Albert Barnes Commentary Amos 2:12

"But ye gave the Nazirites wine to drink, and commanded the prophets, saying, Prophesy not." — Amos 2:12 (ASV)

But ye gave the Nazarites wine to drink — Literally, “and,” (this, on their part, was the consequence of what God did for them) “ye caused the Nazarites to drink wine.” God appointed; Israel strove to undo His appointment. God “raised up Nazarites,” as a testimony to them; they sought to make His servants break their vow, in order to rid themselves of that testimony. Their pains to destroy it are a strong proof of its power. The world is mad against true religion because it feels itself condemned by it. People set themselves against religion and the religious, the Church or the priesthood, only when and because they feel their power on God’s side against them. What people despise, they do not oppose.

“They kill us, they do not despise us,” were true words of a French priest, regarding the “reign of reason” in the first French revolution. If the people in power had not respected the Nazarites, or felt that the people respected them, they would not have attempted to corrupt or to force them to break their vow. The word “cause” them “to drink” does not express whether they used constraint or seduction; Israel’s consciences supplied it. Yet since they “persecuted the prophets” and put them to death, it seems likely that Amos means that they used violence. This could have been either by forcing the wine into their mouths—as swine's flesh was forced into the mouth of Eleazar , and as, in the Decian persecution, an infant was made to eat of an offering made to an idol—or by threat of death.

And commanded the prophets, saying, Prophesy not — God had commanded the prophets to prophesy. Israel issued and laid upon them its commands against the commands of God. The more God reveals His will, the more direct and more determinate the opposition of those who will not yield. God’s perseverance in trying to win them irritates them; they oppose grace and are angered at not being left alone. This large statement of Amos means much more than the prohibition of Amaziah to himself (Amos 7:13). Jeroboam I was prevented only by a miracle (1 Kings 13:4) from seizing the prophet who denounced the altar at Bethel.

Ahab, during the famine foretold by Elijah, sought him everywhere to destroy him (1 Kings 18:10–12), and Jezebel, after the miracle at Carmel and the death of her prophets, swore by her gods to do so (1 Kings 19:2–3). Ahab’s last act was to imprison Micaiah (1 Kings 22:26–27), the son of Imlath, for prophesying his death, when adjured by himself to speak truly.

Ahaziah, his son, undeterred by the fire from heaven which destroyed two captains, each with his fifty, sent yet a third to take Elijah when he prophesied that the king would not recover from his sickness (2 Kings 1:9–13). Jehoram, his second son, swore by God to destroy Elisha (2 Kings 6:31), attributing the evils of the siege to the prophet, just as the Romans attributed the evils of their decaying empire to the Christians. Micah and Isaiah, a little later, speak of such opposition in Judah as habitual (Micah 2:6; Isaiah 30:10–11)—much more so in Israel, where the opposition to God’s law was more fundamental, and where God’s prophets had been all but exterminated.

Even Asa, in his degenerate days, imprisoned Hanani for prophesying that he would have wars (2 Chronicles 16:7; 2 Chronicles 16:10). Joash killed Zechariah son of Jehoiada (2 Chronicles 24:20–21). Amaziah silenced the prophet who rebuked him, saying, Art thou made of the king’s council? Forbear. Why shouldest thou be smitten? (2 Chronicles 25:15–16).

Jehoiakim even sent into Egypt to fetch Uriah and killed him (Jeremiah 26:20–23). Jeremiah’s life was one continuous encounter with false accusations (Jeremiah 20:10; Jeremiah 37:13; Jeremiah 38:4), contradictions by false prophets (Jeremiah 23:17 and following; Jeremiah 27:9–10, 14-16; Jeremiah 28; Jeremiah 29), hatred (Jeremiah 15:10), mockery (Jeremiah 17:15; Jeremiah 20:7–8; Jeremiah 23:33), persecution (Jeremiah 17:18), imprisonment (Jeremiah 20:2; Jeremiah 32:3; Jeremiah 33:1; Jeremiah 37:15–21; Jeremiah 38:6–13), and attempts to destroy him (Jeremiah 11:18–21; Jeremiah 18:18, 20-23; Jeremiah 26:8 and following; Jeremiah 36:26). The complaint was, as here, Wherefore dost thou prophesy? (Jeremiah 32:3).

What, when our Lord states it as the characteristic of Jerusalem that she was the slayer of the prophets, the stoner of those sent unto her? They would not have slain the prophets if they could have silenced them.

People are loath to go to extremities with God; they will make an armistice with Him. Their awe of holiness makes them inwardly shrink from laying hands on it.

Like the wolf in the fable, they must have a plea against it; and that plea against those who have the truth is obstinacy. If the Christians would have abstained from converting the world, they would not have been persecuted.

The chief priests at first sought simply to silence the Apostles (Acts 4:18, 21). Then they enforced their command with scourges (Acts 5:40). Then they persecuted them and the Christians to death (Acts 7:57–59; Acts 8:1–4; Acts 9:1–2; Acts 12:1–3; Acts 22:4–5).

Direct contumacy toward God’s known voice and silencing His messenger is a last stage of obduracy and malice, which leaves God no further avenue to the soul or the people. His means of grace are exhausted when the soul or people not only deaden His voice within but also obstruct it without. One who, through the vehemence of his passions, refuses to hear, is within the reach of the grace of God afterward.

He who stifles God’s word to others has, for the most part, hardened his heart deliberately and maliciously in unlove toward man, as well as contempt of God. Hence, God speaks as though this brought the day of grace to a close.