Commenting on the theme of Chaoskampf in the book of Amos (e.g., 1:2), Eric Nels Ortlund, commenting on Amos 9, notes that:
As the
reader reaches the final chapter of the book, however, the themes normally
associated with theophany and the defeat of the chaos begin to receive fuller
expression. This is first seen in the unity of thought of 9.1-6. The divine
appearance in 9.1 constitutes a most interesting variation to the usual
description of theophany: instead of shaking the earth from his temple, YHWH
appears in his temple to his prophet, who participates in making the entrance
to the temple itself shake. Clearly, with the destruction of the temple
imminent (v. 1), no part of the cosmos is safe for Israel—not even captivity in
exile (v. 4). Inasmuch as the temple is both the center of the cosmos and symbolically
contains all the cosmos within itself, YHWH’s dismantling of his own temple
naturally leads to a complete lack of security anywhere else in creation. The connection
of vv. 1-4 with the poetic statements concerning the destruction of creation in
vv. 5-6 is, as a result, very strong (the second line of v. 6 is especially
striking in its reversal of the picture of creation given in Ps 104.6-7).
Within
this description of cosmic destruction in vv. 5-6, however, a single line
strikes a different note, wherein YHWH builds his מַעֲלוֹתָ֔יו in the heavens,
and founds his אֲגֻדָּת֖וֹ on the earth (v. 6).
In
a helpful article, Reinhard Messner and Martin Lang have discussed the
implications of this line, arguing that the root אגד essentially refers to
binding something together (in Akkadian, the root can refer to an architectural
structure) and that the line as a whole refers, pars pro toto, to the
temple (note again Ps 104.2-3 in this regard). The reason why the “steps” and “vault”
are singled out is that they serve a “binding” function: they attach what YHWH
is dismantling in judgment. The implication of this nuance is to give an
isolated and slightly ambiguous statement of cosmic restoration in the midst of
total judgment: while the temple and earth shake and melt (vv. 1, 5) in
destruction under YHWH’s hand, YHWH is the one who builds his heavenly temple,
founding it on the earth (v. 6). The chiastic structure of 6a, as opposed to
the sequential unfolding of the surrounding verses, nicely mirrors the
different nuance of the line.
How
this cosmic restoration is actually worked out is, as mentioned above, ambiguous
from the perspective of vv. 1-6. But what is hinted at in vv. 1-6 receives
explicit and full treatment in vv. 11-12, where the Davidic tabernacle is rebuilt.
Appropriate to this rebuilding of the divine sanctuary is the cosmic
intensity of the agricultural fertility which follows in v. 13, for, as in other
examples of the Chaoskampf, a (re-)built and fully-functioning
sanctuary acts as a center from which creation is renewed. The desolation
caused by divine judgment and introduced programmatically in 1.2 finally gives
way to blessing in these verses. The connection between 1.2 and 9.11-15 is
strengthened by the status of the latter verses as a kind of epilogue to the book;
as Terrence Fretheim notes, one moves from the withering to the renewal of
creation in 1.2 and 9.11-15. We thus see how the initial image of agricultural
desolation before YHWH’s theophany in the introductory verse of the book is put
to specific (if clipped) use in the descriptions of YHWH’s judgment throughout
the book, even as this withering and mourning in nature takes on cosmic
proportions in later chapters—and it then finally reversed on an equally cosmic
scale. This speaks strongly against a metaphorical interpretation of 1.2, for
it does not seem to function differently from the imagery of 9.11-15. The
same function should be attributed to both passages, but the later by no means
metaphorically describes the restoration of Israel, but rather does so directly
through the symbolism of the temple. This suggests that the image of 1.2 is
not an indirect way of expressing some other action on YHWH’s part, but is
rather used within the larger polarity of chaos and order under divine rule in
YHWH”s judgment and restoration of his people. While YHWH”s direct theophanic
presence in judgment is only hinted at outside of 1.2 and 9.1, theophany is
still an important dimension of this theme as it unfolds in the book. This is
not to deny the presence of metaphors in these texts; the mourning of the earth
in 1.2, and the melting of the hills with win in 9.13, could doubtless be
further explored as metaphors. But metaphor is probably not the best way to
understand Amos 1.2 as a whole. (Eric Nels Ortlund, Theophany and Chaoskampf: The Interpretation of Theophanic Imagery in the Baal Epic, Isaiah, and the Twelve [Gorgias Ugaritic Studies 5; Piscataway, N.J.: Gorgias Press, 2010], 200-2, emphasis in bold added)
Further Reading:
