'Woe to them that are at ease in Zion, and trust in the mountain of
Samaria, which are named chief of the nations, to whom the house of
Israel came! 2. Pass ye unto Calneh, and see; and from thence go ye
to Hamath the great; then go down to Gath of the Philistines: be
they better than these kingdoms? or their border greater than your
border? 3. Ye that put far away the evil day, and cause the seat of
violence to come near; 4. That lie upon beds of ivory, and stretch
themselves upon their couches, and eat the lambs out of the flock,
and the calves out of the midst of the stall; 5. That chant to the
sound of the viol, and invent to themselves instruments of musick,
like David; 6. That drink wine in bowls, and anoint themselves with
the chief ointments: but they are not grieved for the affliction of
Joseph. 7. Therefore now shall they go captive with the first that
go captive, and the banquet of them that stretched themselves shall
be removed. 8. The Lord God hath sworn by Himself, saith the Lord
the God of hosts, I abhor the excellency of Jacob, and hate his
palaces: therefore will I deliver up the city with all that is
therein.'--AMOS vi. 1-8.
Amos prophesied during the reign of Jeroboam, the son of Joash.
Jeroboam's reign was a time of great prosperity for Israel. Moab,
Gilead, and part of Syria were reconquered, and the usual effects of
conquest, increased luxury and vainglory, followed. Amos was not an
Israelite born, for he came from Tekoa, away down south, in the wild
country west of the Dead Sea, where he had been a simple herdsman till
the divine call sent him into the midst of the corrupt civilisation of
the Northern Kingdom. The first words of his prophecy give its whole
spirit: 'The Lord will roar from Zion.' The word rendered 'roar' is the
term specially used for the terrible cry with which a lion leaps on its
surprised prey (Amos iii. 4, 8). It is from Zion, the seat of God's
Temple, that the 'roar' proceeds, and Amos's prophecy is but the echo of
it in Israel.
The prophecy of judgment in this passage is directed against the sins of
the upper classes in Samaria. They are described in verse 1 as the
'notable men ... to whom the house of Israel come,' which, in modern
language, is just 'conspicuous citizens,' who set the fashion, and are
looked to as authorities and leaders, whether in political or commercial
or social life. The word by which they are designated is used in Numbers
i. 17: 'Which are _expressed_ by name.' The word 'carried back the
thoughts of the degenerate aristocracy of Israel to the faith and zeal
of their forefathers' (Pusey, _Minor Prophets_, on this verse). Israel,
Amos calls 'The first of the nations.' It is singular that such a title
should be given to the nation against whose corruption his one business
is to testify, but probably there is keen irony in the word. It takes
Israel at its own estimate, and then goes on to show how rotten, and
therefore short-lived, was the prosperity which had swollen national
pride to such a pitch. The chiefs of the foremost nation in the world
should surely be something better than the heartless debauchees whom the
Prophet proceeds to paint. Anglo-Saxons on both sides of the Atlantic,
who are by no means deficient in this same complacent estimate of their
own superiority to all other peoples, may take note. The same thought is
prominent in the description of these notables as 'at ease.' They are
living in a fool's paradise, shutting their eyes to the thunder-clouds
that begin to rise slowly above the horizon, and keeping each other in
countenance in laughing at Amos and his gloomy forecasts. They 'trusted
in the mountain of Samaria,' which, they thought, made the city
impregnable to assault. No doubt they thought that the Prophet's talk
about doing right and trusting in Jehovah was very fanatical and
unpractical, just as many in England and America think that their
nations are exalted, not by righteousness, but by armies, navies, and
dollars or sovereigns.
Verse 2 is very obscure to us from our ignorance of the facts underlying
its allusions. In fact, it has been explained in exactly opposite ways,
being taken by some to enumerate three instances of prosperous
communities, which yet are not more prosperous than Israel, and by
others to enumerate three instances of God's judgments falling on places
which, though strong, had been conquered. In the former explanation,
God's favour to Israel is made the ground of an implied appeal to their
gratitude; in the latter, His judgments on other nations are made the
ground of an appeal to their fear, lest like destruction should fall on
them.
But the main points of the passage are the photograph of the crimes
which are bringing the judgment of God, and the solemn divine oath to
inflict the judgment. The crimes rebuked are not the false worship of
the calves, though in other parts of his prophecy Amos lashes that with
terrible invectives, nor foul breaches of morality, though these were
not wanting in Israel, but the vices peculiar to selfish, luxurious
upper classes in all times and countries, who forget the obligations of
wealth, and think only of its possibilities of self-indulgence. French
_noblesse_ before the Revolution, and English peers and commercial
magnates, and American millionaires, would yield examples of the same
sin. The hardy shepherd from Tekoa had learned 'plain living and high
thinking' before he was a prophet, and would look with wondering and
disgusted eyes at the wicked waste which he saw in Samaria. He begins
with scourging the reckless security already referred to. These notables
in Israel were 'at ease' because they 'put far away the evil day,' by
refusing to believe that it was at hand, and paying no heed to prophets'
warnings, as their fellows do still and always, and as we all are
tempted to do. They who see and declare the certain end of national or
personal sins are usually jeered at as pessimists, fanatics, alarmists,
bad patriots, or personal ill-wishers, and the men whom they try to warn
fancy that they hinder the coming of a day of retribution by
disbelieving in its coming. Incredulity is no lightning-conductor to
keep off the flash, and, listened to or not, the low growls of the
thunder are coming nearer.
With one hand these sinners tried to push away the evil day, while with
the other they drew near to themselves that which made its coming
certain--'the seat of violence,' or, rather, 'the sitting,' or
'session.' Violence, or wrongdoing, is enthroned by them, and where men
enthrone iniquity, God's day of vengeance is not far off.
Then follows a graphic picture of the senseless, corrupting luxury of
the Samaritan magnates, on which the Tekoan shepherd pours his scorn,
but which is simplicity itself, and almost asceticism, before what he
would see if he came to London or New York. To him it seemed effeminate
to loll on a divan at meals, and possibly it was a custom imported from
abroad. It is noted that 'the older custom in Israel was to sit while
eating.' The woodwork of the divans, inlaid with ivory, had caught his
eye in some of his peeps into the great houses, and he inveighs against
them very much as one of the Pilgrim Fathers might do if he could see
the furniture in the drawing-rooms of some of his descendants. There is
no harm in pretty things, but the æsthetic craze does sometimes indicate
and increase selfish heartlessness as to the poverty and misery, which
have not only no ivory on their divans, but no divans at all. Thus
stretched in unmanly indolence on their cushions, they feast on
delicacies. 'Lambs out of the flock' and 'calves out of the stall' seem
to mean animals too young to be used as food. These gourmands, like
their successors, prided themselves on having dainties out of season,
because they were more costly then. And their feasts had the adornment
of music, which the shepherd, who knew only the pastoral pipe that
gathered his sheep, refers to with contempt. He uses a very rare word of
uncertain meaning, which is probably best rendered in some such way as
the Revised Version does: 'They sing idle songs.' To him their
elaborate performances seemed like empty babble. Worse than that, they
'devise musical instruments like David.' But how unlike him in the use
they make of art! What a descent from the praises of God to the 'idle
songs' fit for the hot dining-halls and the guests there! Amos was
indignant at the profanation of art, and thought it best used in the
service of God. What would he have said if he had been 'fastened into a
front-row box' and treated to a modern opera?
The revellers 'drink wine in bowls' by which larger vessels than
generally employed are intended. They drank to excess, or as we might
say, by bucketfuls. So the dainty feast, with its artistic refinement
and music, ends at last in a brutal carouse, and the heads anointed with
the most costly unguents drop in drunken slumber. A similar picture of
Samaritan manners is drawn by Isaiah (chap. xxviii.), and obviously
drunkenness was one of the besetting sins of the capital.
But the darkest hue in the dark picture has yet to be added: 'They are
not grieved for the affliction (literally, the 'breach' or 'wound') of
Joseph.' The tribe of Ephraim, Joseph's son, being the principal tribe
of the Northern Kingdom, Joseph is often employed as a synonym for
Israel. All these pieces of luxury, corrupting and effeminate as they
are, might be permitted, but heartless indifference to the miseries
groaning at the door of the banqueting-hall goes with them. 'The
classes' are indifferent to the condition of 'the masses.' Put Amos into
modern English, and he is denouncing the heartlessness of wealth,
refinement, art, and culture, which has no ear for the complaining of
the poor, and no eyes to see either the sorrows and sins around it, or
the lowering cloud that is ready to burst in tempest.
The inevitable issue is certain, because of the very nature of God. It
is outlined with keen irony. Amos sees in imagination the long
procession of sad captives, and marching in the front ranks, the
self-indulgent Sybarites, whose pre-eminence is now only the melancholy
prerogative of going first in the fettered train. What has become of
their revelry? It is gone, like the imaginary banquets of dreams, and
instead of luxurious lolling on silken couches, there is the weary tramp
of the captive exiles. Such result must be, since God is what He is. He
has sworn 'by Himself'; His being and character are the pledge that it
will be so as Amos has declared. How can such a God as He is do
otherwise than hate the pride of such a selfish, heartless,
God-forgetting aristocracy? How can He do otherwise than deliver up the
city? God has not changed, and though His mills grind slowly, they do
grind still; and it is as true for England and America, as it was for
Samaria, that a wealthy and leisurely upper class, which cares only for
material luxury glossed over by art, which has condescended to be its
servant, is bringing near the evil day which it hugs itself into
believing will never come.