13<\/strong>. because they have ript up the women with child<\/em> of<\/strong> Gilead<\/em> ] A barbarity probably not uncommon in ancient warfare, at least among more cruel or uncivilized combatants: see 2Ki 8:12<\/span> (Hazael), 2Ki 15:16<\/span> (Menahem); Hos 13:16<\/span>; cf. Hos 10:14<\/span>: comp. the similar cruelty of dashing children in pieces (2Ki 8:12<\/span>; Hos 13:16<\/span>; Nah 3:10<\/span>; Isa 13:16<\/span>; Psa 137:9<\/span>). “In the embittered border-feuds between Arabian tribes the same ghastly barbarity is often mentioned; Ibn Athir iv. 256. 1, 258. 6, 260. 60, 262. 11 sqq.; Kitb al-’Aghani<\/em>, xix. 129. 12 sq., xx. 128. 13; Tabari ii. 755. 19” (Wellh.).<\/p>\n that<\/em> they might enlarge their border<\/em> ] Such cruelty was not perpetrated in self-defence, but in cold blood, simply from a desire to augment their territory, at the expense of their Israelitish neighbours on the N. and W. (cf. at a later date Jer 49:1<\/span>).<\/p>\n 13 15<\/strong>. The Ammonites.<\/strong> The Ammonites occupied the district E. of Jordan bounded by the Arnon on the S., and by the territory of Reuben and the upper course of the Jabbok, on the W. Their capital was Rabbah, mentioned in Amo 1:14<\/em><\/span>. They were closely related to their neighbours on the S., the Moabites, being reckoned as a brother-nation (Gen 19:37<\/span> f.); but (cf. D.B<\/em> [137] s.v.<\/em>), to judge from allusions in the O. T., they seem to have been less settled and civilised: their inhumanity in warfare appears from Amo 1:13<\/em><\/span>, and the proposal in 1Sa 11:2<\/span>; and a suspicious discourtesy towards allies is evinced in 2Sa 10:1-5<\/span>. David reduced the Ammonites to the condition of tributaries (2Sa 8:12<\/span>; cf. 2Sa 12:31<\/span>); but it does not seem that they continued in this condition for long. Various examples of their hostility towards Israel are recorded in Jdg 10:7<\/span> ff. (their oppression of the trans-Jordanic Israelites, which was put an end to by Jephthah, ib.<\/em> Jdg 11:33<\/span>); 1 Samuel 11<\/span>; 2Ki 24:2<\/span>; Jer 40:14<\/span>; Neh 2:10<\/span>; Neh 4:3<\/span>; Neh 4:7<\/span>; comp. also Zep 2:8<\/span>, Jer 49:1<\/span>, Eze 21:28<\/span>; Eze 25:2<\/span>; Eze 25:6<\/span>, which shew now they evinced a malicious satisfaction in Israel’s troubles, and sought to turn them to their own profit.<\/p>\n [137] .B.<\/em> Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible<\/em>, ed. 1<\/span>, or (from A to J) ed. 2<\/span>.<\/p>\n Ammon – <\/B>These who receive their existence under circumstances, in any way like those of the first forefathers of Moab and Ammon, are known to be under physical as well as intellectual and moral disadvantages. Apart from the worst horrors, on the one side reason was stupefied, on the other it was active in sin. He who imprinted His laws on nature, has annexed the penalty to the infraction of those laws. It is known also how, even under the Gospel, the main character of a nation remains unchanged. The basis of natural character, upon which grace has to act, remains, under certain limits, the same. Still more in the unchanging east. Slave-dealers know of certain hereditary good or evil qualities in non-Christian nations in whom they traffic. What marvel then that Ammon and Moab retained the stamp of their origin, in a sensual or passionate nature? Their choice of their idols grew out of this original character and aggravated it.<\/P> They chose them gods like themselves, and worsened themselves by copying these idols of their sinful nature. The chief god of the fierce Ammon was Milehem or Molech, the principle of destruction, who was appeased with sacrifices of living children, given to the fire to devour. Moab, beside its idol Chemosh, had the degrading worship of Baal Peor Num 25:1-3<\/span>, reproductiveness the counterpart of destruction. And, so. in fierce or degrading rites, they worshiped the power which belongs to God, to create, or to destroy. Moab was the seducer of Israel at Shittim Num 25:1-3<\/span>. Ammon, it has been noticed, showed at different times a special wanton ferocity . Such was the proposal of Nahash to the men of Jabesh-Gilead, when offering to surrender, that I may thrust out all your right eyes and lay it for a reproach unto all Israel 1Sa 11:1-3<\/span>.<\/P> Such was the insult to Davids messengers of peace, and the hiring of the Syrians in an aggressive war against David 2Sa 10:1-6<\/span>. Such, again, was this war of extermination against the Gileadites. On Israels side, the relation to Moab and Ammon had been altogether friendly. God recalled to Israel the memory of their common descent, and forbade them to war against either. He speaks of them by the name of kindness, the children of Lot, the companion and friend of Abraham. I will not give thee of their land for a possession, because I have given it unto the children of Lot for a possession Deu 2:9<\/span>, Deu 2:19<\/span>. Akin by descent, their history had been alike. Each had driven out a giant tribe; Moab, the Emim; Ammon, the Zamzummim Deu 2:10-11<\/span>, Deu 2:20-21<\/span>. They had thus possessed themselves of the tract from the Arnon, not quite half way down the Dead Sea on its east side, to the Jabbok, about half-way between the Dead Sea and the Sea of Galilee . Both had been expelled by the Amorites, and had been driven, Moab, behind the Arnon, Ammon, behind the strong border Num 21:24<\/span> of the upper part of the Jabbok, what is now the Nahr Amman, the river of Ammon, eastward.<\/P> The whole of what became the inheritance of the 2 12 tribes, was in the hands of the Amorites, and threatened very nearly their remaining possessions; since, at Aroer that is before Rabbah Jos 13:25<\/span>, the Amorites were already over against the capital of Ammon; at the Arnon they were but 2 12 hours from Ar-Moab, the remaining capital of Moab. Israel then, in destroying the Amorites, had been at once avenging and rescuing Moab and Ammon; and it is so far a token of friendliness at this time, that, after the victory at Edrei, the great iron bedstead of Og was placed in Rabbah of the children of Ammon Deu 3:11<\/span>. Envy, jealousy, and fear, united them to hire Balaam to curse Israel Deu 23:4<\/span>, although the king of Moab was the chief actor in this Num. 2224, as he was in the seduction of Israel to idoltary Num 25:1-3<\/span>. Probably Moab was then, and continued to be, the more influential or the more powerful, since in their first invasion of Israel, the Ammonites came as the allies of Eglon king of Moab. He gathered unto him the children of Ammon and Amalek Jdg 3:13<\/span>. And they served Eglon. Yet Ammons subsequent oppression must have been yet more grievous, since God reminds Israel of His delivering them from the Ammonites Jdg 10:11<\/span>, not from Moab. There we find Ammon under a king, and in league with the Philistines Jdg 10:7<\/span>, crashing and crushing for 18 years all the children of Israel in Gilead. The Ammonites carried a wide invasion across the Jordan against Judah, Benjamin and Ephraim Jdg 10:9<\/span>, until they were subdued by Jephthah. Moab is not named; but the king of Ammon claims as my land Jdg 11:13<\/span>, the whole which Moab and Ammon had lost to the Amorites and they to Israel, from Arnon unto Jabbok and unto Jordan Jdg 11:13<\/span>.<\/P> The range also of Jephthahs victories included probably all that same country from the Arnon to the neighborhood of Rabbah of Ammon . The Ammonites, subdued then, were again on the offensive in the fierce siege of Jabesh-Gilead and against Saul (see above the note at Amo 1:11<\/span>). Yet it seems that they had already taken from Israel what they had lost to the Amorites, for Jabesh-Gilead was beyond the Jabbok ; and Mizpeh of Moab, where David went to seek the king of Moab 1Sa 22:3<\/span>, was probably no other than the Ramoth-Mizpeh Jos 13:26<\/span> of Gad, the Mizpeh Jdg 11:29<\/span> from where Jephthah went over to fight the Ammonites. With Hanan, king of Ammon, David sought to remain at peace, on account of some kindness, interested as it probably was, which his father Nahash had shown him, when persecuted by Saul 2Sa 10:2<\/span>.<\/P> It was only after repeated attempts to bring an overwhelming force of the Syriains against David, that Rabbah was besieged and taken, and that awful punishment inflicted. The severity of the punishment inflicted on Moab and Ammon, in that two-thirds of the fighting men of Moab were put to death 2Sa 8:2<\/span>, and fighting men of the cities of Ammon 2Sa 12:31<\/span> were destroyed by a ghastly death, so different from Davids treatment of the Philistines or the various Syrians, implies some extreme hostility on their part, from which there was no safety except in their destruction. Moab and Ammon were still united against Jehoshaphat 2 Chr. 20<\/span>, and with Nebuchadnezzar against Jehoiakim 2Ki 24:2<\/span>, whom they had before sought to stir up against the king of Babylon Jer 27:3<\/span>. Both profited for a time by the distresses of Israel, magnifying themselves against her border Zep 2:8<\/span>, and taking possession of her cities after the 2 12 tribes has been carried away by Tiglath-pileser. Both united in insulting Judah, and (as it appears from Ezekiel Eze 25:2-8<\/span>), out of jealousy against its religious distinction.<\/P> When some of the scattered Jews were reunited under Gedaliah, after the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, it was a king of Ammon, Baalis, who instigated Johanan to murder him Jer 40:11-14<\/span>; Jer 41:10<\/span>. When Jerusalem was to be rebuilt after the return from the captivity, Ammonites and Moabites Neh 2:10<\/span>, Neh 2:19<\/span>; Neh 4:1-3<\/span>, Sanballat the Horonite (that is, out of Horonaim, which Moab had taken to itself Isa 15:5<\/span>; Jer 48:3<\/span>, Jer 48:5<\/span>, Jer 48:34<\/span>.) and Tobiah the servant, the Ammonite, were chief in the opposition to it. They helped on the persecution by Antiochus (1 Macc. 5:6). Their anti-religious character, which showed itself in the hatred of Israel and the hire of Balaam, was the ground of the exclusion of both from admission into the congregation of the Lord forever Deu 23:3<\/span>. The seduction of Solomon by his Ammonite and Moabite wives illustrates the infectiousness of their idolatry. While he made private chapels for all his strange wives, to burn incense and sacrifice to their gods 1Ki 11:8<\/span>, the most stately idolatry was that of Chemosh and Molech, the abomination of Moab and Ammon . For Ashtoreth alone, besides these, did Solomon build high places in sight of the temple of God, on a lower part of the Mount of Olives 2Ki 23:13<\/span>.<\/P> They have ripped up the women with child in Gilead – <\/B>Since Elisha prophesied that Hazael would be guilty of this same atrocity, and since Gilead was the scene of his chief atrocities , probably Syria and Ammon were, as of old, united against Israel in a war of extermination. It was a conspiracy to displace Gods people from the land which He had given them, and themselves to replace them. The plan was effective; it was, Amos says, executed. They expelled and inherited Gad Jer 49:1<\/span>. Gilead was desolated for the sins for which Hosea rebuked it; blood had blood. It had been tracked with blood (see the note at Hos 6:8<\/span>); now life was sought out for destruction, even in the mothers womb. But, in the end, Israel, whose extermination Ammon devised and in part effected, survived. Ammon perished and left no memorial.<\/P> That they might enlarge their border – <\/B>It was a horror, then, exercised, not incidentally here and there, or upon a few, or in sudden stress of passion, but upon system and in cold blood. We have seen lately, in the massacres near Lebanon, where male children were murdered on system, how methodically such savageness goes to work. A massacre, here and there, would not have enlarged their border. They must haw carried on these horrors then, throughout all the lands which they wished to possess, making place for themselves by annihilating Israel, that there might be none to rise up and thrust them from their conquests, and claim their old inheritance. Such was the fruit of habitually indulged covetousness. Yet who beforehand would have thought it possible?<\/P> <\/p>\n Amo 1:13-15<\/span>; Amo 2:1-8<\/span><\/p>\n I will not turn away the punishment thereof.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n Gods dealing with nations<\/strong><\/p>\n Great sufferings following great sins<\/strong><\/p>\n This passage illustrates three truths.<\/p>\n 1. <\/strong>That the sins of all the people on the earth, whatever the peculiarities of their character or conduct, are under the cognisance of God.<\/p>\n 2. <\/strong>That of all the sins of the people, that of persecution is peculiarly abhorrent to the Divine nature.<\/p>\n 1. <\/strong>The connection between great sins and great sufferings is inevitable. The Moral Governor of the world has so arranged matters that every sin brings with its own punishment, and it is only when the sin is destroyed the suffering ceases. Thank God this sin can be destroyed through faith in the mediation of Him who came to put away sin by faith in the sacrifice of Himself.<\/p>\n 2. <\/strong>Tim connection between great sins and great sufferings is universal. All these sinful peoples had to realise it from their own bitter experience. It does not matter where, when, or how a man lives, his sins will find him out.<\/p>\n 1. <\/strong>That few, if any, suffer more than their consciences tell them they deserve.<\/p>\n 2. <\/strong>That there is to come a period when the whole will appear to be in accord with the justice and goodness of God. (Homilist.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n The atrocities of barbarism and the sins of civilisation<\/strong><\/p>\n The sins Amos condemns in the heathen are at first sight very different from those which he exposes within Israel. Not only are they sins of foreign relations, of treaty and war, while Israels are all civic and domestic; but they are what we call the atrocities of barbarism–wanton war, massacre and sacrilege; while Israels are rather the sins of civilisation–the pressure of the rich upon the poor, the bribery of justice, the seduction of the innocent, personal impurity, and other evils of luxury. So great is this difference that a critic more gifted with ingenuity than insight, might plausibly distinguish, in the section before us, two prophets with two very different views of national sin–a ruder prophet, and of course an earlier, who judged nations only by the flagrant drunkenness of their war; and a more subtle prophet, and of course a later, who exposed the masked corruptions of their religion and their peace. Such a theory would be as false as it would be plausible. For not only is the diversity of the objects of the prophets judgment explained by this, that Amos had no familiarity with the interior life of other nations, and could only arraign their conduct at those points where it broke into light in their foreign relations, while Israels civic life he knew to the very core. But Amos had besides a strong and a deliberate aim in placing the sins of civilisation as the climax of a list of the atrocities of barbarism. He would recall what men are always forgetting, that the former are really more cruel and criminal than the latter; that luxury, bribery, and intolerance, the oppression of the poor, the corruption of the innocent and the silencing of the prophet–what Christ calls offences against His little ones–are even more awful atrocities than the wanton horrors of barbarian warfare. (Geo. Adam Smith, D. D.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n That they might enlarge their borders.–<\/strong><\/p>\n Enlarging our borders<\/strong><\/p>\n The message that comes from the old Hebrew prophet is the injunction to make our lives broader, larger, richer than they already are. Men are enlarged by travel, but the best part of that enlargement comes from intercourse with other human beings. The world of physical nature can do much to enlarge a man, but the world of human minds and hearts can do more. A man is like a planet; he is in the field of two forces, the centrifugal and the centripetal. As he grows, two methods are open to him. His idea of perfect manhood may be reached by pruning away excrescences. This is the conventional way:<\/strong> it produces a Chesterfield. The other is the educating of all his faculties to their full limit:<\/strong> this produces a Gladstone or a Browning. It exhibits many faults in a man; but it enlarges his borders, and gives magnitude and grandeur. Every one of us desires, or thinks he desires, breadth of thought, range of sympathy. Yet at our best we are never full, rounded circles. We may openly resent any imputation of narrowness, but in our hearts we must plead guilty. Let us learn to measure ourselves. How intolerant is youth of the methods of age! Let youth learn to enlarge its borders, and include the thoughts and feelings and methods of age. Every man, if he devotes himself earnestly to his lifes calling, must be, in some degree, narrowed by it. At least, he must give so much time to it that but little remains, and but little strength, for other things. This in itself is not an evil; but it frequently happens that such a man becomes wilfully narrow, and underrates or despises pursuits and faculties which are quite as high as his own. Enlarge your borders, is the command of our text. Broaden your sympathies! Extend your range of observation and understanding! Pierce through to the realities of things, and do not be deceived by externals! We all sadly need this injunction. Herein lies much of the inefficiency of our modern charitable work. The visitor and visited are not in touch, and never can be until both shall have their borders enlarged. In another field our text finds ready application. It is the field of theology, Men of broad religions views are so rare in our time, that the Sodom of our modern denominational life hardly seems worthy to be saved. There is a want of intellectual capacity to see the other side of things. There is such a radical difference in the very texture of mens minds, that the same facts, especially in art, in poetry, and in religion, will lead equally good and able men to widely different conclusions. Many are the forces which serve to enlarge our borders, as often without our consciousness as with it. Whatever opens up the minds and hearts of men to each other, whether it be joy or sorrow, is a blessing to them. The lessons which God teaches us through the varied experiences of life are, many of them, hard and bitter, but the wayward human heart needs deep probing. But the grandest enlargement of life is that which comes through the thought of God. It can enlarge your life by putting into your hand the key of love and compassion, which can open the doors of human hearts as can nothing else on this broad earth. A consciousness of God is the greatest broadening and deepening power which can come into any life. (Bradley Gilman.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Verse 13<\/span>. The children of Ammon<\/B><\/I>] The country of the Ammonites lay to the east of Jordan, in the neighbourhood of Gilead. Rabbah<\/I> was its capital.<\/P> <\/P> Because they have ripped up<\/B><\/I>] This refers to some barbarous transaction well known in the time of this prophet, but of which we have no distinct mention in the sacred historians.<\/P> <\/p>\n The children of Ammon:<\/B> this is the fourth kingdom threatened; a people descended from Lot, by his younger daughter, of near kin to Israel, and much-like neighbours as the Edomites, bitter enemies to the Jews: see Eze 25:2<\/span>. <\/P> I will not turn away the punishment thereof:<\/B> see Amo 1:4<\/span>. <\/P> Ripped up the women with child; <\/B>a most inhuman practice, yet usual in those times and places, of which mention is made 2Ki 8:12<\/span>; 15:16<\/span>; Hos 13:16<\/span>; which see. When, or in what particular place, this was done, is not reported in the history of the Bible. Probably it was when Hazael harassed Israel, 2Ki 8:12<\/span>, with whom the Ammonites perhaps joined; but the thing was done, though we read not in any particular story when and where; all could not be written which was done in those ages. <\/P> Gilead:<\/B> see Hos 6:8<\/span>; Zec 10:10<\/span>; name both of city and country about it, and very rich in excellent spices and balms. <\/P> Enlarge their border, <\/B>by destroying all that dwelt in it, and that hereafter might claim or pretend a title to it. <\/P> <\/p>\n 13. Ammon<\/B>The Ammonites underNahash attacked Jabesh-gilead and refused to accept the offer of thelatter to save them, unless the Jabesh-gileadites would put out alltheir right eyes (1Sa 11:1<\/span>, c.).Saul rescued Jabesh-gilead. The Ammonites joined the Chaldeans intheir invasion of Judea for the sake of plunder. <\/P> ripped up . . . womenwith-child<\/B>as Hazael of Syria also did (2Ki8:12<\/span> compare Ho 13:16<\/span>).Ammon’s object in this cruel act was to leave Israel without “heir,”so as to seize on Israel’s inheritance (Jer49:1<\/span>).<\/P><\/p>\n Thus saith the Lord, for three transgressions of the children of Ammon<\/strong>,…. These are the descendants of Benammi, a son of Lots, by one of his daughters, Ge 19:38<\/span>; are distinguished from the Ammonites, 2Ch 20:1<\/span>; were near neighbours of the Jews, but great enemies to them, though akin:<\/p>\n and for four, I will not turn away [the punishment] thereof<\/strong>;<\/p>\n [See comments on Am 1:3]<\/span>. Among these transgressions, for which God would punish these people, are to be reckoned, not only their ill treatment of the Gileadites after mentioned, but other sins, which are all included in this number, and particularly their idolatry; for idolaters they were, though the children of Lot; and originally might have had better instruction, from which they departed. Moloch or Milcom, which signifies a king, was the abomination or idol of the Ammonites, 1Ki 11:5<\/span>. The image of this idol, according to the Jews, had seven chapels, and he was within them; and his face was the face of a calf or ox; and his hands were stretched out as a man stretches out his hands to receive anything of his friend; and they set it on fire within, for it was hollow; and everyone according to his offering went into these chapels; he that offered a fowl went into the first chapel; he that offered a sheep, into the second chapel; if a lamb, into the third; a calf, into the fourth; a bullock, into the fifth; an ox, into the sixth; but he that offered his son, they brought him into the seventh; and they put, the child before Moloch, and kindled a fire in the inside of him, until his hands were like fire; and then they took the child, and put him within its arms; and beat upon tabrets or drums, that the cry of the child might not be heard by the father f. Benjamin of Tudela g reports, that in his time, at Gibal, the border of the children of Ammon, a day’s journey from Tripoli, was found the remains of a temple of the children of Ammon; and an idol of theirs sitting upon a throne; and it was made of stone, and covered with gold; and there were two women sitting, one on its right hand, and the other on its left; and before it an altar, on which they used to sacrifice and burn incense to it, as in the times of the children of Ammon. Chemosh also was worshipped by the Ammonites, Jud 11:24<\/span>; which was also the god of the Moabites; of which [See comments on Jer 48:7]<\/span>;<\/p>\n because they have ripped up the women with child of Gilead, that they might enlarge their border<\/strong>; this Hazael king of Syria did, according to Elisha’s prophecy; and very likely the children of Ammon might join with him, inasmuch as they bordered on the countries which he smote, 2Ki 8:12<\/span>. This was an instance of shocking cruelty and inhumanity, to destroy at once the innocent and the impotent, though frequently done by enemies, 2Ki 15:16<\/span>. The reason of it was not only that they might possess their land, but keep it when they had got it; there being no heir to claim it, or molest them in the possession of it; see Jer 49:1<\/span>; though some read the words, “because they divided, or cleaved the mountain of Gilead” h; so Aben Ezra and Kimchi, though they mention the other sense: this they did to get into the land of Gilead, as Hannibal cut through the Alps; or rather to remove the borders of it, and lay it even with their own, and so enlarge theirs; which, as Kimchi says, was a very great iniquity, being one of the curses written in the law, De 27:17<\/span>; thus one sin leads on to another. Some by “mountains” understand towers or fortified cities as Kimchi and Ben Melech observe; such as were built on mountains, which sense is approved by Gussetius i.<\/p>\n f Yelammedenu apud Yalkut Simeoni in Jer. vii. 31. fol. 61. 4. g Itinerarium, p. 33. h “eo quod sciderint montes”, Pagninus; so some in Drusius. i Ebr. Comment. p. 216.<\/p>\n Ammon. – Amo 1:13<\/span>. “Thus saith Jehovah: For three transgressions of the sons of Ammon, and for four, I shall not reverse it, because they have ripped up the pregnant women of Gilead, to widen their border,<\/em> Amo 1:14<\/span>. I kindle fire in the wall of Rabbah, and it will devour its palaces, with the war-cry on the day of slaughter, in the storm on the day of the tempest.<\/em> Amo 1:15<\/span>. And their king shall go into captivity, he and his princes all at once, saith Jehovah.”<\/em> The occasion on which the Ammonites were guilty of such cruelty towards the Israelites as is here condemned, is not recorded in the historical books of the Old Testament; possibly during the wars of Hazael with Israel, when they availed themselves of the opportunity to widen their territory by conquering back the land which had been wrested from them by Sihon king of the Amorites, and was then taken possession of by the Israelites, when he was overcome by them, – a thing which they had attempted once before in the time of Jephthah the judge (Jdg 11:12<\/span>.). We may see from Jer 49:1<\/span>. that they had taken possession of the territory of the tribe of Gad, which lay nearest to them, though probably not till after the carrying away of the tribes beyond Jordan by the Assyrians (2Ki 15:29<\/span>). The ripping up of the women with child (see at 2Ki 8:12<\/span>) is singled out as the climax of the cruelties which the Ammonites inflicted upon the Israelites during the war. As a punishment for this, their capital was to be burned, and the king, with the princes, to wander into exile, and consequently their kingdom was to be destroyed. Rabbah , i.e., the great one, is the abbreviated name of the capital; Rabbah of the children of Ammon, which has been preserved in the ruins of Auran (see at Deu 3:11<\/span>). The threat is sharpened by the clause , at the war-cry on the field of battle, i.e., an actual fact, when the enemy shall take the city by storm. is a figurative expression applied to the storming of a city carried by assault, like in Num 21:14<\/span>. The reading , “their (the Ammonites’) king,” is confirmed by the lxx and the Chaldee, and required by (cf. Amo 2:3<\/span>), whereas , Melchom <\/em>, which is found in Aq., Symm., Jerome, and the Syriac, rests upon a false interpretation.<\/p>\n He now prophesies against the Ammonites, who also derived their origin from the same common stock; for they were the posterity of Lot, as it is well known; and Lot was counted as the son of Abraham, as Abraham, having taken him with him from his country brought him up, no doubt, as his own son. Then Abraham was the common father of the Jews and of the Ammonites. Now, when the children of Ammon, without any regard to relationship, joined their forces to those of enemies, and conspired together, their cruelty admitted of no excuse. And there is no doubt but that they were guilty of many other crimes; but God, by his Prophet, enumerates not all the sins for which he had purposed to punish them, and only points out distinctly, as in passing, but one sin, and generally declares, that such people were utterly past hope, for they had hardened themselves in their wickedness. <\/p>\n He therefore says of the children of Ammon, that they rent the pregnant women Some take הרות, erut, for הרים, erim, mountains; but I see not what can induce them, unless they think it strange that pregnant women were rent, that the Ammonites might extend further their borders; and for this ends it would be more suitable to regard the word as meaning mountains; as though he said, “They have cut through mountains, even the earth itself; there has been no obstacle through which the Ammonites have not made their way: an insatiable cupidity has so inflamed them, that they have rent the very mountains, and destroyed the whole order of nature.” Others take mountains metaphorically for fortified cities; for when one seeks to take possession of a kingdoms cities stand in his way like mountains. But this exposition is too strained. <\/p>\n Now, since הרות, erut, mean women with child, the word, I doubt not, is to be taken in its genuine and usual sense, as we see it to be done in Hosea. [Hos 13:16<\/span>.] But why does the Prophet say, that the Ammonites had rent pregnant women? It is to show, that their cupidity was so frantic, that they abstained not from any kind of cruelty. It is possible that one be so avaricious as to seek to devour up the whole earth, and yet be inclined to clemency. Alexander, the Macedonian, though a bloody man, did yet show some measure of kindness: but there have been others much more cruel; as the Persian, of whom Isaiah speaks, who desired not money, but shed blood, (Isa 13:17<\/span>) So the Prophet says here of the Ammonites, that they not only, by unlawful means, extended their borders, used violence and became robbers who spoiled others of their property, but also that they did not spare even women with child. Now this is the worst thing in the storming of towns. When a town has wearied out an enemy, both pregnant women, and children, and infants may, through fury, be destroyed: but this is a rare thing, and never allowed, except under peculiar circumstances. He then reproaches the Ammonites, not only for their cupidity, but also for having committed every kind of cruelty to satisfy their greediness: they have then torn asunder women with child, that they might extend their borders. <\/p>\n CRITICAL NOTES<\/strong>.] <\/strong><\/p>\n Amo. 1:13-15<\/span><\/strong>. Ammon<\/strong>] Ammonites joined the Chaldeans to invade and plunder Judea. Hazael perpetrated the cruelty predicted (2Ki. 8:12<\/span>). Ripped up<\/strong>] A cruel act, done to leave Israel without heir, so as to secure the inheritance. The punishment is by foreign invasion, swift, sudden, and resistless as a tempest; violent and terrific as a whirlwind. King<\/strong>] Their Moloch (the idol of Ammon) and his priests [Grotius<\/em> and LXX<\/em>.]. Or, as the English, their king and his princes would go together into captivity. The reigning head and those who shared his counsels were removed. Their idols and their earthly kings were unable either to save themselves, or those who submitted to them. Hand in hand the wicked shall not be unpunished (Pro. 11:21<\/span>).<\/p>\n THE JUDGMENT ON AMMON.Amo. 1:13-15<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n In the fifth place the Ammonites are accused of guilt, and their punishment is described.<\/p>\n I. Their crimes<\/strong>, consisted in most atrocious deeds towards the Gileadites. <\/p>\n 1. Barbarous cruelty<\/em>. They have ripped up the women with child. Hazael and Ammon were guilty of this barbarity. Probably Syria and Ammon were leagued together for the extermination of Israel. The offspring of the incest of Lot ever retained the stamp of their origin, and were noted for sensuality and ferocity. One would think that human beings could not become so inhuman, but history opens its pages of darkness and blood. <\/p>\n 2. Unbounded selfishness<\/em>. That they might enlarge their border. These deeds were not only performed in rage, but in deliberate design to extirpate the people and take possession of the land. Covetousness leads to great cruelty, and those that seek to extend their borders often use unscrupulous means to accomplish their design. Pharaoh killed the Israelites, and Ammon displayed unwonted ferocity towards the women of Gilead. But neither their kings nor their idols could protect them from the coming storm. <\/p>\n II. Their punishment<\/strong>. Their attempts to exterminate others recoiled upon themselves. <\/p>\n 1. Their chief city was burned<\/em>. I will kindle a fire in the wall of Rabbah. It was a strong city with a stronger citadel, but it was utterly destroyed. Its ruins still exist, some of which perhaps date back to this prophecy. I will make Rabbah a stable for camels, and the Ammonites a couching place for flocks. <\/p>\n 2. War desolated the country<\/em>. Shouting in the day of battle. Foreign invasion would sweep the land like a storm. (a<\/em>) Swift<\/em> as a tempest. (Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
I.<\/strong> <\/em><\/strong>The opportunity for repentance which all possess. The punishment of the six heathen nations, as of Judah and Israel, opens with a picture of the forbearance of God which had preceded this hour of wrath. For three transgressions of–, and for four, I will not turn away the punishment thereof. The cup of iniquity was not full till the fourth transgression. Gods dealing with individuals is such–Who hath hardened himself against Him, and hath prospered? (Pro 29:1<\/span>.)<\/p>\n
II. <\/strong>Persistence in course of sin has only one end. I will not turn away the punishment thereof. Men may put far away the evil day, but all history, all prophecy, all strivings of conscience point to the certainty of ruin.<\/p>\n
III. <\/strong>The causes of the divine indignation vary according to human light. In the fate of Tyrus, for instance (Amo 1:9<\/span>), we see that a brotherly covenant (the league of Hiram with David and Solomon) formed no barrier to the grasping spirit of the mercantile nation. Edom (Amo 1:11<\/span>) did pursue his brother with the sword, and cast off all pity. The heathen nations were to suffer because they had offended against those eternal principles of compassion and of truth which are written on the hearts of all men alike. Judah (Amo 2:4<\/span>) and Israel (Amo 1:6-8<\/span>) were judged by a higher standard, for the light had been greater. In Judah is God known; His name is great in Israel.<\/p>\n
IV. <\/strong>The vindication of Gods ways to men which these pictures of national sin furnish is complete. The preservation of truth and purity is of far higher moment than the fate of one nation, for human society can only be founded on the eternal principles of right and wrong. The detail of Israels sin makes us shrink back with horror. Their law gave no power to sell an insolvent debtor, but they were ready to sell the righteous man (one in trouble through no fault of his own) for silver; and the poor (whom there was none to succour), to provide for themselves a pair of luxurious sandals. They panted after the very dust which the poor spread on their head in token of mourning, and by the vilest sin they profaned the name of God which was called on them as His people. Even their altars witnessed their extortions (Amo 1:8<\/span>; Deu 24:12-13<\/span>) and banquetings. Application–The prophet would have the people clearly understand the equity of the judgments which he foretold. Men can be impartial in estimating the sin of others (David and Nathans parable). To study Gods dealings with others will often open our eyes to our own future. (J. Telford, B. A.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
I. <\/strong>Great sins entail great sufferings. The calamities threatened to these different tribes of different lands are of the most terrible description. But they are all such as to match their crimes.<\/p>\n
II. <\/strong>Great sins often entail great sufferings upon people who are not the actual offenders. The fire, which is here the instrument of Gods retribution to us sinners, would not only scathe the persons and consume the property of the actual offenders, but others. The fact is patent in all history and in all experience, that men here suffer for the sins of others. Two facts may reconcile our consciences to this.<\/p>\n
<\/strong><\/p>\nFuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n