Discovery BoxAmos 2:1-8
Context2:1 This is what the Lord says:
“Because Moab has committed three crimes 1 –
make that four! 2 – I will not revoke my decree of judgment. 3
They burned the bones of Edom’s king into lime. 4
2:2 So I will set Moab on fire, 5
and it will consume Kerioth’s 6 fortresses.
Moab will perish 7 in the heat of battle 8
amid war cries and the blaring 9 of the ram’s horn. 10
2:3 I will remove 11 Moab’s leader; 12
I will kill all Moab’s 13 officials 14 with him.”
The Lord has spoken!
2:4 This is what the Lord says:
“Because Judah has committed three covenant transgressions 15 –
make that four! 16 – I will not revoke my decree of judgment. 17
They rejected the Lord’s law; 18
they did not obey his commands.
Their false gods, 19
to which their fathers were loyal, 20
led them astray.
2:5 So I will set Judah on fire,
and it will consume Jerusalem’s fortresses.” 21
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
2:7 They trample 27 on the dirt-covered heads of the poor; 28
they push the destitute away. 29
A man and his father go to the same girl; 30
in this way they show disrespect 31 for my moral purity. 32
2:8 They stretch out on clothing seized as collateral;
they do so right 33 beside every altar!
They drink wine bought with the fines they have levied;
[2:1] 1 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] 2 tn Heb “Because of three violations of Moab, even because of four.”
[2:1] 3 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] 4 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.
[2:2] 5 sn The destruction of Moab by fire is an example of a judgment in kind – as the Moabites committed the crime of “burning,” so the
[2:2] 6 sn Kerioth was an important Moabite city. See Jer 48:24, 41.
[2:2] 7 tn Or “die” (KJV, NASB, NRSV, TEV); NAB “shall meet death.”
[2:2] 8 tn Or “in the tumult.” This word refers to the harsh confusion of sounds that characterized an ancient battle – a mixture of war cries, shouts, shrieks of pain, clashes of weapons, etc.
[2:2] 9 tn Heb “sound” (so KJV, NASB, NRSV).
[2:2] 10 sn The ram’s horn (used as a trumpet) was blown to signal the approaching battle.
[2:3] 11 tn Heb “cut off” (so KJV, NASB, NRSV); NAB “root out”; NCV “bring to an end.”
[2:3] 12 tn Heb “the leader [traditionally, “judge”] from her midst.”
[2:3] 13 tn Heb “her”; the referent (Moab) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[2:3] 14 tn Or “princes” (KJV, NAB, NASB, NLT); TEV, CEV “leaders.”
[2:4] 15 tn This is the same Hebrew term that is translated “crimes” in the previous oracles (see at 1:3). The change to “covenant transgressions” reflects the probability that the prophet is condemning the nation of Israel for violating stipulations of the Mosaic Law.
[2:4] 16 tn Heb “Because of three violations of Judah, even because of four.”
[2:4] 17 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.
[2:4] 18 tn Or “instruction”; NCV “teachings.”
[2:4] 19 tn Heb “lies.” This may very well be a derogatory term for idols (perhaps also at Ps. 40:4 [Heb 40:5]). Elsewhere false gods are called “vanities” (Deut 32:21; 1 Kgs 16:13, 26) and a delusion (Isa 66:3). In no other prophetic passages, however, are they called “lies.” The term could refer to the deceptions of false prophets (note Ezek 13:6-9; cf. Hab 2:3). See F. I. Andersen and D. N. Freedman, Amos (AB), 301-6.
[2:4] 20 tn Heb “after which their fathers walked.” The expression “to walk after” is an idiom meaning “to be loyal to.” See S. M. Paul, Amos (Hermeneia), 75-76.
[2:5] 21 map For the location of Jerusalem see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.
[2:6] 22 tn For this translation see the note at 2:4.
[2:6] 23 tn Heb “Because of three violations of Israel, even because of four.”
[2:6] 24 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] 25 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] 26 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.
[2:7] 27 tn Most scholars now understand this verb as derived from the root II שָׁאַף (sha’af, “to crush; to trample”), an alternate form of שׁוּף (shuf), rather than from I שָׁאַף (sha’af, “to pant, to gasp”; cf. KJV, ASV, NASB).
[2:7] 28 tn Heb “those who stomp on the dirt of the ground on the head of the poor.” It is possible to render the line as “they trample the heads of the poor into the dust of the ground,” thereby communicating that the poor are being stepped on in utter contempt (see S. M. Paul, Amos [Hermeneia], 79-80). The participial form הַשֹּׁאֲפִים (hasho’afim) is substantival and stands in apposition to the pronominal suffix on מִכְרָם (mikhram, v. 6b).
[2:7] 29 tn Heb “they turn aside the way of the destitute.” Many interpreters take “way” to mean “just cause” and understand this as a direct reference to the rights of the destitute being ignored. The injustice done to the poor is certainly in view, but the statement is better taken as a word picture depicting the powerful rich pushing the “way of the poor” (i.e., their attempt to be treated justly) to the side. An even more vivid picture is given in Amos 5:12, where the rich are pictured as turning the poor away from the city gate (where legal decisions were made, and therefore where justice should be done).
[2:7] 30 sn Most interpreters see some type of sexual immorality here (cf. KJV, NASB, NIV, NCV, NRSV, TEV, CEV, NLT), even though the Hebrew phrase הָלַךְ אֶל (halakh ’el, “go to”) never refers elsewhere to sexual intercourse. (The usual idiom is בוֹא אֶל [bo’ ’el]. However, S. M. Paul (Amos [Hermeneia], 82) attempts to develop a linguistic case for a sexual connotation here.) The precise identification of the “girl” in question is not clear. Some see the referent as a cultic prostitute (cf. NAB; v. 8 suggests a cultic setting), but the term נַעֲרָה (na’arah) nowhere else refers to a prostitute. Because of the contextual emphasis on social oppression, some suggest the exploitation of a slave girl is in view. H. Barstad argues that the “girl” is the hostess at a pagan מַרְזֵחַ (marzeakh) banquet (described at some length in 6:4-7). In his view the sin described here is not sexual immorality, but idolatry (see H. Barstad, The Religious Polemics of Amos [VTSup], 33-36). In this case, one might translate, “Father and son go together to a pagan banquet.” In light of this cultic context, F. I. Andersen and D. N. Freedman argue that this is a reference to a specific female deity (“the Girl”) and correlate this verse with 8:14 (Amos [AB], 318-19).
[2:7] 31 tn Or “pollute”; “desecrate”; “dishonor.”
[2:7] 32 tn Heb “my holy name.” Here “name” is used metonymically for God’s moral character or reputation, while “holy” has a moral and ethical connotation.
[2:8] 33 tn The words “They do so right” are supplied twice in the translation of this verse for clarification.
[2:8] 35 tn Or “gods.” The Hebrew term אֱלֹהֵיהֶם (’elohehem) may be translated “their gods” (referring to pagan gods), “their god” (referring to a pagan god, cf. NAB, NIV, NLT), or “their God” (referring to the God of Israel, cf. NASB, NRSV).
