Prophetic Criticism as a Call to Social-Moral Behaviour Exegetic-Theological Analysis (Am 2:6-16)

Analizirani ulomak Am 2,6-16 predstavlja zadnju u nizu od osam kitica Amosova govora protiv stranih naroda i protiv Izraela. Dok u drugim kiticama prorok šiba povredu prava okolnih naroda jednih prema drugima (ius gentium), dotle u kitici protiv Izraela Amos žigoše povrede prava čovjeka i onih najsiromašnijih i najbjednijih u Izraelu (ius hominis). Struktura ulomka sadrži tri prizora (2,6-8; 2,9-12; 2,13-16). U prvome prizoru prevladava veznik »jer« i u njemu se navode četiri zločina koja se odnose na povredu prava siromašnih, bijednika, nevoljnika i nezaštićenih. U drugome prizoru prikazano je Božje kontrastno djelovanje i tim dijelom dominira naglašeno Gospodinovo »ja«. U trećem prizoru donesen je metaforičan prikaz suda i kazne koja će uslijediti zbog krivoga odnosa prema čovjeku. Amos prikazuje kako Izrael nije ništa bolji od drugih okolnih naroda jer čini zločine protiv čovječnosti kao i drugi. Na to upućuje isti pojam za zločine narodâ i za zločin Izraela. Analiza je pokazala da Bog jednako postupa i prema narodima i prema Izraelu i da jednaka logika vrijedi i za jedne i za druge. Drugo, Bog je prikazan kao gospodar povijesti koji je jednako tako snažno prisutan i kod drugih naroda kao i u Izraelu i koji jednako zaštićuje ljudsko dostojanstvo i Izraelaca i neizraelaca. Prorok ne gradi neki apstraktni moralni sustav ponašanja, nego u konkretnoj povijesnoj situaciji pokazuje na moralnost stavova utemeljenih na Božjem odnosu prema ljudima upravo prema onima najbjednijima i najsiromašnijima u Izraelu.The excerpt Am 2:6-16 is the last in a series of eight verses of Ammos’ speech against foreign nations and against Israel. In other verses the prophet scorns the violation of rights of other nations between each other (ius gentium), yet in the verse against Israel, Amos brands the violation of man’s rights, of the most impoverished and wretched in Israel (ius hominis). In an analysis of this text consisting of three scenes (2:6-8; 2:9-12; 2:13-16) Amos speaks about the violation of man’s dignity and human rights within the Israeli nation of that time. In the first scene the conjunction »because« is predominant and the scene notes four crimes that relate to the violation of the rights of the impoverished, wretched misfortunate and unprotected. The second scene shows God’s contrasted actions and this section is dominated with the Lord’s emphasised »I«. The third scene brings a metaphorical presentation of judgement and punishment consequential to improper relations toward man. It is interesting too that Amos considers that Israel is not better than any of the surrounding nations because it commits crimes against humanity just like the others. This can be seen in the same definition of the crime of nations and the crimes of Israel. In continuation of the analysis of this text we see that Israel commits four crimes against humanity: the sale of humans for money, persecution of the poor, abuse of young girls, the cult of covering up the exploitation of debtors. Amos then notes God’s action against this human behaviour as something quite concrete: God annihilated the Amorites and gave the land to the Israelis. God led the people out of Egyptian slavery, he led them through the desert, cared for them and finally led them into the Promised Land. Finally God raised the prophets for the people to remind the people of their covenant yet the Israelis led the people to breach that covenant. The result of that behaviour is the day of the Lord in which the Lord will encounter Israel. That day will be a day of truth and judgement and no-one will be able to escape it. Punishment follows not because the people directly offended God but because in practise the people despised God’s mercy toward the small, weak, poor. Finally Amos does not express his merciless criticism based on some firm moral system but rather from the experience of God who throughout the history showed himself to be protectiful toward humans. The analysis shows that God treats all nations equally including the Israelites and the same logic applies to all nations. Secondly, God is shown as the master of history which is just as present for other nations as it is for Israel and he protects the human dignity of Israelites and non-Israelites alike. The prophet does not build on some abstract moral system of behaviour but based on concrete historical situations he shows up the morality of attitudes towards the poorest and most impoverished in Israel