Amos 6

Certainty of More Judgment To Come Woe To Those At Ease In ZionAmo_6:1-14 Amos’ second woe rebukes the rulers for their sins of pride, indulgence and false security. “ Woe to them that are at ease in Zion, and to them that are secure in the mountain of Samaria, the notable men of the chief of the nations, to whom the house of Israel come!” (Amos 6:1). God’ s prophet spares neither the rulers of Jerusalem nor Samaria, denouncing all of them. “ At ease” means ‘ secure.’ He is rebuking the false sense of security that both sets of rulers were displaying. Words of warnings about a coming day of Jehovah did not faze them. Both nations were enjoying a high degree of economic and military strength in Amos’ day. With their fortress cities, they felt invincible. “ Notable men” means distinguished and renowned. The same word is used by Moses to identify the princes of the tribes (Numbers 1:17).

They thought of themselves as “ the chief (men) of the nations” i.e. the choicest. The house of Israel came to them for advice and leadership.

He then urges them to consider three contemporary examples; Calneh, Hamath, and Gath. Calneh was to the east on the Tigris. One had to “ pass over” the Euphrates to get there. Hamath was situated on the Orontes River in Syria, north of Israel. Gath was a Philistine city state south and west, near the Mediterranean coast. Each of these cites had been strong, fortified and prosperous.

Hamath had recently been taken by Jeroboam II (2 Kings 14:25; 2 Kings 14:28). Gath had fallen to Uzziah of Judah (2 Chronicles 26:6). Calneh’ s history was that of being ravaged by first one enemy and then another. Some scholars identify Calneh with Kollani, north of Hamath (see Laetesch). If these powerful kingdoms had fallen, in their own day, why should they think that they would fare better? Taylor paraphrases it will. “ Once they were better and greater than you, but look at them now.” He continues his rebuke of the rulers, “ –ye, that put far away the evil day and cause the seat of violence to come near” (6:3). They refused to believe that God would destroy them or that they could be brought down. As in Ezekiel’ s day, they said, “ the vision that he seeth is for many days to come, and he prophesieth of times that are far off “ (Ezekiel 12:27). (See also 2 Peter 3:3-4). They refused to face the possibility and reality of a coming judgment. They continued to indulge themselves and actually “ caused the seat of violence to come near,” even sooner and more certainly. The word rendered “ seat” of violence means, the sitting, dwelling or throne” (Laetsch).

It is noteworthy that the Assyrian monarchs carried their thrones with them into battle and sat upon them when observing or administering judgment following the battle (Rawlinson). This may be his point. Five examples of their indulgence are cited. “ That lie upon beds of ivory, and stretch themselves upon their couches, and eat the lambs out of the flock, and the calves out of the midst of the stall; that sing idle songs to the sound of the viol; that invent for themselves instruments of music, like David; that drink wine in bowls, and anoint themselves with the chief oils; but they are not grieved for the affliction of Joseph” (Amos 6:4-6). He describes the life style of the rich and powerful. The masses knew no such luxury. The things listed were not sinful in and of themselves. It was not evil to rest on a bed of ivory or to eat beef and mutton etc. It was wrong because they were not grieved or concerned about the sad state of affairs in the nation. “ Beds of ivory” were wooden frames decorated with inlaid ivory. They lounged on couches while they ate and relaxed. Verse 5 has frequently been used to try to show that God disapproved of David’ s introduction of instrumental music into the worship of God. Such an interpretation is faulty.

This speaks of the banqueting and entertainment of the rich, not worship. If it was wrong on the basis of this verse for David to use instruments, it was also wrong to lie on couches and eat beef, mutton, etc. David introduced instrumental music into temple worship because “ the commandment was of Jehovah by his prophets” (2 Chronicles 29:25). If it was sinful for Israel to use instruments of music in worship then the Holy Spirit inspired the psalmist to encourage them to sin by saying “ Praise ye Jehovah….with stringed instruments” (Psalms 150). Such could not possibly be the case. The fact is, this passage is not discussing the use or non-use of musical instruments in worship. The New Testament church uses no musical instruments because Christ has not authorized their use (Matthew 28:18; Matthew 28:20; 2 John 1:9). “ Therefore shall they now go captive with the first that go captive; and the revelry of them that stretched themselves shall pass away” . His conclusion is drawn and his point made; those careless, indulgent rulers will be in the forefront of those marched away into captivity. The Assyrian’ s policy was to deport and resettle, in distant lands, the people they conquered (2 Kings 17:5-6) Their revelry will be a sad bitter memory as they are marched away in chains, knowing that because of their sinful indulgence God had destroyed their nation. “ The Lord Jehovah hath sworn by himself, saith Jehovah, the God of hosts; I abhor the excellency of Jacob and hate his palaces; therefore will I deliver up the city with all that is therein” (Amos 6:8). God swore by himself since there is no higher authority by which to sware (Hebrews 6:13). “ The excellency of Jacob” refers to their national pride. (See the footnote). Hosea saw and condemned that pride (5:5; 7:10). Jeremiah dealt with the same problem in Judah (13:9). It was not a wholesome sense of self-worth which he condemned, but an arrogant, false pride based on their feelings of national superiority. God hated their hollow insincere worship (5:21) their pride and their grand palaces. “ And it shall come to pass, if there remain ten men in one house that they shall die. And when a man’ s uncle shall take him up, even he that burneth him, to bring out the bones out of the house, and shall say unto him that is the innermost parts of the house, Is there yet any with thee? and he shall say, No; then shall he say, Hold thy peace; for we may not make mention of the name of Jehovah” (Amos 6:9-10). With graphic, chilling strokes, Amos describes the horrors of the coming judgment. Assyria’ s siege of Samaria would last three years. He sees ten survivors huddled in one house. Perhaps in one of the palaces mentioned above.

One by one they succumb to starvation and the ever present plague that accompanied siege warfare. All immediate family members have perished. An uncle, the nearest surviving relative, comes with “ a burner” whose job it is to dispose of the corpses. When nine have been removed, the burner discovers the last one yet alive, “ in the innermost parts of the house,” i.e., the fartherest comer. He asks him, “ Is there yet any with thee?” And the pitiful emaciated survivor whispers, No. Perhaps the poor fellow began thank God that they had found him.

Please, the uncle interrupts, “ Hold thy peace,” i.e., “ hush,” we may not mention the name of Jehovah. The likely reason being a matter of fear lest Jehovah’ s attention be called “ to the survivor and he too be smitten.

Then in solemn, doleful tones Amos says, “ For, behold, Jehovah commandeth. And the great house shall be smitten with breaches, and the little house with clefts” (Amos 6:11). The judgment will smite all, great and small. They will be beaten to dust. The RSV renders it “ fragments and bits.” This section closes with two rhetorical questions, a rebuke and a promise of doom. “ Shall horses run upon the rock? Will one plow there with oxen? that ye have turned justice into gall, and the fruit of righteousness into worm-wood; ye that rejoice in a thing of nought, that say, Have we not taken to us horns by our own strength? For, behold, I will raise up against you a nation, O house of Israel, saith Jehovah, the God of hosts; and they shall afflict you from the entrance of Hamath unto the brook of the Arabah” (Amos 6:12-14). No right-thinking person would run his horse upon a rock lest he fall and break a leg or shatter his hooves nor would one plow on a rock lest he break his plow. But Israel has followed a course just as stupid. Four instances are cited;1. They have turned justice into the bitter gall of injustice; 2. Righteousness they have turned into hemlock (a poisonous plant) of unrighteousness; 3. They rejoice in idols which are things of nought (nothing); 4. They have boasted that they had taken horns of power by their own strength. Homs were considered symbols of power. By their own strength meant they thought they were strong enough that they did not need God (Deuteronomy 33:7; 1 Kings 22:11). This boast probably refers to their recent victories over Syria whereby their ancient border had been restored (2 Kings 14:25-28). To reward their wickedness; God would raise up Assyria and whip them from Hamath, their northern boundary, to the brook of the Arabah, their southern boundary below the Dead Sea. Amos Chapter SixVerse 1 This chapter continues the further elaboration of the prophetic doom pronounced upon Israel at the conclusion of Amos 2. First, he uttered the second woe over the careless and indulgent leaders of the nation, sunk in their revellings and indifference (Amos 6:1-6). For them, he pronounced their destruction and the overthrow of their nation (Amos 6:7-11), emphasizing that they had acted perversely, trusting in their own power (Amos 6:12-14). The blunt reiteration of their doom in Amos 6:14 concludes this section of the prophecy. In the first sub-section of the chapter (Amos 6:1-6), “The link word is first."[1]They considered themselves first among the nations (Amos 6:1); they only used the finest oils (literally, first)[2] (Amos 6:6); and then in the first line of the second section is revealed the fact that they shall also be first into captivity (Amos 6:7). The whole chapter is pointed squarely at the over-confidence and conceit of the nation, as exhibited in its evil leaders. Amos 6:1“Woe to them that are at ease in Zion, and them that are secure in the mountain of Samaria, the notable men of the chief of the nations, to whom the house of Israel come.“God’s gospel of dealing with mankind is a gospel of grace; but in Amos the emphasis is not upon grace but upon law and obedience, an emphasis which should certainly be observed in our own times; because as McFadden put it: “It is the gospel of law, for that, too, is gospel. To understand and obey the laws by which God governs his world is the way of peace; to ignore or defy them is the way to destruction."[3]“Woe to them that are at ease in Zion …” This is the second great woe, the first being in Amos 5:18, where it is written. “Woe unto you that desire the day of Jehovah!” Zion here is the poetic name of Jerusalem, and some of the commentators would like to get it out of the text on the basis that, “It would seem out of keeping with his habit of concentration upon the immediate situation for him”;[4] but such a view ignores one of the outstanding features of Amos, the fact that Judah is by no means left out of these prophecies of destruction, as in Amos 2:4-5; Amos 3:1; Amos 5:1; Amos 5:5, etc. To be sure Amos was sent particularly to the Northern Kingdom; but Judah is always in the back of his mind; for it is not the Northern Kingdom only, but, “The whole family which I brought up out of the land of Egypt” (Amos 3:1) which is under the judgment of God for their sins. Hammershaimb has brilliantly refuted the allegations of those intent upon disturbing the validity of the text here as it has come down to us. “We must nevertheless keep the Masoretic Text, which must be understood as showing the threat worked out with poetic parallelism against the two capital cities."[5]The over-confidence of the entire nation of the Jews was founded in their regard for Zion (Jerusalem) as the place where the name of God was recorded, and considered by them invulnerable to any disaster of whatever nature, and (especially in the Northern Kingdom) upon the strength and military fortifications of the “mountain of Samaria.” The confidence they had in Samaria, although destined to be frustrated, was nevertheless justified to a certain extent by the unusual strength of the place. When it finally fell, some three years were required to subdue it. The great error lay in the people’s having forgotten that, “Unless the Lord keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain” (Psalms 127:1). “These people misunderstood the terms of the covenant, thinking that God would spare Jerusalem regardless of what they did; they were at ease in Zion … (in Samaria) they were trusting in the mountain of Samaria, a natural fortress which Israel’s leaders must have thought impregnable."[6]“At ease in Zion …” has entered all languages as an idiom for self-indulgent complacency, indifference and over-confidence. Verse 2 “Pass ye unto Calneh, and see; and from thence go ye to Hamath the great; then go down to Gath of the Philistines: are they better than these kingdoms? or is their border greater than your border?“This verse again follows a pattern already observed in Amos’ words, that of putting words or arguments into the mouths of his hearers in order to prove his point, much as the apostle Paul used the diatribe in the Book of Romans. Some scholars have mistakenly tried to take these words as a threat from Amos based upon the premise that since other great cities of the neighboring kingdoms have fallen, Israel herself should not be over-confident; but this is not the case at all. It is a quotation from those proud leaders boasting that they were “Number 1.” As Smith pointed out, it could hardly be a threat, “Since it is fairly certain that Calneh and Hamath did not fall until after Amos’ ministry."[7] The mention of Gath in this place also proves that the omission of that city from the list of those enumerated in Amos 1:6-8, could not be interpreted as proof that Gath no longer existed when Amos wrote. (See the notes on those passages.) The writers who insist upon the other interpretation, which is manifestly false, are evidently doing so in order to use the passage as an assault upon the integrity of the verse. McKeating said, “If this interpretation is correct (the false one), the verse must have been inserted after Amos’ time."[8] This is an excellent example of one of the favorite devices of destructive critics, namely, that of giving a verse a false interpretation, and then using it as an argument against the validity of Biblical texts. The true interpretation of this place was accurately discerned by Motyer, thus: “Amos is ironically repeating the propaganda handout of the rulers who kept up the morale of their people by drawing advantageous comparisons with reasonably distant and clearly inferior places."[9]“Are they better than these kingdoms …” This obviously requires a negative answer. “These kingdoms” are Judah and Israel. As Keil said, “Amos names three great and flourishing capitals, because he is speaking to the great men of the capitals of the two kingdoms of Israel."[10]Before leaving this verse, it should be noted that Mays also defended the correct interpretation of this verse by noting that the other one is “embarrassed by the uncertainty whether Hamath and Calneh had been captured by the Assyrians in the mid-eighth century."[11] He also observed that the Masoretic Text (as followed in our version) makes excellent sense as a quotation. “The boast articulates a pride that is nurtured by the success of Jeroboam’s reign, and a belief in their manifest destiny as the people of Yahweh."[12]Verse 3 “Ye that put far away the evil day, and cause the seat of violence to come near.““Put far away the evil day …” This does not mean, of course, that they actually moved the evil day. They did not really put it off. The passage means “to regard as far off."[13] They were indifferent to the eventual consequences of their wickedness and regarded their sure and certain punishment as a thing that could be relegated to the remote future, and as something for which they needed not to have any apprehension at all. “And cause the seat of violence to come near …” A society that tolerates violence and corruption is hastening the day when violence and corruption will be enthroned among them. As Motyer commented: “They were hastening the day when lawlessness would reign, “the reign of terror.” So it must have been in the final years of the kingdom of Israel when, after Jeroboam II, only one king passed the throne on to his son, and the rest ended their reigns by assassination."[14]Verse 4 “That lie upon beds of ivory, and stretch themselves upon their couches, and eat the lambs out of the flock, and the calves out of the midst of the stall.““Beds of ivory …” The idle rich were using inlays of ivory to decorate their beds, indifferently ignoring the gross poverty around them, and living as extravagantly as possible. “Lambs out of the flock … calves out of the … stall …” This was a custom severely frowned upon by God’s prophet, because it was an extravagant and unnecessary waste. The result was that the flocks and herds were diminished. The current society is guilty of a similar waste in their extravagant taste for caviar, which has practically destroyed the whole species of the sturgeon from which the fish eggs are derived. It would appear that Amos was particularly outraged by their eating of the lambs! There is a great deal in Amos that might induce a superficial criticism to the effect that he was merely a country bumpkin who was opposed to the aristocracy, affluence and culture of city life; “But it is unjust to regard him so."[15] It is the rebellion of the people against God and his word which is the primary concern of Amos: “His message is primarily a religious one, and only inferentially social. Hate the evil, and love the good - that is a motto as applicable to the city as to the country, and as capable of realization."[16]Verse 5 “That sing idle songs to the sound of the viol; that invent for themselves instruments of music, like David.““That sing idle songs to the sound of the viol …” One is amused at a comment which finds nothing more here than the fact (?) that, “Amos does not like the contemporary fashion in music! We might translate, ‘who wail to the accompaniment of the lute.’"[17] Not much is known about this singing, but Barnes is probably correct: “The word which Amos alone uses in this place describes probably a hurried flow of unmeaning, unconsidered words, in which the rhythm of words and music was everything, the sense, nothing."[18]“That invent to themselves instruments of music, like David…” Whatever was reprehensible in those who were condemned in this clause, it was compared to a similar reprehensible action on the part of David. Much more is known with reference to David’s sinful action than is known about the sinful actions of the class Amos rebuked with these words; and a little further attention to what David did, and particularly to the action mentioned here, should give the clue to what the lords of Samaria were guilty of. Some things can be ruled out at once. It is not a sin to invent instruments of music, or anything else, so that could not be the thing in focus here. However, it was sinful for David to introduce, organize, and maintain the use of mechanical instruments in the worship of God, a fact clearly discernible in Amos 5:23. The explanation usually offered on this interesting verse is given thus by Keil: “As David invented stringed instruments in honour of his God in heaven, so do these princes invent playing and singing for their god, the belly."[19]This, of course, is ingenious; and many have followed it in their own interpretations, almost verbatim, as, for example, Butler: “As David invented instruments of music to worship his God, you invent musical instruments to worship your god, your belly."[20]Clever as this interpretation appears, however, it cannot be correct; the key element being overlooked in it is that the passage makes it quite clear that what David did was wrong. If, as this interpretation suggests, the action of the nobles was sinful, that being clear enough from the text, how was it “as” or “like” what David did? The incredible, fanciful view that their worshipping their belly was in any way comparable to David’s “honouring his God” is too fantastic to be accepted. On the other hand, if the passage is viewed as the sinful action of David in introducing instruments into God’s worship, and the action of the nobles (also sinful) who were likewise introducing the instruments of music into the alleged worship of “God” at Bethel, then the comparison is perfect; and that is exactly what we believe to be taught here. It is clearly and uniquely a “religious thing” that is evident, not only in this verse, but in Amos 6:6, immediately following, where the “sacrificial bowls” were being profaned by these gluttonous and drinking nobles. (See the notes on Amos 6:6, below.) Note also that it is not the “invention” of musical instruments which is primarily in focus here, that having no element of sin in any way connected with it; but it is the sin of “inventing for or unto themselves,” a clear echo of “Thou shalt not make unto thee a graven image” (Exodus 20:4), the thing forbidden there not being merely the making of any kind of image, but the making “unto themselves” of graven images, the making of religious images! The similarity of the language here shows that the innovative nobles of Samaria had further corrupted their own perverted worship at Bethel by following the sinful example set by David in his introduction of the musical instruments into God’s worship in Jerusalem. There is no good reason for setting aside this obvious meaning of the passage. Some astute scholars have discerned this and, accordingly, have invoked their rule of last resort, screaming “Interpolation,"[21] when there’s no other way to support the popular prejudice that freely allows the use of mechanical instruments in the worship of the Author of Christianity. The great leaders of the Reformation practically all understood the obvious teaching of this place, including Wesley and many others. There is no need to multiply the witnesses from that era as to what these verses most certainly mean; but we shall quote a few lines from Adam Clarke: “I believe that David was not authorized by the Lord to introduce that multitude of musical instruments into the divine worship of which we read; and I am satisfied that his conduct in this respect is most solemnly reprehended by this prophet; and I further believe that the use of such instruments of music in the Christian Church is without the sanction and against the will of God."[22]We have included this quotation because it is not widely known, the great scholar’s words having long ago been edited out of his commentaries by those who did not agree with his conclusions, the same not appearing in any of the recent abridged editions. One other word regarding this passage. The orthodox Hebrew church, who understand the Hebrew text of the Old Testament better than any Gentile commentator could ever expect to know it, have never allowed instruments of music in their worship of God, their conviction of the sinfulness of it being due in part to the teaching of these very passages in Amos; and the Jews, at least a very considerable percentage of them, have consistently maintained this conviction for some twenty-seven centuries! The view of this passage advocated here is then, by no means, a Johnny-come-lately opinion. If David’s action in introducing mechanical instruments into God’s worship was honorable; and if the Samaritan leaders were using instruments dishonorably in the worship of “their belly,” how could the Holy Spirit possibly have equated these actions or referred to one of them as “like” the other? Verse 6 “That drink wine in bowls, and anoint themselves with the chief oils; but they are not grieved for the affliction of Joseph.““That drink wine in bowls …” The sin indicated here is not merely that of “funneling.” Something far different is indicated: “One view is that their offence consists in not being satisfied with drinking wine in small quantities, but drinking it from the bowl; but the meaning is certainly that they have committed an offence by using sacrificial bowls, which it was not permissible to drink from."[23]“The Hebrew word for “bowl” in this place actually means “the great bowl” and is mentioned elsewhere in the Old Testament only in connection with ritual procedures."[24]The sin which Amos condemned here is therefore a religious violation, and not merely excessive drinking, further pointing up the truth that this whole passage deals primarily with perversion of God’s worship, the particular thing here, being desecration of holy vessels. The ancient people of God viewed this latter thing with extraordinary abhorrence. It will be recalled that for a similar offence of drinking from the sacred vessels robbed from the temple in Jerusalem, Belshazzar was punished by a summary judgment from God; and the kingdom was torn away from him in the same night (Daniel 5:1-25). “And anoint themselves with the chief oils …” Hammershaimb assures us that the word for chief oils (or first oils) could also “be taken with the meaning of firstfruits; their sin would then be that they have anointed themselves with the firstfruits which belong to God."[25] Thus, it is seen that the religious factor is the dominating thought throughout these verses. Understanding the transgression in this light certainly clears up the problem with the other view, which would make it appear that Almighty God was concerned about the “size” of a wine-guzzler’s goblet, bottle, or bowl. It was not “drinking,” as such, which was condemned here, but their drinking from “bowls,” evidently the consecrated vessels which had been dedicated to God. Here also is strong presumptive evidence that it is a similar religious violation in Amos 6:5. An additional facet of the sin mentioned in these verses with regard to their anointing themselves with the “first” oils is seen in the fact that all anointing was suspended in time of mourning (1 Samuel 14:2); and, the sad state of Israel’s rebellion against God should have led to widespread mourning and prayer, instead of the drinking and anointing evident here. That Amos probably had this in mind also, is manifest in the next clause which mentions “the affliction of Joseph.” Verse 7 “Therefore shall they now go captive with the first that go captive; and the revelry of them that stretched themselves shall pass away.“Motyer’s summary of the balance of this chapter is thus: “The fact of pride (Amos 6:8), its moral indifference (Amos 6:12), and its self-centeredness (Amos 6:13) are brought before us; but now we see the divine reaction to them. Amos 6:1-7 tell us in so many words that pride goes before a fall; Amos 6:8-14 tell us why this is. The divine reactions are hatred (Amos 6:8), alienation (Amos 6:9-10), and enmity (Amos 6:11-14)."[26]“Go captive with the first that go captive …” Here is a glimpse of eternal justice. These gross sinners who were hailed as the “first” among the “first” of nations, and used up the “first” fruits (or oils) for their own pampering instead of giving them to God, as was their duty, shall now be “first” to go into captivity! Keil added this: “You that are first in riches will be the first to bear the yoke of captivity”[27]However, they do Amos an injustice who suppose that he was opposed to the rich merely because of their riches. “His message is, by no manner of means, Down with the aristocracy!'; but Return unto God’ (Amos 4:6), Seek good and not evil!'"[28] As <a href="/bible/parallel/AMO/6/1" class="green-link">Amos 6:1-6</a> sternly reveal, the thing that was wrong with the leaders of Israel was that they had lost all regard for their status as a God-rescued, God-redeemed, and God-chosen community and had corrupted his worship, prostrated themselves before idols, desecrated his sacred vessels, introduced pagan mechanical instruments into his worship "like David," and had violated with impunity the sacred ordinances of the Pentateuchal covenant, except in those cases where the observance of them was in some manner pleasing to themselves! Verse 8 "The Lord Jehovah hath sworn by himself, saith Jehovah, the God of hosts: I abhor the excellency of Jacob, and hate his palaces; therefore will I deliver up the city with all that is therein.""Jehovah hath sworn by himself ..." It may not be allowed that God's oath is any more binding, or more true, than his word; but, inasmuch as the opposite is true among men, the Holy Spirit here, wishing to emphasize the dependability and certainty of God's Words, uses this anthropomorphic accommodation to the prejudices of men in order to achieve that purpose. "I abhor the excellency of Jacob ..." This expression shows that Amos never has Judah very far out of mind; for Jacob was the ancestor of Judah, as well as of Israel. Writers who try to make out that these various references to Judah, Jacob, and the whole house of Israel which came up out of Egypt, etc. are added to the prophecy by later writers are totally wrong. Despite the principal burden of Amos' commission having been to cry out against the Northern Kingdom, unless he had kept before them continually the reminder that God was also displeased with similar sins in Judah, he would have lost his effectiveness through the appearance that he was merely crying out against the sins of his neighbor, and not against the sins of his own nation. Verse 9 "And it shall come to pass, if there remain ten men in one house, that they shall die. And when a man's uncle shall take him up, even he that burneth him, to bring out the bones out of the house, and shall say to him that is in the innermost parts of the house, Is there yet any with thee? and he shall say, No; then shall he say, Hold thy peace; for we may not make mention of the name of Jehovah."The situation envisioned by these verses presupposes the possible survival of "ten men in one house," evidently one of the "great houses" which normally had a hundred or more inhabitants, as the remnant after a devastating military defeat; and the prophecy is that they (these few survivors) will all die of the plague. The plague is evidenced by the burning of the bodies, contrary to the usual Hebrew custom. "A man's uncle ..." An alternate reading here is "kinsman," in any case, the person who came to burn the bodies. "Is there any yet with thee? ..." The picture is that of the very last of the survivors who answered the inquiry negatively. "Hold thy peace, for we may not make mention of the name of Jehovah ..." A number of somewhat fanciful interpretations have been given to this, but it seems merely to indicate that all of the people at that late stage of their sorrow had at last recognized that their punishment was of God, and that it was God's judgment that was upon them. The solicitation, therefore, not to invoke the name of God would have come from the fear that if God were aware of "any" survivor, he also would have been destroyed. That such a conception does not take account of the omniscience of God does not nullify it, for the very fault that led to Israel's destruction was their total failure to develop any adequate conception of the true nature of God. Verse 11 "For behold, Jehovah commandeth, and the great house shall be smitten with breaches, and the little house with clefts.""The great house ..." does not mean any particular "great house," but all of the great houses, the same being true of the "small house." The mention of "great house" first in this verse, immediately after <a href="/bible/parallel/AMO/6/9" class="green-link">Amos 6:9-10</a>, strongly supports the probability that the "ten men left in one house" in those verses has reference to one of those great palatial establishments for which Samaria was famous, each having an occupancy of a hundred or so, including domestics, servants and retainers. Although the great houses shall all be carried away by the destruction, the small houses also will not escape. Why? God has commanded it! "Rich and poor alike have been guilty of turning away from Jehovah to serve their appetites."[29]Verse 12 "Shall horses run upon the rock? will one plow there with oxen? that ye have turned justice into gall, and the fruit of righteousness into wormwood."The meaning of this verse was thus summarized by Schultz: "There is a spiritual and moral order in the universe that is just as impossible to ignore as the natural order. It is as senseless to pervert justice as it is to expect horses to run on the rocks, or for oxen to plow on rock."[30]Translators have difficulty with this verse, some of them rendering it "horses to run up a cliff... or plow in the sea with oxen"; but such renditions, even if allowed, would not change the essential meaning of the passage. "It is easier to change the course of nature, or the use of things of nature, than the course of God's providence or the laws of his just retribution."[31]As Keil said, "These verses show the moral perversity of the unrighteous conduct of the wicked."[32]Verse 13 "Ye that rejoice in a thing of naught, that say, Have we not taken to us horns by our own strength? For, behold, I will raise up against you a nation, O house of Israel, saith Jehovah, the God of hosts; and they shall afflict you from the entrance of Hamath, unto the brook of the Arabah.""Things of naught ... horns ..." Recent scholarly studies on these words indicate that, "a thing of naught is actually a mistranslation for Lodebar, which has the same sound in Hebrew, and that horns is the same as the proper name Karnaim, which means horns in Hebrew."[33] In this light, most recent translations renderAmos 6:13, as follows: "You brag about capturing the town of Lodebar. You boast, We were strong enough to take Karnaim." "The verse is a sarcastic allusion to the conquests of Jeroboam II in Transjordan, which are narrated in <a href="/bible/parallel/2KI/14/25" class="green-link">2 Kings 14:25</a>, two towns that he captured being mentioned here."[34] Amos here made a play upon the meaning of the names of the towns, Lodebar, for example, meaning "a thing of naught." Nevertheless, the people were very arrogant and boastful about their successes. The reiterated emphasis on `our … we … ourselves’ mocks the boasting assessment which the people made of Jeroboam’s successes.’"[35]“I will raise up against you a nation, O house of Israel …” It should always be remembered in studying this prophecy that it was exactly and terribly fulfilled just as God had promised. Both the Sacred Scriptures and the testimony of the archeologist testify to the overwhelming destruction of Israel within some thirty years after Amos wrote this prophecy. “The kingdom of Israel was destroyed in the year 722 by Sargon in the first month of his reign when Samaria was taken after a siege which was begun by his predecessor, Shalmanezer IV, and had lasted three years."[36]Excavations made about 1843 revealed the old palace of Sargon II and the so-called “Display Inscription” at Khorsabad, in which Sargon II described the humiliation of Samaria in his own words: “I besieged and captured Samaria, carrying off 27,290 of the people who dwelt therein. Fifty chariots I gathered from among them. I caused others to take their portion (of the deported inhabitants). I set my officers over them and imposed upon them the tribute of the former king."[37]“From the entrance of Hamath, unto the brook of Arabah …” This expression stands for the northern boundary of the kingdom and the southern boundary of Canaan,"[38] thus including the southern kingdom of Judah also, a recurring theme in Amos. “Hamath is the pass between Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon, the northern limit of Israelite territory. The Arabah is the deep valley in which the Dead Sea lies."[39] The most extended borders of Jewish dominion in the days of Solomon were encompassed in these limits; and, although they had for a brief season been restored under Jeroboam II, it was but for a little time. All was swept away by the Assyrian invasion, except that Jerusalem and the southern kingdom remained about 150 years until they were carried away to Babylon. The relevance of this prophecy for our own times should never be overlooked. As Butler said: “The message of Amos is still quite relevant and contemporary. Our society is almost a sister to that one in its ingratitude, irresponsibility, arrogance, and sensuality. Amos was not able to call men back to God in his day; but he was willing to lay down his life if necessary to give God’s call to repentance. Can prophets of today succeed where Amos did not? Time alone will tell."[40] Amos Chapter SixWoe To Complacency (Amos 6:1-7)The second woe is against the complacency and affluence of the people. The people think they do not need God for anything. They have everything they could ever want. They are believe they are secure and satisfied because of their wealth. They take their ease. They live for their comforts. The condemnation is not the wealth itself, because God had made them prosperous. The condemnation is that the people found their security and joy in their wealth. Now the people felt secure because of the wealth they possessed. They thought the day of judgment and disaster would not come because they had their wealth (Amos 6:3).

We easily do the same thing as these people in the days of Amos. One way we do this is by making comparisons in wealth. We want to make sure that we are equal to or greater than our neighbors. If they get a new car, then we need to get a new car because we think we deserve it more than they. We compare the new toys they buy versus ours. We compare the size of our homes, the niceness of our yards, or some other standard by which we are finding our value.

Rather than finding our value in God and his grace, we care about what we have. We find security in accumulating possessions, keeping things nice and as new as possible, and always keeping up with the neighbors. What we fail to see is that our wealth is causing us to be complacent toward God. We lose our passion and our zeal for him and his word because we are caught up in the things we have. We are entangled in having the comforts and ease that this world has to offer. Rather than being uncomfortable to the glory of the Lord, we want to be comfortable for the glory of ourselves.

Instead of seeking and saving the lost, we will sit and watch the television show, Lost. Our efforts turn to our comforts and we lose our purpose and mission given to us by God to passionately pursue his kingdom. Verse 6 shows that this was the trouble with Israel. They are enjoying drinking wine from the bowl rather than being grieved over the spiritual condition of Israel. Spiritual things no longer drive our hearts nor direct our actions. Comfort and wealth become the drive and the decision-maker.

We think we have all we need without God.

Woe To Pride (Amos 6:8-14)This complacency and enjoyment of wealth leads to pride. In this section of Amos God declares that he will take their pride away. God decrees, “ I will deliver up this city and all that is in it.” If ten are in the house, they shall die. Fear will strike the nation so severely that they will be afraid to even utter the name of the Lord lest the wrath of God come against him. How proud do you think you can be when you stand before the Almighty God? Job’ s pride was brought low when the Lord visited him in the whirlwind.

We too easily are trusting in ourselves on the basis of our wealth, our work, and wisdom. We need to seriously consider if we are trusting our lives to God or if we are trusting in ourselves. Can we honestly say that we have put our lives in the hand of God or are we still running our lives? God tells Israel that they think they are something when they are actually nothing. They were rejoicing because they had conquered Lodebar. God makes fun of them because Lo-debar literally means “ nothing.” God makes a play on words telling the people that they think they are something when they conquered nothing.

How can we possibly think that we have power before God? How can we think that we have any room for pride or selfish ambition before God? Who do we think we are? Trust in God, not in yourself. To think that we do not need God’ s direction and do not need to obey his words is the highest point of selfish pride. We are not that wise or that smart.

God possesses wisdom and we are arrogant to think that we know better how to live in this world than what he has revealed to us.

ConclusionGod has promised that another “ day of the Lord” is coming. “ But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed.” (2 Peter 3:10 ESV) We need to carefully consider if we are truly ready for the coming the Lord. We must learn from Israel’ s example by carefully considering if we are holding on to our idols and false worship all the while thinking that the day of the Lord is something to look forward to when it is not. We must prepare our hearts and change our lives if we are going to be truly ready for the day of the Lord. Do not be caught by surprised. Do not let the day of the light of Christ become your day of darkness because you were walking in the sins of Israel.

Amos 6:1

Amos 6:1. Woe is pronounced just once in the present connection and it applies to all the leading men in Israel who are described in the first 6 verses of the chapter. It is from nowv and Strong defines it with the single word “oh!” It has been rendered by ah, alas, ho, O, and woe in the A. V. It signifies that something very distressing is going to come upon those of whom it is spoken. At ease means to be feeling secure and contented, and unconcerned about the comfort of others.

And that, too, even when the feeling of security might be at the expense of the poor and be causing them much distress. Zion is used figuratively to denote the people of Israel as a nation. Samaria was the capital of the 10-tribe kingdom, and that portion of the Jews trusted in the power of their headquarters to stand between them and all trouble. Named chief of the nations. These leaders of the Israelites had obtained a high standing even among the heathen nations because of their partaking with them in idolatrous practices. House of Israel came.

These princes had so much power that the common people looked to them for leadership, notwithstanding the unjust treatment they had received concerning their own rights.

Amos 6:2

Amos 6:2. Calneh, Hamath and Gath were communities of the heathen which were once powerful. But what was their condition now as Amos was writing? It was one of humiliation brought about by the same people who were predicted to come against Israel. Since the people of the Lord were no stronger than the mentioned ones who were subdued, they should not loll around with a feeling of “ security” as if nothing evil could come upon them.

Amos 6:3

Amos 6:3, The false teachers denied that the nation was in any danger, or at least for the time being. Such as-surances of security misled the people because they believed their prophets. The result of it was to encourage further acts of injustice. This is along the same line as a statement of Solomon in Ecclesiastes 8; Ecclesiastes 11 : “ Because sentence against, an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil,”

Amos 6:4

Amos 6:4. The simple meaning of this verse is that the princes and other leaders of the nation were living in the height of luxury. That fact alone would have been bad enough, hut by picking out the choicest food only, they deprived the common people of their share of the good things that were intended for all of the citizens.

Amos 6:5

Amos 6:5. With all of the facts and truths before him that have been so clearly set forth, surely the reader is prepared to avoid a fundamental error that has been made in commenting on this verse, It is a common thing for certain .teachers to use this verse in showing that God condemned instrumental music even in Old Testament times. In such teaching they miss en-tirely the point the prophet is making. The verse is but another item of the practice I have already explained, that of mixing some things that would have been endorsed previously, with their idolatrous and other evil things, thinking that God would accept the whole program.

Amos 6:6

Amos 6:6. In the preceding chapter we saw how these selfish leaders had sandwiched their evil doings with some of the original ordinances of the law, and the same thing is done in this. Verse 5 is the “fining” composed of instrumental music, something in-troduced and endorsed by David with the Lord’ s blessing. Then around that are the things that were prompted by their own evil desires. Drink wine in bowls. The last word is from MIZBAQ, which Strong defines, “A bowl (as if for sprinkling),” and the word has also been rendered by ‘ ‘basin.” It indicates the extravagance and selfishness of these men.

They were not satisfied with what a regular drinking cup would supply, but drank so much wine that it required these large vessels to serve them. The ointments were all precious and costly, but these men appropriated to their personal use the chief or choice ones. After his description of the general program of these leaders, the prophet states his concluding charge against them in the words, but they are not grieved for the affliction of Joseph. For some reason the name of Joseph is occasionally used to designate the nation as a whole, especially when the writer is dealing with the sorrows and injustices of its common people. This is doubtless because he was such an unusual example of patience and virtue even under the most trying circumstances. But the hardships of the poor did not mean anything to these leaders among the Israelites, for they persisted in gratifying their own selfish desires at the expense of their poor brethren.

Amos 6:7

Amos 6:7. When an army invades a city or territory, it is considered good strategy to capture its leading men first if possible (for example see 1 Kings 22:31). That idea seems to have been followed in this case, for the men who were “ out in front” in their selfish domination over the common people, were destined to he first, to go when the enemy came against, the land. That will put ail end to their banquets and other indulgencies. The reader should again consult the long note in connection with the comments on Isaiah 1:10, volume 3 of this Commentary.

Amos 6:8

Amos 6:8. Excellency is from a Hebrew word that means arrogance or pride. Jacob is used as a designation for the nation as a whole, but espedaily the leading men who dominated the common people. These men exalted themselves in their pride of power, and did many evil things under the pretense of their position. It was all this that God said he abhorred, and caused Him to decree the complete destruction of their city.

Amos 6:9

Amos 6:9. The destruction threatened was to be so complete that if a house contained 10 men. they would a!! die and would need to be disposed of by someone outside the building who was supposed to be Interested in their cases.

Amos 6:10

Amos 6:10. It was customary in ancient times for the nearest relative living to bury the dead (see Genesis 25:9; Genesis 35:29; Judges 16:31), which is the reason that the uncle is mentioned here. Burneth is rendered “ burial” in Moffatt’ s translation, I shall Quote from Funk and Wagnalls Standard Bible Dictionary on the subject of “ Mode of Burial.” “ Cremation was not practiced in Israel; the usage was rather to bury the dead, while cremation, of criminals for example (Leviticus 20; Leviticus 14; Leviticus 21:9; Joshua 7:25), appears as a disgrace added to the penalty of death.” The burning of incense in connection with burial cere-monials sometimes might be mistaken for the burning of the bones of the dead (1 Samuel 31; 1 Samuel 12; 2 Chronicles 16:11; Jeremiah 31:5). By the sides of the house means someone near the house where those 10 men were just found dead. Is there yet any with thee; is there one that I have overlooked? Hold thy tongue, etc. The destruction decreed for the place was to be so complete that it would he of no use at that late hour to make any appeal to the Lord.

Amos 6:11

Amos 6:11. This verse explains why the remark was made in the close of the preceding one. The Lord had com-manded that just such a complete de-struction. was to come upon the people and houses of Israel as is described.

Amos 6:12

Amos 6:12. The two questions in the beginning of this verse should be an-swered in the negative. The wickedness of the nation had turned good judgment into gall (bitterness), and righteousness had been supplanted by hemlock (poison). Therefore the Lord determined to strip the land of its fertility, and render it useless to work their beasts.

Amos 6:13

Amos 6:13. Strong says the figurative meaning of the original for horn is “power.” These exacting leaders of Israel were boasting that they had power by reason of their own merit. Tile truth of the matter was that they beat down all who asked for their own rights, and usurped a position of almost absolute power.

Amos 6:14

Amos 6:14. Hemath was a place at the northern extremity of Palestine, and the wilderness refers to the valley at the south near the Dead Sea. The prediction is that a nation was to come against Israel and subdue the Whole territory between the points.