis," Journal
of Biblical Literature 114 (summer 1995): 209-26.
19 Gary V. Smith, Amos: A Commentary, Library of Biblical Interpretation (Grand
Rapids: Zondervan, 1989), 7-9.
20 William R. Harper, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Amos and
Hosea, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: Clark, 1905), cxxxii.
21 Ibid.
22 Koch sees the two "long" doxologies of 4:13 and 9:5-6 as closing a main section of
the book while the shorter doxology of 5:8 closes a part of a main section (Amos: Un-
tersucht mit den Methoden einer strukturalen Formgeschichte [Kevelaer: Butzon
& Berchker, 19761, 1:80; 2:81).
23 This phenomenon is the reason Koch does not identify Amos 7:1 as the start of a
new section of the book even though it contains the formula "this is what the
Sovereign LORD showed me" (ibid).
24 Ibid.
2`' Gerhard Hasel notes that Koch's work is vulnerable to literary studies that
show larger connections than are allowed in his methodology which is a
"structural-form-critical" approach (Understanding the Book of Amos: Basic Is-
sues in Current Interpretations [Grand Rapids: Baker, 19911, 94).
26 Samuel R. Driver, An Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament, 2d
ed., International Theological Library (New York: Scribner's Sons, 1913; reprint,
Cleveland: Meridian, 1965), 314-16.
Analysis of the Structure of Amos 165
based on topical development. For them, chapters 1-2 introduce
the topic of the book, judgment on Israel; chapters 3-6 argue
against the privileged guarantee of safety the Israelites believed
they enjoyed; and chapters 7-9 reinforce the topic of divine judg-
ment. Unlike those who accentuate the disjunctive nature of the
Book of Amos, these men develop a-synthetic topic and emphasize
coherence in the material.
FOUR-DIVISION STRUCTURES
House declares that "scholars generally agree that Amos has a
clearly demarcated structure based on its thematic emphases.
Despite the fact that they differ on the specifics of exact verse divi-
sion, most experts conclude that Amos 1-2, Amos 3-6, Amos 7:1-
9:10, and Amos 9:11-15 constitute distinct sections."28 However,
many scholars do not agree with such a statement or such a four-
fold division.
Andersen and Freedman argue for the following fourfold
pattern: the Book of Doom, with oracles against the nations and
Israel (chaps. 1-4); Woes and Lamentations (chaps. 5-6); the
Book of Visions (7:1-9:6); and the Epilogue (9:7-15).29 For them,
the first division does not come after chapter 2, but rather after
chapter 4 with its concluding doxology. The reason Andersen and
Freedman do not make a major division break between chapters
2 and 3 is that they see chapters 3-4 as containing more argu-
ments for the course adopted by Yahweh against Israel and Judah
(2:9-4:13). They see 3:1-2 serving as "the heading and summary
of what follows in the next two chapters and is thus a pivotal ex-
pression or bridge between the two sections, lying at the center of
Part I-a nuclear expression of the whole message and its mean-
ing and tenor."30 Chapters 5-6 of Amos are considered a separate
unit because of their common tone of lament and woe. Andersen
and Freedman believe that their structure for Amos is "the cumu-
lative demonstration of the literary coherence of all the diverse
ingredients in the whole assemblage [of the Book of Amos] which
is more than an assemblage; it is a highly structured unity."31
27 Carl Friedrich Keil, "Amos," in The Twelve Minor Prophets, trans. James Mar-
tin, 2d ed. (reprint, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982), 1:237-38.
28 Paul R. House, "Amos and Literary Criticism," Review and Expositor 92
(spring 1995): 181.
29 Francis I. Andersen and David Noel Freedman, Amos: A New Translation with
Introduction and Commentary, Anchor Bible (New York: Doubleday, 1989), 23-72.
30 Ibid., 32.
31 Ibid., 144 (italics theirs).
166 BIBLIOTHECA SACRA / April-June 1999
One of the more intriguing fourfold structural proposals is
presented by O'Connell. He argues that "on the basis of the pat-
terns of repetition observable among the introductory formulae
and speech forms in the book of Amos, it may be averred that the
speech forms of the book have been arranged according to a step-
wise pattern of escalation that involves the telescoping of N + 1
groupings (where `N' represents a number, usually 3 or 7)."32
This telescoping series for Amos may be illustrated in the follow-
ing way:
Seven short judgment speeches (1:3-2:5)
+ One long judgment speech (2:6-16)
[This final judgment speech ushers in the remaining mate-
rial in 3:1-9:15.]
Three judgment oracles (3:1-5:17)
+ One double woe oracle (5:18-6:14)
[This final double woe oracle ushers in the remaining
material in 7:1-9:15.]
Three sign visions (7:1-9)
Inset: confrontation narrative (7:10-17)
+ One sign vision (8:1-2)
[This final sign vision ushers in the remaining ma-
terial in 8:3-9:15.]
Three eschatological judgments (8:3-14)
Inset: prophetic vision (9:1-10)
+ One eschatological promise (9:11-15)
While O'Connell can be lauded for the manner in which he
has diagrammed the movement through the book, there are some
difficulties with this scheme. His attempt to create a three-plus-
one division from a three-plus-two division in Amos 3:1-6:14 by
treating the "double woe oracle" as a single unit is suspect. His
division of three-plus-one sign visions breaks the vision mate-
rial by leaving the fifth vision as an "inset" to the judgment-and-
eschatological oracles. Whether the compiler, as O'Connell calls
the designer of such structure, intended to cause the fifth and fi-
nal vision to stand apart is highly debatable. This emphasis is
suggested by means of the introduction of a conflict narrative so
as to create a three-plus-one division for the first four visions.
32 Robert H. O'Connell, "Telescoping N+1 Patterns in the Book of Amos," Vetus
Testamentum 46 (January 1996): 56.
Analysis of the Structure of Amos 167
Also debatable is the effort to create another three-plus-one divi-
sion for four "eschatological narratives" of 8:3-9:15. This is at-
tempted both by treating the fifth vision (9:1-10) as an inset and
by combining Amos 8:11-14 as a single eschatological unit.
FIVE-DIVISION STRUCTURES
Hubbard proposes essentially the same structure as Smith under
his threefold structure (Amos 1:1-2:16; 3:1-6:14; 7:1-9:15),33 but
Hubbard divides the introduction of 1:1-2 and the salvation
promise of 9:11-15 into separate sections.
Gese's five-part structure shows a three-tiered level. This
type of composition is used in gradation form, in which the last
level reaches the book's climax and goal.34
SEVEN-DIVISION STRUCTURES
Limburg sees in the Book of Amos recurring structures of both
seven and seven-plus-one. He sees the seven sequence in 2:6-7
(seven transgressions of Israel); 2:14-16 (seven consequences of
the announced punishment against Israel); 5:8-9 (seven verbs
that describe the Lord's activity); and 8:4-8 (seven accusations
against the merchants).35 He argues that the seven-plus-one se-
quence is present in Amos 1:3-2:16 (seven nations plus Israel);
3:3-8 (seven rhetorical questions plus two concerning the Lord);
4:4-5 (seven verbs in the imperative, or its equivalent, in an imi-
tation of a call to worship plus a statement of their love for such