Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Amos 6:2
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?
2. Two diametrically opposed explanations of this verse have been given. (1) It has been regarded as continuing the argument of Amo 6:1, the cities named in it being referred to as examples of prosperity: Can you find, from Calneh and Hamath in the North of Syria to the Philistine border on the South, a single kingdom ‘better’ (i.e. more flourishing) than your own? Thus has Jehovah favoured you; and ye requite Him with indifference and neglect ( Amo 6:3-6). Therefore ( Amo 6:7) the sentence is, Ye shall be amongst the first to go into exile. The argument is similar to that of Amo 2:9-16, Amo 3:2: Israel has been visited by Jehovah with unwonted favour; that however will not exempt it from punishment, if it acts in such a way as to merit punishment. So Ew., Hitz., Keil, W. R. Smith, Proph. p. 138, &c. (2) It has been taken as introductory to Amo 6:3-7, the places named in it being pointed to as examples of fallen greatness: if cities, till recently so flourishing, so far from being now ‘better,’ or more prosperous (Jer 44:17), than Israel and Judah, have been overtaken by disaster, let Israel take warning betimes, and not rely too implicitly that its present good fortune will continue to attend it: the ground why such warning is needed follows then in Amo 6:3-6. So Baur, Pusey, Schrader, von Orelli, Wellhausen. In support of this view it may be urged that it is not very obvious why the places named especially the distant Calneh should be specially selected as examples of flourishing cities: the age was one in which the cities of Western Asia were liable at any moment to be roughly treated by the Assyrians (see below); and of Gath, in particular, it is observed that it is not mentioned among the Philistine cities enumerated either by Amos himself in Amo 1:7-8, or in Jeremiah 47, or Zep 2:4-7, or Zec 9:5-7; and hence it has been inferred (G. A. Smith, Geogr. p. 194) that it must have been destroyed by the Assyrians about 750 b.c. But, on the whole, the former, which is also the general view, seems preferable. Hamath (see below) was taken by Sargon in 720; and the conquest of Calneh at least, if it be the same as Calno is alluded to as recent in 701 (Isa 10:9); and there is no sufficient reason for supposing (Schrad., Wellh.; cf. G. A. Smith, p. 173 n.) that the verse is an insertion in the original text of Amos made towards the end of the 8th cent. b.c.
Calneh ] The identification is uncertain. A Calneh is mentioned as an ancient Babylonian city in Gen 10:10; and a Calno is alluded to in Isa 10:9 as a place conquered recently by the Assyrians. According to some, Calneh may be the place usually called Zirlaba or Zarilab, the characters of which, however, admit of being read ideographically as Kulunu, and which is mentioned by Sargon in b.c. 710 as one of his conquests (Schrader, K.A.T [166][167] , pp. 96, 444). According to others (Winckler, Gesch. Bab. und Ass. p. 225; Tiele, Bab.-Ass. Gesch. p. 230 [168] ) it is Kullani, a place mentioned in the Eponym Canon (G. Smith, Eponym Canon, p. 50) as (apparently) the principal conquest of Tiglath-pileser III. in b.c. 738: as this king was engaged that year in the north of Syria, there is a probability that it was in that region; and it is accordingly identified by Mr Tomkins ( Proceedings of the Soc. of Bibl. Arch. 9 Jan. 1883, p. 61) with the present Kullanhou, about six miles from Tel Arfad (Arpad), a little N. of Aleppo (notice Calno and Arpad together in Isa 10:9). Guthe, Das Zukunftsbild des Jesaia (1885), p. 43, and Dillmann (on Isa 10:9) would identify it with Kunulua, or Kinalia, the capital of the land of Patin, between the Afrin and the Orontes, on the S.E. of Antioch, some 70 or 80 miles N. of Hamath [169] , and consequently in the same neighbourhood as Kullanhou.
[166] .A.T. Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.
[167] Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.
[168] Who distinguishes it from the Calneh (= Kulunu) of Gen 10:10.
[169] See Schrader, Keilinschr. und Geschichtsforschung (1878), p. 217 f.; Delitzsch, Paradies, p. 274. Asshurnazirpal (b.c. 885 860), in his “Standard Inscription,” iii. 72 ( R.P. 2 ii. 170; or Schrader, K.B. i. 107) speaks of receiving immense tribute from it.
Hamath ] an important town, situated some 150 miles N. of Dan, beyond the broad valley of Coele-Syria, on the Orontes (el‘A), the seat of an independent kingdom, whose king Toi (or Tou) is mentioned in the time of David (2Sa 8:9 f.), and the modern am, a place of 60,000 inhabitants. The territory of Hamath extended at least as far S. as Riblah (2Ki 23:33; 2Ki 25:21), in Coele-Syria, about 50 miles S. of Hamath itself. The “entrance to Hamath,” i.e. probably (G. A. Smith, p. 177; Buhl, Geogr. Pal., pp. 66, 110) the mouth of the pass between the Lebanons, a little N. of Rb and Dan (Num 13:21; cf. Jdg 18:28), which was considered the starting-point of the road to Hamath, is often named as the northern limit of Israelitish territory ( Amo 6:14, 2Ki 14:25; Jos 13:5; Jdg 3:3 ; 1Ki 8:65; Eze 47:20; Eze 48:1; Num 34:8; cf. Num 13:21). Hamath is mentioned frequently in the Assyrian Inscriptions. In 854 b.c. its king Irchulina joined Ben-hadad of Syria and Ahab of Israel in a great coalition against the Assyrians, and was defeated with his allies by Shalmaneser II. (Schrader, K.A.T [170][171] p. 201 f.). Disastrous losses were inflicted upon it by Tiglath-pileser III. in 740, and by Sargon in 720 ( ib. pp. 221, 323 f.; cf. Isa 10:9; and see also Delitzsch, Paradies, pp. 275 278).
[170] .A.T. Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.
[171] Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.
go down ] from the high central ground of Palestine to the plain by the sea, on which the Philistine cities were situated. So regularly, as Jdg 14:1; Jdg 14:19 , 1Sa 13:20; and conversely ‘went up,’ 1Sa 6:9. The use in geographical descriptions of these two terms should always be noted.
Gath ] the fifth (see on Amo 1:7-8) chief town of the Philistines (Jos 13:3; 1Sa 6:17), one of the homes of the giant race of the Rephaim, Jos 11:22, 2Sa 21:18-22 (cf. 1Sa 17:4), mentioned also in 1Sa 21:10; 1Sa 27:11, 2Sa 15:18 (600 warriors from Gath forming part of David’s body-guard), Mic 1:10, and elsewhere. If “Gimtu Asdudim” (? Gath of the Ashdodites) be this place, it is spoken of also as taken by Sargon at the same time that he took Ashdod (above, on Amo 1:8), in b.c. 711 ( K.A.T [172][173] p. 399; cf. pp. 166, 444). Its site is uncertain. It is frequently mentioned next to Ekron, and from 1Sa 17:52 appears to have lain between Ekron and the vale of Elah (probably the Wdy es-Sunt); hence many have sought it at Tell e-fiyeh, a commanding height, 11 miles S. by E. of Ekron, rising out of the plain, where the Wdy es-Sunt opens into it, and looking across Philistia to the sea. Cf. G. A. Smith, Geogr., pp. 194 197.
[172] .A.T. Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.
[173] Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O. T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the German, which is given on the margin of the English translation.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Pass over to Calneh – He bids them behold, east, north, and west, survey three neighboring kingdoms, and see whether God had not, even in the gifts of this world, dealt better with Israel. Why then so requite Him? Calneh (which Isaiah calls Calno Isa 10:9, Ezekiel, Canneh Eze 27:23), was one of the four cities, built by Nimrod in the land of Shinar Gen 10:10, the beginning of his kingdom. From that time, until this of Amos, no mention of it occurs. It, probably, was more than once conquered by the Assyrians , lying, as it did, on the Tigris, some 40 miles perhaps from Babylon. Hence, it was said, under its new name Ctesiphon , to have been built, that is, rebuilt, by the Macedonians , and again by the Parthians, , whose kings made it their winter residence on account of its good air.
It was anew destroyed by Severus , rebuilt by Sapor II in the 4th Century . Julians generals held it impregnable , being built on a peninsula, surrounded on three sides by the Tigris . It became the scene of repeated persecutions of Christianity ; Nestorianism was favored . A center of Persian luxury, it tell at once and forever before Omar , and the Persian empire perished with it. It was replaced by the neighboring Bagdad. The history illustrates the tenacity of life in those well-chosen sites, and the character of the place, of whose conquest Sennacherib boasted, with which Amos compared the land of Israel.
Go thence to Hamath the great – Originally, a Canaanite kingdom Gen 10:18. The entrance to it was assigned as the northern border of Israel Num 34:7-8; Jos 13:5. In Davids time its king was at war with the king of Zobah 2Sa 8:9-10, and made presents to David on his subdual. In Solomons time it had fallen under the power of the king of Zobah, from where it was called Hamath-zobah. Solomon won it from him, incorporated it with Israel, and built towns in its territory 2Ch 8:3-4. The Hamathites were, under their own king, united with Benhadad, the Hittites, and the Phoenicians in their war with Shalmanubar, and defeated by him . Ezekiel speaks of the border of Damascus and the coast of Hamath Eze 47:16; Eze 48:1, as of places of like importance, and Zechariah Zec 9:1-2, of their joint subdual by Alexander. To judge from the present site, it in some respects resembled Samaria. It lay in a narrow oval valley of the Orontes; its citadel on a round hill in the center.
The city rises up the steep sides of the hills which enclose it . Vast water-wheels , some of a diameter of 67 , 80, 90 feet, raise the water of the Orontes to supply, by aid of aqueducts, the upper city, or to water the neighboring gardens. : The western part of its territory is the granary of northern Syria. Even when Antiochus Epiphanes called it after himself Epiphania, its inhabitants called it after its old name . Mention occurs of it in the crusades . In the 13th century it had its own well-known prince ; and has still a population of some 30,000 .
Gath – (Winepress) must, from its name have been situated in a rich country. It lay on the confines of Judea and Philistia, for Rehoboam fortified it as a border-fortress 2Ch 11:8. It had been contrariwise fortified by the Philistines against Judah, since, when David took it out of the hand of the Philistines, it had the title (2Sa 8:1, compare 1Ch 18:1) methegammah, bridle of the mother city, or metropolis. It had at that time daughter towns 1Ch 18:1 dependent upon it. It must also have been near Micahs birthplace, Moresheth Gath, that is, Moresheth of Gath, which in Jeromes time was a small village near Eleutheropolis, (Bethgabrin). Of Gath itself Jerome says , It is one of the five cities of Philistia, near the confines of Judea, and now too a very large village on the way from Eleuthcropolis to Gaza. Eusebius says , about the 5th milestone from Eleutheropolis to Diospolis (Lydda).
Since the Philistines carried the ark of God from Ashdod to Gath, and thence to Ekron 1Sa 5:8, 1Sa 5:10, it seems likely that Gath lay nearer to Ashdod than Ekron, although necessarily more inland than either, since it was a border-city to Judah. The Tel-es-Safiyeh corresponds with these conditions, lying at the entrance of the Shephelah, about 5 miles from Beit-Jibrin on the road to Lydda, (Ludd). It rises about 100 feet above the eastern ridge which it terminates, and perhaps 200 over the plain which terminates its western base. The ruins and subterranean reservoirs shew that it is a site of high antiquity, great strength, and importance. Gath had at this time probably been taken by Uzziah who broke down its wall 2Ch 26:6; and since it is not mentioned with the other four Philistine cities, whose sentence is pronounced by Amos Amo 1:7-8 himself, Zephaniah Zep 2:4, and Zechariah Zec 9:5, it is probable that it never recovered.
Be they better than these kingdoms? – The prophet seems purposely to say less than he might, in order that his hearers might have to supply the more. Calneh, Hamath, Gath, had not been more guilty against God than Ephraim, yet probably they had all been conquered: Gath by Judah; Hamath by Israel (see the note below at Amo 6:14) himself; Calneh by Assyria. Both Shalmanubar and Shamasiva conquered in Babylonia ; and Shamasiva declares that he took above 200 towns in Babylonia. Amos, then, upbraids Israel for their ingratitude, both as to the original gift of their good land, and its continuance. The pagan had suffered; they, the guiltier, had been spared; yet still they acted no otherwise than these pagan.
Rib.: What spacious, what wide border have we, boundless as the life of God and eternity! Lap.: Our hopes and the bounds of our bliss are measured, not like those of the worldly and ungodly, by the limits of a petty time or by this dot of earth, but by the boundless space of eternity and of heaven; so that we may say confidently to the ungodly, Is not our border wider than your border?
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Amo 6:2
Pass ye unto Calneh, and see; and from thence go ye to Hamath.
Comparing notes
This was a Divine challenge to Israel. Israel in those days thought that religion was often a great hardship; that it abounded with demands for self-denial; and that its numerous duties could be observed only at considerable cost. You generally find that the least self-denying are the most keenly conscious of their self-denial. In those days the people of Israel were willing to be religious, after a fashion, but they must be also politic, so that their religion should not militate against their national interests, or weaken them in their struggle with the heathen powers by which they were surrounded. Israel practically said: Cast among these godless nations, there is nothing for us to do but largely to adapt ourselves to circumstances; to obey Gods commandments as far as it is practicable, but not henceforth, as in the past, to sacrifice national interests by a too scrupulous attention to religious precepts. We have in the text Gods reply to Israels fallacy. Pass ye into Calneh. Calneh was a great city on the Tigris. Hamath was also a great city, and a capital, on the banks of the Orontes, on the north. Gath was one of the great cities of Palestine. God now practically says to Israel: Look at those powers, those centres of worldly empires and governments. You say that they have nothing to hamper them; that they fight their battles irrespective of right and wrong; that no principle is at stake; that their aim is self-aggrandisement; and therefore that the path of victory is to them a far easier one than it can be for nations who, like yourselves, have to fear God and to keep His commandments. See, what is the practical issue. Compare your national prosperity with the prosperity of these surrounding nations. Are their borders greater than your borders? That was the question which practically silenced their complaint. What are the relative compensations of godliness and worldliness? In what consists mans highest interests or his greatest wealth? Does true blessedness consist in what the world calls success? Take–
1. The life of the thorough worldling–the man who has no principle to hamper him, and to whom the highest law of life is self-aggrandizement. Such as the spendthrift. The man with an insatiable love of money. The gambler.
2. Those who are determined to make their position in the world. Such an one enters business, or a profession, and considers that it is necessary to adopt certain customs which are not above suspicion, but which become largely respectable by their universal acceptance. Even in such cases there are hundreds of thousands who fail entirely in their attempts. Some undoubtedly do prosper and accumulate wealth; but in how many instances have they lost their good name in the effort!
3. The honest man of the world. Even then business may be allowed to monopolise all his time and all his energy, to the exclusion of higher aims, without Which even an honest life is poor. There is a distinctly spiritual work for man to do. If that Christian work is neglected, and the claims of Jesus Christ along spiritual lines ignored, that man may gain the whole world, but he will lose his soul. (David Davies.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 2. Pass ye unto Calneh] This is, says Calmet, the Ctesiphon on the river Tigris.
Hamath] The same as Emesa. Hamath was a city on the Orontes, in Syria.
Gath] A well-known town, and head of one of the five seignories of the Philistines.
Be they better] You have no more reason to expect exemption from the consequences of your sins than they had. They have been punished; so shall you. Why then will ye trust in their gods, that could not save their own cities?
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Pass ye unto Calneh; run over the history of that great and ancient city; as, Go to Shiloh, Jer 7:12. It was built by Nimrod, Gen 10:10, and after a long growth to power, wealth, and security, through near one thousand three hundred years, was at last ruined, as is probable, in the civil wars which ended in the utter ruin of Sardanapalus by Arbaces, and Pul-belochus, grandfather to Shalmaneser who captivated Israel; the story of which, fresh in the days of Amos, is thus referred unto for warning to Israel. And see; consider well what befell that city built on Euphrates, rich, delightful, and, as you, full of sin.
Hamath; head of the Syrian kingdom, lately overthrown by Tiglath-pileser; a very fresh instance of Gods just indignation against secure sinners, and a very fit warning to Israel.
Gath; the chief city of the Philistines, a few years before wasted by the arms and cruelty of Hazael, 2Ki 12:17; by these examples learn to amend your ways, or expect to perish in them.
Be they better than these kingdoms? or their border greater than your border? The reading this passage interrogatively renders it darker than if it were read assertively, Yet they were better, i.e. greater, than these kingdoms of Israel and Judah; and their borders, i.e. the bounds of those kingdoms, greater than these of Israel and Judah. But if you retain our version, it will amount to this; Are they, i.e. Israel and Judah, better, more just, thankful, and merciful than these kingdoms, that they should hope to escape? or is the border of these two kingdoms greater, that they should hope to stand by power?
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
2. Calnehon the east bank ofthe Tigris. Once powerful, but recently subjugated by Assyria (Isa10:9; about 794 B.C.).
Hamethsubjugated byJeroboam II (2Ki 14:25). Alsoby Assyria subsequently (2Ki18:34). Compare Am 6:14.
Gathsubjugated byUzziah (2Ch 26:6).
be they betterno.Their so recent subjugation renders it needless for Me to tell youthey are not. And yet they once were; still they couldnot defend themselves against the enemy. How vain, then, yoursecure confidence in the strength of Mounts Zion and Samaria! Hetakes cities respectively east, north, south, and west of Israel(compare Na 3:8).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Pass ye unto Calneh, and see,…. What is become of that city, which was in the land of Shinar, an ancient city, as early as the days of Nimrod, and built by him, and was with others the beginning of his kingdom, Ge 10:10; it belonged to Babylon, and is by Jarchi here interpreted by it, being put for Babel, as he supposes. According to Jerom g, it is the same city, sometimes called Seleucia, in his days Ctesiphon; very probably it had been lately taken by the king of Assyria, and therefore made mention of; see Isa 10:9; where it is called Calno;
and from thence go ye to Hamath the great; the same with Antiochia, as Jarchi and Jerom; called the great, to distinguish it from Hamath the less, sometimes called Epiphania; or from Hamathzobah, near Tadmor, or Palmyra, in the wilderness, 2Ch 8:3; though it might be so called with respect to its own grandeur and magnificence; as Sidon is called “Sidon the great”, though there was no other, Jos 11:8; for it was a royal city; we read of Toi, king of Hamath, in the times of David, 2Sa 8:9. It is placed by Josephus h on the north of the land of Canaan; and so it appears to be, and to be between Damascus and the Mediterranean sea, from Eze 47:15. Abu’lfeda i, a learned prince, who reigned in Hamath, and should know its situation, places it on the Orontes, between Hems and Apamea, that river surrounding it on the east and north. The learned Vitringa k thinks that neither Antiochia nor Epiphania are meant, but the city Emissa; which Ammianus Marcellinus l makes mention of along with Damascus, as a famous city in Syria, equal to Tyre, Sidon, and Berytus: and of the same opinion was Theodoret m among the ancients, and so Calmet n of late. And so Hamath and Damascus are mentioned together as recovered by Jeroboam, 2Ki 14:28; very probably the kingdom of Hamath became subject to the kings of Damascus; see Jer 49:23; but, be it what place it will, it is very likely it had been lately spoiled by the king of Assyria; see Isa 37:13.
then go down to Gath of the Philistines; one of their five principalities, and a chief one, so called to distinguish it from other Gaths, as Gathhepher, Gathrimmon. It stood about five or six miles south of Jamnia, about fourteen south of Joppa, and thirty two west of Jerusalem. A village of this name as shown, as Jerom o says, five miles from Eleutheropolis, as you go to Diospolis or Lydda, and is taken to be the same place. It is famous for being the birthplace of Goliath; and is called in 2Sa 8:1; compared with 1Ch 18:1, Methegammah, or the bridle of Ammah, or Metheg and her mother; that is, Gath and her daughters. Reland p thinks Gath is the city Cadytis of Herodotus q, who says it is a city of the Syrians, called Palestines or Philistines, and speaks of the mountains of it; and this city was not far from the mountainous country of Judea: now this city had been taken by Hazael, king of Syria, and its wall was broke down by Uzziah, king of Judah, 2Ki 12:17;
[be they] better than these kingdoms? or their border greater than your border? that is, do Calneh, Hamath, and Gath, excel in dignity and grandeur, in wealth and strength, the kingdoms of Israel and Judah? or are they of a larger circumference, and exceed them in length and breadth? no, they did not; and therefore the more ungrateful were Israel and Judah to sin against the Lord as they had done, who had given them such rich and large kingdoms, and therefore might expect to be taken and spoiled as well as they: though some think there is a change of number and persons in the text, and that the sense is, are you better than these kingdoms, or your border greater than theirs? and, if not, you may expect to fare as they; see a like expression in Na 3:8.
g Quaest. in Gen. fol. 66. M. h Antiqu. l. 9. c. 10. sect. 1. i See the Universal History, vol. 2. p. 316. k Comment. in Jessiam, c. 10. 9. l Lib. 23. m Comment. in Jer. ii. 15. and xlix. 23. n Dictionary, in the word “Hamath”. o De locis Hebr. fol. 92. A. p Palestina Illustrata, tom. 2. l. 3. p. 669. q Euterpe, sive l. 2. c. 159. & Thalia, sive l. 3. c. 5.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Amo 6:2 states what the princes of Israel are to see in the cities mentioned, – namely, that they are not better off ( denoting outward success or earthly prosperity) than these two kingdoms, i.e., the kingdoms of Judah and Israel, and that their territories are not larger than theirs. It is very evident that this does not apply to cities that have been destroyed. The double question … requires a negative answer. Amo 6:3. assigns the reason for the woe pronounced upon the sinful security of the princes of Israel, by depicting the godless conduct of these princes; and this is appended in the manner peculiar to Amos, viz., in participles. These princes fancy that the evil day, i.e., the day of misfortune or of judgment and punishment, is far away ( , piel of = , to be far off, signifies in this instance not to put far away, but to regard as far off); and they go so far as to prepare a seat or throne close by for wickedness and violence, which must be followed by judgment. , to move the sitting ( shebheth from yashabh ) of violence near, or better still, taking shebheth in the sense of enthroning, as Ewald does, to move the throne of violence nearer, i.e., to cause violence to erect its throne nearer and nearer among them.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
By this representation Amos shows that there was no excuse for the Jews or the Israelites for sleeping in their sins, inasmuch as they could see, as it were in a mirror, the judgments which God brought on heathen nations. It is a singular favor, when God teaches us at the expense of others: for he could justly punish us as soon as we transgress; but this he does not, on the contrary he spares us; and at the same time he sets others before us as examples. This is, as we have said a singular favor: and this is the mode of teaching which our Prophet now adopts. He says, that Calneh and Hamath, and Gath, were remarkable evidences of God’s wrath, by which the Israelites might learn, that they had no reason to rest on their wealth, to rely on their fortresses, and to think themselves free from all dangers; for as God had destroyed these cities, which seemed impregnable, so he could also cut off Jerusalem and Samaria, whenever he pleased. This is the real meaning of the Prophet.
Some read the sentence negatively “Are not these places better than your kingdoms?” But this is not consistent with the Prophet’s words. Others attend not to the object of the Prophet; for they think that the blessings of God are here compared, as though he said, “God deals more liberally with you than with the Chaldeans, the Assyrians, and the neighboring nations.” For Calneh was situated in the plain of Babylon, as it is evident from Gen 10:10; and Hamath was also a celebrated city, mentioned in that chapter, and in many other places; and Gath was a renowned city of the Philistines. In this opinion therefore interpreters mostly agree; that is, that there is set forth here God’s bounty to the Jews and Israelites, seeing that he had favored them with a rich and fertile country, and preferred them to other nations. But this view seems not to me to be the correct one; for when a comparison is made between Calneh and Jerusalem, Babylon was no doubt the more fruitful and the more pleasant country, as we learn from all histories. The Prophet then does not speak here of the ancient condition of these places, but shows, as I have already said, that it availed these cities nothing, that they were wealthy, that they were fortified by all kinds of defenses; for God, at last, executed vengeance on them. Hence the Prophet declares that the same was now nigh the Jews and the Israelites.
“
What will hinder the hand of God,” he says, “from delivering you to destruction? For if men could have arrested God’s wrath by any fortresses, certainly Calneh and Hamath, and Gath, would have resisted by their forces; but the Lord has yet executed his vengeance on these cities, though fortified; your confidence then is nothing but infatuation, which deceives you.” Jeremiah uses a similar language, when he says, ‘Go to Shiloh,’ (Jer 7:12) He certainly does not remind the Jews, that the Lord had more splendidly adorned them than Shiloh; but he had quite a different thing in view. Shiloh had indeed been eminent, for it had long afforded a dwelling to the ark of the covenant; the sanctuary of God had been there. But at that time the place was deserted; and Jeremiah sets before the eyes of the people its sad desolation, that they might know that they ought to dread the same event, except they repented; for if they hardened their necks, nothing could prevent God from dealing with them as he did before with the inhabitants of Shiloh.
We now then perceive the meaning of the Prophet, when he says, Go and pass into Calneh, and see In bidding them to see, he no doubt refers to the dreadful change which had taken place there. For Calneh had been a strongly fortified city, and possessed supreme power; and the neighboring country was also no less pleasant than fruitful: but it was now a solitary place; for Babylon, as it is well known, had swallowed up Calneh. Since then the place afforded such a spectacle, the Prophet rightly says, Pass over into Calneh, and see; that is consider, as in a mirror, what men can gain by their pride and haughtiness, when they harden themselves against God: for this was the cause of destruction to that celebrated city.
From thence, he says, go to Hamath, רבה, rebe, the great; which was a well-known city of Assyria; and see there, “How has it happened that a city so famous was entirely overthrown, except that the Lord could not endure so great a perverseness? As they had abused his patience, he at length executed his vengeance. The same thing also happened to your neighbors.” For the Jews and the Israelites were not far distant from Gath. Now then since there were so many evidences of God’s wrath before their eyes, justly does the Prophet here inveigh against their want of thought, inasmuch as they feared not God’s judgment, which was nigh at hand.
Are they then better? that is, is the condition of these cities better than that of the two kingdoms, Judah and Israel? and then, Is their border larger than your border? They have indeed been reduced to such straits, that they even pay tribute for their houses, whereas formerly they occupied a wide extent of country, and ruled, as it were, with extended wings, far and wide: but God has taken away those territories: for all these cities are become tributaries. See, he says, Is their border larger than your border? It now follows —
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
CRITICAL NOTES.]
Amo. 6:2. Pass] Survey three neighbouring kingdoms. If these kingdoms are not better and greater than yours, why do ye worship their gods and forsake the true God? [Elzas].
Amo. 6:3. Woe] Charge first from a general and then a special view. Put off] Lit. with aversion, the day of retribution, though declared near (Eze. 12:21-28). Bring near] Suffer oppression to be enthroned among you.
INGRATITUDE FOR THE PRESENCE AND INDIFFERENCE TO THE WARNINGS OF GOD.Amo. 6:2-3
To prove the ingratitude of the nation, Amos shows that Israel was not inferior to any heathen state in greatness and prosperitythat this honour involved serious responsibility, and that to despise the warnings of God who had thus blessed them would bring great punishment.
I. Ingratitude for Gods presence. Israel were ungrateful to God for the original gift and the continued preservation of the land. The heathens had suffered, they had been spared, yet they forgot God.
1. In national prosperity. Pass ye, &c., look everywhere and see if any kingdom has a border greater than your border. We boast of our rank and pre-eminence; talk of our colonies and dependencies, and exclaim, Great and mighty England! But empire is not greatness. The history of Gath and Hamath, of Greece and Rome, remind us that we stand by Gods providence alonethat we fall when we rely on our own might and prosperity. If we trust to our insular position, our popular platform, and our natural resources, we forget the real and extract the wrong causes.
2. In national morality. We pride ourselves in national worth, and point to other nations, are they better than these kingdoms? Education and government, society and public sentiment, are intoned and controlled by the spirit of Christianity. But morally we are far from being what we ought. Boasting is excluded by non-recognition of God and prevalent evils. We are often extravagant and haughty. Vice and intemperance abound. Bacchus and Mammon have temples in every town, and votaries in every street. There are spots in our sun and dirt upon our pedestal. Let us not be unthankful to God, not forgetful of other nations. Art thou better than populous No, that was situate among the rivers, that had the waters round about it, whose rampart was the sea, &c. (Nah. 3:8-9)?
II. Indifference to Gods warning. You put away the evil day. As Israel despised the judgments, so men now put away the warnings of Gods providence. The evil day frightens the ungodly, and in different ways they push it from them and assign it to a distance.
1. In carelessness. Sentence against sin is not executed speedily, and men grow indifferent. Space for escape is given, the long-suffering of God is seen, and they take liberties. Sin blinds the mind and hardens the heart. Impressions wear away, proofs of judgments grow weaker, and sinners view things with inverted glance. Duty is delayed and death is put out of their minds.
All men think all men mortal, but themselves.
2. In unbelief. Amid culture and science scepticism abounds, infidelity spreads, and warnings are unheeded. Indulgence in sin opens up avenues to unbelief. Led to believe against all moral evidence, men speak as they feel, and make evil days small and distant. Therefore do men take judgment to be far off from them, says one, because they take sin to be near them. Truth looked at from a distance will gradually fade away, and lose its authority over life. It will be put farther and farther from us until it is denied altogether, and we sleep in false security.
3. In contempt. Israel neither feared nor believed approaching danger. In scorn they might tell the prophet it was delayed, and would therefore not come near them. Instead of preparing for it, they grew harder and more eager in sin. They cause violence to come near. The farther they put away judgment the nearer they brought oppression. Under colour of justice and law the wicked fix up the throne of iniquity, disregard the voice of God, and hasten on that last destruction which they dream will never come. Death is but a step off, and the Judge standeth before the door. Retribution follows judgment, and if retribution were only temporal and mutable that would be alarming. But it is eternal and irreversible. Are we prepared for the change? Who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth?
ILLUSTRATIONS TO CHAPTER 3
Amo. 6:2-3. He that is graceless in a day of grace will be speechless in a day of judgment [Mead].
Heaven gives the needful, but neglected call.
What day, what hour, but knocks at human hearts,
To wake the soul to sense of future scenes. [Young.]
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
(2) The meaning is obscure. Kalneh, the Kalno of Isa. 10:9, the Assyrian Kulunu (comp. Gen. 10:10), is here probably mentioned first because it is most easterly. It is identified by Kiepert with Holwn, but its position is uncertain, though generally regarded as lying in the neighbourhood of the Greek Ctesiphon, on the Tigris. Hamath is the ancient Hittite city in the valley of the Orontes, and it had felt the strong hand of Jeroboam II. (2Ki. 14:28). We have no reason for believing that at this period the Assyrian power had destroyed the importance of these places, though the prophet may have regarded that issue as imminent. Hamath the Great (or Rabba; comp. Jos. 11:8), according to the inscriptions, sustained defeats from Salmanassar II. about 850 B.C. It was finally overthrown by Sargon in 720 B.C., who in his own boastful language swept over its land like a flood. Gath, the home of Goliath, had probably lost its original importance. Uzziah destroyed it. Were Calno, Hamath, Gath, more important than Zion or Samaria? Then, says the prophet, do not expect in your opulence and self-satisfaction immunity from a worse doom.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
Amo 6:2. Be they better than these kingdoms? Are these kingdoms better than yours? Houbigant.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Amo 6:2 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?
Ver. 2. Pass ye unto Calneh and see ] Take a voyage to and a view of those most famous bordering cities, Calneh, or Seleucia, in Mesopotamia on the east (whereof see Gen 10:10 , the beginning of Nimrod’s kingdom), Hamath the great, or Antiochia (now Aleppo, a famous market town), on the north. Then go down southward to Gath of the Philistines, which was of all the five satrapies potissima et potentissima, most strong and powerful, and is therefore called Methegammah, 2Sa 8:1 cf. 1Ch 18:1 , because, being a town of great strength, it was, as it were, the bridle, whereby the whole country about was kept in awe: it was afterwards known by the name of Diocaesarea. Away to these neighbouring cities, and see in them, as in so many telescopes, how much more God hath done for you than for them in every respect; the greater is your guilt, and the deeper will be your judgment in the end, for abuse of these rich mercies, of a fertile soil, a large empire, to security, oppression, and other detestable vices and villanies.
Be they better than these kingdoms
Or their border grearer than your border
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Pass = Pass over: i. e, the Euphrates. Compare Jer 2:10. unto Calneh. The sequence of these cities is logical rather than geographical.
Calneh. On the Tigris. Built by Nimrod (Gen 10:10). Called Calno (Isa 10:9); Canneh (Eze 27:23).
see = consider [its fate]. So in the next two clauses.
Hamath. On the north. Now called Hama, on the Orontes, north of Damascus. Reference to Pent (Gen 10:18. Num 34:7, Num 34:8) Compare Amo 6:14 App-92
Gath. Now Tell es Safi, in the south. See 1Sa 5:8.
be they better: i.e. these nobles and chief men.
these kingdoms: which have been overthrown.
or their border = or [is] their border or boundary greater? &c. your: i.e. the borders of Israel and Judah. Supply the logical Ellipsis: “[yet I overthrew them; how much more shall I judge you! ]”.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Pass: Jer 2:10, Jer 2:11, Nah 3:8
Calneh: Gen 10:10, Isa 10:9, Calno
Hamath: 2Ki 17:24, 2Ki 17:30, 2Ki 18:34, 2Ki 19:13
Gath: 1Sa 17:4, 1Sa 17:23, 2Ch 26:6
better: Isa 10:9-11, Isa 36:18, Isa 36:19, Isa 37:12, Isa 37:13, Eze 31:2, Eze 31:3, Nah 3:8
Reciprocal: Num 13:21 – Hamath Jos 13:5 – unto the 1Sa 5:8 – Gath 1Sa 6:17 – Gath 2Sa 8:9 – Hamath 1Ki 19:4 – better Ecc 5:8 – regardeth Isa 10:13 – I have removed Eze 27:23 – Canneh Mal 1:4 – The border
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Amo 6:2. Calneh, Hamath and Gath were communities of the heathen which were once powerful. But what was their condition now as Amos was writing? It was one of humiliation brought about by the same people who were predicted to come against Israel. Since the people of the Lord were no stronger than the mentioned ones who were subdued, they should not loll around with a feeling of security as if nothing evil could come upon them.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Amo 6:2. Pass ye unto Calneh To check their pride and carnal security, the prophet bids them consider the state of those cities in the neighbourhood of Canaan that had been as illustrious in their time as ever Zion and Samaria were, and yet had been destroyed. Calneh, called Calno, (Isa 10:9,) was a city in the land of Shinar, or the territory of Babylon, (Gen 10:10,) supposed by St. Jerome to be the same as Ctesiphon; and, it seems, had been taken and destroyed, probably by some king of Assyria, not long before the uttering of this prophecy. Thence go ye to Hamath the great A city of Syria, on the Orontes. It was conquered by Jeroboam, 2Ki 14:25; and by the Assyrians, 2Ki 19:34. It is called here Hamath the great, to distinguish it from another Hamath, mentioned Amo 6:14, which was the northern boundary of Palestine. Then go down to Gath This city was taken by Uzziah, in whose reign Amos prophesied, 2Ch 26:6. Be they better than these kingdoms? The kingdoms of Judah and Israel? The answer seems to be, Yes; they were better, and their border greater than your border. So that they had more reason to be confident of their safety than you have; yet you see what is become of them, and dare you be secure? Thus Nahum asks Nineveh, (Nah 3:8,) Art thou better than populous No, that was situate among the rivers, whose rampart was the sea? &c.; yet she was carried away, she went into captivity. By these examples, then, learn to amend your ways, or expect to perish in them. Or, the sense may be, Were these cities more favoured of God than Israel and Judah? or had they a larger and more fertile country to live in, and therefore were more deserving of the wrath of God for their ingratitude? or had they greater riches to tempt the avarice of invaders? In this sense Archbishop Newcome seems to have understood the passage, and therefore supposes the prophet to ask, Why then do ye worship their gods? and why are ye not grateful to Jehovah? The prophet, however, seems to have intended rather to check and reprove their presumption than their ingratitude, as appears by the next verse.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
6:2 Pass ye unto Calneh, and see; and from thence go ye to Hamath the great: then go down to Gath of the Philistines: [be {c} they] better than these kingdoms? or their border greater than your border?
(c) If God has destroyed these excellent cities in three different kingdoms, that is Babylon, Syria, and that of the Philistines, and has narrowed their wide borders more than yours yet are, do you think that you are better, or that you will escape?
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Amos challenged these proud leaders to visit other cities that had once considered themselves great. Calneh (or Calno, Isa 10:9) and Hamath were city-states in northern Aramea. Shalmaneser III of Assyria had overrun them in 854-846 B.C., but Israel controlled them in Amos’ day. Gath had been a notable city in Philistia, but it had fallen before King Hazael of Aram in 815 B.C. and again to King Uzziah of Judah in 760 B.C. Presently Judah controlled it. Samaria was no better than those city-states, and their territories were larger than Samaria’s. Yet they had fallen to foreign invaders. What had happened to them could happen to Samaria even though the people of Israel believed that Yahweh would protect it.