Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Amos 7:13

But prophesy not again any more at Bethel: for it [is] the king’s chapel, and it [is] the king’s court.

13. for it is the king’s sanctuary, and it is a national temple ] Lit. the temple of the kingdom. Beth-el was the principal sanctuary of the northern kingdom, under the special patronage and support of the king.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

It is the kings chapel – Better, as in the English margin, sanctuary. It is the name for the sanctuary of God. Let them make Me a sanctuary, that I may dwell among them Exo 25:8. Ye shall reverence My sanctuary: I am the Lord Lev 19:30; Lev 26:2. It is most often spoken of as, The sanctuary ; elsewhere, but always with emphasis, of reverence, sanctity, devotion, protection, it is called His sanctuary; My sanctuary; Thy sanctuary; the sanctuary of the Lord of God, of his God ; whence God Himself is called a sanctuary Isa 8:14; Eze 11:16, as a place of refuge. In three places only, is it called the sanctuary of Israel; her sanctuary. God, in His threat to cast them off, says, I will bring your sanctuaries to desolation Lev 26:31; Jeremiah laments, the pagan have entered into her sanctuary Lam 1:10; he says, the place of our sanctuary is a glorious high throne from the beginning Jer 17:12, inasmuch as God was enthroned there.

In this case too it is the sanctuary for Israel, not a mere property of Israel. The sanctuary of God could not he called the sanctuary of any man. One man could not so appropriate the sanctuary. God had ordained it for Himself. His presence had sanctified it. Heresy, in unconsciousness, lets out more truth than it means. A high priest at Jerusalem could not have said this. He knew that the temple was the sanctuary of God, and could not have called it the kings sanctuary. The sanctuary at Bethel had no other sanction, than what it had from the king. Jeroboam I consecrated it and its priests 1Ki 12:31-33; and from him it and they had their authority. Amaziah wished to use a popular plea to rid himself of Amos. Bethel was the kings sanctuary and the house, not of God, but of the kingdom, that is, the house, which had the whole royal sanction, which with its Worship was the creature of royal authority, bound up in one with the kingdom, and belonging to it.

Or it may be, a royal house, (not a palace, or court, for the kings palace was at Samaria, but) a royal temple, the state-Church. So the Arians betrayed their worldliness by dating one of their Creeds from the Roman Consuls of the year, its month and day , thereby to show all thinking people, that their faith dates, not of old but now. Their faith was of yesterday. They are accustomed to say, says Jerome, the Emperor communicates with us, and, if anyone resists them, immediately they calumniate. Actest thou against the Emperor? Despisest thou the Emperors mandate? And yet we may think, that many Christian kings who have persecuted the Church of God, and essayed to establish the Arian impiety in the whole world, surpass in guilt Jeroboam king of Israel. He despised the message of a false priest, nor would he make any answer to his suggestions. But these, with their many Amaziahpriests, have slain Amos the prophet and the priest of the Lord by hunger and penury, dungeons and exile.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Verse 13. But prophesy not – at Beth-el] He must not speak against idolatry, because that was the king’s religion; and he who speaks against the king’s religion must be an enemy to the state. This was the doctrine held in England by popish James II. and his insidious Jesuit hireling priests, till God in his mercy put this pitiful tyrant down, and with him his false prophets, and the degrading superstition which they endeavoured to establish in these lands.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

Prophesy not again any more at Beth-el; as a friend I advise thou do not, and as having authority from the king, I do declare thou shalt not, prophesy in Beth-el.

For it is the kings chapel, where I am by the kings authority empowered to give license, or impose silence, and to see that none but fit persons preach before the king, who doth there pay his devotions.

And it is the kings court, where all his nobles attend him, and where no ordinary, obscure, and uncourtly doctor may appear: besides, such preaching so near to the kings court will be speedily punished; therefore, as thou lovest thyself, Amos, follow my advice, and let the kings court and this country hear no more of thee.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

13. prophesy not again (Am2:12).

at Beth-elAmaziahwants to be let alone at least in his own residence.

the king’s chapelBeth-elwas preferred by the king to Dan, the other seat of the calf-worship,as being nearer Samaria, the capital, and as hallowed by Jacob of old(Gen 28:16; Gen 28:19;Gen 35:6; Gen 35:7).He argues by implication against Amos’ presumption, as a private man,in speaking against the worship sanctioned by the king, and that inthe very place consecrated to it for the king’s own devotions.

king’s courtthat is,residence: the seat of empire, where the king holds his court, andwhich thou oughtest to have reverenced. Samaria was the usual king’sresidence: but for the convenience of attending the calf-worship, aroyal palace was at Beth-el also.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

But prophesy not again any more at Bethel,…. He might prophesy any where, if he did not there, for what the priest cared, that so his honour and interest were not hurt. The reasons he gave were,

for it [is] the king’s chapel; or “sanctuary” i; where a temple was built for the idol calf, and where the king worshipped it, and attended all other religious service:

and it [is] the king’s court; or “the house of the kingdom” k; the seat of it, where the king had a royal palace, and sometimes resided here, and kept his court, as well as at Samaria; often coming hither to worship, it being nearer to him than Dan, where the other calf was placed; intimating hereby that the king would never suffer such a troublesome man as he to be so near him; and by prophesying to interrupt him, either in his religious or civil affairs; and therefore advises him by all means to depart, if he had any regard to his life or peace.

i “sanctuarium”, Pagninus, Montanus, Vatablus, Mercerus, Junius Tremellius. Piscator, Drusius, Cocceius. k “et domus regni est”, V. L. Pagninus, Montanus, Mercerus, Cocceius “domus regia”, Junius & Tremellius, Piscator.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Now as to the fifth argument, it is especially needful to dwell on it. In Bethel, he says, add no more to prophesy, for it is the king’s sanctuary, and it is the house of the kingdom Here only Amaziah shows what he wished, even to retain possession of his priesthood; which he could not have done without banishing the Prophet: for he could not contend with him in arguments. He consulted then his own advantage by getting rid of the Prophet. Whatever various characters therefore he assumed in the last verse, and notwithstanding the many coverings by which he concealed himself, the ape now, as they say, appears as the ape. Amaziah then shows what he had in views even that he might remain quiet in the possession of his own tyrannical powers and that Amos should no more molest him, and pull up by the roots the prevailing superstitions: for Amaziah was a priest, and Amos could not perform his office without crying out daily against the temple of Bethel; for it was a brothel, inasmuch as God was there robbed of his own honor; and we also know that superstitions are everywhere compared to fornication. Amaziah then now betrays his wicked intention, In Bethel prophesy not; he would retain his quiet state, and wished not the word of God to be heard there. His desire was, as we have already said, to extinguish everywhere the light of heavenly truth; but as he could not do this, he wished to continue at least in his own station without any disputes, as we see the case to be in our time with the Pope and his milted bishops. They became quite mad when they heard that many cities and some princes made commotions in Germany, and departed from their submission to them; but as they could not subdue them by force, they said, “Let us leave to themselves these barbarians; why, more evil than good has hitherto proceeded from them; it is a barren and dry country: provided we have Spain, France, and Italy, secured to us, we have enough; for we have probably lost more than what we have gained by Germany. Let them then have their liberty, or rather licentiousness; they will again some time return, and come under our authority: let us not in the meantime be over-anxious about them. But let not this contagion penetrate into France, for one of our arms has been already cut off; nor let Spain nor Italy be touched by it; for this would be to aim at our life.” Such also was this Amaziah, as it evidently appears, — Prophesy not then in Bethel.

And he spoke cunningly when he said, Add no more to prophecy; for it was the same as though he pardoned him. “See, though thou hast hitherto been offending the king and the common feeling of the people, I will not yet treat you with strict justice, I will forgive thee all, let what thou hast done amiss remain buried, provided thou ‘addest no more’ in future.” We hence see that there is emphasis in the expression, when he says, Proceed not, or, add not; as though he had said, that he would not inquire into the past, nor would accuse Amos of having been seditious: provided he abstained for the future, Amaziah was satisfied, as we may gather from his words, Add then no more to prophesy.

And why? Because it is the king’s sanctuary This was one thing. Amaziah wished here to prove by the king’s authority that the received worship at Bethel was legitimate. How so? “The king has established it; it is not then lawful for any one to say a word to the contrary; the king could do this by his own right; for his majesty is sacred.” We see the object in view. And how many are there at this day under the Papacy, who accumulate on kings all the authority and power they can, in order that no dispute may be made about religion; but power is to be vested in one king to determine according to his own will whatever he pleases, and this is to remain fixed without any dispute. They who at first extolled Henry, King of England, were certainly inconsiderate men; they gave him the supreme power in all things: and this always vexed me grievously; for they were guilty of blasphemy ( erant blasphemi ) when they called him the chief Head of the Church under Christ. This was certainly too much: but it ought however to remain buried, as they sinned through inconsiderate zeal. But when that impostor, who afterwards became the chancellor of that Proserpina, (50) who, at this day, surpasses all devils in that kingdom — when he was at Ratisbon, he contended not by using any reasons, (I speak of the last chancellor, who was the Bishop of Winchester, (51)) and as I have just said, he cared not much about the testimonies of Scripture, but said that it was in the power of the king to abrogate statutes and to institute new rites, — that as to fasting, the king could forbid or command the people to eat flesh on this or that days that it was lawful for the king to prohibit priests from marrying, that it was lawful for the king to interdict to the people the use of the cup in the Supper, that it was lawful for the king to appoint this or that thing in his own kingdom. How so? because supreme power is vested in the king. The same was the gloss of this Amaziah of whom the Prophet now speaks: It is the sanctuary of the king.

But he adds afterwards a second thing, It is the house of the kingdom (52) These words of Amaziah ought to be well considered. He says first, It is the king’s sanctuary, and then, It is the house of the kingdom. Hence he ascribes to the king a twofold office, — that it was in his power to change religion in any way he pleased, — and then, that Amos disturbed the peace of the community, and thus did wrong to the king by derogating from his authority. With regard to the first clause, it is indeed certain that kings, when they rightly discharge their duty, become patrons of religion and supporters ( nutricios — nursers) of the Church, as Isaiah calls them, (Isa 49:23) What then is chiefly required of kings, is this — to use the swords with which they are invested, to render free ( asserendum ) the worship of God. But still they are inconsiderate men, who give them too much power in spiritual things; ( qui faciunt illos nimis spirituales —who make them too spiritual) and this evil is everywhere dominant in Germany; and in these regions it prevails too much. And we now find what fruit is produced by this root, which is this, — that princes, and those who are in power, think themselves so spiritual, that there is no longer any church discipline; and this sacrilege greatly prevails among us; for they limit not their office by fixed and legitimate boundaries, but think that they cannot rule, except they abolish every authority in the Church and become chief judges as well in doctrine as in all spiritual government. The devil then suggested at that time this sentiment to Amaziah, — that the king appointed the temple: hence, since it was the king’s sanctuary, it was not lawful for a private man, it was not even lawful for any one, to deny that religion to be of authority, which had been once approved of, and pleased the king. And princes listen to a sweet song, when impostors lead them astray; and they desire nothing more than that all things without any difference or distinction should be referred to themselves. They then gladly interfere, and at first show some zeal, but mere ambition impels them, as they so carefully appropriate every thing to themselves. Moderation ought then to be observed; for this evil has ever been dominant in princes — to wish to change religion according to their will and fancy, and at the same time for their own advantage; for they regard what is of advantage to themselves, as they are not for the most part guided by the Spirit of God, but impelled by their own ambition. Since then we see that Satan by these hidden arts formerly contended against God’s prophets, we ought to bewail and lament our own courses. But whosoever desires to conduct himself as it behaves him, let him watch against this evil.

It now follows, And it is the house of the kingdom Amaziah contends here no more for the royal prerogative, with regard to spiritual power. “Be it, that the king ought not to have appointed new worship, thou hast yet offended against the peace of the community.” The greater part of the princes (53) at this day seek nothing so much as that they might enjoy their own quietness. They ever declare that they would he courageous enough even to death in the defense of their first confession; but yet what are the teachers they seek for themselves? Even those who avoid the cross and who, to gratify the Papists, or to render them at least somewhat milder, change according to their wishes: for we see at this day that the minds of princes are inflamed by these fanners, not to spare the sacramentarians, nor allow to be called into question what is asserted, not less grossly than foolishly and falsely, respecting the presence of Christ’s body, or his body being included under the bread. “When we show that we contend against them, and that we are separated from them, nay, that we will be their mortal enemies, we in this agree with the Papists; there will then be some access to them, at least their great fury will cease, the Papists will become gentle: they will no more be so incensed against us; we shall hereafter obtain some middle course.” So things are at this day carried on in the world; and nothing is more useful than to compare the state of our time with this example of the Prophet, so that we may go on in our works employing the same weapons with which he contended and not be moved by these diabolical arts; for we have no enemies more hostile and open than these domestic traitors.

It is then the house of the kingdom He now speaks of the secular arm, as they say, and shows that though religion were to perish a hundred times, yet care was to be taken, lest Amos should pull up by the roots the kingdom of Jeroboam, and the customs of the people. It now follows —

(50) The fabled queen of hell. — Ed.

(51) This was probably Gardiner. — Ed.

(52) So it is literally בית ממלכה. Newcome renders it, “The temple of the kingdom.” Henderson, “The royal residence.” Grotius, Sedes imperii , “The seat of the empire.” — Ed.

(53) He refers evidently to the Protestant princes. — Ed.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

Amo 7:13. For it is the king’s chapel, &c. Because this is the sanctuary of the king, and this is his palace] Samaria was the place where the kings of Israel commonly dwelt: but they had a palace at Beth-el, as this was the place where they exercised their false religion.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Amo 7:13 But prophesy not again any more at Bethel: for it [is] the king’s chapel, and it [is] the king’s court.

Ver. 13. But prophesy not any more at Bethel ] Take heed of that; lest, by diffusing too much light among us, thou mar our markets, and hinder the sale of our false wares. This was the naked truth of the business; though something else was pretended, and the king’s interest pleaded.

For it is the king’s chapel, and the king’s court] Touch these mountains and they wiil smoke. Truth is a good mistress, but such of her servants as follow her too close at heels may hap to have their teeth struck out. Ahab hateth Micaiah, and Herod John Baptist, and the Pope Savonarola, for their plain dealing, laying them fast enough for it. Great ones love it, , they must hear pleasing things; or if told of their faults, it must be done with silken words, as she said, . They are usually beset with their Aiones and Negones, as one hath it, that will say as they say: et mirifica est sympathia inter magnates et parasites, and there is a wonderful sympathy between kings and court parasites, as was between Ahab and the false prophets. Few Vespasians are to be found, of whom as it was said, that he was the only one who was made the better man by being made emperor, so Quintilian commendeth him for this, that he was patientissimus veri, most patient of truth, though never so sharp. Jeroboam was none such; or at least Amaziah, the priest of Bethel, would make the prophet so believe, when he tells him it is the king’s court, an ill air for truth to breathe in. Nihil veritate gravius, nihil assentatione suavius.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)