This section of the prophecy falls naturally into three parts, Amos 5:1-27, Amos 6:1-14, each drawing out, in different terms, the moral grounds of Israel’s impending ruin, and ending with a similar outlook of invasion, or exile.

-1Amos 5:1-17. Israel continuing to shew no signs of amendment, there remains nothing but inevitable ruin; and the prophet accordingly begins to sing his elegy over the impending fall of the kingdom, which in spirit he beholds already as consummated (Amos 5:1-3). Israel deserves this fate, for it has done the very opposite of what God demands: God demanded obedience, judgement, and mercy; Israel has persistently practised the reverse, and has acted so as to call down upon itself a just retribution (Amos 5:4-11). Its state is desperate (Amos 5:12 f.); certainly, even now it is not too late to amend, and the prophet again in treats it earnestly to do so (Amos 5:14 f.); but he sees only too well that his words will not be listened to; and again therefore he draws in outline a dark picture of the calamities impending upon the nation.

1. Woe to them that, &c.] Ah! they that.… and that, &c., as Amos 5:18. are at ease] Cf. Isaiah 32:9 (“rise up, ye women that are at ease”), Isaiah 32:11. The word (though it may be used in a good sense, ib. Isaiah 32:18; Isa 32:20) denotes, in such a context as die present, those who are recklessly at ease, and live on in tranquillity and contentment, insensible to real danger.

in Zion] For the allusion to Judah, cf. Amos 2:4-5.

trust] are secure (R.V.), viz. without sufficient ground: in parallelism with ‘at ease,’ just as in Isaiah 32:9; Isaiah 32:11 (A.V., R.V., careless).

the men of mark of the first of the nations] i.e. the nobles of Samaria, who are described as the cream of a nation, which was itself (partly by its prosperity, partly by its theocratic privileges: cf. Jeremiah 3:19; Ezekiel 20:6; Ezekiel 20:15) the first of the nations. But the expression first of the nations may be used in irony, to reflect Israel’s own opinion of itself: so Wellh. and G. A. Smith. Men of mark (R.V. notable men) is lit. marked, marked out: elsewhere the same verb is rendered expressed (sc. by name, opposed to the unnamed crowd); cf. Numbers 1:17, 1 Chronicles 12:31; 1 Chronicles 16:41, 2 Chronicles 28:15 (in all “expressed by name”).

to whom the house of Israel come] viz. for judgement (Exodus 18:16; 2 Samuel 15:4). They hold a position of responsibility, they are raised above their fellow-citizens, and have to administer justice to them, and yet they are heedless of the interests entrusted to them and live only for themselves (Amos 6:3 ff.).

2. Two diametrically opposed explanations of this verse have been given. (1) It has been regarded as continuing the argument of Amos 6:1, the cities named in it being referred to as examples of prosperity: Can you find, from Calneh and Hamath in the North of Syria to the Philistine border on the South, a single kingdom ‘better’ (i.e. more flourishing) than your own? Thus has Jehovah favoured you; and ye requite Him with indifference and neglect (Amos 6:3-6). Therefore (Amos 6:7) the sentence is, Ye shall be amongst the first to go into exile. The argument is similar to that of Amos 2:9-16, Amos 3:2 : Israel has been visited by Jehovah with unwonted favour; that however will not exempt it from punishment, if it acts in such a way as to merit punishment. So Ew., Hitz., Keil, W. R. Smith, Proph. p. 138, &c. (2) It has been taken as introductory to Amos 6:3-7, the places named in it being pointed to as examples of fallen greatness: if cities, till recently so flourishing, so far from being now ‘better,’ or more prosperous (Jeremiah 44:17), than Israel and Judah, have been overtaken by disaster, let Israel take warning betimes, and not rely too implicitly that its present good fortune will continue to attend it: the ground why such warning is needed follows then in Amos 6:3-6. So Baur, Pusey, Schrader, von Orelli, Wellhausen. In support of this view it may be urged that it is not very obvious why the places named—especially the distant Calneh—should be specially selected as examples of flourishing cities: the age was one in which the cities of Western Asia were liable at any moment to be roughly treated by the Assyrians (see below); and of Gath, in particular, it is observed that it is not mentioned among the Philistine cities enumerated either by Amos himself in Amos 1:7-8, or in Jeremiah 47, or Zephaniah 2:4-7, or Zechariah 9:5-7; and hence it has been inferred (G. A. Smith, Geogr. p. 194) that it must have been destroyed by the Assyrians about 750 b.c. But, on the whole, the former, which is also the general view, seems preferable. Hamath (see below) was taken by Sargon in 720; and the conquest of Calneh—at least, if it be the same as Calno—is alluded to as recent in 701 (Isaiah 10:9); and there is no sufficient reason for supposing (Schrad., Wellh.; cf. G. A. Smith, p. 173 n.) that the verse is an insertion in the original text of Amos made towards the end of the 8th cent. b.c.

Calneh] The identification is uncertain. A Calneh is mentioned as an ancient Babylonian city in Genesis 10:10; and a Calno is alluded to in Isaiah 10:9 as a place conquered recently by the Assyrians. According to some, Calneh may be the place usually called Zirlaba or Zarilab, the characters of which, however, admit of being read ideographically as Kulunu, and which is mentioned by Sargon in b.c. 710 as one of his conquests (Schrader, K.A.T[166][167], pp. 96, 444). According to others (Winckler, Gesch. Bab. und Ass. p. 225; Tiele, Bab.-Ass. Gesch. p. 230[168]) it is Kullani, a place mentioned in the Eponym Canon (G. Smith, Eponym Canon, p. 50) as (apparently) the principal conquest of Tiglath-pileser III. in b.c. 738: as this king was engaged that year in the north of Syria, there is a probability that it was in that region; and it is accordingly identified by Mr Tomkins (Proceedings of the Soc. of Bibl. Arch. 9 Jan. 1883, p. 61) with the present Kullanhou, about six miles from Tel Arfad (Arpad), a little N. of Aleppo (notice Calno and Arpad together in Isaiah 10:9). Guthe, Das Zukunftsbild des Jesaia (1885), p. 43, and Dillmann (on Isaiah 10:9) would identify it with Kunulua, or Kinalia, the capital of the land of Patin, between the Afrin and the Orontes, on the S.E. of Antioch, some 70 or 80 miles N. of Hamath[169], and consequently in the same neighbourhood as Kullanhou.

[166] .A.T. … Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.

[167] … Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.

[168] Who distinguishes it from the Calneh (= Kulunu) of Genesis 10:10.

[169] See Schrader, Keilinschr. und Geschichtsforschung (1878), p. 217 f.; Delitzsch, Paradies, p. 274. Asshurnazirpal (b.c. 885–860), in his “Standard Inscription,” iii. 72 (R.P.2 ii. 170; or Schrader, K.B. i. 107) speaks of receiving immense tribute from it.

Hamath] an important town, situated some 150 miles N. of Dan, beyond the broad valley of Coele-Syria, on the Orontes (el‘A̅ṣî), the seat of an independent kingdom, whose king Toi (or Tou) is mentioned in the time of David (2 Samuel 8:9 f.), and the modern Ḥamâ, a place of 60,000 inhabitants. The territory of Hamath extended at least as far S. as Riblah (2 Kings 23:33; 2 Kings 25:21), in Coele-Syria, about 50 miles S. of Hamath itself. The “entrance to Hamath,” i.e. probably (G. A. Smith, p. 177; Buhl, Geogr. Pal., pp. 66, 110) the mouth of the pass between the Lebanons, a little N. of Rĕḥôb and Dan (Numbers 13:21; cf. Jdg 18:28), which was considered the starting-point of the road to Hamath, is often named as the northern limit of Israelitish territory (Amos 6:14, 2 Kings 14:25; Joshua 13:5; Jdg 3:3; 1 Kings 8:65; Ezekiel 47:20; Ezekiel 48:1; Numbers 34:8; cf. Numbers 13:21). Hamath is mentioned frequently in the Assyrian Inscriptions. In 854 b.c. its king Irchulina joined Ben-hadad of Syria and Ahab of Israel in a great coalition against the Assyrians, and was defeated with his allies by Shalmaneser II. (Schrader, K.A.T[170][171] p. 201 f.). Disastrous losses were inflicted upon it by Tiglath-pileser III. in 740, and by Sargon in 720 (ib. pp. 221, 323 f.; cf. Isaiah 10:9; and see also Delitzsch, Paradies, pp. 275–278).

[170] .A.T. … Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.

[171] … Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.

go down] from the high central ground of Palestine to the plain by the sea, on which the Philistine cities were situated. So regularly, as Jdg 14:1; Jdg 14:19, 1 Samuel 13:20; and conversely ‘went up,’ 1 Samuel 6:9. The use in geographical descriptions of these two terms should always be noted.

Gath] the fifth (see on Amos 1:7-8) chief town of the Philistines (Joshua 13:3; 1 Samuel 6:17), one of the homes of the giant race of the Rephaim, Joshua 11:22, 2 Samuel 21:18-22 (cf. 1 Samuel 17:4), mentioned also in 1 Samuel 21:10; 1 Samuel 27:11, 2 Samuel 15:18 (600 warriors from Gath forming part of David’s body-guard), Micah 1:10, and elsewhere. If “Gimtu Asdudim” (? Gath of the Ashdodites) be this place, it is spoken of also as taken by Sargon at the same time that he took Ashdod (above, on Amos 1:8), in b.c. 711 (K.A.T[172][173] p. 399; cf. pp. 166, 444). Its site is uncertain. It is frequently mentioned next to Ekron, and from 1 Samuel 17:52 appears to have lain between Ekron and the vale of Elah (probably the Wâdy es-Sunt); hence many have sought it at Tell eṣ-Ṣâfiyeh, a commanding height, 11 miles S. by E. of Ekron, rising out of the plain, where the Wâdy es-Sunt opens into it, and looking across Philistia to the sea. Cf. G. A. Smith, Geogr., pp. 194–197.

[172] .A.T. … Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.

[173] … Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.

3. Ye that put far away the evil day] Probably, with aversion: cf. the use of the word in Isaiah 66:5. They feel themselves secure against coming disaster (Amos 9:10), and will not hear of it, while at the same time they bring near the seat of violence, or, more literally, the sitting of violence: i.e. they prepare in their very midst a place where, instead of justice, violence may sit enthroned. “They put from them the judgement of God (Amos 2:6 f. &c.), that they may exercise violence over His creatures” (Pusey).

3–7. The luxury and indifference of the leaders of the nation.

4. That lie upon divans (Amos 3:12) of ivory] i.e. divans, the frames of which were inlaid with ivory: cf. the “ivory couches,” and “great ivory seats,” which Sennacherib boasts that he received from Hezekiah (K.A.T[174][175] p. 293 bottom, referred to by Mitchell).

[174] .A.T. … Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.

[175] … Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.

and are stretched out upon their couches] The older custom in Israel was to sit while eating (Genesis 27:19; Jdg 19:6; 1 Samuel 20:5; 1 Samuel 20:24; 1 Kings 13:20), whether upon a rug or carpet spread out on the floor, or (2 Kings 4:10) on a seat: the custom of reclining at table is first mentioned here; it was not impossibly a foreign fashion introduced from Syria, and is in any case viewed by the shepherd-prophet as a signal mark of effeminacy and luxury. Of course, in later times—probably through Greek or Aramaic influence—it became general (Sir 41:19; Matthew 9:10; Matthew 26:7, &c.).

lambs] Heb. kârîm, not the usual word for lambs, and denoting apparently such as, from their age or kind, were a special delicacy (cf. Deuteronomy 32:14; 1 Samuel 15:9).

and calves out of the midst of the stall] Brought directly from the place where they were tied up (such, as Arabic shews, is the meaning of the word) to be fatted. Cf. Luke 15:23.

5. chant] improvise idly. The word (pâraṭ) occurs only here; and its meaning is uncertain: but (if the text be correct) this on the whole is the most probable rendering: see the Additional Note, p. 236. In illustration of the custom of having music at banquets, see Isaiah 5:12; Isaiah 24:9.

the viol] the harp (comp. Amos 5:23, and see p. 234 ff.).

devise for themselves instruments of musick, like David] or, perhaps, like David’s. The skill of David as a player on the kinnôr (p. 234) is of course, well known (1 Samuel 16:18; 1 Samuel 16:23, &c.): this passage speaks of him as famed further either for the musical instruments which he invented, or for those which he owned, and which will naturally have been performed upon either by himself or by others at his direction. The comparison rather suggests that the music for which David at this time was chiefly remembered was of a secular kind (cf., of Solomon, 1 Kings 10:12 where ‘singers’ is not the term used technically in later writings of the Temple-singers), but it is obviously not inconsistent with the tradition embodied in the Chronicles that he cultivated sacred music as well. Comp. W. R. Smith, O.T.J.C[176][177] p. 223 f.

[176] .T.J.C. … W. Robertson Smith, The Old Testament in the Jewish Church, ed. 2, 1892.

[177] … W. Robertson Smith, The Old Testament in the Jewish Church, ed. 2, 1892.

Additional Note on Chap. Amos 6:5 (pâraṭ)

The root in Arabic which corresponds to the Hebrew pâraṭ means properly to precede, anticipate, hence faraṭa minhu kalâm, “speech proceeded from him prematurely, without reflexion,” and faraṭa ‘alaihi (Qor. 20:47), “he hasted (acted hastily and unjustly) against him”; conj. ii. to send before, hence to send before so as to leave, to relinquish, to fail, be remiss, neglectful in anything (Qor. 6:31, 12:80, 39:57); conj. iii. takallama firâṭan, he spoke hastily, without premeditation; conj. iv. to send before (Qor. xvi. 64 “They shall be sent first into the fire of hell”), to hasten, and (very frequently) to exceed due bounds, act extravagantly in a thing, ’afraṭa fi ’lqauli, to be immoderate in talk. It is thus just possible that, as Abul-walid supposed, it might be used of those who extemporized poetry over-rapidly, without premeditation, in a hurried flow of unmeaning, unconsidered words: hence R.V. sing idle songs. The mediaeval Jewish authorities, Rashi, Ibn Ezra, and David Kimchi, connecting the word with pereṭ (Leviticus 19:10), the fallen or separated berries in a vineyard, supposed it to denote the way in which a singer divides his words into parts (מְחַתֵּךְ אֶת־הַדּבּוּר בִּפְרוּסְרוּם) to suit the notes of the accompaniment; hence, no doubt, A. V. chant (marg. quaver). (In Dr Pusey’s note, “measured out defilements” should be “divided the melody”: a word was inaccurately transcribed in the Thesaurus of Gesenius; see Roediger’s note in the Appendix, p. 107, or Neubauer’s ed. of Abul-walid’s Lexicon, col. 586.)

An ancient Egyptian lyre (from Sir J. Gardner Wilkinson’s Ancient Egyptians, 1878, ii. 476).

An ancient Egyptian guitar[229] (from Sir J. Gardner Wilkinson’s Ancient Egyptians, 1878, ii. 481).

[229] The lute differs substantially from the guitar only in having a shorter neck.

6. that drink with bowls of wine] Not satisfied with ordinary cups. Bowl is properly a throwing-vessel, the root zâraḳ signifying to throw or dash in a volume, Leviticus 1:5; Leviticus 1:11, &c. (not to sprinkle, which is hizzâh, Leviticus 4:6; Leviticus 4:17, &c.); and elsewhere it is always used of the large bowls or basins from which the blood was thrown in a volume against the altar (Exodus 27:3; 1 Kings 7:40; 2 Kings 12:13; Zechariah 9:15; Zechariah 14:20 : see Leviticus 1:5; Leviticus 1:11; Leviticus 3:2; Leviticus 3:8; Leviticus 3:13; 2 Kings 16:13; 2 Kings 16:15; 2 Chronicles 29:22. Sprinkle, in these and similar passages, is incorrect: it should be throw or dash). The luxurious nobles of Samaria at their banquets drank their wine from bowls of similarly large size.

and anoint with the first of oils] oils of the choicest kind. The practice of anointing the body, especially after washing (Ruth 3:3), was common in the East: it both soothed and refreshed the skin, and was a protection against the heat. As a rule, fresh olive-oil was used for the purpose (Deuteronomy 28:40; Micah 6:15), but aromatic spices and perfumes were often added, especially by the rich (1 Kings 10:10; Ezekiel 27:22; cf. Mark 14:3; Mark 14:5); and such choice and costly compounds are alluded to here. Anointing was in particular practised on festal occasions; and oil was accordingly a mark of joy (Psalm 23:5; Psalm 45:7; Psalm 92:10; Isaiah 61:3; Ecclesiastes 9:8), while not to anoint oneself was a token of mourning (2 Samuel 14:2).

but they are not grieved for the affliction of Joseph] more lit., are not sick for the breach (or wound) of Joseph. The words bring out the irony of their position: immersed themselves in a vortex of pleasure, they are unconcerned by the thought of the breach or wound in the body politic, i.e. the impending material ruin, the signs of which the prophet can only too clearly discern, though they are invisible to the self-satisfied political leaders of the nation. For the term breach (or wound), applied to a nation, cf. Isaiah 30:26; Jeremiah 6:14 (“the breach of the daughter of my people”), Jeremiah 8:21, Jeremiah 10:19, Jeremiah 14:17, Jeremiah 30:12; Jeremiah 30:15; Nahum 3:19; Lamentations 2:13 (A.V., R.V., often “hurt”).

7. The sentence. These nobles will indeed retain their preeminence, but it will be at the head of a procession of exiles.

Therefore now] i.e. as soon as the threatened disaster has arrived.

shall they go into exile at the head of them that go into exile] heading the procession.

banquet] revelry (R.V.). The word appears to denote properly a loud cry (though no corresponding root with this meaning is known in the Semitic languages[178]), here of the cry of revelry, in Jeremiah 16:5 of the cry of grief (A.V., R.V., inadequately “mourning”)[179]. In the original there is an assonance between the word rendered “stretched out,” and that rendered “pass away,” the latter being formed by the first two letters of the former, which thus, as it were, ominously suggests it (wesâr mirzaḥ serûḥîm).

[178] See Fleischer in Levy’s Neu-Hebr. Wörterbuch, iii.317 f.

[179] Hçrîa‘ may have the same double application: contrast Isaiah 15:4, Micah 4:9, with Zephaniah 3:14, Zechariah 9:9, &c.

8. The contemplation of such strange moral obliquity excites the prophet’s indignation, which finds expression in the oath (cf. Amos 4:2, Amos 8:7), in which Jehovah solemnly affirms that He abhors Israel.

by himself] Lit. by his soul: the same oath, Jeremiah 51:14 only. (Jehovah’s ‘soul,’ Isaiah 1:14; Isaiah 42:1, Jeremiah 5:9; Jeremiah 6:8 al.)

abhor] From being Israel’s guardian and protector He is turned into its foe. Comp. for the general thought Deuteronomy 28:63; Hosea 5:12; Hosea 5:14; Hosea 13:7 f.; Isaiah 63:10; and below, ch. Amos 9:4.

excellency] pride,—whether of Israel’s vain-glorious temper itself (Isaiah 9:9), or of the objects of which it is proud, its affluence, material splendour, military efficiency, &c. The word will bear either sense: see (a) Hosea 5:5; Hosea 7:10, Isaiah 16:6; and (b) Nahum 2:3, Psalm 47:4, Zechariah 9:6. On the feeble and very inadequate rendering ‘excellency,’ see the Additional Note, p. 238.

his palaces] in which Israel’s pride is only too manifest; the homes of the nonchalant nobles, founded on oppression (cf. Jeremiah 22:13-17, of Jehoiakim), and enriched by what had been wrung from the indigent (cf. ch. Amos 3:10).

and I will deliver up &c.] As in Amos 2:14-16, Amos 3:11 f., Amos 4:2 f., Amos 5:16, there rises before the prophet’s eye a vision of invasion, one of the accompaniments of which would be naturally the siege of the strong cities.

Additional Note on Chap. Amos 6:8 (excellent, excellency)

The words excellency and excellent are unfortunately, to the great detriment of the sense, used frequently in both the Authorized and the Revised Versions, to represent various Hebrew words expressive of majesty, pride, glory[230]. Excellency is thus used (as here) for gâ’ôn, majesty, pride (in a good or a bad sense according to the context), in Exodus 15:7 (“in the greatness of thy majesty (cognate with the verb rendered ‘hath triumphed gloriously’ in v. 1, 21; lit. hath risen up majestically) thou overthrowest them that rise up against thee”); Isaiah 13:19 (A.V. pride), Isaiah 60:15 (“an everlasting pride”); Ezekiel 24:21 (R.V. pride, as Leviticus 26:19 in A.V., in the same phrase); Amos 8:7; Nahum 2:2; Psalm 47:4; Job 37:4 (R.V. majesty); for ga’ăwâh, majesty, Deuteronomy 33:26; Deuteronomy 33:29, Psalm 68:34; for gôbah, loftiness, Job 40:10 (R.V. dignity, using ‘excellency’ for gâ’ôn); for hâdâr, splendour, glory, Isaiah 35:2 (‘the splendour of Carmel,’ ‘the splendour of our God’); and excellent for gâ’ôn, Isaiah 4:2 (read this verse, “In that day shall the sprouting of Jehovah be for an ornament and for a glory, and the fruit of the land for majesty and for beauty, to them that escape of Israel,” and it both expresses more exactly the original, and also exhibits more clearly the prophet’s thought that a true glory is to take the place of the false glory which, as ch. 2, 3 has shewn, is to vanish away); for gç’ûth, also majesty, Isaiah 12:5 (R.V. marg. gloriously); for ’addîr, noble or glorious, Psalm 8:1; Psalm 8:9 (“How glorious is thy name in all the earth!”), Psalm 16:3 (the saints of God are the nobles, in whom the Psalmist delights), Psalm 76:4 (“all-bright (?)[231] art thou, and glorious, (coming down) from the mountains of prey”); for nisgâb, exalted (so R.V.), Psalm 148:13 : in the Prayer-Book Version of the Psalms, it stands similarly for ’addîr, Psalm 8:1; Psalm 8:9, for nikbâdôth, ‘glorious things,’ Psalm 87:2, for nisgâb, exalted, Psalm 139:5 (i.e. here, too high for me), Psalm 148:12 : cf. excel for ’addîr, Psalm 16:3. These renderings are the more to be regretted, as the Hebrew words in question are elsewhere expressed quite correctly: thus gâ’ôn is pride in A.V., R.V., of Isaiah 23:9, Jeremiah 13:9 (‘the pride of Judah’), Hosea 5:5; Hosea 7:10, Zechariah 9:6; Zechariah 10:11 &c.; majesty in Isaiah 2:10; Isaiah 2:19; Isaiah 2:21, Micah 5:4; gç’ûth is majesty, Isaiah 26:10, Psalm 93:1;’addîr is glorious in Isaiah 33:21 (R.V. in majesty); noble, Jeremiah 14:3; Jeremiah 30:21 (R.V. here prince), and the cognate verb is glorious in Exodus 15:6; Exodus 15:11; hâdâr is majesty in Psalm 21:6; Psalm 29:4; Psalm 96:6 and frequently; and nisgâb is constantly exalted (as Isaiah 2:11; Isaiah 2:17 &c.), and with name (exactly as Psalm 148:13), Isaiah 12:4. It is of course true that idiom sometimes imposes limits to the principle of representing the same Hebrew word uniformly by the same English one (for the corresponding words in two languages seldom develope their meanings quite symmetrically); but the use of excellent, and excellency, for the words here in question, is thoroughly gratuitous, and affords simply an “excellent” illustration of that needless and often misleading creation of “artificial distinctions” which the late Bishop Lightfoot criticized with such justice (On a Fresh Revision of the English New Testament, chap. IV. § 2).

[230] The root-idea of gâ’ôn, ga’ăwâh, gç’ûth is, it is true, to rise up, grow tall (see Ezekiel 47:5; Job 8:11), which is also that of the Lat. excello: but no one can pretend that this sense is perceptible in the English words excellent and excellency; and in the Hebrew words also the primary physical sense has largely given way to the derived metaphorical one. The writer formerly thought it possible that these English words had become weakened in meaning since 1611; but the quotations in Murray’s English Dictionary lend no support to this supposition.

[231] Read probably (cf. Amos 6:8) terrible (נורא for נאור).

9. A house in which ten men were left, surviving the casualties and privations of a siege, must have been a fairly large one: no doubt, Amos has still in view the palaces of the wealthy (cf. Amos 3:15). Those, however, who in such a house have escaped other dangers, shall nevertheless die, viz. by the pestilence, which the prophet pictures tacitly as raging in the city at the time.

9–10. The terrible consequences of the siege.

10. A grim episode imagined by the prophet (cf. Isaiah 3:6 f.) for the purpose of illustrating vividly the terrors of the time: the relative of a deceased man enters his house to perform the last duties to his corpse: he finds no living person in it except one, secreted in a far corner, who tells him he is the solitary survivor of the household, all the others having perished (cf. Amos 5:9): so desperate is the outlook that men dread even to mention Jehovah’s name, for fear lest it should call down a fresh judgement upon them.

a man’s uncle] His father and brother are supposed to be dead: so his uncle is his next-of-kin, and, as such, has the care of his interment.

and he that burneth him] As a rule, the Hebrews did not burn their dead, but buried them, the only exceptions noted in the O.T. being the cases of criminals (Leviticus 20:14; Leviticus 21:9; Joshua 7:15; Joshua 7:25; cf. Genesis 38:24), and of Saul and his son, whose bodies were burnt by the men of Jabesh-Gilead, after they had rescued them from the wall of Beth-shean. If the rendering given be correct, it must be supposed that Amos pictured burial as being impossible, either on account of the limited space available, in a besieged city, or because of the virulence of the plague. The Heb. is however, literally, not he that burneth him, but his burner; and as the terms used seem to imply that some recognised custom is alluded to, it is quite possible that the reference is to the practice of burning fragrant spices in honour of the dead: see Jeremiah 34:5; and esp. 2 Chronicles 16:14 (“and they laid him [Asa] in the bed [bier], which was filled with sweet odours, and divers kinds of spices, prepared by the perfumer, and they burnt for him a very great burning”); 2 Chronicles 21:19 b.

by the sides] in the innermost parts (R.V.),—the same word which is used of the furthest or innermost parts of a cave (1 Samuel 24:3), of Sheol (Isaiah 14:15), and, as here, of a house, Psalm 128:3.

Is there yet any with thee?] viz. alive.

Then shall he say] And he shall say: the subject is still the survivor, speaking from the corner of the house, the words ‘and he shall say’ being inserted merely for the purpose of separating two parts of the answer which have no immediate connexion with each other (Hitzig compares 2 Kings 6:27 f.; see also Genesis 16:10-11; Genesis 21:7).

Hold thy tongue] Hush!—the exclamation found also in Amos 8:3; Jdg 3:19; Habakkuk 2:20; Zephaniah 1:7; Zechariah 2:13; and in the plural, treated as a verb, Nehemiah 8:11.

for we must not mention, &c.] lest, namely—such, at least, appears to be the meaning—by an injudicious utterance some fresh judgement should be invoked upon the panic-stricken survivors. It may have been the custom, upon occasion of a death, to offer some prayer or invocation to Jehovah; and the speaker, unmanned by the terrible mortality about him, feels a superstitious dread of mentioning Jehovah’s name, lest He should be moved by it to manifest some fresh token of His displeasure (comp. partly Isaiah 19:17).

11. For behold, &c.] The words give the reason for Amos 6:8, rather than for Amos 6:9-10, which describe merely an episode in the ruin.

commandeth] viz. the human agents, by whose instrumentality (cf. Isaiah 10:6) He carries out His will. Who these agents are conceived by Amos to be will appear in Amos 6:14.

the great house into fragments and the little house into clefts] Neither the palaces of the wealthy, nor the more modest dwellings of the ordinary citizens, will escape the coming ruin.

12. Do horses run upon crags? doth one plow (there) with oxen? or (dividing one word into two) doth one plow the sea with an ox? that ye have turned judgement into poison, &c.] The two questions are meant to represent what is obviously unnatural and absurd. Do horses run over the jagged crags, or do men plough there with oxen (or with the emendation, Do men plough the sea with oxen), that ye do what is not less preposterous and unreasonable, viz. turn justice into injustice, and so transform what is wholesome into a poison? For the figure ‘turn judgement into poison,’ see Amos 5:7 (“into wormwood”). The emendation proposed (which, though conjectural, is supported by many of the best modern scholars) is recommended by the fact that it avoids the unusual plural beḳârîm and also obviates the necessity of mentally understanding “there” in the second clause of the verse.

gall] poison: Heb. rôsh, occurring also Deuteronomy 32:32-33; Hosea 10:4; Jeremiah 8:14; Lamentations 3:5; Psalm 69:21; Job 20:16; and coupled, as here, with ‘wormwood’ (cf. ch. Amos 5:7), Deuteronomy 29:18; Jeremiah 9:15; Jeremiah 23:15; Lamentations 3:19. Deuteronomy 29:18, Hosea 10:4 shew that some poisonous plant is denoted by the word (so that the rendering gall is certainly wrong), though, since it is quite uncertain what plant is meant, it is impossible to render otherwise than by a perfectly general term, such as poison. As rôsh also signifies ‘head,’ some have thought poppies, of which several species are found in Palestine, to be the plant denoted by the word.

the fruit of righteousness] i.e. the effects of righteousness (or justice), which would normally be wholesome and beneficial to society, but which, as it is perverted by the nobles of Israel into injustice, become wormwood (Amos 5:7), i.e. something bitter and deleterious to all.

13. Ye which rejoice in a thing of nought] Lit. in a no-thing, a non-entity, what has no substantial existence, and is destined to pass away when the hour of trial comes, i.e. their boasted, but unreal, material prosperity. Hebrew poets, by prefixing to a term the negative lô, sometimes express the pointed and emphatic negation of an idea: cf. a not-people, a not-god, Deuteronomy 32:17; Deuteronomy 32:21, a not-man, Isaiah 31:8, i.e. something as different as possible from a people, a god, or a man. See Kautzsch’s edition of Gesenius’s Heb. Grammar, § 152. 1 note.

which say, Have we not, &c.] The Israelites are represented as priding themselves on the power which they had newly acquired under Jeroboam II., and the acquisition of which they attribute to their own exertions. For a similar overweening speech, placed in the mouth of the people of Ephraim, see Isaiah 9:10. The horn is a figure often used in Hebrew poetry to denote the strength which repels and tosses away whatever is opposed to it: cf. Deuteronomy 33:17 (of the double tribe of Joseph); Psalm 75:5; Psalm 75:10; Psalm 89:17[180].

[180] Wellhausen, following Grätz, takes the Hebrew expressions rendered respectively a thing of nought and horns as two proper names, viz. Lo-debar (2 Samuel 9:4 f., 2 Samuel 17:27) and Ḳarnaim (1Ma 5:26, and perhaps in the ‘Ashteroth-Karnaim, i. e. “ ‘Ashtaroth of (or near) Ḳarnaim,” of Genesis 14:5), two towns, both on the east of Jordan, the conquest of which by Jeroboam II. he supposes to be the subject of the Israelites’ boast: so G. A. Smith, p. 176 f. But these towns (though Ḳarnaim was strongly situated) hardly seem to have been places of great importance; nor is it the manner of the Hebrew prophets to mention specially such successes; lâḳaḥ, also, is not the word properly used of taking a town (lâkhad), whereas to take for oneself (with the reflexive ל) is an idiom constantly used in the sense of providing oneself with (Leviticus 23:40; Isaiah 8:1; Jeremiah 36:2; Jeremiah 36:28; Ezekiel 4:1; Ezekiel 5:1; Zechariah 11:15 &c.). At most the conquests of these places may be alluded to, in the words used.

14. But] For,—justifying the low estimate of their power, expressed in Amos 6:13.

raise up] not absolutely, as Amos 2:11 (for the Assyrians had long existed as a nation), but against you, i.e. as your adversaries. As in Habakkuk 1:6 (of the Chaldaeans) the term is used of the unconscious instruments of Providence: cf. 1 Kings 11:14; 1 Kings 11:23; also Isaiah 10:5. (The Hebrew words in Exodus 9:16, and in Isaiah 41:2; Isaiah 41:25; Isaiah 45:13 are both different: in Ex. made thee to stand, i. e. to endure; in Is. stirred up, i.e. impelled into activity, as Isaiah 13:17.) Properly, am raising up: cf. Amos 7:8; and on Joel 2:19.

God of hosts] the title designates Jehovah appropriately, as one able to wield the powers of the world: cf. Amos 5:27, and p. 232.

afflict] or oppress,—often used of oppression by a foreign power (Exodus 3:9; Jdg 4:3; Jdg 6:9 &c.). Lit. to crush (Numbers 22:25).

from the entering in of Hamath unto the wâdy of the ‘Arâbâh] i.e. over the whole extent of territory which had been recently recovered from Israel by Jeroboam II., who (2 Kings 14:25) “restored the border of Israel from the entering in of Hamath unto the sea of the ‘Arábah.” The “entering in of Hamath,” as was observed on Amos 6:2, marks the furthest limit of Israelitish territory on the north. The ‘Arábah (comp. Deuteronomy 1:1 R.V. marg.) is the deep depression, varying from 2 to 14 miles across, through which the Jordan flows, and in which the Dead Sea lies (hence one of its Biblical names, the “sea of the ‘Arábah,” Deuteronomy 3:17; Deuteronomy 4:49, Joshua 3:16; Joshua 12:3), and which is prolonged southwards to the Gulf of ‘Aḳabah. At present, the northern part of this valley is called el-Ghôr, i.e. the Hollow, or Depression, the ancient name being limited to the part between the S. end of the Dead Sea, and the Gulf of ‘Aḳabah, the “Wâdy el-‘Arăbah.” See further the writer’s Commentary on Deut., p. 3, with the references. The “Wâdy” (see on Amos 5:24) of the ‘Arábah intended, can be identified only by conjecture; but it must, it seems, have been some fairly well-known Wâdy, and one also that might naturally be adopted as a boundary; hence it is generally supposed, with much plausibility, to have been the Wâdy el-Aḥsâ, which, flowing down from the south-east, enters the ‘Arábah about 3 miles S. of the Dead Sea, and then, turning northwards, runs straight into the lower end of the Dead Sea. The stream, which is a considerable one, divides now the district of Kerak from that of Jebal (Gebal, Psalm 83:7, the ancient Gebalene), which would correspond, respectively, to the ancient Moab, and the N. part of Edom.