Amos 3:3

3:3 Do two walk together without having met? ¹ 

Amos 1:15

1:15 Ammon’s ²  king will be deported; ³ 

he and his officials ⁴  will be carried off ⁵  together.”

The Lord has spoken!

Amos 7:15

7:15 Then the Lord took me from tending ⁶  flocks and gave me this commission, ⁷  ‘Go! Prophesy to my people Israel!’

Amos 2:10

2:10 I brought you up from the land of Egypt;

I led you through the wilderness for forty years

so you could take the Amorites’ land as your own.

Amos 6:2

6:2 They say to the people: ⁸ 

“Journey over to Calneh and look at it!

Then go from there to Hamath-Rabbah! ⁹ 

Then go down to Gath of the Philistines!

Are they superior to our two ¹⁰  kingdoms?

Is their territory larger than yours?” ¹¹ 

Amos 7:12

7:12 Amaziah then said to Amos, “Leave, you visionary! ¹²  Run away to the land of Judah! Earn your living ¹³  and prophesy there!

Amos 9:4

9:4 Even when their enemies drive them into captivity, ¹⁴ 

from there ¹⁵  I will command the sword to kill them.

I will not let them out of my sight;

they will experience disaster, not prosperity.” ¹⁶ 

Amos 2:4

2:4 This is what the Lord says:

“Because Judah has committed three covenant transgressions ¹⁷  –

make that four! ¹⁸  – I will not revoke my decree of judgment. ¹⁹ 

They rejected the Lord’s law; ²⁰ 

they did not obey his commands.

Their false gods, ²¹ 

to which their fathers were loyal, ²² 

led them astray.

Amos 2:7

2:7 They trample ²³  on the dirt-covered heads of the poor; ²⁴ 

they push the destitute away. ²⁵ 

A man and his father go to the same girl; ²⁶ 

in this way they show disrespect ²⁷  for my moral purity. ²⁸ 

[3:3]  ¹ sn The rhetorical questions in vv. 3-5 expect the answer, “No, of course not!” Those in v. 6 anticipate the answer, “Yes, of course they do/he is.” They all draw attention to the principle of cause and effect and lay the logical foundation for the argument in vv. 7-8. Also note the progression from a general question in v. 3 to the “meetings” of two animals (v. 4), to that of an animal and a human trap (v. 5), to a climax with the confrontation with the Lord (v. 6). Each of these meetings is disastrous.

[1:15]  ² tn Heb “their”; the referent (Ammon) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[1:15]  ³ tn Heb “will go into exile.”

[1:15]  ⁴ tn Or “princes” (KJV, NAB, NASB, NLT); TEV “officers”; CEV “leaders.”

[1:15]  ⁵ tn The words “will be carried off” are supplied in the translation for clarification.

[7:15]  ³ tn Heb “from [following] after.”

[7:15]  ⁴ tn Heb “and the Lord said to me.”

[6:2]  ⁴ tn The words “They say to the people” are interpretive and supplied in the translation for clarification. The translation understands v. 2 as the boastful words, which the leaders (described in v. 1) spoke to those who came to them (v. 1b). Some interpret v. 2 differently, understanding the words as directed to the leaders by the prophet. Verse 2b would then be translated: “Are you (i.e., Israel and Judah) better than these kingdoms (i.e., Calneh, etc.)? Is your border larger than their border?” (This reading requires an emendation of the Hebrew text toward the end of the verse.) In this case the verse is a reminder to Judah/Israel that they are not superior to other nations, which have already fallen victim to military conquest. Consequently Judah/Israel should not expect to escape the same fate. Following this line of interpretation, some take v. 2 as a later addition since the Assyrians under Tiglath-pileser III conquered Calneh, Hamath, and Gath after the time of Amos’ ministry. However, this conclusion is not necessary since the kingdoms mentioned here had suffered military setbacks prior to Amos’ time as well. See S. M. Paul, Amos (Hermeneia), 201-4.

[6:2]  ⁵ tn Or “Great Hamath” (cf. NIV); or “Hamath the great” (cf. KJV, NAB, NASB, NRSV); the word “rabbah” means “great” in Hebrew.

[6:2]  ⁶ tn Heb “to these,” referring to Judah and Israel (see v. 1a).

[6:2]  ⁷ tn Both rhetorical questions in this verse expect the answer “no.” If these words do come from the leaders, then this verse underscores their self-delusion of power (compare 6:13). The prophet had no such mistaken sense of national grandeur (7:2, 5).

[7:12]  ⁵ tn Traditionally, “seer.” The word is a synonym for “prophet,” though it may carry a derogatory tone on the lips of Amaziah.

[7:12]  ⁶ tn Heb “Eat bread there.”

[9:4]  ⁶ tn Heb “Even if they go into captivity before their enemies.”

[9:4]  ⁷ tn Or perhaps simply, “there,” if the מ (mem) prefixed to the adverb is dittographic (note the preceding word ends in mem).

[9:4]  ⁸ tn Heb “I will set my eye on them for disaster, not good.”

[2:4]  ⁷ 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]  ⁸ tn Heb “Because of three violations of Judah, even because of four.”

[2:4]  ⁹ 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]  ¹⁰ tn Or “instruction”; NCV “teachings.”

[2:4]  ¹¹ 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]  ¹² 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.

[2:7]  ⁸ 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]  ⁹ 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]  ¹⁰ 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]  ¹¹ 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]  ¹² tn Or “pollute”; “desecrate”; “dishonor.”

[2:7]  ¹³ 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.