John Calvin Commentary Amos 1:3-5

"Thus saith Jehovah: For three transgressions of Damascus, yea, for four, I will not turn away the punishment thereof; because they have threshed Gilead with threshing instruments of iron: but I will send a fire into the house of Hazael, and it shall devour the palaces of Ben-hadad. And I will break the bar of Damascus, and cut off the inhabitant from the valley of Aven, and him that holdeth the sceptre from the house of Eden; and the people of Syria shall go into captivity unto Kir, saith Jehovah." — Amos 1:3-5 (ASV)

It is strange that Amos said his words concerned Israel, and yet he now turns to speak of Damascus and the country of Syria. This seems inconsistent. Why does he not perform the task committed to him? Why does he not reprove the Israelites? Why does he not threaten them?

Why does he not show their sins? And why does he speak of the destruction then near to the people of Syria? But it is right here to consider what his design was. He shows briefly, in the last verse, that ruin was near the Israelites, for God, who had until now spared them, was now resolved to ascend His tribunal.

But now, to better prepare the Israelites, he shows that God, as a judge, would call all the neighboring nations to account. For if the Prophet had threatened only the Israelites, they might have thought that what they suffered was by chance, especially when they saw similar things happening to their neighbors: “How is it credible that these evils and calamities have flowed from God’s vengeance, since the Idumeans, the Moabites, the Ammonites, the Syrians, and the Sidonians are implicated in these evils in common with us?”

“For if God’s hand pursues us, it is the same for them; and if it is fate that, with blind force, exercises its rule over the Moabites, the Idumeans, and the Syrians, the same thing, doubtless, must be thought of our case.” Thus, all the Prophet’s authority would have lost its power unless the Israelites were made to know that God is the judge of all nations.

We must also bear in mind that the kingdom of Israel was devastated, along with other neighboring countries, as war had spread far and wide. For the Assyrian, like a violent storm, had swept through that entire region. Therefore, not only were the Israelites distressed by adversities at that time, but so were all the nations of which Amos prophesied.

It was therefore necessary to add the list we find here, so that the Israelites might have as many confirmations of God’s vengeance as there were examples of the dire calamities prevailing everywhere before their eyes. This should be kept in mind.

Furthermore, the Prophet considered another point: If the Idumeans, the Moabites, the Syrians, and Ammonites were to be treated so severely, and the Prophet had not connected the Israelites with them, they might have thought they were to be exempted from the common punishments because God would be favorable to them. For hypocrites always harden themselves further whenever God spares them: “See, the Ammonites and the Moabites are punished; the Idumeans, the Syrians, and other nations are visited with judgment. God then is angry with all these; but we are His children, for He is indulgent to us.”

But the Prophet here puts the Israelites in the same bundle with the Moabites, the Idumeans, and other heathen nations, as if he were saying, “God will not spare your neighbors; but do not think that you will be exempt from His vengeance when they are led to punishment. I now declare to you that God will be the judge of you all together.”

We now understand the Prophet’s design. He wished here to set before the eyes of the Israelites the punishment of others to awaken them and also to induce them to examine themselves. For we often see that those who are stubborn and rebellious by nature, when directly addressed, do not pay much attention; but when they hear of the sins of others, and especially when they hear something of punishment, they do pay attention.

The Prophet therefore designed by degrees to lead the Israelites to a teachable state of mind, for he knew them to be lethargic in their self-indulgence and also blinded by presumption, so that they could not easily be brought under the yoke. Therefore, he sets before them the punishment that was soon to fall on neighboring nations.

Yet we must observe that there was another reason. I do not dismiss what I have already mentioned, but the Prophet no doubt also had this in view: God would punish the Syrians because they cruelly raged against the Israelites, especially against Gilead and its inhabitants.

Since God, then, would inflict so severe a punishment on the Syrians because they so cruelly treated the inhabitants of Gilead, what could the Israelites themselves expect? They had been arrogant towards God, had violated His worship, had robbed Him of His honor, and had, in turn, destroyed one another. For, as we shall see later, there was no equity or humanity among them; they had forgotten all reason.

Since the Israelites were like this, how could they hope that so many and so detestable crimes should go unpunished, when they saw that the Syrians, though uncircumcised, were not to be spared because they had so cruelly treated declared enemies, against whom they lawfully waged war?

I now come to the words of the Prophet: Thus saith Jehovah, For three transgressions of Damascus, and for four, will not be propitious to it; literally, I will not convert it. But I take this actively to mean that God would not turn Himself to mercy, or that He would not be favorable to Damascus.

We know that Damascus was the capital of Syria. The Prophet here, by mentioning a part for the whole, threatens the entire people and summons all the Syrians to God’s tribunal, because they had inhumanly treated, as we shall see, the city of Gilead. But he says, God will not be propitious for three and four transgressions of Damascus. Some interpret this to mean, “For three transgressions I have been propitious; for four I will not be.” But there is no need to add anything to the Prophet’s words, for the most suitable sense here is that for the many sins of Damascus God would not be favorable to it. And the Prophet, I have no doubt, intended by the two numbers to show the irreclaimable perverseness of the Syrians.

Seven in Scripture is an indefinite number and is taken, as is well known, to express what is countless. By saying then, three and four transgressions, it is the same as if he had said seven; but the Prophet more strikingly indicates the progress the Syrians made in their transgressions until they became so perverse that there was no hope of repentance.

This then is the reason God declares that He would no longer forgive the Syrians, since without measure or limit they burst forth into transgressions and did not cease, though they were given time to change. This is the true meaning. And the Prophet repeats the same form of speech when speaking of Gaza, of Amman, of Edom, and of other nations.

Let us learn from this passage that God, whom the world regards as too cruel when He takes vengeance on sins, truly shows by sure proof the truth of what He so often declares about Himself in Scripture: that He is patient and does not quickly take vengeance. Though people deserve to perish, yet the Lord suspends His judgments.

We have a remarkable proof of this in these prophecies, for the Prophet speaks not only of one people but of many. Thus, God endured many transgressions not only in the Syrians but also in other nations; there was not then a country in which a testimony to God’s forbearance did not exist. It therefore appears that the world unjustly complains of too much rigor when God takes vengeance, for He always waits until iniquity (as was stated yesterday) reaches its highest point.

Besides this, a dreadful spectacle of sins among so many nations is presented to us here. At the same time, when we compare that age with ours, it is certain that greater integrity existed then. All kinds of evils so overflow today that, compared with the present, the time of Amos was the golden age.

And yet we hear him declaring here that the people of Judah and of Israel, and all the other nations, were monstrously wicked, so that God could not bring them to repentance. For He does not testify here in vain that He would punish completely obstinate wickedness, since they had not turned to Him—they who had advanced to the “number seven,” that is, who had sinned (as has been stated before) without measure or limits. This also ought to be noticed in the Prophet’s words, but I cannot proceed further now.

Prayer:

Grant, Almighty God, that as You see we are of a disposition so hard and rebellious that we are not, without great difficulty, drawn to You—O grant that we may at least be subdued by the threatenings You daily pronounce against us. May we be so subdued that, being also drawn by Your word, we may give ourselves up to You. May we not only allow ourselves to be constrained by punishments and corrections, but also obey You with a willing mind, and most readily offer ourselves to You as a sacrifice of obedience, so that, being ruled by the Spirit of Your Son, we may at last attain that blessed rest which has been prepared for us by the same, Your Son our Lord. Amen.

[Exposition continues from previous day's lecture]

We explained in yesterday’s lecture that what the Prophet means by the three and four transgressions of Damascus is perverse and incurable wickedness. For God here declares that He had endured long enough the sins of Damascus, and that now He is, in a way, forced to proceed to extreme rigor, since there was no hope of amendment.

But what follows may seem strange, for immediately the Prophet adds, Because they have threshed Gilead with iron wains, or serrated machines. He records here only one wickedness: where, then, were the seven of which he spoke? The answer may be easily given. By naming the three and four sins of Damascus, he does not mean different kinds of sins, but rather the perverseness which we have mentioned. For they had been extremely rebellious against God, and God had suspended His vengeance until it became evident that they were incurable.

It was, therefore, not necessary to mention seven different sins here; for it was enough that Damascus (which means the kingdom of Syria) was bound by such a degree of obstinacy that no remedy could be applied to its transgressions, for it had for a long time tested God’s patience.

Now the Prophet adds, I will send fire unto the house of Hazael, which will devour the palaces of Ben-hadad. The Prophet still speaks of the kingdom of Syria, for we know that both Ben-hadad and Hazael were kings of Syria.

But Jerome is much mistaken in thinking that Ben-hadad was here put in the second place, as if he had been Hazael’s successor. Sacred history relates that Hazael came to Elisha when Ben-hadad was ill in bed (2 Kings 8:9), sent to request an answer. Now the Prophet declared that Hazael would be the king of Syria, and declared this not without tears, for he pitied his own people, of whom this Syrian would be the destroyer. After Hazael returned home, he strangled Ben-hadad and took the royal dignity for himself.

But it is common enough in Scripture to speak of a present thing and then, as in this place, to add what is past: I will send fire into the house of Hazael, and this fire will devour the palaces of Ben-hadad. It is as if he were saying, “I will destroy the kingdom of Syria; I will consume it as with burning.”

But he first names the house of Hazael and then the palaces of Ben-hadad, as if he were saying, “No antiquity shall preserve that kingdom from being destroyed.” For, metaphorically, under the word “fire,” he designates every kind of destruction; and we know how great the violence of fire is.

It is then as if he were saying that no wealth, no strength, no fortifications would prevent the kingdom of Syria from being destroyed.

He then adds, I will break in pieces the bar of Damascus. The Prophet confirms what he had already said, for Damascus, being strongly fortified, might have seemed impregnable. By “bar,” the Prophet, using a part for the whole, meant strongholds and everything that could keep out enemies. Nothing, then, will prevent enemies from taking possession of the city of Damascus. How so? Because the Lord will break its bars in pieces.

It is then added, I will cut off, or destroy, the inhabitant from Bikoth Aven, or from the plain of Aven. It is uncertain whether this was the actual name of a place or not, though this is probable. Although it means “plain,” derived from a verb meaning to cut in two, or divide (because a plain or a valley divides or separates mountains), hence a valley or plain is called in Hebrew a “division.”

Now, we know that there were very delightful plains in the kingdom of Syria, even near Damascus. Aven also may have been the name of a place, though in Hebrew it means trouble or laborer. But whatever it may have been, the Prophet no doubt declares here that all the plains near Damascus, and in the kingdom of Syria, would be deprived of their inhabitants.

I will then destroy the inhabitant from the plain of Aven, and the holder of the scepter from the house of Eden, or from the house of pleasure. This also may have been the name of a place, and from its situation a region that, by its pleasantness, greatly delighted its inhabitants. But the Prophet, I have no doubt, alludes in these two words to trouble and pleasure. Removed, he says, shall be the people of Syria into Kir. The meaning of this is that the kingdom of Syria would be devastated, so that the people would be taken into Assyria. For the Prophet declares that the Assyrians would be the conquerors, removing the spoils into their own kingdom and leading away the people as captives, for the word “city,” as a part for the whole, is used here for the whole land.