¶ … Amos Hosea exploring ways message prophets rooted theological narrative traditions Israel. What light texts shed modern-day readers question God's objectives church human society
Amos and Hosea -- a contemporary understanding of prophets during eight-century B.C.'s Israel
While the contemporary society is accustomed to associating the concept of religion with prophets living in the a.D. era, Old Testament is actually particularly influential when considering present day religious ideas. Amos and Hosea were both prophets in Israel in the eight-century, a period when the state experienced a variety of more or less fortunate events. These two are considered Minor Prophets because of the short length of their books, given that their works are much shorter in comparison to the books of Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Jeremiah. They focused on putting across a traditional view in regard to the Empire of Israel and they emphasized the fact that one of the principal reasons for its fall was the fact that people had abandoned God and spirituality.
Amos and Hosea were interested in providing their people and the world as a whole with an explanation regarding suffering experienced by Israel and its people. They acknowledged the fact that individuals had lost their interest in religious matters and embraced sinful lifestyles. As a consequence, God was no longer willing to support them in their dealings with neighboring states and they would end up being persecuted by these respective nations.
In order to have a better understanding of the attitudes that Amos and Hosea employed in their attempt to present people with God's interests, one would have to be presented with the social, economic, and political factors related to Israel during the eight-century B.C. Amos and Hosea focused on providing the public with a moral message and they did not necessarily relate to the supernatural aspect of being a prophet.
Amos did not consider himself to be an actual prophet because most prophets were believed to be educated at the time. Moreover, they would normally be seen around influential people and they would stay near the king's court, as kings apparently considered their advice to be particularly important. From a modern perspective, one might regard Amos as being a moral commentator of affairs occurring in his vicinity. He was concerned about having people understand the importance of spirituality and of believing in God. He was particularly disturbed with people's behavior and considered that something needed to be done in order for the people of Israel to experience as little suffering as possible in the near future.
Amos used drama with the purpose of emphasizing the wrongness in the behavior of Israelites and his work represented a shift from typical prophetic works written before him. In spite of his later tendencies, he initially followed tradition in writing, as "the early Amos already exhibits both simplicity and intensity in his utterances, and he may be singled out in his bold outlines to exemplify the activity of the prophet in general" (Cook, 1996, p. 16). It is very probable that his interest in detaching himself from typical prophets is not actually an attempt to have people perceive him as being inferior to these respective individuals. It is likely that he intended his personality and his works to be distinguished from mainstream prophecies and thus focused on highlighting his background, his thinking, and his perspective in regard to the world. While many people living contemporary to him believed that only a true prophet could receive word from God, Amos wanted to change their opinion and to simply provide them with his theories (Koch, 1983, p. 9).
Laws were particularly harsh to prophets who were found to put across false prophecies and this was probably a reason for which Amos managed to express his thinking without being criticized, as he and his community did not consider him to be a prophet. Amos seemed unconcerned about how people would see him, as he principally wanted them to understand his teachings and focus on leading more spiritual lifestyles (Koch, 1983, p. 9).
Amos presented the world with a new kind of prophecy and with a new kind of prophet. The fact that he was different from other prophets apparently made it possible for him to see things from an objective point-of-view. "Moving from South to North, he is a native Hebrew but also something of a stranger, which suggests that he occupies the formal status of the ger, the "resident alien," a regular role in the society" (Cook, 1996, p. 17)....
According to the boy himself he had motivation as well as the means to kill his father. Perhaps most damning of all, the young man has no alibi. He says he was 'at the movies.' Saying he was at the movies seems like a convenient excuse, given that it is a dark place where no one is likely to have seen him. Furthermore, the defendant claims he cannot remember the
Twelve Angry Men Questions from the Film The character with the most effective critical thinking skills was Juror #8. Clearly #8 is the most thoughtful and analytical of all the jurors. He may have been the most progressive politically as well. He is hero in the movie and he may have been an open-minded person prior to the trial; that is, he may have come from a home that was not racist
First, the men are deciding what is a black-and-white issue: innocence or guilt. Only Juror 8, played by Henry Fonda, tries to see shades of gray in the issues that arise during the trial. Fonda is dressed in white, which makes his defiant stance against the call for a guilty verdict seem even more pure, radical, and shocking. The defendant who is accused is non-white, while all of the
Juror 7 can be classified as a salesman who simply cannot wait to be elsewhere. The eighth juror is an insightful individual, who is also patient and who constantly strives to attain the truth. Juror 9 is the eldest and is a fair individual as well. Juror 10 is much like Juror 3, in that he is opinionated, intolerant and a racist. Juror 11 is an immigrant who expresses respect for the American system
Democracy: Hughes vs. Rose We celebrate democracy in America every day. Whether we are pledging allegiance to the flag or honoring the achievements of our nation's veterans, the idea that America is the greatest country in the world is something most people do not question. However, writers such as Langston Hughes and Reginald Rose have presented challenges to the idea that democracy is something which is good in a straightforward
Psychosocial Dynamics of Twelve Angry Men Social-Psychology of Twelve Angry Men As a portrayal of a microcosm of society -- enhanced by its drill-down into the 1950s era in which the plot unfolds -- few films are as excruciatingly accurate as 12 Angry Men. The story lends itself to analysis of team dynamics and conflict resolution techniques, with the promise of extending beyond explicit attributes, such as an all-male cast, and
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now