The Lord GOD has sworn by his holiness/As the Sovereign LORD is holy, he has promised. Nowhere else in the book of Amos does the Lord GOD swear by his holiness and only one other time in the whole of the Old Testament (Psa 89.35). In 6.8 the Lord GOD swears by “his life” or by himself, and the meaning is much the same. In this context the moral part of holiness seems emphasized, and that is why Good News Translation translates As the Sovereign LORD is holy, he has promised.

Another possibility is that this oath and the one in 6.8 can be translated in the same way: “The Lord God has sworn by his life/himself,” especially if this is a kind of oath in the receptor language. Where no word for “swearing” exists or where it has to be avoided, one can say “declared” or, better, promised to make clear that this particular declaration refers to the future.

Holy belongs to the specialized vocabulary of theology and presents a problem for the translator. It is usually not satisfactory to use a word for “clean,” since this normally means “free from dirt.” In many cases, a word for “right” or “righteous” is the nearest possible equivalent. Many times the clearest translation of holy emphasizes the Biblical fact that holiness comes from relationship to God; Holy Spirit is often translated as “God’s Spirit,” etc. This leads to a translation such as “As surely as he is God, the Lord God swears” (compare Moffatt); “With his authority as God, the Lord God swears.”

The following words are the LORD’s, as quoted by Amos, and some of the same problems as those of the women speaking in verse 1 will have to be solved. Good News Translation translates the words as spoken directly by God, but it could have translated just as well in an indirect way: “… he has promised that the day will come…” (see Revised Standard Version, New English Bible). The question of how to translate this quotation must be considered along with the question of says the LORD at the end of verse 3.

That, behold, the days are coming upon you/The days will come. The Hebrew for that, behold gives emphasis to what follows. In English this could be expressed by such a word as “surely”: “The days will surely come.” One should simply make sure that the translation is emphatic.

The days will come may not be translated literally in all languages. A way should be found to indicate an indefinite future period: “There will be a time,” “One of these days,” “Not very long from now,” etc. One should try to avoid too indefinite an expression like “some time.” In making any necessary adaptation, however, see 2.16, and it is important to keep in mind the day of the LORD (5.18,20) and in/on that day (8.3,9,13; 9.11) which occur later in this book and in other books of the Old Testament. If it is possible to translate “the days will come” in such a way that it will help the reader to see a connection with those phrases, this should certainly be done.

When they shall take you away with hooks, even the last of you with fishhooks/they will draw you away with hooks; every one of you will be like a fish on a hook. They does not refer to the husbands, as it would appear in Good News Translation and Revised Standard Version! The meaning is general: “men” (New English Bible), “people,” “someone,” or “you will be dragged away” (see Jerusalem Bible, Moffatt).

The picture now changes. This time the women of Samaria are compared to fish caught and taken away. The women will be taken away into exile with force and cruelty.

Hooks, fishhooks/hooks, hook. These are two different words in Hebrew and we cannot be sure exactly what they mean. For the first word such different meanings as hooks, shields, and snares have been proposed. And for the second word such different meanings as fishhooks and fish baskets. However, because of the comparison to fish, meanings not having to do with fishing do not need to be considered. The two words may have meant much the same thing. Much the same action may have been spoken of twice: Take you away with hooks, even the last of you with fishhooks is not saying two different things but putting a different emphasis on the same point.

Because we do not know the precise meaning of the terms, it is better to choose a general one which covers different types of fishing tools and which can be used in both parts of the comparison. Of course, if the language only has a few specific words, one of these will have to be taken. Where people do not know about fish or fishing it may sometimes be possible to use a short descriptive phrase such as “things which live in the water.” However, this will draw people’s attention away from the real comparison, even if the “capture” is made clear: “everyone of you will be like creatures that lived in the water and which have been seized with a hook” is not likely to picture the deportation of people.

But even if the two terms were fairly distinct, the differences between them are not what is being emphasized. The essential point is that nobody will escape deportation. It may be better to change the picture to one that is known: “drag you away with a ring in your nose,” “drag you away in a chicken coop,” “drag you away with a rope around your neck,” etc. Good News Translation makes the comparison clearer with the use of like: everyone of you will be like a fish on a hook. Each language has its ways of making comparisons.

Quoted with permission from de Waard, Jan & Smalley, William A. A Handbook on Amos. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1979. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .