John Calvin Commentary Amos 6

The Prophet now directs his discourse not only to the Israelites, to whom he was especially given as an instructor and teacher, but also includes the Jews. Yet he does not address all indiscriminately, but only the chief men, who were intent on their pleasures, as though they were exempt from the common miseries. For he does not, as many suppose, only reprove luxury and pride here; but we must remember a fact connected with their situation: they were not awakened by God’s judgments. When God severely punished the sins of the people, the chief men always remained heedlessly in their own dregs. This complacency is now condemned by our Prophet.

And this is a very common evil, as we can see in the present day. For when the Lord afflicts a country with war or with famine, the rich make great profit from such evils. They abuse the scourges of God, for we see merchants getting rich in the midst of wars, since they scrape together plunder from every quarter.

Those who carry on war are forced to borrow money, and also the peasants and artisans, so that they may pay taxes; and then, so that they may live, they are forced to accept unjust conditions. Thus the rich increase in wealth. Those who are also in authority, and in favor at the courts of princes, make more profit in wars, famine, and other calamities than during times of peace and prosperity. For when peace flourishes, the state of affairs is then more equitable; but when the poor are burdened, the others grow fat. And this is the evil now noted by the Prophet.

Hence he pronounces a curse here on the complacent and those at ease; not that it is an evil thing, or in itself displeasing to God, when anyone quietly enjoys their leisure. But to be unmoved when the Lord openly shows himself to be displeased and angry, when his scourges are clearly inflicted, and instead to indulge ourselves more in pleasures—this is to provoke him, as it were, intentionally.

The Prophet here, then, condemns the complacent and the presumptuous, for it was fitting for them to humble themselves when they saw that God was incensed against them. They were not, indeed, more just than the multitude. And when God treated the common people with such severity, should not the chiefs have looked to themselves and examined their own lives?

Since they did not do this, but made themselves drunk with pleasures and dismissed every fear and thought that the scourges of God were of no concern to them—this was a contempt rightly condemned by the Prophet. We see that God was greatly displeased in the same manner, as it is recorded in Isaiah: when he called them to mourning, they sang with the harp and, according to their custom, feasted sumptuously and joyfully (Isaiah 23:12). As they then thus persevered in their indulgences, the Lord became extremely angry, for it was as though they openly despised him and scorned all his threatening.

We now observe the Prophet's intention, which interpreters have not sufficiently noted. It indeed behooves us always to keep in view these scourges of God, by which he began to punish the sins of the people. God can by no means endure, as I have said, such stubborn rebellion as this—that people should continue in the indulgence of their sins and never regard their judge nor feel any guilt.

Hence the Prophet says, Woe to you who are secure in Zion, who are confident, that is, who are without any fear, on the Mount of Samaria. He names here the Mount of Zion and the Mount of Samaria, for these were the chief cities of the two kingdoms, as we all know.

The whole country had been laid waste by various calamities; the citizens of Jerusalem and Samaria were, at the same time, wealthy; and then, trusting in their strongholds, they despised God and all his judgments. This, then, was the complacency, full of stubborn rebellion, which is condemned by the Prophet.

He then mentions their ingratitude: he says that these mountains had been celebrated from the beginning of the nations, and that the Israelites entered into them. God here rebukes both the Jews and Israelites for having come into a foreign possession, for they had obtained those cities, not by their own valor, but the Lord drove out the ancient inhabitants before them.

Since, then, they did not perceive that a safe dwelling place was given to them there by the Lord, so that they might purely worship him and submit to his government, their ingratitude was inexcusable.

The Prophet then, after having inveighed against the gross and heedless complacency with which the chiefs of both kingdoms were intoxicated, now highlights their ingratitude:

“You are not natives, but you have come in, for God went before you, for it was his will to give you this land as your possession. Why then are you now so inflated with pride against him? For before your time these cities were certainly well known and celebrated, and yet this was of no avail to the natives themselves. Why then do you not now fear the Lord’s judgment and repent when he threatens you? Indeed, when he shows his scourges to you?”

We now perceive the Prophet’s meaning in this verse.

By this representation Amos shows that there was no excuse for the Jews or the Israelites for sleeping in their sins, since they could see, as it were in a mirror, the judgments which God brought on heathen nations. It is a unique favor when God teaches us at the expense of others, for He could justly punish us as soon as we transgress. But He does not do this; on the contrary, He spares us and at the same time sets others before us as examples.

This is, as we have said, a unique favor, and this is the mode of teaching which our Prophet now adopts. He says that Calneh, Hamath, and Gath were remarkable evidences of God’s wrath, by which the Israelites might learn that they had no reason to rest on their wealth, to rely on their fortresses, and to think themselves free from all dangers. For as God had destroyed these cities, which seemed impregnable, so He could also cut off Jerusalem and Samaria whenever He pleased. This is the real meaning of the Prophet.

Some read the sentence negatively: “Are not these places better than your kingdoms?” But this is not consistent with the Prophet’s words. Others do not consider the Prophet’s purpose, for they think that the blessings of God are here compared, as if he said, “God deals more generously with you than with the Chaldeans, the Assyrians, and the neighboring nations.” For Calneh was situated in the plain of Babylon, as is evident from Genesis 10:10; and Hamath was also a celebrated city, mentioned in that chapter and in many other places; and Gath was a renowned city of the Philistines.

In this opinion, therefore, interpreters mostly agree: that is, that God’s bounty to the Jews and Israelites is presented here, since He had favored them with a rich and fertile country and preferred them to other nations. But this view does not seem to me to be the correct one, for when a comparison is made between Calneh and Jerusalem, Babylon was no doubt the more fruitful and the more pleasant country, as we learn from all histories.

The Prophet then does not speak here of the ancient condition of these places but shows, as I have already said, that it was of no avail to these cities that they were wealthy and fortified by all kinds of defenses, for God, at last, executed vengeance on them. Hence the Prophet declares that the same was now near the Jews and the Israelites.

“What will hinder the hand of God,” he says, “from delivering you to destruction? For if men could have stopped God’s wrath by any fortresses, certainly Calneh, Hamath, and Gath would have resisted by their forces. But the Lord nevertheless executed His vengeance on these cities, though fortified; your confidence then is nothing but infatuation, which deceives you.” Jeremiah uses similar language when he says, ‘Go to Shiloh,’ (Jeremiah 7:12). He certainly does not remind the Jews that the Lord had more splendidly adorned them than Shiloh, but he had something quite different in mind.

Shiloh had indeed been eminent, for it had long provided a dwelling for the ark of the covenant; the sanctuary of God had been there. But at that time the place was deserted, and Jeremiah presents to the people its sad desolation, that they might know that they should dread the same event unless they repented. For if they hardened their necks, nothing could prevent God from dealing with them as He had previously dealt with the inhabitants of Shiloh.

So now we perceive the Prophet's meaning when he says, Go and pass into Calneh, and see. In telling them to see, he no doubt refers to the dreadful change that had taken place there. For Calneh had been a strongly fortified city and possessed supreme power, and the neighboring country was also no less pleasant than fruitful; but it was now a solitary place, for Babylon, as is well known, had swallowed up Calneh. Since the place presented such a spectacle, the Prophet rightly says, Pass over into Calneh, and see; that is, consider, as in a mirror, what men can gain by their pride and haughtiness when they harden themselves against God, for this was the cause of destruction to that celebrated city.

From there, he says, go to Hamath, רבה, rebe, the great; which was a well-known city of Assyria. And see there, “How has it happened that a city so famous was entirely overthrown, unless it was because the Lord could not endure such great perverseness? As they had abused His patience, He finally executed His vengeance. The same thing also happened to your neighbors.” For the Jews and the Israelites were not far from Gath. So now, since there were so many evidences of God’s wrath before their eyes, the Prophet justly inveighs here against their thoughtlessness, because they did not fear God’s judgment, which was near at hand.

Are they then better? That is, is the condition of these cities better than that of the two kingdoms, Judah and Israel? And then, Is their border larger than your border? They have indeed been reduced to such straits that they even pay tribute for their houses, whereas previously they occupied a wide extent of country and ruled, as it were, with extended wings, far and wide. But God has taken away those territories, for all these cities have become tributaries. See, he says, Is their border larger than your border?

The Prophet here reproves the Jews and Israelites for another crime: that they had often provoked God’s wrath, continually brought about new punishments by their sins, and, in the meantime, through their haughtiness and obstinacy, rejected all His threatenings as if they were vain and would never be carried out against them. We must always remember what I have said before: that the Prophet is not speaking here of the whole people, but of the leaders. For the expression that they drew near the throne of iniquity could not be applied to the common people. This discourse, then, was addressed particularly to the judges and counselors, and those who were in power in both kingdoms, in Judah as well as in Israel.

But it is a remarkable saying that they drove far off the evil day while they drew near the throne of iniquity, or of violence. It is as if he said, “You seek a fever for yourselves by your intemperance, and yet you drive it far off, as drunken men are accustomed to do, who swallow down wine without any moderation. When a physician or someone more moderate comes and warns them not to indulge in excess, they ridicule all their forebodings: ‘What! Will a fever seize me? I am entirely free from fever; I am indeed accustomed to drink wine.’”

Such are ungodly men, when they provoke God’s wrath, as it were, deliberately, and at the same time scorn all threatenings, as if they were safe through some special privilege. So now we see what the Prophet meant by saying that they drove far the evil day and yet drew near the throne of iniquity.

He means that they drew near the throne of iniquity when the judges strengthened themselves in their tyranny and took the liberty to steal, to rob, to plunder, to oppress. Therefore, when they thus hardened themselves in all kinds of licentiousness, they then drew near the throne of iniquity. And they put away the evil day because they felt no alarm, for when the Prophets denounced God’s vengeance, they regarded it as a fable.

In short, Amos here charges the principal men of the two kingdoms with two crimes: first, that they continually provoked God’s wrath by subverting and trampling all equity underfoot, and by ruling the people in a tyrannical and haughty manner; and second, that in the meantime, they heedlessly despised all threatenings, procrastinated, and promised themselves impunity. Even when God seriously and sharply addressed them, they still thought that the evil day was not near.

We find passages of this kind everywhere in the Prophets, where they show their indignation at this kind of heedlessness, when hypocrites, casting off every feeling of sorrow, as if they had deluded themselves, scornfully laughed at all the Prophets because they thought that the hand of God was far removed from them. Thus Isaiah speaks of them, saying:

‘Let us eat and drink, since we must die,’
(Isaiah 22:13)

They indeed thought that the Prophets did not seriously threaten them; but they regarded the mention of a near destruction as an empty scare. So now we understand what the Prophet meant.

Amos still pursues the rebuke we noticed at the beginning of the chapter: that the chief men, of whom he speaks, cast off all cares and anxieties and indulged in pleasures, while the whole country was miserably distressed.

We must always bear in mind what I have already said: luxury is not simply condemned by the Prophet, as some incorrectly think (not having sufficiently considered what is said), for that is not what the Prophet is addressing. Rather, he rebukes the Israelites for setting up an iron neck against God’s judgments, indeed, for shamelessly trifling with God, while He was trying to lead them gradually to repentance.

The Prophet complains that nothing had any effect on them.

He then says, first, that they slept on ivory beds. Using ivory beds was not bad in itself, except that excess is always to be condemned. For when we give ourselves up to pomp and pleasures, we are certainly not then free from sin; indeed, every desire for present things that exceeds moderation is always justly reprehensible.

And when people greedily seek splendor and display, or become ambitious and proud, or are given to delicacies, they are guilty of vices always condemned by God. But it might be that someone used an ivory bed who was still willing to lie on the ground, for we know that there was a great abundance of ivory then, and that it was commonly used in Asia.

Italy formerly did not know what it was to use an ivory bed, that is, before the victory of Lucius Scipio. But after King Antiochus was conquered, Italy then freely used ivory beds and fineries; and thus luxury broke down their courage and made them effeminate.

I will come now to our Prophet. It might have been that ivory was not so valuable then in Judea; they might then have used ivory beds without blame. But Amos always regards the miseries of those times. The rich then ought to have given up all their luxuries and to have resorted to dust and ashes when they saw that God was incensed with them, when they saw that the fire of His vengeance was kindled. We now perceive then why Amos was so indignant against those who slept on ivory beds.

He adds, And who extend themselves on their beds: for סרח, sarech, properly means to extend; it also means to become fetid; and further, it means to be superfluous. Therefore, some render the words, “upon ivory beds and superfluities”; but this is strained and does not agree with what follows, upon their couches.

The Prophet then, I have no doubt, points out here the behavior of those who so heedlessly indulged themselves: “You extend,” he says, “your legs and your arms on your couches, as idle people, accustomed to indulgences, usually do. But the Lord will awaken you in a new way; His scourges ought to have roused you, but you remain asleep. Hence, since God could not terrify you by His rods, nothing more remains but to draw you out against your will to be punished.”

This was the reason why the Prophet said that they extended themselves on their couches.

Ye eat also the lambs from the flock, and the calves from the midst of the rich pasture, or of the stall. I prefer taking מרבק, merebek, for folds. Since they loved fat meat then, the Prophet rebukes this luxury.

He indeed had in view, as has already been said, the calamitous time then; for if the rich had feasted in their usual way, and had even eaten fat meat, they would not have deserved so severe a punishment. But when the Lord called them to mourning, and when the signals of His wrath spread horror all around, it was an intolerable stupidity for them to continue their indulgences, which they ought, on the contrary, to have renounced.

Indeed, this passage agrees with that of Isaiah, to which I have already referred.

The word פרט, pereth, means to divide. So some explain it and derive it from the clusters that remain after the vintage, because there are not then thick grapes, but a cluster here and there, and a great distance between them. From this, they think that the participle הפורטים, epurethim, is to be taken here metaphorically as meaning to divide by marks, as music has its various notes; for unless there is a distinct variety in singing, the sound would be confused and would produce no pleasing effect. Who sing then with the harps and have invented for themselves, after the example of David, musical instruments.

The Prophet still continues his discourse and shows that these men lived sumptuously. As if they did not belong to the common class, they delighted themselves, against God’s will, not only in the ordinary way of life but even sought new pleasures, as if they were continually at marriage feasts or celebrating birthdays. Since they had no season for mourning, they pursued their own indulgences; and this is what the Prophet now rebukes.

If anyone thinks that music is condemned in these words, he is greatly mistaken, as is clear from the context.

Indeed, the Prophet never dealt so rigidly with those people; rather, he always emphasized this: they were extremely sluggish, even lacking common sense, not perceiving that God showed Himself angry with them. God’s intention in this was so that they might flee immediately to the standard of repentance and humbly plead for Him to avert His wrath with mourning, as they should have done. It was therefore fitting always to set God's wrath before them, which should have humbled the Jews and the Israelites, since they always obstinately set up their own indifference against God.

In saying that after the example of David they invented for themselves musical instruments, he undoubtedly greatly aggravated their sin by this comparison. For it is not likely that they had misused this pretext, as hypocrites do, who are accustomed to boast of the examples of the saints when they try to conceal their own vices— “What!” some will say, “Did not David use musical instruments?” Others will say, “Had not Solomon very splendid palaces?” And some will add, “Had not Abraham a company of servants in his house?” So everyone seizes on what may serve as an excuse, and so the examples of the saints are absurdly invoked by many.

But it does not seem probable that this was done by those whom Amos is now addressing. On the contrary, he appears to sharply rebuke them for provoking God’s wrath by self-indulgence and for manifesting their perverseness, while David used musical instruments in religious exercises to lift his mind to God.

Undoubtedly, David, when in a peaceful state after being delivered from all dangers, could also amuse himself; but he used musical instruments for another purpose—to proclaim the praises of God in the temple, so that by them he and other godly persons might together lift their thoughts to religious devotion.

So, while David, even in a state of peace and prosperity, did not allow his mind to become engrossed in vain self-indulgences, these men—when God appeared angry, when He spread terror by so many signs of His vengeance—yet dared stubbornly to follow their own ways, so that they abandoned none of their usual pomp and their accustomed pleasures.

We now see the purpose of the comparison that the Prophet makes. He aggravates, I have no doubt, their sin, because they did not regard the example of David. Instead, they used musical instruments for the purpose of gross and beastly indulgences. And they did this when God was opposed to them, when He had begun to terrify them by His vengeance. Let us proceed.