BIG IDEA:
FUNERAL LAMENT: JUDGMENT DESERVED FOR FAILING TO SEEK AFTER GOD AND RIGHTEOUSNESS
INTRODUCTION:
Ray Stedman: Now this is the reason this book is so loved by the liberal; Amos is called the prophet of social justice, the man who demanded that man treat their fellow-man rightly. Liberals love this book because of these thundering pronouncements against the social evils of Amos’ day — and rightly so. God is always disturbed by social injustices. But what the liberals seem to miss in this book is Amos’ appeal to these people. He doesn’t just say to them, “Now stop doing these things.” He does say that, but that isn’t all he says. It is how to stop doing these things that is the important message, and you will find it plainly given twice in chapter 5:
“For thus says the Lord to the house of Israel:
‘Seek me and live.’” [Amos 5:4 RSV]
[“Don’t go to Bethel. Don’t go to those golden calves. Seek me and live.”]
“Seek the Lord and live,
lest he break out like fire in the house of Joseph.” [Amos 5:6a RSV]
What is the answer to the wandering heart? The answer isn’t just to clean up your life. It is to come back to God. It is to repent and to think again. Turn. Come back to the Lord of your salvation. Call upon him. Ask him to set you back on your feet and straighten out your life. That is the answer. That is always God’s appeal. Come back into a relationship with one who loves and in patience tries to awaken us and bring us back to himself.
M. Daniel Carroll R.: The opening exhortation of chapter 5 signals the beginning of a new part of the book. This section begins with a lament over the defeated nation and closes with howls of grief in every place. It is a picture of terrible judgment and its aftermath. This literary setting determines the mood and movement of the next two sections, 5:18–27 and 6:1–14. Both are introduced by woes and reinforce the tone set here. They also push the descriptions of judgment to new vistas: the exile of the nation and its leaders (5:26–27; 6:7), the destruction of the capital city (6:8–11), and the oppressive presence of a foreign power in the land (6:14).
Several decades ago, de Waard recognized a chiasm in 5:1–17, and his proposal has found wide acceptance. It reads (captions mine):
A Lament for Israel (vv. 1–3)
B Seek Yahweh and live (vv. 4–6)
C Warning to Israel (v. 7)
D The power of Yahweh to create (v. 8a, b, c)
E “Yahweh is his name” (v. 8d)
D′ The power of Yahweh to destroy (v. 9)
C′ Warning to the powerful (vv. 10–13)
B′ Seek Yahweh and live (vv. 14–15)
A′ Lament for Israel (vv. 16–17)
Allen Guenther: [Different titles for same chiastic symmetry]
It’s Your Funeral, 5:1-3
There’s One Way Out, Maybe, 5:4-6
Cause of Death, 5:7
God’s in Charge: I AM! 5:8-9
Cause of Death, 5:10-13
There’s One Way Out, Maybe, 5:14-15
It’s Your Funeral, 5:16-17
Thomas Constable: [5:1-17] The structure of this message is chiastic, which focuses attention and emphasis on the middle part.
A A description of certain judgment vv. 1-3
B A call for individual repentance vv. 4-6
C An accusation of legal injustice v. 7
D A portrayal of sovereign Yahweh vv. 8-9
C’ An accusation of legal injustice vv. 10-13
B’ A call for individual repentance vv. 14-15
A’ A description of certain judgment vv. 16-17
Trent Butler: Seek God and Live
The prophet invites the people of Israel to a sneak preview of their own funeral. Their hope for life is to seek God rather than traditional worship places. They must forsake a system of justice that no longer works and implement one that rolls down for everyone. They cannot count on the Day of the Lord coming, since it will bring darkness and death, not light and life. Those enjoying the “good life” for the moment will soon face God’s eternal judgment.
MAIN IDEA: Religion impacts daily living; people demonstrate their faith in God by compassionate, consistent, godly behavior focused on a relationship with him.
Robert Martin-Achard: This chapter, which opens with a song of lamentation (vv. 1–3) and ends with a threat of deportation for the Israelites (v. 27), and in which the prophet outlines various misfortunes that will happen to them (thus vv. 16 f and vv. 18 f), is probably the most important in Amos’ book. In it we find a list of the characteristic themes arrived at by the prophet such as the trial of Israelite society given over to injustice (particularly vv. 10 ff), the rejection of the worship that Israel offers her God (vv. 21 ff), and the radical calling into question of the Israelites’ hope (vv. 18 ff). Once more the prophet adopts the contrary opinion to that of his questioners and turns their most cherished traditions upside down.
This chapter is divisible into four parts: vv. 1–3; 4–17; 18–20; 21–27.
J. Vernon McGee: The previous chapter closed with a bang, with a note of finality. It would seem as if God had closed the door, that judgment was inevitable, and that there was no hope for Israel at all. Although chapter 5 reaches into the future and makes it very clear that God will punish them for their iniquity, in the first fifteen verses God pleads with Israel to seek Him so that judgment can be averted. As long as He did not bring that final stroke of judgment, their captivity, there was hope for them.
(:1) LITERARY GENRE = FUNERAL LAMENT
“Hear this word which I take up for you as a dirge, O house of Israel.”
Cf. Lamentations of Jeremiah
M. Daniel Carroll R.: Laments are a response to loss of a loved one or friend (2 Sam 1:17–27; 3:31–35). The Old Testament contains various terms for mourning and offers glimpses of customs associated with grief in ancient Israel, such as tearing garments, wearing sackcloth, shaving the head (8:10; 2 Sam 3:31; cf. Gen 37:34–35; 2 Sam 1:11–12; Mic 1:16), chanting or singing (8:10; 2 Chr 35:25), and the wailing of professional mourners (5:16–17; Jer 9:17, 20 [MT 9:16, 19]). Prophetic literature, however, often uses the qînâ to anticipate destruction and death instead of to mourn what has already occurred. So, too, in Amos. Though Israel has already experienced loss (see the OAN; 4:6–11), this lament concerns the effects of a major judgment yet to come. . .
What is the tone of this lament? Is it ironic and condemnatory—a warning of the horror that awaits the nation because of its sinful stubbornness? Or is this an expression of sadness at the suffering that is coming? The latter may be the better option.
Billy Smith: Singing a funeral song about Israel implied that the nation was dead. That understanding must have stunned the audience, since the nation then was strong and prosperous. What that use of language suggests is that the future death of the nation was so certain Amos saw it as an accomplished fact, and it made him grieve. Once God declares war on a people, they are as good as defeated. Having just declared the destruction of Israel, it was appropriate that Amos should lament (cf. 3:11-12; 4:2-3, 12).
I. (:2-3) TRAGIC FALL OF ISRAEL
A. (:2) Beyond Help
“She has fallen, she will not rise again—
The virgin Israel. She lies neglected on her land;
There is none to raise her up.”
M. Daniel Carroll R.: Finally, virgin Israel is a startling metaphor that here appears for the first time in the Old Testament. This same phrase also occurs in Jer 14:17; 18:13; 31:4, 21 (cf. 14:17; 46:11), and similar combinations are used of Zion (2 Kgs 19:21; Isa 37:22; Lam 2:13), Judah (Lam 1:15), Sidon (Isa 23:12), Babylon (Isa 47:1), and Egypt (Jer 46:11). Its grammatical form is a construct, although “virgin” and Israel can be taken in apposition—that is, “the virgin that is Israel.” This is a reference to the Northern Kingdom, although some argue that the capital city of Samaria is in view. In passages like Jer 31:4, 21, however, the reference is clearly to more than a city. The rest of the chiasm of 5:1–17, as well as many descriptions of the rest of the book, have the entire nation in view.
What does virgin connotate in this context? While some relate the context of war in these verses to the idea that this young woman (Israel) has been violated, most commentators interpret this as a reference to a maiden being cut down before reaching full maturity as a fruitful mother and wife (cf. Judg 11:37–40). The image of the discarded body of a dead maiden may have evoked a sense of horror and sadness. If she lies dead with no one to carry her away for burial, one wonders if the scene might suggest that neither are there any comforters to console whoever might mourn her loss (vv. 16–17). To face the death of a loved one without a comforter would make a terrible situation even more tragic (e.g., Gen 37:35; Job 2:11–13; Lam 1:2, 9, 16–17, 21). If this continues the expression of God’s own sorrow, the verse is even more impactful.
Gary Cohen: Israel evidently did not rise again through moral repentance, because God did not spare her as He offered to do if she would but turn to Him (vv. 4, 6, 14). After Samaria fell to the Assyrians in 722 B.C. she never arose to be a nation again. Even in the Millennial age, after the Lord’s second coming, the Northern Kingdom still will not be restored as a separate nation. At that time, both she and Judah shall be united into one new Israel (see Ezek. 37:15-28).
Thomas McComiskey: “Never to rise again” need not mean that God has no future role for Israel in his redemptive program. This seems to be precluded by Zechariah 12:10. Amos is here suggesting that the northern kingdom will never be reestablished as a nation, but there will be a believing remnant through whom the promises will continue (9:9–12).
Jorg Jeremias: By already treating his listeners as dead persons, Amos wants to rouse them into recognizing the hopelessness of their situation.
B. (:3) Reduced to a Pitiful Remnant
“For thus says the Lord God,
‘The city which goes forth a thousand strong Will have a hundred left,
And the one which goes forth a hundred strong Will have ten left
to the house of Israel.’”
Trent Butler: Israel prided themselves in their victorious armies. God would let them march out to battle once more, but this would bring disaster. Nine of every ten soldiers would not return. This did not represent a remnant with hope. This represented defeat and destruction.
M. Daniel Carroll R.: This is a remnant (also at 5:15), but as elsewhere, the remnant theme does not engender strong hope. The focus is on the paucity of survivors, damage reminiscent of 3:12 (cf. 2:14–16; 4:10; 9:8). This terrible defeat is a direct contradiction of the nation’s imaginary’s conviction of divinely guaranteed victory.
II. (:4-15) THREE EXHORTATIONS TO SEEK AFTER GOD AND RIGHTEOUSNESS
A. (:4-5) Avoid Idolatry — “Seek Me that You May Live”
“For thus says the LORD to the house of Israel, ‘Seek Me that you may live. 5 But do not resort to Bethel, And do not come to Gilgal, Nor cross over to Beersheba; For Gilgal will certainly go into captivity, And Bethel will come to trouble.’”
M. Daniel Carroll R.: The unconditional call to seek Yahweh coupled with the announcement of comprehensive judgment, while hard to grasp, is not a contradiction in the prophetic mind (cf. Zeph 1:2–3, 18; 2:3). Israel is to seek him irrespective of its potential fate.
James Mays: Seek (dāraš) does not mean ‘inquire about’ or ‘search for’ something or someone lost or inaccessible. When Yahweh is the object, seek frequently means ‘turn to Yahweh’ (for help in a specific situation), and then by extension ‘hold to Yahweh’ (as a way of life). The prohibitions (5a) make it clear that dāraš involves a visit to a sanctuary; the Israelites were seeking Yahweh in Bethel and Gilgal. A series of texts in the Old Testament depict a specific procedural context for seeking Yahweh; in a situation of need for help or instruction, one went to a man of God or a prophet to secure an oracle of promise or direction (Gen. 25.22; Ex. 18.15; I Sam. 9.9; I Kings 14.1ff.; II Kings 8.8f.; Jer. 21.2; Ezek. 20.1ff., etc.).a When the Israelites heard Amos exhort them to seek Yahweh, they would have thought that this was precisely what they were doing in the sanctuaries. They were seeking Yahweh in expectation that he would bestow upon them a secure and prosperous life. They were coming to shrines at which Yahweh had been worshipped from ancient times to carry out the required ritual, quite possibly in an attitude of personal devotion, and they hoped to receive God’s help for special needs and blessing for their whole lives (for an idea of the content of ‘life’ as blessing, cf. the long description of the effect of blessing on those in covenant with Yahweh in Deut. 30). The radical distinction between ‘Seek me’ and ‘Visit Bethel’ would have left Amos’ hearers, probably pilgrims to the shrine, in puzzled shock—bid to seek Yahweh as a matter of life itself, but forbidden the very holy places where they believed the Lord willed that they find him. What ‘Seek me’ as a word of Yahweh means when the shrines are excluded is left obscure and provocative. The emphasis lies on the prohibition of the current cult. What Amos had in mind as the right way to seek Yahweh appears in the similar exhortation in 5.14, where ‘Yahweh’ is replaced as object of the verb by ‘good’: ‘Seek good that you may live.’
Billy Smith: The concept of seeking the Lord is a major theme in Chronicles, where it describes “how one was to respond to God and thus defined one who was a member of the believing community.” More than looking for God’s help and guidance, it “stood for one’s whole duty toward God” and entailed keeping God’s laws. Every search for God through a prophet or in a house of worship should result in doing right, for seeking God ultimately means living under his authority and in dependence upon his power.
Alec Motyer: The first five verses of Amos 5 consist of lamentation (1, 2), application (3, the ‘death’ of Israel will be by military decimation) and explanation (4, 5): it has all happened because the shrines [Bethel / Beer-sheba / Gilgal] were trusted to fulfil their promises and they could not do so, as we have just seen. In all the seeking after the shrines, the Lord Himself got left out.
But having looked at the message of the shrines we are in a position to understand the message of the dirge. It speaks of death where there should have been life: Fallen, no more to rise (2a). Here is the failure of Bethel: the house of God, the location of the promise ‘God is in this place’ as the giver of hope and new life, the one who can make the name ‘Israel’ a reality. Secondly, the dirge speaks of abandonment where there should have been companionship: the virgin Israel; forsaken…, with none to raise her up (2b). Here is the failure of the Beer-sheba promise ‘God is with you’. Israel has been carried off in death as a virgin who has never known the joys of married companionship and who, even in her virgin state, could find none to befriend her in the hour of need. Thirdly, the dirge speaks of dispossession where there should have been inheritance: Fallen,… forsaken on her land, with none to raise her up, the failure of the Gilgal promise, the people of God lying in defeat, dead, where in the heyday of Joshua’s Gilgal they had shouted in triumph over dispossessed foes.
B. (:6-13) Anticipate Fiery Judgment — “Seek the Lord that You May Live”
- (:6-9) Destructive Power of God’s Judgment
“Seek the LORD that you may live, Lest He break forth like a fire, O house of Joseph, And it consume with none to quench it for Bethel, 7 For those who turn justice into wormwood And cast righteousness down to the earth. 8 He who made the Pleiades and Orion And changes deep darkness into morning, Who also darkens day into night, Who calls for the waters of the sea And pours them out on the surface of the earth, The LORD is His name. 9 It is He who flashes forth with destruction upon the strong, So that destruction comes upon the fortress.”
Lloyd Ogilvie: vs. 6 — The call to seek the Lord and not the degraded worship at the national shrines is reiterated in verse 6. Truly seeking the Lord was the only hope of surviving the devouring fire of the wrath of Yahweh that would destroy all of Israel including the shrine at Bethel.
Allen Guenther: To seek (daraš, finite verb or infinitive) God or gods means that a worshiper enters God’s presence to ask for guidance or instruction (1 Sam. 9:9; 2 Kings 22:13, 18). One who seeks God goes into his presence and walks in his ways, doing his will (Fs. 24:3-6; Isa. 55:6-9). This encounter normally occurs at a holy place, though the focus is on the submission to God. One who seeks God from the heart can expect God to disclose himself and respond with salvation (1 Chron. 28:8-9). . .
The personal name of God, Yahweh (= the Lord), was first explained to Moses at the burning bush (Exod. 3:14-15; cf. 6:1-3) as “I AM.” In context, the significance of the name appears to identify the Lord as the One who can be trusted to fulfill the covenant promise made to his people. God is present to act, usually and preferably for a people’s salvation, but at times such as these, for judgment.
Within the Amos 5:1-17 text, the mention of the name Yahweh draws attention to the two themes surrounding it. First, since God promised to ensure an orderly world after the Flood (Gen. 8:21-22; 9:11-17), he remains faithful to his covenant oath. The One who set the stars in their heavenly patterns, who regulates the sequences of day and night, who majestically loads the clouds with moisture from the sea and pours it out on the land (Amos 5:8a-c)-this One will keep covenant forever.
Yahweh is his name!
The other side of the meaning of the divine name is that the Lord will visit with judgment those who claim the name but refuse to observe his decrees of justice and compassion (Amos 5:9; cf. 5:10-13). Those who desecrate the name of the Lord will experience the faithfulness of God, the Judge. The Lord has promised blessings on obedience and judgments for disobedience (Deut. 27-30). If Yahweh is to live up to his name, fulfillment demands judgment.
Yahweh is his name!
The judgment is imminent unless Israel repents and returns to her covenant Lord. The people have not yet acknowledged that the funeral procession is for them. They continue to hold out the hope that God will still intervene on their behalf. God dashes that hope to the ground in the wailing crescendos of two woe oracles (Amos 5:18-27; 6:12-14).
Gary Cohen: Here “the house of Joseph” is addressed, and this is another title for the Northern Kingdom. Joseph’s two sons were Ephraim and Manasseh, from whom sprang two tribes that became the two strongest among the ten tribes of the Northern Kingdom.
Therefore those names together, and sometimes merely Ephraim alone, are synonymous with the Northern Kingdom (e.g. Isa. 7:2).
Jorg Jeremias: vs. 7 — Here “justice” refers to the impartial application of the law “in the gate” (cf. vv. 10, 12, 15), and “righteousness” to the corresponding behavior in daily life allowing the other person—and the weak in particular—to be treated justly.
Alec Motyer: vs. 7 — But this fine hymn is bracketed about with references to a people who resist change. They come to Bethel (7) and they go from Bethel (10-12) totally unaltered. The failure, therefore, lay not in the Bethel promises, nor in the God of Bethel, but in the wilfulness which would not be transformed from lawlessness and transgression. Amos’ exposure of a religion which leaves life untouched could not have been more brilliantly accomplished. They go, they sing, they come away, and nothing, simply nothing has changed. Justice is still turned sour (7a, 12c) and righteousness is still overthrown (7b, 12b). It is an argument against those who wish to insert verse 7 immediately before verse 10 that in that position it becomes otiose. It adds nothing to the contents of verses 10-12. It is a supreme argument for the verse order as it is that it enables us to follow the worshipper through what was (if this hymn is a sample) a superb spiritual experience and see him emerge on the other side exactly the same person.
J. Vernon McGee: vs. 8 — It is God who makes the rain fall. It is true that rainfall is controlled by the law of hydrodynamics, but who made the law of hydrodynamics? Who is the One who pulls the water up out of the ocean, puts it on the train (they call it a cloud), moves those clouds with the wind until they get to just the right place, then turns loose the rain? God is the One doing that, my friend. Amos says, “The LORD is his name.” In effect, he is saying to the people of Israel, “You have turned to idols, and your life does not commend your profession of a faith in the living God, the living God who is the Creator.”
Trent Butler: God’s style of living—righteousness—was cast to the ground like rubbish. The court system depended on righteous men—the elders in the gate and the judges—to produce equity and fairness for all parties, rich or poor. Instead, the rich controlled the justice system, and the poor got only an opportunity to become poorer. Israel might go through the motions of worship. They did not seek God in doing so. Judgment loomed.
John Goldingay: The expressions signify that people with power and authority ought to make decisions in a way that expresses faithfulness in relationships with God and with the community. In practice, power tends to be exercised without faithfulness and thus to be overthrown and turned into something that tastes foul; wormwood is “the bitterest substance nameable, . . . comparable only to the taste of poison.” Faithfulness has thus been thrown over and trampled in the dust. Amos’s assertion applies not just to the authority exercised by the administration but also to the power exercised by all those who have it (e.g., heads of households). And working against the faithful exercise of authority is contradictory to having recourse to Yahweh—because faithful exercise of authority is integral to who Yahweh is.
James Mays: v. 9 — Let none imagine himself invulnerable to Yahweh. To live in his universe is to be his dependent. To exist in history is to be subject to his power.
Gary Smith: In the second part of the hymn (5:9), Amos focuses on the application of God’s power over the wealthy people in his audience. Today they may live securely in expensive mansions in strongly fortified cities, but soon God will flash destruction over these places and leave them in ruins (see 3:11, 14; 4:3–4; 5:11). This hymn supports Amos’s persuasive attempt to convince the people that their relationship to God is central to their future. God has the power over life and death, and death will soon bring mourning and wailing to the nation of Israel.
- (:10) Detesting Those Who Expose Injustice
“They hate him who reproves in the gate,
And they abhor him who speaks with integrity.”
M. Daniel Carroll R.: The interpretive challenge is to discern the identity of the individuals in this verse—both the subjects and objects of the verbs. To begin with, there is a group that shows deep antipathy (hate) toward those who challenge their unethical behavior. Apparently, these people control what goes on at the gate. They may represent multiple roles, such as elders, merchants, propertied men of standing in the community, or government officials, such as formally appointed judges. In other words, interrelated unscrupulous decisions and transactions—legal, commercial, and administrative—are at work as multiple unfair means and ends serve each other in an unequal distribution of social and economic power (cf. 2:6–8; 3:9–10; 8:4–6). Injustice permeates every sphere of the community and nation.444 Denouncing corruption at the gate is a recurring Old Testament theme (e.g., Prov 22:22; Isa 29:20–21; Zech 8:16–17), as is the hostility of the unprincipled toward those who correct them (Prov 12:1; 15:10; 29:10). The emotions of this rejection of critical voices are strong: hate and abhor. What would cause such rancor? Social class and clout? Economic gain? Irregular land acquisition? Political power? A combination of these factors? The text does not say, but the language underscores the strong dislike for anyone who might get in the way of those in control achieving their goals.
Gary Cohen: In ancient times the town elders often sat at the city gates to rebuke open sinners who entered or exited the city. In Amos’s day apparently he and the elders did this kind of rebuking. They received hatred for it. The people should have been struck in their consciences and should have turned to God in true repentance. Perhaps that rebuking took place in the gates of Bethel, where many were entering to worship at the calf altar. (Cf. Matt. 5:12; Luke 6:22; 21:17.)
- (:11-12) Detailing of Israel’s Sins
“Therefore, because you impose heavy rent on the poor And exact a tribute of grain from them, Though you have built houses of well-hewn stone, Yet you will not live in them; You have planted pleasant vineyards, yet you will not drink their wine. 12 For I know your transgressions are many and your sins are great, You who distress the righteous and accept bribes, And turn aside the poor in the gate.”
Trent Butler: Amos became even more explicit in describing Israel’s problem. The people who worshipped were the same ones who trampled on the poor and forced payment of grain. Israel’s economic system depended on land staying in the hands of small landowners and within the same tribe. That was the way God intended it when he had Joshua distribute the land among the tribes (Josh. 13–21). Powerful businessmen changed all that. They got people into debt, took over their land to pay the debt, then forced the former landowners to work the soil for them and pay the largest share of the crop to rent the land.
Lloyd Ogilvie: Amos then contrasts the glory of Yahweh with the sinfulness of His people (vv. 10–13). This is a strange twist for a funeral oration. Instead of dwelling on the laudable qualities of the deceased, Amos lists Israel’s social unrighteousness. All the charges the prophet previously made are now exposed as the cause of the nation’s death. The poor were exploited. They were taxed for the aggrandizement of the wealthy and powerful. It was an evil time of bribery and the passing of hush money for even the prudent to keep silent about the injustice. The rich who profited at the expense of the poor and oppressed built stone houses and planted desirable vineyards. But with the death of the nation, these unrighteous people will not live in their houses or drink of the wine from their vineyards.
Gary Smith: Justice is an outworking of God’s character of holiness, but the nation does not emulate him. They have changed the sweet experience of dealing with people based on righteousness into a bitter and evil thing through their mistreatment of those who are poorer or less powerful. By manipulating the courts through bribery, supplying false witnesses, and intimidating judges, the powerful political and business leaders are able to maintain their lifestyles and insulate themselves from accusations of unfairness. Amos laments these unbearable injustices. These rich people make life miserable for the poor, who suffer under them.
As a result, God will not allow the wealthy to enjoy the fruits of their crimes. They will not be able to live in their fine mansions built of expensively cut stones or appreciate the wine that comes from their well-groomed vineyards (5:11). They make others poor and homeless; now the same will be done to them.
- (:13) Discretion Is Called for
“Therefore, at such a time the prudent person keeps silent,
for it is an evil time.”
J. Vernon McGee: In other words, a man in that day knew he could not get justice, and many good people were keeping quiet. It was the prudent thing to do because, if he had attempted to protest, it wouldn’t have done him a bit of good. The tragedy of the hour in which we live is that we talk about the freedom of the press, the freedom of religion, and the freedom of speech, but there is not much of it left. The news media have definitely become a brainwashing agency. It is true that only he who has money can get a public hearing today. As a result, we do have a silent majority in this country, because they know that their voices would not amount to anything at all. We are in a tragic day, very much like the day to which Israel had come.
Alec Motyer: Finally, in verse 13 Amos implies that, had they been effectively in the presence of the God of Bethel, they would have sought to achieve a social order favourable to righteousness, but instead the social climate of the day threatened anyone who voiced an opinion contrary to its unrighteous and self-seeking ethos. Such was the rule of lawlessness (cf. on 6:3) that a person feared to open his mouth to protest: prudence dictated otherwise. There may be a little more to it than just that, the silence of prudence. The word translated prudent could well mean ‘anyone who wants to get on’ or ‘succeed’. In this light we can easily see the sort of pressures society at that day was exerting: ‘You wouldn’t want to spoil your prospects, now, would you?’ It both silenced protests which might have been made for others who had been wronged and placed severe adverse pressures on the person who wished to steer a straight course for himself. It was a society which encouraged wrong-doing and discouraged standing for principle. When grace transforms a person it brings this aspect of life into focus: a determination to create a society in which righteousness dwells.
C. (:14-15) Amend Your Ways and Appeal to God’s Grace –
“Seek Good and Not Evil, that You May Live”
“Seek good and not evil, that you may live;
And thus may the LORD God of hosts be with you, Just as you have said! 15 Hate evil, love good, And establish justice in the gate!
Perhaps the LORD God of hosts May be gracious to the remnant of Joseph.”
M. Daniel Carroll R.: For Andersen and Freedman, these two verses are the center of the book thematically and according to word count. The matters of justice, good and evil, and the exhortation to seek are foundational to its message. As in its corresponding passage, this pericope’s call to pursue the things of God is couched within a severe warning.
John Goldingay: Having recourse to Yahweh in worship involves having recourse to what is morally good in the rest of life, and it issues in Yahweh’s blessing and in the nation’s life continuing. It means that the affirmations made in worship about the Lord being with us (e.g., Ps. 46) can come true. Having recourse to what is dire (to despoiling the needy and countenancing faithless exercise of authority) means people are not really having recourse to Yahweh even though they think they are, and it will issue in death (see vv. 16–17).
To put it in different words (v. 15a), they need to hate and repudiate what is bad, morally and thus experientially, rather than repudiating the reprover mentioned in v. 10. And they need to love and be loyal to what is good in both aspects, rather than just expressing the love for worship mentioned in 4:5. The concrete expression of that hatred/repudiation and love/loyalty will be to set up the exercise of authority at the gate “so that all may see.” The reference to the exercise of authority complements the reference to the faithful person in v. 12; elsewhere in Amos the two expressions always come together (5:7, 24; 6:12). Each needs the other: faithfulness needs to be embodied in the exercise of authority; the exercise of authority needs to be undertaken with faithfulness. The exercise of authority that needs to be publicly established is the kind whereby the faithful person is found to be in the right, not falsely found guilty.
Tchavdar Hadjiev: The general word good is defined as the practice of social justice in the gate. Instead of hating the one who reproves in the gate (v. 10) the Israelites are called to Hate evil, that is, all the practices of judicial corruption and economic exploitation denounced in verses 10–12 that result in the arrival of the evil time of judgment (v. 13). The repetition of the lengthy title Lord, the God of hosts adds solemnity to the call.
Billy Smith: The title for God here is literally “Yahweh God of hosts.” While the title “Yahweh of hosts” (“LORD Almighty”) occurs many times in Scripture, the longer designation used here is found only in Amos (4:13; 5:14-15, 27). It stresses that the God of Israel has sovereign power over the affairs of earth and heaven. If such a God were with them, at their side and on their behalf, they could be assured not only of military victory (cf. Josh 1:9; Judg 1:22) but also of true success and security (cf. Hag 2:4). But to offend such a God meant certain disaster. Just as seeking him and his ways meant life, failing to do so meant death.
(:16-17) CONCLUSION OF THE FUNERAL SONG – NATIONWIDE WAILING
“Therefore, thus says the LORD God of hosts, the Lord, ‘There is wailing in all the plazas, And in all the streets they say, Alas! Alas! They also call the farmer to mourning And professional mourners to lamentation. 17 And in all the vineyards there is wailing, Because I shall pass through the midst of you,’ says the LORD.”
Lloyd Ogilvie: Verses 16–17 conclude Amos’s funeral address with a grim picture of the wailing over the death of the nation. There will be wailing in all the streets. The grief will be so profound that there will not be enough professional wailers to express the grief. Even farmers from outside the cities will be called to add their voices to the multitude of anguished cries.
Jorg Jeremias: After all these enumerations of places of lament, and all the enumerations of those affected by grief, the brief justification—comprising only two words and once more confirmed in a concluding fashion as the words of Yahweh—comes as a crushing blow. It is not God’s absence that leads to Israel’s death, but rather: “I will pass through the midst of you.” With this uniquely formulated concluding sentence, the composition returns to the collective perspective of the beginning (“maiden Israel,” 5:2; cf. by contrast the plural imperatives “seek . . .” in vv. 4, 6, 14). This statement evokes two associations.
- The first is of a traditio-historical nature, recalling the departure event at the exodus as it is evoked anew in every Passover celebration; there Israel celebrates the fact that it was spared while Yahweh “passed through” Egypt and slew the firstborn. Now it is Israel itself that is threatened, and not merely its firstborn.
- The other association concerns Amos’ third and fourth visions, where the end of God’s patience and willingness to forgive are described with the same verb, though with a different preposition such that Yahweh now can “no longer pass them (i.e., Israel) by” (῾ābar lĕ: 7:8; 8:2). Amos 5:17 describes the alternative: the deadly act of “passing through the midst of” (῾ābar bĕ). If Yahweh acts thus, Israel is lost; its “end has come” (8:2). In this situation, the divine “perhaps” of 5:15 is Israel’s only hope.
Billy Smith: But what Amos did here, as frequently elsewhere (cf. 5:18–20), was to reverse completely the usual use of theophany. Instead of covenant renewal and confirmation of the Lord’s promises, the appearance of the Lord was to judge disobedient Israel. The Lord himself was the one who stood behind the massive loss of life implied by the widespread mourning.