Why does God criticize offerings in Amos 4:5 if they were commanded in the Law? The Passage in Focus “Go to Bethel and transgress; go to Gilgal and multiply transgression. Bring your sacrifices every morning, your tithes every three days. Burn leavened bread as a thank offering and loudly proclaim your freewill offerings— for this is what you love to do, O children of Israel,” declares the Lord GOD. (Amos 4:4-5) Historical Backdrop of Amos Amos prophesied during the reign of Jeroboam II (ca. 793–753 BC) when the Northern Kingdom enjoyed economic prosperity yet pervasive moral decay. Political stability emboldened Israel to maintain the rival cultic centers established by Jeroboam I at Bethel and Dan (1 Kings 12:28-33). Excavations at Tel Dan have unearthed an immense open-air altar platform that matches the biblical description of those unauthorized shrines, substantiating that a full sacrificial system functioned outside the Jerusalem temple. Mosaic Regulations: What Did God Actually Command? 1. Central Sanctuary—Sacrifices were to be brought “to the place the LORD your God will choose” (Deuteronomy 12:5-14). 2. Ethical Prerequisite—Offerers were to “do justice” and “love kindness” (Micah 6:8). 3. Heart Engagement—“I desire mercy, not sacrifice” (Hosea 6:6), and “obedience is better than sacrifice” (1 Samuel 15:22). 4. Correct Form—Daily offerings, tithes, thank offerings, and freewill offerings had precise stipulations (Leviticus 1–7; Numbers 28–29). Thanksgiving offerings could include leavened loaves (Leviticus 7:13), but only in the prescribed context and place. Unauthorized Sanctuaries: Bethel and Gilgal Bethel (“house of God”) had been the patriarchal worship site of Jacob (Genesis 28), yet Jeroboam turned it into an idolatrous center with a golden calf, duplicating Egyptian imagery and violating the second commandment. Gilgal, once a memorial of covenant faithfulness (Joshua 4), devolved into a center for syncretistic rites. Performing even biblically commanded sacrifices at these locations constituted direct rebellion against Deuteronomy’s mandate for a single sanctuary. The Satire of Amos 4:4–5 Amos’s imperatives are sarcastic. “Bring your sacrifices every morning” twists Numbers 28:3-4 (where daily burnt offerings were commanded) into a command to commit sin because the location and heart posture were wrong. “Your tithes every three days” mocks their frequency; the Law required annual or tri-annual presentations (Deuteronomy 14:22,28). Amos exposes their self-chosen religiosity: they magnified outward ritual while multiplying inward corruption. Heartless Worship vs. Covenant Obedience God’s criticism aligns perfectly with the Law. The sacrificial system pointed to relationship, repentance, and foreshadowed the ultimate once-for-all sacrifice of Messiah (Hebrews 10:1-10). When an unrepentant people used offerings as religious cover, the very acts became “transgression.” The prophets consistently echoed this theme: • Isaiah 1:11-17—God “cannot endure iniquity with a solemn assembly.” • Jeremiah 7:21-23—“Add your burnt offerings to your sacrifices and eat the meat yourselves!” • Psalm 51:16-17—“You do not delight in sacrifice… A broken and contrite heart… You will not despise.” Moral Decay and Social Injustice Amos catalogs Israel’s sins: trampling the poor (2:6-7), selling the needy for sandals (8:4-6), living in ivory-paneled houses (3:15) while ignoring righteousness. External offerings can never compensate for violating the moral core of the covenant (Leviticus 19; Deuteronomy 24). Consistency Across Scripture 1. Sacrifice presupposes obedience (Genesis 4:4-7; 1 John 3:12). 2. God rejects worship divorced from justice (Proverbs 21:3; Matthew 23:23). 3. The entire canon unites: ritual without reality is abhorrent, but Spirit-empowered obedience consummates worship (John 4:23-24; Romans 12:1-2). Archaeological Corroboration of Illicit Northern Shrines • Tel Dan: high-place, massive altar steps, and cultic vessels dated to the 9th-8th centuries BC. • Kuntillet ‛Ajrud inscriptions: syncretistic references to “YHWH of Samaria and his Asherah,” confirming the blend of YHWH-language with idolatry prevalent in Amos’s era. These finds dovetail with the biblical indictment that Israel “mixed” devotions, showing the historical reliability of Amos’s context. Application and Theological Implications 1. Orthodoxy without orthopraxy invites divine judgment. 2. Worship acceptable to God flows from a regenerated heart—ultimately secured through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, the perfect Lamb (John 1:29; 1 Peter 1:18-19). 3. The critique in Amos underscores the unbreakable unity of Law, Prophets, and Gospel: all point to the necessity of inner transformation accomplished by the Holy Spirit. Concise Answer God criticizes the offerings in Amos 4:5 not because sacrifices were wrong in themselves, but because Israel offered them at unauthorized sanctuaries, in proud self-promotion, and divorced from justice and covenant fidelity. The Law never sanctioned ritual as a substitute for obedience; therefore, their very obedience to one command became transgression of the larger covenant, demonstrating that true worship demands both right act and right heart, ultimately fulfilled in Christ. |
    |