Amos 1:3

1:3 This is what the Lord says:

“Because Damascus has committed three crimes ¹  –

make that four! ²  – I will not revoke my

decree of judgment. ³ 

They ripped through Gilead like threshing sledges with iron teeth. ⁴ 

Amos 1:6

1:6 This is what the Lord says:

“Because Gaza ⁵  has committed three crimes ⁶  –

make that four! ⁷  – I will not revoke my decree of judgment. ⁸ 

They deported a whole community ⁹  and sold them ¹⁰  to Edom.

Amos 1:8

1:8 I will remove ¹¹  the ruler ¹²  from Ashdod, ¹³ 

the one who holds the royal scepter from Ashkelon. ¹⁴ 

I will strike Ekron ¹⁵  with my hand; ¹⁶ 

the rest of the Philistines will also die.” ¹⁷ 

The sovereign Lord has spoken!

Amos 2:1

2:1 This is what the Lord says:

“Because Moab has committed three crimes ¹⁸  –

make that four! ¹⁹  – I will not revoke my decree of judgment. ²⁰ 

They burned the bones of Edom’s king into lime. ²¹ 

Amos 2:6

God Will Judge Israel

2:6 This is what the Lord says:

“Because Israel has committed three covenant transgressions ²²  –

make that four! ²³  – I will not revoke my decree of judgment. ²⁴ 

They sold the innocent ²⁵  for silver,

the needy for a pair of sandals. ²⁶ 

Amos 4:6

4:6 “But surely I gave ²⁷  you no food to eat in any of your cities;

you lacked food everywhere you live. ²⁸ 

Still you did not come back to me.”

The Lord is speaking!

Amos 4:8-9

4:8 People from ²⁹  two or three cities staggered into one city to get ³⁰  water,

but remained thirsty. ³¹ 

Still you did not come back to me.”

The Lord is speaking!

4:9 “I destroyed your crops ³²  with blight and disease.

Locusts kept ³³  devouring your orchards, ³⁴  vineyards, fig trees, and olive trees.

Still you did not come back to me.”

The Lord is speaking!

Amos 4:11

4:11 “I overthrew some of you the way God ³⁵  overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah. ³⁶ 

You were like a burning stick ³⁷  snatched from the flames.

Still you did not come back to me.”

The Lord is speaking!

[1:3]  ¹ tn Traditionally, “transgressions” or “sins.” The word refers to rebellion against authority and is used in the international political realm (see 1 Kgs 12:19; 2 Kgs 1:1; 3:5, 7; 8:22). There is debate over its significance in this context. Some relate the “rebellion” of the foreign nations to God’s mandate to Noah (Gen 9:5-7). This mandate is viewed as a treaty between God and humankind, whereby God holds humans accountable to populate the earth and respect his image as it is revealed in all people. While this option is a possible theological explanation of the message in light of the Old Testament as a whole, nothing in these oracles alludes to that Genesis passage. J. Barton suggests that the prophet is appealing to a common morality shared across the ancient Near East regarding the conduct of war since all of the oracles can be related to activities and atrocities committed in warfare (Amos’s Oracles against the Nations [SOTSMS], 39-61). The “transgression” then would be a violation of what all cultures would take as fundamental human decency. Some argue that the nations cited in Amos 1-2 had been members of the Davidic empire. Their crime would consist of violating the mutual agreements that all should have exhibited toward one another (cf. M. E. Polley, Amos and the Davidic Empire). This interpretation is connected to the notion that Amos envisions a reconstituted Davidic empire for Israel and the world (9:11-15). Ultimately, we can only speculate what lay behind Amos’ thinking. He does not specify the theological foundation of his universal moral vision, but it is clear that Amos believes that all nations are responsible before the Lord for their cruelty toward other human beings. He also assumes that even those who did not know his God would recognize their inhumane treatment of others as inherently wrong. The translation “crimes” is general enough to communicate that a standard (whether human or divine) has been breached. For a survey of the possible historical events behind each oracle, see S. M. Paul, Amos (Hermeneia).

[1:3]  ² tn Heb “Because of three violations of Damascus, even because of four.”

[1:3]  ³ tn Heb “I will not bring it [or “him”] back.” The pronominal object (1) refers to the decree of judgment that follows; the referent (the decree) has been specified in the translation for clarity. See S. M. Paul, Amos (Hermeneia), 46-47. Another option (2) is to understand the suffix as referring to the particular nation mentioned in the oracle and to translate, “I will not take him [i.e., that particular nation] back.” In this case the Lord makes it clear that he does not intend to resume treaty relations with the nation in view. See M. L. Barré, “The Meaning of lá ásŒybnw in Amos 1:3-2:6,” JBL 105 (1986): 622.

[1:3]  ⁴ tn Heb “they threshed [or “trampled down”] Gilead with sharp iron implements” (NASB similar).

[1:6]  ⁵ sn Gaza was one of the five major Philistine cities (along with Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ekron, and Gath). It was considered to mark the southern limit of Canaan at the point on the coast where it was located (Gen 10:19).

[1:6]  ⁶ tn Traditionally, “transgressions” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV) or “sins” (NIV). For an explanation of the atrocities outlined in this oracle as treaty violations of God’s mandate to Noah in Gen 9:5-7, see the note on the word “violations” in 1:3.

[1:6]  ⁷ tn Heb “Because of three violations of Gaza, even because of four.”

[1:6]  ⁸ tn Heb “I will not bring it [or “him”] back.” The translation understands the pronominal object to refer to the decree of judgment that follows; the referent (the decree) has been specified in the translation for clarity. For another option see the note on the word “judgment” in 1:3.

[1:6]  ⁹ tn Heb “[group of] exiles.” A number of English translations take this as a collective singular and translate it with a plural (e.g., NAB, NIV, NRSV).

[1:6]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “in order to hand them over.”

[1:8]  ⁹ tn Heb “cut off.”

[1:8]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “the one who sits.” Some translations take this expression as a collective singular referring to the inhabitants rather than the ruler (e.g., NAB, NRSV, NLT).

[1:8]  ¹¹ sn Ashdod was one of the five major Philistine cities (along with Ashkelon, Ekron, Gaza, and Gath).

[1:8]  ¹² sn Ashkelon was one of the five major Philistine cities (along with Ashdod, Ekron, Gaza, and Gath).

[1:8]  ¹³ sn Ekron was one of the five major Philistine cities (along with Ashdod, Ashkelon, Gaza, and Gath).

[1:8]  ¹⁴ tn Heb “I will turn my hand against Ekron.” For other uses of the idiom, “turn the hand against,” see Ps 81:14; Isa 1:25; Jer 6:9; Zech 13:7.

[1:8]  ¹⁵ tn Heb “and the remnant of the Philistines will perish.” The translation above assumes that reference is made to other Philistines beside those living in the cities mentioned. Another option is to translate, “Every last Philistine will die.”

[2:1]  ¹³ tn Traditionally, “transgressions” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV) or “sins” (NIV). For an explanation of the atrocities outlined in this oracle as treaty violations of God’s mandate to Noah in Gen 9:5-7, see the note on the word “violations” in 1:3.

[2:1]  ¹⁴ tn Heb “Because of three violations of Moab, even because of four.”

[2:1]  ¹⁵ tn Heb “I will not bring it [or “him”] back.” The translation understands the pronominal object to refer to the decree of judgment that follows; the referent (the decree) has been specified in the translation for clarity. For another option see the note on the word “judgment” in 1:3.

[2:1]  ¹⁶ sn The Moabites apparently desecrated the tomb of an Edomite king and burned his bones into a calcined substance which they then used as plaster (cf. Deut 27:2, 4). See S. M. Paul, Amos (Hermeneia), 72. Receiving a proper burial was very important in this culture. Desecrating a tomb or a deceased individual’s bones was considered an especially heinous act.

[2:6]  ¹⁷ tn For this translation see the note at 2:4.

[2:6]  ¹⁸ tn Heb “Because of three violations of Israel, even because of four.”

[2:6]  ¹⁹ tn Heb “I will not bring it [or “him”] back.” The translation understands the pronominal object to refer to the decree of judgment that follows; the referent (the decree) has been specified in the translation for clarity. For another option see the note on the word “judgment” in 1:3.

[2:6]  ²⁰ tn Or “honest” (CEV, NLT). The Hebrew word sometimes has a moral-ethical connotation, “righteous, godly,” but the parallelism (note “poor”) suggests a socio-economic or legal sense here. The practice of selling debtors as slaves is in view (Exod 21:2-11; Lev 25:35-55; Deut 15:12-18) See the note at Exod 21:8 and G. C. Chirichigno, Debt-Slavery in Israel and the Ancient Near East (JSOTSup). Probably the only “crime” the victim had committed was being unable to pay back a loan or an exorbitant interest rate on a loan. Some have suggested that this verse refers to bribery in legal proceedings: The innocent are “sold” in the sense that those in power pay off the elders or judges for favorable decisions (5:12; cf. Exod 23:6-7).

[2:6]  ²¹ tn Perhaps the expression “for a pair of sandals” indicates a relatively small price or debt. Some suggest that the sandals may have been an outward token of a more substantial purchase price. Others relate the sandals to a ritual attached to the transfer of property, signifying here that the poor would be losing their inherited family lands because of debt (Ruth 4:7; cf. Deut 25:8-10). Still others emend the Hebrew form slightly to נֶעְלָם (ne’lam, “hidden thing”; from the root עָלַם, ’alam, “to hide”) and understand this as referring to a bribe.

[4:6]  ²¹ tn The Hebrew construction is emphatic (pronoun + verb). It underscores the stark contrast between the judgments that the Lord had been sending with the God of blessing Israel was celebrating in its worship (4:4-5).

[4:6]  ²² tn Heb “But I gave to you cleanness of teeth in all your cities, and lack of food in all your places.” The phrase “cleanness of teeth” is a vivid way of picturing the famine Israel experienced.

[4:8]  ²⁵ tn The words “people from” are supplied in the translation for clarification.

[4:8]  ²⁶ tn Heb “to drink.”

[4:8]  ²⁷ tn Or “were not satisfied.”

[4:9]  ²⁹ tn Heb “you.” By metonymy the crops belonging to these people are meant. See the remainder of this verse, which describes the agricultural devastation caused by locusts.

[4:9]  ³⁰ tn The Hiphil infinitive construct is taken adverbially (“kept”) and connected to the activity of the locusts (NJPS). It also could be taken with the preceding sentence and related to the Lord’s interventions (“I kept destroying,” cf. NEB, NJB, NIV, NRSV), or it could be understood substantivally in construct with the following nouns (“Locusts devoured your many orchards,” cf. NASB; cf. also KJV, NKJV).

[4:9]  ³¹ tn Or “gardens.”

[4:11]  ³³ tn Several English versions substitute the first person pronoun (“I”) here for stylistic reasons (e.g., NIV, NCV, TEV, CEV, NLT).

[4:11]  ³⁴ tn Heb “like God’s overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah.” The divine name may be used in an idiomatic superlative sense here, in which case one might translate, “like the great [or “disastrous”] overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah.”

[4:11]  ³⁵ tn Heb “like that which is burning.”