Amos 7:10-17 · Amos and Amaziah
Amos and Amaziah
Amos 7:10-17
Understanding Series
by Elizabeth Achtemeier
Loading...

The Prophet’s Visions and Encounter with Amaziah: While this section contains two different types of visions and a biographical insert, it should be regarded as a unit that has been given its present form by the disciples of the prophet.

The first two visions, in 7:1–3 and 7:4–6, are “event visions,” portraying what is about to happen, and they are identical in their form. The third and fourth visions, in 7:7–9 and 8:1–3, are “wordplay visions,” in which the meaning of what is seen depends on Yahweh’s interpretation of the word used. The biographical account of 7:10–17 shows the reaction of the priest Amaziah to the judgment announcement in 7:9 and is bound to the third vision by the use of “sword” in both 7:9 and 7:11 and by the reference to “sanctuaries” in both 7:9 and 7:13. Thus the whole unit holds together by its common subject matter of visions and the reaction to them.

Visions were frequent means of God’s communication with the prophets. In an ecstatic state of heightened consciousness, the prophet was granted to see and to hear God’s voice and actions, of which others were unaware. For example, Isaiah sees and hears God in the heavenly court (in Isa. 6). In an account similar to that in our passage, Jeremiah sees and hears God’s future judgment upon the people in the form of a military attack by the mysterious enemy from the North (Jer. 4:19–22). Or in Jeremiah 1:11–12, he is asked what he sees, and the Lord then interprets the meaning of the “branch of the almond tree” for him. There is no way we moderns can analyze or explain such prophetic experiences. We can only say that they were validated by Israel’s subsequent history, and we accept them at face value as belonging to the traditions of our faith.

It is not necessary that we consider the visions in this unit to have been granted Amos all at one time. Nor do the visions form a “call” to the prophet, marking the beginning of his ministry. Indeed, the first vision (7:1–3) takes place in the late spring, the second (7:4–6) in midsummer, the fourth (8:1–3) in autumn. Amaziah’s reference to “all” of Amos’s words, in 7:10, implies that the prophet has been preaching for some time. And the content of the visions, which proclaims the exile and end of Israel, is consonant with the prophet’s preaching in 5:2, 5, 17 and 6:7. The implication is, therefore, that the visions occurred in those days when Amos was also given the messages now found in chapters 5 and 6.

Like all of the prophets, Amos undoubtedly experienced opposition to his announcements of judgment—no people like to hear that they are going to die at the hand of their God. The encounter with Amaziah in 7:10–17 portrays that opposition brought to a head in the objection of the royal priest at the king’s sanctuary. Amos’s life was in danger.

In one sense, however, the first two visions in verses 1–6 form an apologetic for the prophet’s ministry, as did 3:3–8. By telling of his intercessions on behalf of his sinful compatriots, intercessions that have twice turned aside the wrath of God, Amos shows that he has had no desire to see the death of his people. Like so many of the prophets both before and after him, he has vigorously exercised the prophetic function of interceding for the good of his nation.

We do not often realize that the prophets of the OT not only proclaimed God’s judgment on their sinful folk but also defended that folk in tearful intercession before the throne of God (cf. Jer. 9:1). Moses, the first and greatest of the prophets, undertook strenuous asceticism to turn aside God’s judgment (Deut. 9:17–20, 25–29). Jeremiah pleaded so frequently with God for the forgiveness of his people that God finally had to tell him to be quiet (Jer. 7:16–17; 11:14; 15:1). Ezekiel likened prophetic intercession to a soldier filling up a breach in a fortification that Israel might stand in battle in the day of the Lord (Ezek. 13:5). Thus Amos, by his prayers in 7:2 and 7:5, is fulfilling the role of a true prophet.

It is interesting to note in this section that Amos is the only one in Israel who sees the condition of his people correctly. “Jacob,” Amos’s favorite name for the northern kingdom (3:13; 6:8; 8:7; 9:8), is “so small,” he says (7:2, 5). That is, Jacob is so weak, so helpless, so pitiful. But this is the people who boasted in their pride of their security and wealth, their military prowess and their lavish cult (see the comments on 5:18–6:14). In the light of God’s word, Amos sees their true condition; they are pitiful and small. We can be grateful that God saw our real natures behind all of our equally foolish and proud claims, that God pitied us as a father pities his children and came to rescue us in Jesus Christ.

7:10–17 In the visionary oracle of Amos 7:7–9, the prophet has foretold the death of King Jeroboam II by the sword and the destruction of all of the northern kingdom’s worship sites, including those royal sanctuaries at Bethel and Dan. Amos’s words have now become politically unbearable, verse 10, because they threaten the throne with insurrection.

Such was the fear of the priest Amaziah, who was in charge of the royal sanctuary at Bethel, and his fear was well-founded. In Israel’s history, at the command of the Lord, prophets had repeatedly instigated the overthrow of a reigning monarch (1 Kgs. 11:25–40; 2 Kgs. 8:7–15), and indeed, Elijah and Elisha were the ones who finally caused the fall of the powerful Omri dynasty (1 Kgs. 19:15–18; 2 Kgs. 9:1–14).

Moreover, the worship sites of the northern kingdom were intimately connected with the power of the throne. Jeroboam I founded the sanctuaries at Bethel and Dan, with their idols of golden calves. He changed the time of the autumn New Year festival. He rejected the levitical priesthood in favor of ordained lay priests, and he himself offered sacrifices upon the altar at Bethel (1 Kgs. 12:26–33). In short, Jeroboam founded a state religion different from the religion of Israel’s covenant past, a civil religion over which he himself ruled supreme. King and cult had become joined together, and state power was thereby absolutized. It was as if worship services whose content and order were dictated solely by the President of the U.S.A. were held in the White House—a practice known in our past.

Jeroboam I’s priest at Bethel therefore sends a message to that king in his palace, some fifty miles away in Samaria, to report what Amos has been preaching, verses 10–11. It is noteworthy that in his message Amaziah does not attribute Amos’s words to Yahweh: This is what Amosis saying. In short, Amaziah does not believe Amos’s words are divinely inspired. However, Amaziah is responsible for preserving peace and stability in the social and religious order by maintaining loyalty to the throne, so he does not wait for the king’s reply, but takes matters into his own hands, verses 12–13.

Amaziah’s aim is to get rid of the problem, and the problem is the place in which Amos has chosen to preach. Amaziah does not care a whit if Amos returns to Judah and mouths his oracles, because Amaziah does not believe the oracles. The priest has seen lots of professional prophets earning their living by preaching, giving oracles in return for money. Amaziah accepts that as a customary occurrence in society. But such professional prophets become dangerous if they start stirring up the people against the king. God will not do anything subversive, Amaziah believes, but the aroused populace may, and it is that threat that Amaziah wishes to be rid of.

Amos’s reply to Amaziah, in verses 14–15, is therefore a response to the priest’s unbelief, and it is an emphatic response. “No professional prophet (am) I,” reads the Hebrew, “and no member of a prophetic guild (am) I. I am (still) a herdsman and a cultivator of figs.” (See the comment on 1:1 for the meaning of these terms.) “But Yahweh took me . . . and he said . . . ‘Go prophesy to my people Israel’.” In short, Amos contradicts Amaziah by maintaining that he is a man under divine compulsion with a message from the Lord of the covenant. (Note my people, v. 15). His authority is not that of a prophetic institution or of an accepted social role but an authority given him solely by the word of his God, and when Amaziah opposes him, the priest is opposing God. It is not Amos who is the rebel, but Amaziah, and Amaziah is rebelling against the real king, Yahweh.

As a result, Amos pronounces a divine oracle of judgment against Amaziah for his lack of faith in the word of God, verses 16–17. An enemy will come against Isaac, the term used here for the northern kingdom to emphasize its covenant responsibility. Amaziah’s wife will become a harlot for the invading soldiers. His children will fall before their sword. Amaziah’s own property will be divided up among the conquerors. Amaziah will be exiled, along with his countrymen, to an unclean land that worships foreign deities (cf. 5:25–27), and there Amaziah will die. Such will be his punishment for his lack of faith in the word of God.

 

Baker Publishing Group, Understanding the Bible Commentary Series, by Elizabeth Achtemeier