Amos 6:10 Yorum

In this chapter we have, I. A sinful people studying to put a slight upon God's threatenings and to make them appear trivial, confiding in their privileges and pre-eminences above other nations (Amo 6:2, Amo 6:3), and their power (Amo 6:13), and wholly addicted to their pleasures (Amo 6:4-6). II. A serious prophet studying to put a weight upon God's threatenings and to make them appear terrible, by setting forth the severity of those judgments that were coming upon these sensualists (Amo 6:7), God's abhorring them, and abandoning them and theirs to death (Amo 6:8-11), and bringing utter desolation upon them, since they would not be wrought upon by the methods he had taken for their conviction (Amo 6:12-14).

INTRODUCTION TO AMOS 6 This chapter seems to be directed both to the two tribes of Judah and Benjamin, and the ten tribes of Israel, under the names of Zion and Samaria, and to the principal men in both; who are reproved and threatened for their carnal security and self-confidence, being in no fear of the evil day, though they had no reason for it no more than other people, Amo 6:1; are charged with wantonness, luxury, intemperance, and want of sympathy with those in distress, Amo 6:4; therefore are threatened to be carried captive first, and their city to be delivered up; which, for the certainty of it, is not only said, but swore to, Amo 6:7; and a great mortality in every house, and the destruction of all houses, both great and small, Amo 6:9; and since a reformation of them seemed impracticable, and not to be expected, but they gloried in their wealth, and boasted of their strength, therefore they should be afflicted by a foreign nation raised against them, which affliction should be general, from one end of the country to the other, Amo 6:12.

And a man's uncle shall take him up,.... That is, his father's brother, as Kimchi; or his near kinsman, as the Targum; to whom the right of inheritance belongs, and also the care of his funeral; he shall take up the dead man himself, in order to inter him, there being none to employ in such service; the mortality being so universal, either through the pestilence raging everywhere, or through the earthquake, men being killed by the fall of houses upon them; which Aben Ezra takes to be the case here; see Amo 6:11; and he that burneth him; which may be read disjunctively, "or he that burneth him" (e); his mother's brother, according to Judah ben Karis in Aben Ezra; for which there seems to be no foundation. The Targum renders it in connection with the preceding clause, "shall take him up from burning;'' and so Jarchi interprets of a man's being found, and taken up in a house, burnt by the enemy at the taking of the city: but it is best to understand it of one whose business it was to burn the dead; which, though not commonly used among the Jews, sometimes was, Sa1 31:12; and so should be at this time, partly because of the infection, and to stop the contagion; and chiefly because a single man could not well carry whole bodies to the grave, to bury them; and therefore first burnt their flesh, and then buried their bones, as follows: to bring out the bones out of the house; in order to bury them: and shall say unto him that is by the sides of the house; or "in the corner of it" (f), as the Targum; either the uncle shall say to the burner, that is searching the house for the dead; or the uncle and burner, being one and the same person, shall say to the only surviving one of the ten, that is got into some corner of the house through fear or melancholy, under such a sad calamity, is there yet any with thee? any dead corpse to be brought out and burned and buried? and he shall say, no; there are no more: or "there is an end" of them all (g); the last has been brought out: or, as the Targum, "they are perished;'' they are all dead, and carried out: then shall he say, hold thy tongue; lest the neighbours should hear, and be discouraged at the number of the dead in one house; or say not one word against the providence of God, nor murmur and repine at his hand, since it is just and righteous: for we may not make mention of the name of the Lord; being forbid by their superiors; or it is not right to do it by way of complaint, since our sins have deserved such judgments to come upon us; or it will be to no purpose to make mention of the name of the Lord, and pray unto him to turn away his hand, since destruction is determined, the decree is gone forth. The Targum is, "he shall say, remove (that is, the dead), since while they lived they did not pray in the name of the Lord.'' And so the Syriac and Arabic versions make this to be the reason of the mortality, "because they remembered not the name of the Lord"; or, "called not upon" it. (e) "aut vespillo", Tigurine version; "aut ustor ejus", Junius & Tremellius. (f) "in penitissimis domus", Cocceius. (g) "finis est", V. L. Pagninus, Montanus, Vatablus, Calvin, Drusius.

(Vers. 7 seqq.) Therefore now they will migrate to the head of the transmigrants, and the faction of the revelers will be removed. The Lord God has sworn by his own soul, says the Lord God of hosts: I detest the pride of Jacob, and I hate his houses, and I will deliver the city with its inhabitants: and if there are ten men left in one house, they shall die; and their close relative shall take them, and burn them, to carry out the bones from the house; and he who is in the innermost chambers of the house shall say: Is there still anyone with you? And he will answer: It is the end; and he will say to him: Be silent, and do not remember the name of the Lord. LXX: Therefore now the strong ones will be captives from the beginning, and the noise of horses will be taken away from Ephraim; because the Lord has sworn by himself, says the Lord God of hosts: because I will abhor all the reproach of Jacob, and I will hate his regions, and I will take away the city with all its inhabitants. And it shall come to pass, if ten men remain in one house, and they die; and the household members shall take them, and they shall make an effort to remove their bones from the house; and those who are in charge of the house shall say: Are there still any with you? And he shall say, by no means; and he shall say, Be silent, and do not mention the name of the Lord. Because of the higher causes that the prophetic discourse describes (of those who sleep on ivory beds, and revel on couches, and eat lambs from the flock, and calves from the midst of the herd, and sing to the sound of the harp and drink from bowls, and are anointed with the finest ointment, and yet suffer nothing in the destruction of their people, who are descended from Joseph), now the Lord threatens, and says: Because they have done these things and these things, now they shall migrate at the head of the exiles. And the meaning is this: Punishment is never delayed for the future, nor is it prophesied for long centuries to come. What is now imminent, is now coming, my words predict, that they will go in the beginning of the transmigration, namely the rulers and the powerful, of whom he said above: Hear this word, you fat cows, who are in the mountain of Samaria (Above, IV, 1). And again: Woe to you who are wealthy in Zion, and trust in the mountain of Samaria: you nobles, heads of the people, who enter pompously into the house of Israel. You who are the first in wealth, will be the first to endure the yoke of captivity, according to what is written in Ezekiel: 'Begin from my sanctuary' (Ezek. IX, 6). Not from the saints, as many think; but from the destruction of the temple, which was holy. For the powerful will endure torments powerfully (Wisdom VI), and to whom much is entrusted, much will be demanded from him (Luke XII). And as it is said, the faction of the indulgent will be taken away, those who had one consent in taking pleasure and engaging in feasts and revelry: they will be taken away together, so that for those whose unity was in luxury, their punishment will also be united. As for why the LXX translated it, the neighing of the horse of Ephraim shall be taken away: which is not found in the Hebrew, and will be discussed by us as unnecessary when we begin to weave the tropology. The Lord has sworn by himself, or as we read in Hebrew, by his soul, according to what is written in Isaiah: My soul hates your new moons and your Sabbaths and your feast days (Isa. I, 13): not that God has a soul, but in order to speak in human terms. It is not surprising if it is said to have a soul, since even the other parts, which are less valuable than the soul, such as the feet, hands, stomach, and other organs, attest to having themselves. But if those who deny that Christ had a human soul oppose us, saying that God was in the human body instead of a soul, let them hear that in Christ the substance of the soul is demonstrated: just as the members of his body had substance. In God the Father, however, the head, feet, and other things that are said to be, are not members, but the diversity of efficient acts is indicated by the words used to describe them: similarly, the soul is not substantial, but the seat of the inner mind and the place where thoughts reside, through which God reveals His will. Therefore the Lord, the God of hosts, that is, Sabaoth (which the Seventy translated as powers), swore that he detests the pride of Jacob and hates his dwellings. This is Jacob according to the previous chapter, where it is written: And they allowed nothing to prevail over the affliction of Joseph, or the ten tribes, or certainly the entire house of the twelve tribes. And he will deliver the city with its inhabitants; either Samaria, or certainly Jerusalem, or both in common. As for the time of the Lord Savior, after whose coming and passion God detested all the pride and injury of Jacob, because they cried out against him, the son of a carpenter and a Samaritan and possessed by a demon (Matthew 13; John 8): therefore Jerusalem was handed over to the Roman armies with its inhabitants. And to such an extent did the wrath of God rage against them, that even if ten men were to remain in one house, they would also die, and the neighbor or neighbor would burn the corpses of the dead to remove the bones from his house, because they are not able to remove the whole bodies due to the crowds of the dying. And when he has become tired from carrying [the body], let him ask the person who is in the innermost part of the house if there are any bodies left for him to hand over, and let that person respond: It is over, I no longer have anyone to give to you for burial; and before he swears that he does not have [any bodies], let that person, who asked the question and was outside, and did not know [that there were no bodies], order him and say: Be silent, and do not remember the name of the Lord. But he mentions this in order to show that even those who are not compelled by the weight and necessity of evil do not want to confess the name of the Lord, and that the name of God has come into such great oblivion among the people of Israel that it does not even deign to be heard in a simple oath. We have drawn fine lines of history, now let us imprint the hand of allegory. The leaders of heretics, who devoured my people because of their pleasures, and allowed nothing to stand in the way of Joseph's torment, will be led first to punishment, and the neighing of the horse will be taken away from Ephraim: which is understood in holy scriptures in two ways, either in the pride and power of those who neigh, or in the magnitude of lust. In the pride and consent of evil people, as it is written: Some trust in chariots and some in horses (Psalm 20:7). And: A deceitful horse for salvation (Ps. XXXII, 17). And to the kings of Israel, it is commanded that they not multiply horses for themselves (Deut. XVII). And in the book of Job, the voice of the horse is compared to the sound of the trumpet (Job. XXXIX). In Zachariah also we read, which is confirmed by the testimony of the Gospel, and it is referred to the presence of the Savior: Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion: proclaim, O daughter of Jerusalem. Behold, your King comes to you righteous and Savior: He is gentle, and riding on a donkey and the foal of a donkey: and he will destroy the chariots from Ephraim, and the horses from Jerusalem (Zach. IX, 9). But the magnitude of lust and unrestrained desire for sexual intercourse, as Jeremiah, describing the luxurious adulterers, declared: Each one neighs over the wife of his neighbor (Jer. V, 8). The coming of Christ subdues such horses, as does the wrath of God. And the Lord swears by Himself (since He has no one greater to swear by) that He abhors all heretical blasphemies and hates all their regions (Heb. VI). For whatever they speak is injustice, and worthy of God's hatred. And He will take away their city and their assemblies with those who dwell in it, and the people indeed, and the leaders, even if there were ten men left (for if they had been in Sodom and Gomorrah, no fire would have come down upon them), they will all die the same death that leads to Tartarus, of which Ezekiel writes: The soul that sins, it shall die. Their relatives and domestics bury the bones of these people, of whom it is said: Let the dead bury their own dead (Luke 9:60). And the one who is outside and does not enter the house of the dead; but rather casts out the dead outside, the one who burns the dead gives orders, and reduces them to ashes, and breaks their bones, so that he may remain silent; and the most pure name of God not be defiled by the mouth of the dead. For to the sinner, God says: Why do you declare my righteousness, and take my covenant in your mouth? (Psalm 50). Wherefore, we also must provide, that we may not bury the dead dead, but rather, that as living, we may bring forth to life those who are dead. And if we do not do this, it is commanded to us and it is said: Be silent, for we are judged unworthy of the name of God.

The passage involves deep obscurity from the viewpoint of commentary. It resembles the part in Genesis where there is mention of the treaty that Laban and Jacob made with each other about ownership of the offspring of the sheep, one man owning some, the other owning others. While that is obscure in its expression, the sense gains clarity in the course of comment. Now it is necessary to expound the sense of this passage as well, whose reference is not clearly expressed. His intention, in fact, is to cite a proof of the devastation affecting them in that it was very extreme. In many cases scarcely ten will be left from a large household of many members, the rest being done away with in various ways through the war.

The prophet reproves his people for indulging themselves in luxurious ease, and forming alliances with their powerful idolatrous neighbors, Amo 6:1. He asks if their lands or their lot be better than their own, Amo 6:2, that they should choose to worship the gods of the heathen, and forsake Jehovah. Then follows an amplification of the sin which the prophet reproves, Amo 6:3-6; to which he annexes very awful threatenings, confirmed by the oath of Jehovah, Amo 6:7, Amo 6:8. He next particularly specifies the punishment of their sins by pestilence, Amo 6:9-11; by famine, or a drought that should harden the earth so that it could not be tilled, Amo 6:12; and by the sword of the Assyrians, Amo 6:14.

A man's uncle shall take him up - Bp. Newcome says, this obscure verse seems to describe the effects of famine and pestilence during the siege of Samaria. The carcass shall be burnt, and the bones removed with no ceremony of funeral rites, and without the assistance of the nearest kinsman. Solitude shall reign in the house; and if one is left, he must be silent, (see Amo 8:3), and retired, lest he be plundered of his scanty provision! Burning the body, and then collecting the ashes, and putting them into an urn, was deemed the most honorable mode of burial.

DENUNCIATION OF BOTH THE SISTER NATIONS (ESPECIALLY THEIR NOBLES) FOR WANTON SECURITY--ZION, AS WELL AS SAMARIA: THREAT OF THE EXILE: RUIN OF THEIR PALACES AND SLAUGHTER OF THE PEOPLE: THEIR PERVERSE INJUSTICE. (Amo 6:1-14) named chief of the nations--that is, you nobles, so eminent in influence, that your names are celebrated among the chief nations [LUDOVICUS DE DIEU]. Hebrew, "Men designated by name among the first-fruits of the nations," that is, men of note in Israel, the people chosen by God as first of the nations (Exo 19:5; compare Num 24:20) [PISCATOR]. to whom . . . Israel came--that is, the princes to whom the Israelites used to repair for the decision of controversies, recognizing their authority [MAURER]. I prefer to refer "which" to the antecedent "Zion" and "Samaria"; these were esteemed "chief" strongholds among the heathen nations "to whom . . . Israel came" when it entered Canaan; Amo 6:2 accords with this.

a man's uncle--The nearest relatives had the duty of burying the dead (Gen 25:9; Gen 35:29; Jdg 16:31). No nearer relative was left of this man than an uncle. and he that burneth him--the uncle, who is also at the same time the one that burneth him (one of the "ten," Amo 6:9). Burial was the usual Hebrew mode of disposing of their dead. But in cases of necessity, as when the men of Jabesh-gilead took the bodies of Saul and his three sons from the walls of Beth-shan and burned them to save them from being insulted by the Philistines, burning was practised. So in this case, to prevent contagion. the bones--that is, the dead body (Gen 50:25). Perhaps here there is an allusion in the phrase to the emaciated condition of the body, which was little else but skin and bones. say unto him that is by the sides of the house--that is, to the only one left of the ten in the interior of the house [MAURER] (compare Note, see on Isa 14:13). Hold thy tongue . . . we may not . . . mention . . . the Lord--After receiving the reply, that none is left besides the one addressed, when the man outside fancies the man still surviving inside to be on the point, as was customary, of expressing devout gratitude to God who spared him, the man outside interrupts him, "Hold thy tongue! for there is not now cause for mentioning with praise (Jos 23:7) the name of Jehovah"; for thou also must die; as all the ten are to die to the last man (Amo 6:9; compare Amo 8:3). Formerly ye boasted in the name of Jehovah, as if ye were His peculiar people; now ye shall be silent and shudder at His name, as hostile to you, and as one from whom ye wish to be hidden (Rev 6:16), [CALVIN].

The prophet utters the second woe over the careless heads of the nation, who were content with the existing state of things, who believed in no divine judgment, and who revelled in their riches (Amo 6:1-6). To these he announces destruction and the general overthrow of the kingdom (Amo 6:7-11), because they act perversely, and trust in their own power (Amo 6:12-14). Amo 6:1. "Woe to the secure upon Zion, and to the careless upon the mountain of Samaria, to the chief men of the first of the nations, to whom the house of Israel comes! Amo 6:2. Go over to Calneh, and see; and proceed thence to Hamath, the great one: and go down to Gath of the Philistines: are they indeed better than these kingdoms? or is their territory greater than your territory? Amo 6:3. Ye who keep the day of calamity far off, and bring the seat of violence near." This woe applies to the great men in Zion and Samaria, that is to say, to the chiefs of the whole of the covenant nation, because they were all sunk in the same godless security; though special allusion is made to the corrupt leaders of the kingdom of the ten tribes, whose debauchery is still further depicted in what follows. These great men are designated in the words נקבי ראשׁית הגּוים, as the heads of the chosen people, who are known by name. As ראשׁית הג is taken from Num 24:20, so נקבי is taken from Num 1:17, where the heads of the tribes who were chosen as princes of the congregation to preside over the numbering of the people are described as men אשׁר נקּבוּ בּשׁמות, who were defined with names, i.e., distinguished by names, that is to say, well-known men; and it is used here in the same sense. Observe, however, with reference to ראשׁית הגּוים, that in Num 24:20 we have not הגּוים, but simply ראשׁית גּוים. Amalek is so called there, as being the first heathen nation which rose up in hostility to Israel. On the other hand, ר הגוים is the firstling of the nations, i.e., the first or most exalted of all nations. Israel is so called, because Jehovah had chosen it out of all the nations of the earth to be the people of His possession (Exo 19:5; cf. Sa2 7:23). In order to define with still greater precision the position of these princes in the congregation, Amos adds, "to whom the house of Israel cometh," namely, to have its affairs regulated by them as its rulers. These epithets were intended to remind the princes of the people of both kingdoms, "that they were the descendants of those tribe-princes who had once been honoured to conduct the affairs of the chosen family, along with Moses and Aaron, and whose light shone forth from that better age as brilliant examples of what a truly theocratical character was" (Hengstenberg, Dissertations, i. p. 148). To give still greater prominence to the exalted calling of these princes, Amos shows in Amo 6:2 that Israel can justly be called the firstling of the nations, since it is not inferior either in prosperity or greatness to any of the powerful and prosperous heathen states. Amos names three great and flourishing capitals, because he is speaking to the great men of the capitals of the two kingdoms of Israel, and the condition of the whole kingdom is reflected in the circumstances of the capital. Calneh (= Calno, Isa 10:9) is the later Ctesiphon in the land of Shinar, or Babylonia, situated upon the Tigris opposite to Seleucia (see at Gen 10:10); hence the expression עברוּ, because men were obliged to cross over the river (Euphrates) in order to get there. Hamath: the capital of the Syrian kingdom of that name, situated upon the Orontes (see at Gen 10:18 and Num 34:8). There was not another Hamath, as Hitzig supposes. The circumstance that Amos mentions Calneh first, whereas it was much farther to the east, so that Hamath was nearer to Palestine than Calneh was, may be explained very simply, from the fact that the enumeration commences with the most distant place and passes from the north-east to the south-west, which was in the immediate neighbourhood of Israel. Gath: one of the five capitals of Philistia, and in David's time the capital of all Philistia (see at Jos 13:3; Sa2 8:1). The view still defended by Baur - namely, that Amos mentions here three cities that had either lost their former grandeur, or had fallen altogether, for the purpose of showing the self-secure princes of Israel that the same fate awaited Zion and Samaria - is groundless and erroneous; for although Calneh is spoken of in Isa 10:9 as a city that had been conquered by the Assyrians, it cannot be proved that this was the case as early as the time of Amos, but is a simple inference drawn from a false interpretation of the verse before us. Nor did Jeroboam II conquer the city of Hamath on the Orontes, and incorporate its territory with his own kingdom (see at Kg2 14:25). And although the Philistian city Gath was conquered by Uzziah (2 Chronicles 26:60, we cannot infer from Ch2 26:6, or from the fact of Gath not being mentioned in Amo 1:6-8, that this occurred before the time of Amos (see at Amo 1:8). On the other hand, the fact that it is placed by the side of Hamath in the passage before us, is rather a proof that the conquest did not take place till afterwards.