John Calvin Commentary Amos 2

Now Amos prophesies here against the Moabites and proclaims concerning them what we have noticed concerning the other nations—that the Moabites were completely perverse, that no repentance could be hoped for, as they had added crimes to crimes and reached the height of wickedness. For, as we have said, the number seven signifies this.

The Prophet then charges the Moabites here with perverseness. From this we learn that God’s vengeance did not come quickly upon them, for their wickedness was intolerable, since they persisted in their crimes. But he mentions one thing in particular—that they had burnt the bones of the king of Edom.

Some take "bones" here to mean courage, as if the Prophet had said that the whole strength of Edom had been reduced to ashes. But this is a strained exposition, and its authors themselves confess that they are forced to it by necessity, even though there is no such necessity. The interpretation given by the Rabbis does not satisfy them—that the body of a certain king had been burnt, and then that the Moabites had strangely used the ashes to make a cement instead of lime.

Thus the Rabbis trifle in their usual manner; for when an obscure passage occurs, they immediately invent some fable. Even if there is no historical basis, they exercise their ingenuity in fanciful interpretations, and this I completely dislike. But what need is there to resort to allegory when we can simply take what the Prophet says: that the body of the king of Edom had been burnt? For the Prophet, I do not doubt, charges the Moabites with barbarous cruelty.

To dig up the bodies of enemies and burn their bones—this is an inhuman and completely barbarous deed. But it was more detestable in the Moabites, who had some connection with the Edomites, for they descended from the same family. The memory of that relationship should have continued, since Abraham raised Lot, the father of the Moabites, and thus the Moabites had an obligation to the Edomites.

If, then, any humanity existed in them, they should have restrained their passions so as not to treat their brethren so cruelly. Now, when they exceeded all restraint in war, raged against dead bodies, and burned the bones of the dead, it was, as I have said, extremely barbarous conduct.

The meaning, then, is that the Moabites could no longer be tolerated, for in this one instance, they provided an example of savage cruelty. If there had been a drop of humanity in them, they would have treated their brethren, the Edomites, more kindly.

But they burned into lime, that is, into ashes, the bones of the king of Edom, thereby proving they had forgotten all humanity and justice. We now understand the Prophet’s meaning.

He therefore adds a threat: I will send a fire on Moab, which shall devour the palaces of קריות, Koriut. We have stated that what the Prophet means by these expressions is that God would consume the Moabites by a violent punishment, as if by a burning fire; that fortified places could not prevent Him from executing His vengeance; and that though they were proud of their palaces, these would be of no avail to them.

He further adds, Moab shall die with tumult, with noise, with the sound of the trumpet. That is, God will send strong enemies who will come and make no peace with the Moabites, but will take possession of every place and fortified city by force and by the sword. For what the Prophet means by tumult, shouting, and the sound of the trumpet is that the Moabites would not fall under the power of their enemies through agreements or treaties, as happens when a voluntary surrender is made, which usually lessens the hostile rage of enemies. No, he says, it will not be so, for their enemies will take not only their wealth but also their lives.

Finally, he adds, And I will cut off the judge from the midst of her, and will slay her princes, saith Jehovah. God here declares that the kingdom of the Moabites and its people will cease to exist, for we know that people cannot exist as a community without some form of civil government.

Wherever, then, there is an assembly of people, there must be rulers to govern them. Hence, when God declares that there will no longer be a judge among the Moabites, it is the same as if He had said that their name would be blotted out.

For if the people of Moab had continued, some rulers must necessarily, as we have said, have remained among them. When rulers, then, are destroyed, the people must also perish, for there is no security for them.

The Prophet, then, does not announce here a temporary punishment on the Moabites, but utter ruin, from which they were never to recover. This is the meaning.

Amos now turns his discourse to the tribe of Judah, and to that kingdom, which still continued in the family of David. He has until now spoken of heathen and uncircumcised nations: what he said of them was a prelude to the destruction which was near the chosen people; for when God did not spare others who had sinned through ignorance, what was to become of the people of Israel, who had been taught in the law?

For a servant, knowing his master’s will, and not doing it, is worthy of many stripes (Luke 12:47). God could not, then, forgive the children of Abraham, whom he had adopted as his special people, when he inflicted such grievous punishments on heathen nations, whose ignorance, as it is commonly thought by men, was excusable.

It is indeed true, that all who sin without law will justly perish, as Paul says in Romans 2, but when a comparison is made between the children of Israel and the wretched heathens, who were immersed in errors, the latter were doubtless worthy of being pardoned, when compared with that people who had betrayed their perverseness and, as it were, intentionally resolved to bring on themselves the vengeance of God.

The Prophet then, having until now spoken of the Gentiles, now turns his discourse to the chosen people, the children of Abraham. But he speaks of the tribe of Judah, from which he sprang, as I said at the beginning; and he did this, lest anyone should charge him with favoring his own countrymen: he had, indeed, migrated into the kingdom of Israel, but he was there a stranger.

We shall now see how severely he reproved them.

Had he, then, been silent regarding the tribe of Judah, he might have been subject to slander. Many might have said that there was collusion between him and his own countrymen, that he concealed their vices, and that he fiercely denounced their neighbors through wicked rivalry, in order to transfer the kingdom back to the family of David.

Therefore, so that no such suspicion might tarnish his doctrine, the Prophet here summons the tribe of Judah to judgment and speaks in no milder language of the Jews than of other nations. For he says that they, through their stubbornness, had so provoked God’s wrath that there was no hope of pardon. Indeed, such was the mass of their vices that God would now justly execute extreme vengeance, as moderate chastisement would not be sufficient.

We now understand then the Prophet’s design.

I come now to the words: he says, For they have despised the law of Jehovah. Here he charges the Jews with apostasy, for they had cast aside the worship of God and the pure doctrine of religion. This was a most grievous crime. Thus we see that the Prophet here condemns freely and honestly, as was fitting for him, the vices of his own people, so that there was no room for slander when he afterwards became a severe censor and reprover of the Israelites. For he does not lightly touch on something wrong in the tribe of Judah, but says that they were apostates and faithless, having cast aside the law of God.

But it may be asked, why the Prophet charges the Jews with such an atrocious crime, since religion, as we have seen in the Prophecies of Hosea, still existed among them? But to this there is a ready answer: the worship of God had become corrupt among them, though they had not so openly departed from it as the Israelites. Circumcision indeed remained among the Israelites, but their sacrifices were pollutions, their temples were brothels. They thought that they worshipped God; but as a temple had been built at Bethel contrary to God’s command, the whole worship was a profanation. The Jews were somewhat purer; but they, we know, had also degenerated from the genuine worship of God. Therefore, the Prophet does not unjustly say here that they had despised the law of God.

But we must notice the explanation which immediately follows—that they kept not his statutes. The way, then, by which Amos proves that the Jews were covenant-breakers, and that having repudiated God’s law, they had fallen into wicked superstitions, is by saying that they did not keep the precepts of God.

It may, however, appear that he treats them here with too much severity; for one might not altogether keep God’s commands—either through ignorance, carelessness, or some other fault—and yet not be a covenant-breaker or an apostate. I answer that in these words of the Prophet, mere negligence is not what is blamed in the Jews; rather, they are condemned for intentionally, that is, knowingly and willfully departing from the commandments of God and devising for themselves various modes of worship.

It is not, then, keeping the precepts of God when men do not continue under his law but audaciously contrive new forms of worship for themselves; they do not regard what God commands but seize upon anything pleasing that comes to their minds. This crime the Prophet now condemns in the Jews, and this is why they had despised the law of God.

For men should never presume to change anything in the worship of God; rather, due reverence for God ought to influence them. If they were persuaded of this—that there is no wisdom but what comes from God—they would surely confine themselves within his commands. Whenever, then, they invent new and fictitious forms of worship, they sufficiently show that they do not regard what the Lord wills, what he enjoins, or what he forbids. Thus, then, they despise his law and even cast it away.

This is a remarkable passage. For we see, first, that a most grievous sin is condemned by the Prophet: that the Jews did not confine themselves to God’s law but took the liberty of innovating. This is one thing. We also learn how much God values obedience, which, as it is said in another place, is better than all sacrifices (1 Samuel 15:22). And so that we may not think this a light or trifling sin, let us notice the expression—that they despised the law of God. Everyone ought to dread this as a most monstrous thing, for we cannot despise the law of God without insulting his majesty. And yet the Holy Spirit declares here that we repudiate and reject the law of God unless we wholly follow what it commands and continue within the limits prescribed by it. We now perceive what the Prophet means.

But he also adds that their own lies deceived them or caused them to go astray. He here confirms his preceding doctrine, for the Jews always had a defense ready at hand: that they did with good intent what the Prophet condemned in them. They, to be sure, diligently worshipped God, though they mixed their own leaven, by which their sacrifices were corrupted. It was not their purpose to spend their substance in vain, to undergo great expenses in sacrifices, and to undertake much labor, if they had not thought that it was service acceptable to God.

As, then, the pretense of good intention (as they say) always deceives the unbelieving, the Prophet condemns this pretense and shows it to be wholly fallacious and to no avail. “It is nothing,” he says, “that they pretend before God some good intention; their own lies deceive them.” And Amos, no doubt, mentions here these lies in opposition to the commands of God.

As soon, then, as men swerve from God’s word, they involve themselves in many delusions and cannot help but go astray; and this deserves special notice. We indeed see how much wisdom the world claims for itself, for as soon as we invent anything, we are greatly delighted with it; and the ape, according to the old proverb, is always pleased with its own offspring. But this vice especially prevails when by our devices we corrupt and adulterate the worship of God.

Therefore, the Prophet here declares that whatever is added to God’s word, and whatever men invent in their own minds, is a lie: “All this,” he says, “is nothing but imposture.” We now see what use good intention is: by this, indeed, men harden themselves, but they cannot make the Lord retract what he has once declared by the mouth of his Prophet.

Let us then be careful to continue within the boundaries of God’s word and never to leap over to one side or the other; for when we turn aside even a little from the pure word of God, we immediately become involved in many deceptions.

It then follows, After which their fathers have walked; literally it is, Which their fathers have walked after them: but we have given the sense. The Prophet here exaggerates their sin, the insatiable rage of the people, for the children now followed their fathers. This vice, we know, prevailed in all ages among the Jews; leaving the word of God, they always followed their own dreams and the delusions of Satan. Since God had now often tried to correct this vice by his Prophets, and no fruit followed, the Prophet charges them here with stubbornness, and by this circumstance enhances the sin of the Jews: “It is nothing new,” he says, “for children to imitate their fathers and to be wholly like them: they are then the bad eggs of bad ravens.” So also said Stephen,

You are hard and uncircumcised in heart, and resist the Holy Spirit, as your fathers also did formerly (Acts 7:51).

We now understand the intention of the Prophet.

But we thus learn how useless is the subterfuge resorted to by the Papists when they boast of antiquity. For they set up this shield against the Law, the Prophets, and the Gospel: that theirs is the old religion, that they were not its first founders, but that they follow what has been handed down to them from early times and observed for many ages. When the Papists boastingly declare all this, they think that they say enough to put God to silence and wholly to reject his Word. But we see how frivolous this sort of quibbling is, and how worthless before God. For the Prophet does not concede to the Jews the example of their fathers as an excuse, but rather sets forth their sin as being greater because they followed their faithless fathers, who had forsaken the Law of the Lord. The same thing is also said by Ezekiel,

After the precepts of your fathers walk not (Ezekiel 20:18).

We now see what sort of crime it is of which the Prophet speaks. At last a threatening follows: The Lord says, Fire will I send on Judah, which shall devour the palaces of Jerusalem. But all this we have already explained.

The Prophet here assails the Israelites, to whom he had been sent, as we have said at the beginning. He now omits every reference to other nations, for his business was with the Israelites to whom he was especially appointed a teacher. But he wished to set before them, as in various mirrors, the judgment of God which awaited them, that he might the more effectively awaken them. He also wished to exhibit in the Jews themselves an example of the extreme vengeance of God, though there was greater purity among them, at least a purer religion, and more reverence for God still prevailed among them.

In this way, he prepared the Israelites, that they might not obstinately and proudly reject his doctrine. He now addresses them and says that they continued unmoved in their many sins. The import of the whole is this: if the Moabites, the Idumeans, the Tyrians, the Sidonians, and other nations, and if the Jews as well as these, were irreclaimable in their obstinacy, so that their diseases were incurable and their wickedness such as God could no longer endure, then the Israelites were also in the same condition. For they also continued perverse in their wickedness, provoked God, and did not repent, though God had waited long and exhorted them to repent.

It is now fitting for us to bear in mind what we have said before—that if impiety was so rampant in that age, and the contempt of God so prevailed that people could not be restored to a sound mind, and if iniquity everywhere overflowed (for Amos accuses not just a few people, but many nations), let us today beware, lest such corruptions prevail among us. For, certainly, the world is now much worse than it was then.

Indeed, since the Prophet says here that both the Israelites and the Jews were wholly irreclaimable in their obstinacy, there is no excuse for us today to deceive ourselves with an empty name because we have the symbol of faith, having been baptized. And if we have other marks which seem to belong to the Church of God, let us not think that we are therefore free from guilt if we allow ourselves that unruliness condemned here by the Prophet in both the Israelites and the Jews.

For they had become hardened against all instructions, against all warnings. Let these examples, then, rouse our attention, lest we, like them, harden ourselves so much as to compel the Lord to execute extreme vengeance on us.

Let us now especially observe what the Prophet charges Israel with. He begins with their cruel deeds, but the whole book is filled with reproofs; there is to the very end a continued accusation regarding those crimes which then prevailed among the people of Israel. He does not then point out only one particular crime, as with respect to the other nations, but he scrutinizes all the vices of which the people were guilty, as if he would thoroughly anatomize them. But these we shall notice in their proper order.

Now as to the first thing, the Prophet says that the just among the Israelites was sold for silver, indeed, for shoes. It may be asked, why does he not begin with those superstitions, in which they surpassed the Jews? For if God had resolved to destroy Jerusalem and his own temple because they had fallen away into superstitious and spurious modes of worship, how much more should such a judgment have been executed on the Israelites, since they had perverted the whole law, had become wholly degenerate, and even circumcision was nothing but a profanation of God’s covenant?

Why, then, does the Prophet not touch on this point? To this I answer—that since superstition had prevailed among them for many years, the Prophet does not make this his subject now. But we shall hereafter see that he has not spared these ungodly corruptions which had become rampant among the Israelites.

He indeed sharply arraigns all their superstitions, but he does this in its suitable place. It was now necessary to begin with common evils, and this was far more opportune than if he had at first spoken of superstitions, for they might have said that they did indeed worship God.

He therefore preferred condemning the Jews for alienating themselves from the pure commandments of God; and as for the Israelites, he here reproves their gross vices. But after charging them with cruelty, shameless rapacity, and many lusts, after exposing their filthy abominations, he then takes the occasion, as then being more suitable, to exclaim against superstitions. Our Prophet intentionally observed this order, as we shall see more fully from the connection of his discourse.

I now return to the words, that they sold the just for silver, and the poor for shoes. He means that there was neither justice nor equity among the Israelites, because they made a sale of the children of God; and it was a most shameful thing that there was no remedy for injuries.

For from this we no doubt learn that the Prophet directs his reproof against the judges who then exercised authority. The just, he says, is sold for silver: this could not apply to private individuals, but to judges, whose role it was to extend a helping hand to the miserable and the poor, to avenge wrongs, and to give to everyone what is rightfully theirs.

It is then the same as if the Prophet had said that unbridled licentiousness reigned triumphant among the Israelites, so that just men were exposed as prey and were put up for sale, so to speak. He says, first, that they were sold for silver, and then he adds for shoes: and this ought to be carefully observed, for once people begin to turn aside from the right course, they abandon themselves to evil without any shame.

When an attempt is first made to lead astray a man who is just and upright and free from corruption, he is not immediately overcome; though a great price may be offered to him, he will still stand firm. But when he has sold his integrity for ten pieces of gold, he may afterwards be easily bought, as is usually the case with women.

A woman, while she is pure, cannot be easily drawn away from her conjugal fidelity: she may still be corrupted by a great price; and when once corrupted, she will afterwards prostitute herself, so that she may be bought for a crust of bread. The same is the case with judges.

They, then, who at first covet silver, that is, who cannot be corrupted except by a rich and substantial bribe, will afterwards barter their integrity for the most insignificant reward, for there is no shame remaining in them any longer. This is what the Prophet points out in these words—That they sold the just for silver; that is, that they sold him for a high price, and then that they were corrupted by the most insignificant gift, so that if one offered them a pair of shoes, they would be ready without any blush of shame to receive such a bribe.

We now see the crime of which Amos accused the Israelites. They could not raise an objection here, which they might have done if he had touched their superstitions. He wished therefore to acquire authority by first reprobating their manifest and obvious crimes. He afterwards, as it has been stated, speaks in its proper place of that fictitious worship which they, after having rejected the Law of God, embraced.

Here Amos charges them first with insatiable avarice; they panted for the heads of the poor on the dust of the earth. In my judgment, this passage is not well understood. שאף, shaph, means to pant and to breathe, and is often taken metaphorically to signify desire: hence some render the words, “They desire the heads of the poor to be in the dust of the earth;” that is, they are anxious to see the innocent cast down and prostrate on the ground. But there is no need for many words to refute this interpretation, for you see that it is strained. Others say that in their greed they cast down the miserable into the dust; they therefore think that a depraved greed is connected with violence, and they identify it as the lust for the deed itself.

But what need is there to resort to these extraneous meanings when the Prophet's words are in themselves plain and clear enough? He says that they panted for the heads of the poor on the ground; as though he had said that they were not content with casting down the miserable, but that they gaped anxiously until they had wholly destroyed them. There is then nothing to be changed or added in the Prophet’s words, which harmonize well together and mean that, through greed, they panted for the heads of the poor after the poor had been cast down and were laid prostrate in the dust. The very misery of the poor, whom they saw to be in their power and lying at their feet, ought to have satisfied them. But when such an insatiable greed still inflamed them, so that they panted for more punishment on the poor and the miserable, was it not a completely outrageous fury? We now perceive the Prophet’s meaning: He points out again what he has said in the former verse—that the Israelites were given to rapacity, avarice, and cruelty of every kind.

He adds at last, and the way of the miserable they pervert. He still inveighs against the judges, for it can hardly be consistent with what belongs to private individuals, but it properly pertains to judges to pervert justice and to violate equity for bribery, so that he who had the best cause became the loser because he brought no bribe sufficiently ample. We now see what accusation he alleged against the Israelites. But there follows another charge: that of indulgence in lusts.

Prayer:

Grant, almighty God, that as we see such grievous punishments formerly executed on unbelievers who had never tasted the pure knowledge of Your word, we may be warned by their example to abstain from all wickedness and to continue in pure obedience to Your word; and that, as You have made known to us that You hate all those superstitions and depravations by which we turn aside from Your word—O grant, that we may ever be attentive to that role which has been prescribed to us by You in the Law, as well as in the Prophets and in the Gospel, so that we may constantly abide in Your precepts, be wholly dependent on the words of Your mouth, and never turn aside either to the right hand or to the left, but glorify Your name, as You have commanded us, by offering to You a true, sincere, and spiritual worship, through Christ our Lord. Amen.

[Exposition continues from previous day's lecture]

It follows, in the seventh verse, that the son and the father entered in into the same maid. The Prophet here charges the people of Israel with the unbridled lusts which prevailed then among them, which were promiscuous and even incestuous. It is, we know, a detestable monstrosity when a father and a son have relations with the same woman, for the common feeling of mankind abhors such wickedness.

But the Israelites were so addicted to their own lusts that the father and the son had the same woman in common, as indeed must happen when men allow themselves excessive indulgences. A prostitute will, indeed, readily admit a son and a father without any difference, for she has no shame, and no fear of God restrains abandoned women given up to filthiness. It therefore becomes a common thing for a father and a son to pollute themselves by incestuous relations. But it is no lessening of guilt before God when men, blinded by their lusts, make no difference and, without any discrimination and without any shame, follow their own sinful propensities. Whenever this happens, it certainly proves that there is no fear of God, and that even the common feeling of nature is extinct. Therefore, the Prophet now justly condemns this crime in the Israelites: that the father and the son went in to the same woman.

An amplification of this crime is also added—that they thus polluted the holy name of God. We indeed know that the people of Israel were chosen for this purpose: that the name of God might be called upon by them; and well known is that declaration, often repeated by Moses: Be holy, for I am holy (Leviticus 11:44).

Therefore, the children of Israel could not defile themselves without at the same time polluting the name of God, which was engraved on them. God then complains here of this profanation, for the children of Israel not only contaminated themselves but also profaned whatever was sacred among them, inasmuch as the name of God was exposed to reproach when the people thus gave way to their filthy lusts. We now understand what the Prophet means.

Here the Prophet again denounces the people’s avarice, addressing his message especially to the leaders; for what he mentions could not have been done by the common people, as the lower and humbler classes could not make feasts using spoils gained from legal judgments. The Prophet then undoubtedly condemns here the luxury and rapacity of men in high stations. They lie down, he says, on pledged clothes near every altar. God had forbidden in His law to take from a poor man a pledge which he needed for the support of life and daily use (Exodus 22:26). For instance, the law prohibited taking from a poor man his cloak or his coat, or taking the covering of his bed, or anything else he needed. But the Prophet now accuses the Israelites of taking away pledges and clothes without any distinction, and lying down on them near their altars. This practice belonged to the rich.

Then follows another clause, which, strictly speaking, must be restricted to the judges and governors: They have drunk the wine of the condemned in the house, or in the temple, of their God. This may also be understood of the rich, who were accustomed to indulge in luxury by means of ill-gotten spoils, for they sued without cause. When they gained judgment in their favor, they thought it lawful to live more sumptuously. This expression of the Prophet may therefore be extended to any of the rich. But he seems here to condemn more specifically the cruelty and rapacity of the judges. We now perceive then what the Prophet had in view by saying that they lay down on pledged garments.

He then says that they drank wine derived from fines, which had been imposed on the condemned. But this added circumstance ought to be observed: that they lay down near altars and drank in the very temple. For the Prophet here mocks the gross superstition of the Israelites, who thought that they were fulfilling their duty to God, provided they came to the temple and offered sacrifices at the altar.

Thus, indeed, hypocrites are accustomed to appease God, as if someone were playing with a child using puppets. This wickedness has been very common in all ages, and the Prophet here charges it against the Israelites: they dared brazenly to enter the temple, and there to bring the pledged garments, and to feast on their spoils.

Hypocrites always make God’s temple a den of thieves (Matthew 21:13), for they think that all things are lawful for them, provided they give the appearance, by external worship, of being devoted to God. Since, then, the Israelites expected to act with impunity and felt free to sin because they performed religious ceremonies, the Prophet here sharply reproves them. They even dared to make God a witness of their cruelty by bringing pledged garments and by blending their spoils with their sacrifices, as though God were a partner with robbers.

Therefore we see that rapacity and avarice are not the only things condemned here by the Prophet, but that the gross superstition of the Israelites is also reprobated. They thought that there would be no punishment for them, though they plundered and robbed the poor, provided they reserved a part of the spoil for God, as though a sacrifice from what had been unjustly obtained were not an abomination to Him.

But it may be asked: Why does the Prophet condemn the Israelites in this way, since they had no sacred temple? We also know (as it has been stated elsewhere) that the temples in which they thought they worshipped God were filthy brothels, full of all obscenity. How is it, then, that the Prophet now so sharply denounces them for mingling their spoils with their impure sacrifices?

To this the answer is that he took into account their perspective and derided the dullness of their minds, because they thus childishly trifled with the God whom they imagined for themselves. We say the same today to the Papists: that they blend profane with sacred things when they prostitute their masses, and also when they trifle with God in their ceremonies.

It is certain that whatever the Papists do is an abomination, for their entire religion is adulterated. Yet they do not cease to wrong God, whose name they claim to profess. Such also were the Israelites at that time: though they still professed to worship God, they were nevertheless sacrilegious. Though they offered sacrifices to the calves in Dan and in Bethel, they still reproached God, for they continually abused His name. This, then, is the crime the Prophet now condemns in them. But what I have said must be remembered: this blind assurance is censured in the Israelites, that they thought spoils to be lawful provided they professed to worship God. But they thus made their crime twice as bad, as we have said, for they tried to make God the associate of robbers, by mingling their pollutions with their sacrifices. Let us proceed.