2 Kings 15:16

15:16 At that time Menahem came from Tirzah and attacked Tiphsah. He struck down all who lived in the city and the surrounding territory, because they would not surrender. ¹  He even ripped open the pregnant women.

Psalms 137:8-9

137:8 O daughter Babylon, soon to be devastated! ² 

How blessed will be the one who repays you

for what you dished out to us! ³ 

137:9 How blessed will be the one who grabs your babies

and smashes them on a rock! ⁴ 

Isaiah 13:16

13:16 Their children will be smashed to pieces before their very eyes;

their houses will be looted

and their wives raped.

Isaiah 13:18

13:18 Their arrows will cut young men to ribbons; ⁵ 

they have no compassion on a person’s offspring, ⁶ 

they will not ⁷  look with pity on children.

Hosea 10:14

Bethel Will Be Destroyed Like Beth Arbel

10:14 The roar of battle will rise against your people;

all your fortresses will be devastated,

just as Shalman devastated ⁸  Beth Arbel on the day of battle,

when mothers were dashed to the ground with their children.

Hosea 13:16

13:16 (14:1) ⁹  Samaria will be held guilty, ¹⁰ 

because she rebelled against her God.

They will fall by the sword,

their infants will be dashed to the ground –

their ¹¹  pregnant women will be ripped open.

Amos 1:3-5

1:3 This is what the Lord says:

“Because Damascus has committed three crimes ¹²  –

make that four! ¹³  – I will not revoke my

decree of judgment. ¹⁴ 

They ripped through Gilead like threshing sledges with iron teeth. ¹⁵ 

1:4 So I will set Hazael’s house ¹⁶  on fire;

fire ¹⁷  will consume Ben Hadad’s ¹⁸  fortresses.

1:5 I will break the bar ¹⁹  on the gate of Damascus.

I will remove ²⁰  the ruler ²¹  from Wicked Valley, ²² 

the one who holds the royal scepter from Beth Eden. ²³ 

The people of Aram will be deported to Kir.” ²⁴ 

The Lord has spoken!

Amos 1:13

1:13 This is what the Lord says:

“Because the Ammonites have committed three crimes ²⁵  –

make that four! ²⁶  – I will not revoke my decree of judgment. ²⁷ 

They ripped open Gilead’s pregnant women ²⁸ 

so they could expand their territory.

Nahum 3:10

3:10 Yet she went into captivity as an exile; ²⁹ 

even her infants were smashed to pieces ³⁰  at the head of every street.

They cast lots ³¹  for her nobility; ³² 

all her dignitaries were bound with chains.

[15:16]  ¹ tn Heb “then Menahem attacked Tiphsah and all who were in it and its borders from Tirzah, for it would not open, and he attacked.”

[137:8]  ² tn Heb “O devastated daughter of Babylon.” The psalmist dramatically anticipates Babylon’s demise.

[137:8]  ³ tn Heb “O the happiness of the one who repays you your wage which you paid to us.”

[137:9]  ⁴ sn For other references to the wholesale slaughter of babies in the context of ancient Near Eastern warfare, see 2 Kgs 8:12; Isa 13:16; Hos 13:16; Nah 3:10.

[13:18]  ⁵ tn Heb “and bows cut to bits young men.” “Bows” stands by metonymy for arrows.

[13:18]  ⁶ tn Heb “the fruit of the womb.”

[13:18]  ⁷ tn Heb “their eye does not.” Here “eye” is a metonymy for the whole person.

[10:14]  ⁸ tn Heb “as the devastation of Shalman.” The genitive noun שַׁלְמַן (shalman, “Shalman”) functions as a subjective genitive: “as Shalman devastated [Beth Arbel].”

[13:16]  ⁹ sn Beginning with 13:16, the verse numbers through 14:9 in the English Bible differ by one from the verse numbers in the Hebrew text (BHS), with 13:16 ET = 14:1 HT, 14:1 ET = 14:2 HT, etc., through 14:9 ET = 14:10 HT. Thus ch. 14 in the Hebrew Bible has 10 verses.

[13:16]  ¹⁰ tn Or “must bear its guilt” (NIV similar); NLT “must bear the consequences of their guilt”; CEV “will be punished.”

[13:16]  ¹¹ tn Heb “his.” This is a collective singular, as recognized by almost all English versions.

[1:3]  ¹² tn Traditionally, “transgressions” or “sins.” The word refers to rebellion against authority and is used in the international political realm (see 1 Kgs 12:19; 2 Kgs 1:1; 3:5, 7; 8:22). There is debate over its significance in this context. Some relate the “rebellion” of the foreign nations to God’s mandate to Noah (Gen 9:5-7). This mandate is viewed as a treaty between God and humankind, whereby God holds humans accountable to populate the earth and respect his image as it is revealed in all people. While this option is a possible theological explanation of the message in light of the Old Testament as a whole, nothing in these oracles alludes to that Genesis passage. J. Barton suggests that the prophet is appealing to a common morality shared across the ancient Near East regarding the conduct of war since all of the oracles can be related to activities and atrocities committed in warfare (Amos’s Oracles against the Nations [SOTSMS], 39-61). The “transgression” then would be a violation of what all cultures would take as fundamental human decency. Some argue that the nations cited in Amos 1-2 had been members of the Davidic empire. Their crime would consist of violating the mutual agreements that all should have exhibited toward one another (cf. M. E. Polley, Amos and the Davidic Empire). This interpretation is connected to the notion that Amos envisions a reconstituted Davidic empire for Israel and the world (9:11-15). Ultimately, we can only speculate what lay behind Amos’ thinking. He does not specify the theological foundation of his universal moral vision, but it is clear that Amos believes that all nations are responsible before the Lord for their cruelty toward other human beings. He also assumes that even those who did not know his God would recognize their inhumane treatment of others as inherently wrong. The translation “crimes” is general enough to communicate that a standard (whether human or divine) has been breached. For a survey of the possible historical events behind each oracle, see S. M. Paul, Amos (Hermeneia).

[1:3]  ¹³ tn Heb “Because of three violations of Damascus, even because of four.”

[1:3]  ¹⁴ tn Heb “I will not bring it [or “him”] back.” The pronominal object (1) refers to the decree of judgment that follows; the referent (the decree) has been specified in the translation for clarity. See S. M. Paul, Amos (Hermeneia), 46-47. Another option (2) is to understand the suffix as referring to the particular nation mentioned in the oracle and to translate, “I will not take him [i.e., that particular nation] back.” In this case the Lord makes it clear that he does not intend to resume treaty relations with the nation in view. See M. L. Barré, “The Meaning of lá ásŒybnw in Amos 1:3-2:6,” JBL 105 (1986): 622.

[1:3]  ¹⁵ tn Heb “they threshed [or “trampled down”] Gilead with sharp iron implements” (NASB similar).

[1:4]  ¹⁶ tn “Hazael’s house” (“the house of Hazael”) refers to the dynasty of Hazael.

[1:4]  ¹⁷ tn Heb “it”; the referent (the fire mentioned in the previous line) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[1:4]  ¹⁸ sn Ben-hadad may refer to Hazael’s son and successor (2 Kgs 13:3, 24) or to an earlier king (see 1 Kgs 20), perhaps the ruler whom Hazael assassinated when he assumed power.

[1:5]  ¹⁹ sn The bar on the city gate symbolizes the city’s defenses and security.

[1:5]  ²⁰ tn Heb “cut off.”

[1:5]  ²¹ tn Heb “the one who sits.” Some English versions take the Hebrew term in a collective sense as “inhabitants” (e.g., KJV, NKJV, NASB, NRSV). The context and the parallel in the next clause (“the one who holds the royal scepter”), however, suggest that the royal house is in view. For this term (יוֹשֵׁב, yoshev), see N. K. Gottwald, The Tribes of Yahweh, 512-30.

[1:5]  ²² tn Heb “valley of wickedness.” Though many English versions take the Hebrew phrase בִקְעַת־אָוֶן (biq’-at ’aven) as a literal geographical place name (“Valley of Aven,” so NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV, NLT), it appears to be a derogatory epithet for Damascus and the kingdom of Aram.

[1:5]  ²³ tn Many associate the name “Beth Eden” with Bit Adini, an Aramean state located near the Euphrates River, but it may be a sarcastic epithet meaning “house of pleasure.”

[1:5]  ²⁴ sn According to Amos 9:7, the Arameans originally came from Kir. The Lord threatens to reverse their history and send them back there.

[1:13]  ²⁵ tn Traditionally, “transgressions” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV) or “sins” (NIV). For an explanation of the atrocities outlined in this oracle as treaty violations of God’s mandate to Noah in Gen 9:5-7, see the note on the word “violations” in 1:3.

[1:13]  ²⁶ tn Heb “Because of three violations of the Ammonites, even because of four.”
On the three…four style that introduces each of the judgment oracles of chaps. 1-2 see the note on the word “four” in 1:3.

[1:13]  ²⁷ tn Heb “I will not bring it [or “him”] back.” The translation understands the pronominal object to refer to the decree of judgment that follows; the referent (the decree) has been specified in the translation for clarity. For another option see the note on the word “judgment” in 1:3.

[1:13]  ²⁸ sn The Ammonites ripped open Gilead’s pregnant women in conjunction with a military invasion designed to expand their territory. Such atrocities, although repugnant, were not uncommon in ancient Near Eastern warfare.

[3:10]  ²⁹ tc The MT reads לַגֹּלָה (laggolah, “as a captive”) with the preposition לְ (lamed) denoting essence/identity. On the other hand, 4QpNah reads בגולה (“as a captive”) with the preposition בְּ (bet) denoting essence/identity (“as a captive”). The LXX’s αἰξμάλωτος (aixmalwto", “as a prisoner”) does not reveal which preposition was the original.

[3:10]  ³⁰ tc The past-time reference of the context indicates that the Pual verb יְרֻטְּשׁוּ (yÿruttÿshu) is a preterite describing past action (“they were smashed to pieces”) rather than an imperfect describing future action (“they will be smashed to pieces”). The past-time sense is supported by the Syriac and Vulgate. The LXX, however, misunderstood the form as an imperfect. Not recognizing that the form is a preterite, the BHS editors suggest emending to Pual perfect רֻטְּשׁוּ (ruttÿshu, “they were smashed to pieces”). This emendation is unnecessary once the possibility of a preterite is recognized. The Masoretic reading is supported by the reading ירוטשו found in the Dead Sea Scrolls (4QpNah 3:10).

[3:10]  ³¹ tc The MT reads יַדּוּ (yadu, “they cast [lots]”) from יָדַד (yadad, “to cast [lots]”). On the other hand, the Dead Sea Scrolls (4QpNah) read ירו (“they threw, cast [lots]”) from יָרָה (yarah, “to throw, cast [lots]”) (e.g., Josh 18:6). The textual variant arose due to orthographic confusion between ד (dalet) and ר (resh) – two Hebrew letters very similar in appearance. The root יָדַד is relatively rare – it occurs only two other times (Obad 11; Joel 4:3 [3:3 ET]) – therefore, it might have been confused with יָרָה which appears more frequently.

[3:10]  ³² tc The MT and Dead Sea Scrolls (4QpNah) read ועל נכבדיה (“for her nobles”). The LXX reflects וְעַל כָּל נִכְבַּדֶּיהָ (vÿ’al kol nikhbaddeha, “for all her nobles”), adding כָּל (“all”). The LXX addition probably was caused by the influence of the repetition of כָּל in the preceding and following lines.