The purpose of this lesson: (Begin by noting last week’s text focused on Judah, and this week’s test focuses on the ten tribes know as Israel.) (1) God’s approach is provided in a way that will have full impact. (2) God is deeply concerned about how people treat people.
How frequently have we become the victim of our own attitudes? How often are we guilty of using a double standard to justify ourselves and condemn our enemies? Is it not true that we are guilty of doing what we condemn in others?
We will receive the benefits of Old Testament and New Testament statements when we ask ourselves questions and reply with sober responses.
The author, Amos, gives us three ways to date this prophecy. He spoke this message to Israel during the reign of King Uzziah in Judah (792—740 BC), during the reign of Jeroboam II in Israel (793—753 BC), and two years before the earthquake (used as a historical reference point by other writers).
Remember there were no international calendars with common, universal dating systems then (calendars and an international dating systems are something we take for granted today.) Most ancient dating was by what we would regard as local events. Dating ancient events occurs by cross-dating local events.
Amos was not someone who trained to be a prophet. We would likely think of him as a herdsman and a farmer. These were not “glamorous” occupations, but common, essential occupations. Some of the other prophets were apprentices to a recognized prophet or went to schools for prophets (neither were condemned if the people accurately heard and faithfully delivered God’s message to others). Amos was not affirming “the virtue of ignorance” but affirming God’s message is not confined to those who train.
This is not an affirmation of “training versus no training.” In fact, Amos likely would not even understand that “modern” discussion. At best, it probably is an affirmation that God was not limited in granting a prophetic message. The fact that Amos was not trained would not likely have been of any advantage to him. There were those who were thoroughly trained—like Moses who was referred to as a prophet (see Deuteronomy 34:10 and 18:15 along with Acts 3:22 and 7:37).
He was from an area south of Jerusalem. Thus we have a man coming from the Kingdom of Judah to prophecy to the Kingdom of Israel. Unfortunately, people in the Kingdom of Israel would not expect a prophet from the Kingdom of Judah to have something good to say about the Kingdom of Israel. They would be likely to attribute the prophet’s message to prejudice rather than to God.
Depending on the relationship between Samaria (the king’s city in the Kingdom of Israel) and Jerusalem (the king’s city in the Kingdom of Judah), a spiritual message from Judah to Israel might not be welcomed.
Amos’ message was truly a “hard sell” for the situation then. In both kingdoms, it was a time of prosperity and political stability. Even to this day, times of economic prosperity and political stability are equated with “everything is okay.” It is extremely difficult to create an understanding that “danger is upon us” if we are prosperous and our society is stable. Times of danger are associated with economic distress and political instability. Amos’s message from God declared, “Nothing is okay!” at a time when prosperity and stability screamed, “Everything is better than fine!” Unless a person is paranoid, he prefers not to see “danger” in the face of “fine”!
A warning of danger in times of prosperity and political stability is a difficult warning to take seriously anywhere at anytime. Conditions of prosperity and political stability never are seen as indicators of danger. Spiritual danger can exist when material signs suggest that all is well.
The danger was real! God Himself was depicted a as a hungry lion roaring. God was roaring from Jerusalem (not a place Samaria [the capitol of the Kingdom of Israel] wished to receive a spiritual message). The sheep pastures and the constantly green top of Mount Carmel took God’s roar seriously!
A roaring lion, pastures in grief, and a place that was dry when it was always wet were not good signs! God Himself was upset!
Amos had a message from none other than the Lord Himself in verses 1:3-2:8. Note several observations in the messages.
The message was God’s, not Amos’. Amos was merely the spokesman.
Observation one: Amos’ message began in a way that would put the Kingdom of Israel at ease. Israel would expect Amos to begin by declaring how bad they were. Instead, Amos began by declaring how bad their horrible neighboring nations were. Amos began by declaring how bad Damascus, Gaza (the Philistines), Tyre, Edom, Ammon, Moab, and Judah were.
The neighboring nations had caused the Kingdom of Israel a lot of pain in the past. They were the kind of people who deserved “to have things go badly.” As far as Israel was concerned, it was time these people “got what they deserved.”
One almost can hear the initial response of the Kingdom of Israel. “It is about time! Those people have done terrible things, some of their terrible things were done to us, and some of them have done terrible things for a long time. We were at times bad, but never as bad as they have been. It is past time for God to punish them for the bad things they did! Go, Lord, go! Lord, Your punishment is just and overdue!”
Israel rejoiced in the punishment and downfall of her past enemies. Her former enemies got what they deserved. We always deserve mercy. Our enemies always deserve justice.
Observation two: the injustices of these nations centered in abuses of people rather than in failures in spiritual rituals. An interesting case could be made for the idolatrous influences in the Kingdom of Israel. While there is some indication that YHWH (the Lord that created and was the God of Abraham) was acknowledged in Jeroboam’s (the II) reign, there is no indication YHWH was honored above their other gods—He was one among the others. In the declarations of Exodus 20:2-6 and Deuteronomy 6:4, there would be no surprise if the existence of and the influences of idolatry were the core of Amos’s message from God.
Notice consistently the nations were to be punished because of the way they treated people. The frequent consequences were fire and the destruction of military defense systems, or massive devastation when they thought they were secure.
However, the concern of God’s message in Amos focused on the improper treatment of people rather than the improper treatment of God. That combined with Jesus’ statements should make us aware of how important our treatment of others is.
The core of the condemnation/consequences was focused on how they treated people rather than their idolatry.
Observation three: other people’s mistakes do not obscure our mistakes. The fact that Israel’s neighbors treated people badly did not excuse Israel’s bad treatment of people.
The evil of others does not excuse our evil. We are accountable for our actions regardless of the conduct of others.
Observation four: God is concerned with the existence of evil treatment of people even when it exists in people who make no pretense of being His people. Everyone is accountable for their actions even if they do not pretend to belong to God.
God’s concern for evil exists anywhere evil exists and expresses itself.
While God does not pronounce a consequence in Amos 2:6-8, the rest of Amos deals with the consequences Israel would pay. Especially note Amos 6:7, 8.
The unique thing about Israel’s condemnation is this: no consequence is pronounced. The rest of Amos will detail why God is upset and the consequence of exile.
For Thought and Discussion
1. As this lesson began, what does the lesson suggest we ask ourselves?
a. Are we not often the victim of our own attitudes?
b. Do we not use double standards to justify ourselves and condemn our enemies?
c. Are we frequently guilty of condemning in others what we do ourselves?
2. Give three ways Amos provided to date this prophecy.
a. It was in the rule of King Uzziah of Judah.
b. It was in the rule of king Jeroboam II of Israel.
c. It was two years before the earthquake.
3. Amos was not what? He was not affirming what, but what?
Amos was not trained to be a prophet. He was not affirming that it was a blessing to be untrained, but affirming God was not confined in providing His message.
4. To what was the Kingdom of Israel likely to attribute Amos’ message?
They were likely to attribute the message to prejudice.
5. What about the “then” situation made Amos’ message a “hard sell”?
It was a time of prosperity and political stability.
6. How did Amos depict God?
He depicted God as a roaring lion.
7. Give four observations about today’s text.
a. It began in a way that would put the Kingdom of Israel at ease.
b. The injustices of the nations centered in their abuse of people.
c. Other people’s mistakes do not obscure our mistakes.
d. God is concerned with the existence of evil wherever it exists.
8. What consequence does Amos 6:7, 8 declare on the Kingdom of Israel?
It declares the consequence of exile.
9. In today’s text, what do you find to be the most insightful? (What should provoke in us some sober thinking?)
The answer to this question depends on the individual.
Link to Student Guide
Lesson 3