Commenting
on the “hut” (alt. booth/tabernacle) of David in Amos 9:11 being the “house”
(i.e., the temple per 2 Sam 7:5 and
other texts [listed below]), Walter Kaiser Jr wrote:
. . . there was hope beyond this disaster of
the fall of Samaria. With a grand theological climax to the book in 9:11-15,
God promised to rebuild David’s house,
which in its current dilapidated condition could only be likened to a “fallen
booth” or “hut” (sukkah). What was normally styled “the house (bêt) of David” (2 Sam. 7:5, 11; 1
Kings 11:38; Isa. 7:2, 13), or dynasty of David, would shortly be in a
collapsed state with “breaches” and “ruins” in it. The Hebrew active participle
stressed either its present state,
the “falling” house, or its impending state of ruin, the house “about to fall.”
Thus the dynasty of David would suffer, but God would bring it back from its
ruined condition, for He had promised David that His was an eternal house.
The suffixes on the words in 9:11 have special
interest for the theologian. C.F. Keil commented on this passage that the
feminine plural suffix on “breaches thereof”
(pirṣêhen) could only refer to the
tragic division of the Davidic house
(which symbolized the kingdom of God) into two kingdoms, north and south (cf.
6:2, “these kingdoms”). God would, however, “wall up their rents.” Hus even
before Ezekiel (37:15-28) had pictured the unification of the ten northern
tribes with the two southern tribes, Amos had envisioned the same result. The masculine
singular suffix on “his ruins” (harisotāyw) referred
to David himself and not to the “hut” which is feminine. Thus under a new
coming David, the destroyed house of that promised Messiah would rise from the
ashes. God would also “rebuild her” (benîtîhā) as in the days of old.” The suffix is famine
singular this time and naturally refers to the fallen hut which would be
rebuilt. But the phrase “as in the days of old” clearly points back to the
antecedent theology of 2 Samuel 7:11-12, 16 where God had promised that He
would raise up David’s seed after him and give him a throne, a dynasty, and a
kingdom that would endure forever. (Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., Toward an Old Testament Theology [Grand Rapids, Mich.: Academie
Books, 1978], 195-96, emphasis in bold added)
This is yet
another nail in the coffin of Rob Bowman’s bogus “temple of Solomon” ‘argument.’
For more on this issue, see:
Amos 9 and "the booth of David"
Elena Butova on Amos 9:11 and the Tabernacle/Booth of David being a Temple Reference
Richard Bauckham on James and the Author of Luke-Acts Interpreting the Tabernacle of David in Amos 9:11 to be the Temple
John Anthony Dunne, “David’s Tent as Temple in Amos 9:11-15: Understanding the Epilogue of Amos & Considering Implications for the Unity of the Book,” Westminster Theological Journal 73.2 (Fall 2011): 363-374