4<\/strong>. despised<\/em> ] R.V. rejected<\/strong>, as 1Sa 15:23<\/span>; 1Sa 15:26<\/span>, Isa 7:15-16<\/span> shew, the better rendering of the Hebrew word used ( m’as<\/em>): comp. Isa 5:24<\/span>; Jer 6:19<\/span>.<\/p>\n the law of the Lord<\/em> ] the direction<\/strong> of<\/em> Jehovah.<\/strong> See further, on this expression, the Additional Note, p. 230. The reference, as is there shewn, is probably not to ceremonial ordinances, but to spiritual and moral teaching, uttered, as the case might be, by priests or prophets in Jehovah’s name.<\/p>\n not kept his commandments<\/em> ] better, with R.V., his<\/em> statutes<\/strong> (as o<\/em> properly something engraven<\/em>, viz. on a public tablet, hence fig. decree<\/em>, statute<\/em> is rendered in Deut., and elsewhere): cf. (also with keep<\/em>) Exo 15:26<\/span>; Deu 4:40<\/span>; Deu 7:11<\/span> &c.<\/p>\n their lies<\/em> ] i.e. their unreal gods, whose existence, power, ability to help, &c., are all falsely imagined.<\/p>\n caused them to err<\/em> ] or led them astray:<\/em> the false gods, set up by the fathers as objects to be revered, beguiled and misled their children. To walk after<\/em> (sometimes rendered follow<\/em>) is an expression used often of devotion to idolatry: see Deu 4:3<\/span>; Deu 8:19<\/span>; Deu 11:28<\/span>; Deu 13:2<\/span>; Jer 2:5<\/span>; Jer 2:8<\/span>; Jer 2:23<\/span> &c. (also of devotion to Jehovah, Deu 13:4<\/span> al.<\/em>).<\/p>\n Additional Note<\/strong> on Chap. Amo 2:4<\/span> ( ‘trh<\/em>,’ law<\/em>)<\/p>\n The general sense of ‘law’ (Heb. trh<\/em>) in the O.T. is authoritative direction<\/em> (from hrh<\/em>, to point out<\/em>, Gen 46:28<\/span>, or direct<\/em>, Jdg 13:8<\/span>) [219] , but the kind of ‘direction’ denoted by it varies with the context. Its principal and probably primary application is to oral direction<\/em> given by the priests in Jehovah’s name, on matters of ceremonial observance, e.g. on distinctions between clean and unclean, on the different species of sacrifice, and the cases in which they were respectively to be offered, on the criteria of leprosy &c.: Lev 6:8<\/span>; Lev 6:14<\/span>; Lev 11:46<\/span>; Lev 14:57<\/span>; Lev 15:32<\/span>; Num 5:29<\/span> &c.; Jer 18:18<\/span> (“ direction<\/em> will never perish from the priest,” i.e. the priest and his functions will never come to an end, said by those who disbelieved Jeremiah’s predictions of national ruin), Eze 7:26<\/span>; Hag 2:11<\/span> (‘Ask now direction<\/em> of the priests,’ after which an example follows); Mal 2:7<\/span> (‘They seek direction<\/em> at his mouth’): the cognate verb [A.V., R.V. teach<\/em> ] is used similarly, Deu 24:8<\/span> (with reference to leprosy), Deu 33:10<\/span> (“They direct<\/em> Jacob with thy judgements (Exo 21:1<\/span>), and Israel with thy direction<\/em> ”); Mic 3:11<\/span> (“Her priests give direction<\/em> for a price”); Eze 44:23<\/span>; and elsewhere, passages which shew that it is the word employed technically to denote this aspect of the priests’ duties. Both the verb and the subst. would be most exactly represented in English by direct<\/em> and direction<\/em>, respectively: teach, teaching<\/em>, and law<\/em>, when they stand for either, must be understood to possess the same force. The term is however also employed, more generally, both of decisions on points of secular, or civil law (Exo 18:16<\/span>; Exo 18:20<\/span>), and of the authoritative teaching given in Jehovah’s name, either by priests or prophets, on questions of moral or religious duty. Thus Hosea (Hos 4:6-8<\/span>) speaks of Jehovah’s Trh<\/em> as a moral<\/em> agency, and attributes the crimes prevalent in Israel (Hos 4:1<\/span> b<\/em>, Hos 4:2<\/span>) to the priests’ forgetfulness of its true character (Amo 4:6<\/span> b<\/em>), and to their worldly unconcern for the “knowledge” of God, which its possession implies (Amo 4:6<\/span> a<\/em>; comp. Jer 2:8<\/span>): see also Amo 8:1<\/span>; Amo 8:12<\/span>. In Isa 1:10<\/span> the ‘Trh<\/em> of our God’ is the exposition which follows ( Amo 2:11-16<\/em><\/span>) respecting the true character of religious service; Isa 5:24<\/span> the Trh<\/em>, which Judah has “rejected” (same word as in Amo 2:4<\/span>) consists of the precepts of civil righteousness and morality, the disregard of which the prophet has been just denouncing, Amo 2:8-16<\/em><\/span>; Isa 8:16<\/span>; Isa 8:20<\/span> it denotes the half-political, half-religious advice just given by the prophet ( Amo 2:12-15<\/em><\/span>); Isa 30:9<\/span> it is used similarly of the partly political, partly religious, warnings of the prophets (see Amo 2:10-15<\/em><\/span>); Isa 30:20<\/span> the prophets are called by the corresponding subst., the ‘directers’ (teachers) of the people of Jerusalem. In Deuteronomy the exposition of moral and religious duty, which occupies the greater part of the book, is repeatedly described as “this Trh” (Deu 1:5<\/span>, Deu 4:8<\/span>; Deu 4:44<\/span>, Deu 17:18<\/span> &c.). Jeremiah uses the word in a similar sense: e.g. Jer 6:19<\/span> (as in Isa 1:10<\/span>, of the spirit in which religious duties should be performed, see Isa 1:20<\/em><\/span>); Amo 9:13<\/span> f. (of exhortations against idolatry probably those contained in Deuteronomy), Jer 16:11<\/span> (similarly), Jer 26:4<\/span> (of the preaching of the prophets, see Amo 2:5<\/em><\/span>). It is also used of the authoritative religious and moral teaching, which the prophets picture as being given in the future to the world, either by God Himself, or by His representative: Isa 2:3<\/span> (= Mic 4:2<\/span>); Jer 31:33<\/span>; Isa 42:4<\/span> (of the preaching of Jehovah’s ideal “Servant”), Isa 51:4<\/span>. Here the context (comp. the note on lies<\/em>, in the same verse), and the importance which Amos uniformly attaches to moral<\/em> duties, make it probable that, like Isaiah and Jeremiah, he means by the term spiritual and moral teaching, uttered, whether by priests or prophets, in Jehovah’s name.<\/p>\n [219] The root yrh<\/em> signifies, however, properly to throw<\/em> or cast<\/em> (Exo 15:4<\/span>); and hence it is quite possible that the primitive meaning of hrh<\/em>, in this connexion, was to cast<\/em> the sacred lot at a sanctuary, for the purpose of ascertaining the will of the deity on behalf of those who came to consult it. Comp. the use made by the priest of the “Ephod,” and “Urim and Thummim” ( 1Sa 14:3 ; 1Sa 14:18<\/span> (LXX.), 41 [note esp. LXX.], 42, 1Sa 23:9-12<\/span>, 1Sa 28:6<\/span>, 1Sa 30:7-8<\/span>). Trh<\/em>, if this view be correct, will have denoted originally the ‘direction’ obtained by means of the sacred lot. It remained a principal duty of the Israelitish priest to teach Jehovah’s Trh<\/em>, though this particular method of ascertaining it fell no doubt early into abeyance, and the term acquired a more general sense. Comp. Nowack, Hebr. Arch<\/em>. ii. 97f. In Arabic, it may be observed, khin<\/em> (which corresponds to the Heb. khn<\/em>, priest) means a diviner<\/em>, who speaks as the organ of a god or jinn<\/em>; and a comparison of the Hebrew and Arabic terms makes it probable that the common and primitive meaning of both was one who gave answers, in the name of his god, at a sanctuary: in Arabia, the khin<\/em> was gradually dissociated from the sanctuary and became a mere diviner; in Canaan, his connexion with the sanctuary was preserved, and he acquired important sacrificial functions in addition.<\/p>\n 4 5<\/strong>. Judah.<\/strong> The prophet now comes nearer home; and passes sentence on the Southern kingdom.<\/p>\n For three transgressions of Judah etc. – <\/B>Rup.: Here too there is no difference of Jew and Gentile. The word of God, a just judge, spareth no mans person. whom sin joins in one, the sentence of the Judge disjoins not in punishment Rom 2:12<\/span>. As many as have sinned without law, shall also perish without law, and as many as have signed in the law, shall be judged by the law. Jerome: Those other nations, Damascus and the rest, he upbraids not for having cast away the law of God, and despised His commandments, for they had not the written law, but that of nature only. So then of them he says, that they corrupted all their compassions – and the like. But Judah, who, at that time, had the worship of God and the temple and its rites, and had received the law and commandments and judgments and precepts and testimonies, is rebuked and convicted by the Lord, for that it had cast aside His law and not kept His commandments; wherefore it should be punished as it deserved.<\/P> And since they rejected and despised these, then, in course, their lies deceived them, that is, their idols; lies on their part who made them and worshiped them for the true God, and lies and lying to them, as deceiving their hopes. For an idol is nothing in the world 1Co 8:4<\/span>, as neither are all the vanities in the world whereof people make idols, but they deceive by a vain show, as though they were something. Jerome: They would not have been deceived by their idols, unless they had first rejected the law of the Lord and not done His commandments. They had sinned with a high hand: despising and so rejecting the law of God; and so He despised and rejected them, leaving them to be deceived by the lies which they themselves had chosen. So it ever is with man. Man must either love Gods law and hate and abhor lies Psa 119:163<\/span>, or he will despise Gods law and cleave to lies.<\/P> He first in act despises Gods law, (and whoso does not keep it, despises it,) and then he must needs be deceived by some idol of his own, which becomes his God. He first chooses willfully his own lie, that is, whatever he chooses out of God, and then his own lie deceives him. So, morally, liars at last believe themselves. So, whatever false maxim anyone has adopted against his conscience, whether in belief or practice, to justify what he wills against the will of God, or to explain away what God reveals and he mislikes, stifling and lying to his conscience, in the end deceives his conscience, and at the last, a man believes that to be true, which, before he had lied to his conscience, he knew to be false. The prophet uses a bold word in speaking of mans dealings with his God, despises. Man carries on the serpents first fraud, Hath God indeed said? Man would not willingly own, that he is directly at variance with the Mind of God. Man, in his powerlessness, at war with Omnipotence, and, in his limited knowledge, with Omniscience! It were too silly, as well as too terrible.<\/P> So he smoothes it over to himself, lying to himself. Gods word must not be taken so precisely; God cannot have meant; the Author of nature would not have created us so, if He had meant; and all the other excuses, by which he would evade owning to himself that he is directly rejecting the Mind of God and trampling it under foot. Scripture draws off the veil. Judah had the law of God, and did not keep it; then, he despised it. On the one side was Gods will, His Eternal Wisdom, His counsel for man for good; on the other, what debasements! On the one side were Gods awful threats, on the other, His exceeding promises. Yet man chose whatever he willed, lying to himself, and acting as though God had never threatened or promised or spoken. This ignoring of Gods known Will and law and revelation is to despise them, as effectually as to curse God to His face Job 2:5<\/span>. This rejection of God was hereeditary.<\/P> Their lies were those after which their fathers walked, in Egypt and from Egypt onward, in the wilderness (see the note at Amo 5:25-26<\/span>) , making the image of the calf of Egypt and worshiping Baalpeor and Ashtoreth and Baalim. Evil acquires a sort of authority by time. People become inured to evils, to which they have been used. False maxims, undisputed, are thought indisputable. They are in possession; and possession is held a good title. The popular error of one generation becomes the axiom of the next. The descent of the image of the great goddess Diana from Jupiter or of the Coran, becomes a thing which cannot be spoken against Act 19:35-36<\/span>. The lies after which the fathers walked deceive the children. The children canonize the errors of their fathers. Human opinon is as dogmatic as revelation. The second generation of error demands as implicit submission as Gods truth.<\/P> The transmission of error against himself, God says, aggravates its evil, does not excuse it Neh 5:5<\/span>. Judah is the Church. In her the prophet reproves whosoever, worshiping his own vices and sins, cometh to have that as a god by which he is overcome; as Peter saith, Whereby a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage 2Pe 2:19<\/span>. The covetous worshipeth mammon; the glutton, his belly Phi 3:19<\/span>; the impure, Baalpeor; she who, living in pleasure, is dead while she liveth 1Ti 5:6<\/span>, the pleasure in which she liveth. Of such idols the world is full. Every fair form, every idle imagination, everything which gratifies self-love, passion, pride, vanity, intellect, sense, each the most refined or the most debased, is such a lie, so soon as man loves and regards it more than his God.<\/P> <\/p>\n Amo 2:4-5<\/span><\/p>\n Thus saith the Lord: For three transgressions of Judah, and for four, I will not turn away the punishment thereof.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n National sins and national punishment<\/strong><\/p>\n The British nation, like the kingdom of Judah, has received innumerable favours at the hand of God. In the purity of our creed, the outward prosperity of our churches, the influence of our literature, the excellence of our laws, the freedom of our institutions, the success of our commerce, and the glory of our arms,–we are not surpassed by any nation in the world. Yet our very prosperity has been in many respects a snare to us. The advancement of true religion in the inner life and outward practice of the people has been very far from keeping pace with the outward movement of society in matters that evidently interest, us more, though they really concern us less. Under three heads the transgressions of Judah are comprehended.<\/p>\n National evils<\/strong><\/p>\n They have despised the law of the Lord, and have not kept His commandments. Despising Gods law<\/strong><\/p>\n Here <\/em>the prophet charges the people of Judah with apostasy; for they had cast aside the worship of God, and the pure doctrine of religion. This was a crime the most grievous. But it may be asked, why the prophet charges the Jews with a crime so atrocious, since religion still existed among them? To this there is a ready answer: <\/strong>the worship of God was become corrupt among them, though they had not so openly departed from it as the Israelites. There remained, indeed, circumcision among the Israelites; but their sacrifices were pollutions, their temples were as immoral houses; they thought that they worshipped God; but as a temple had been built at Bethel contrary to Gods command, the whole worship was a profanation. The Jews were somewhat purer; but they had also degenerated from the genuine worship of God. Hence the prophet does not unjustly say here that they had despised the law of God. But notice the explanation which immediately follows,–that they kept not His statutes. The way by which Amos proves that the Jews were covenant-breakers, and that having repudiated Gods law, they had fallen into wicked superstitions, is by saying that they kept not the precepts of God. In these words no mere negligence is blamed; they are condemned for designedly, knowingly, and wilfully departing from the commandments of God, and devising for themselves various modes of worship. It is not then to keep the precepts of God, when men continue not under His law, but audaciously contrive for themselves new forms of worship: <\/strong>they regard not what God commands, but lay hold on anything pleasing that comes to their minds. This crime the prophet now condemns in the Jews. Men should confine themselves within Gods commands. (John Calvin.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Their lies caused them to err<\/strong>.–<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n The pretence of good intention<\/strong><\/p>\n The Jews had ever a defence ready at hand, that they did with good intent what the prophet condemned in them. They sedulously worshipped God, though they mixed their own leaven, by which their sacrifice was corrupted. It was not their purpose to spend their substance in vain, to undergo great expenses in sacrifices, and to undertake much labour, had they not thought it was service acceptable to God! As then the pretence of good intention ever deceives the unbelieving, the prophet condemns this pretence, and shows it to be wholly fallacious, and of no avail. It is nothing, he says. that they pretend before God some good intention; their own lies deceive them. And Amos no doubt, mentions here these lies, in opposition to the commands of God. As soon, then, as men swerve from Gods Word, they involve themselves in many delusions, and cannot but go astray; and this is deserving of special notice. We indeed see how much wisdom the world claims for itself: <\/strong>for as soon as we invent anything, we are greatly delighted with it; and the ape, according to the old proverb, is ever pleased with its own offspring. But this vice especially prevails, when by our devices we corrupt and adulterate the worship of God. Hence the prophet here declares that what ever is added to Gods Word, and whatever men invent in their own brains, is a lie. All this, he says, is nothing but imposture. We now see of what avail is good intention: <\/strong>by this, indeed, men harden themselves; but they cannot make the Lord to retract what He has once declared by the mouth of His prophet. Let us then take heed to continue within the boundaries of Gods Word, and never to leap over on this or on that side; for when we turn aside ever so little from the pure Word of God, we become immediately involved in many deceptions. (John Calvin.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Lies in the State<\/strong><\/p>\n National sins have ever the same general features; there are always the same general features. Our lies cause us to err; there are certain false principles which we, as a people, assume to be true. These we cherish, and on these we act. They are to be found in the State, in the Church, and in society. It is, of course, far easier to point out existing evils than to effect their remedy–far easier to prove the need of reformation than to bring it about. The first step to reformation is conviction of our errors. It is the most daring impiety, and most inexcusable folly, to imagine that, in political science, it is more judicious to act upon unrighteous precedents, after the example to others, than, by adhering to the Divine precepts of a heavenly jurisprudence, to trust in God and stand alone. The great question for our nation is, How shall we best promote the glory of God by extending the blessings of civil and religious liberty, and thereby the knowledge of the truth, to every Corner of the world? Missionary societies are invaluable, but they are not doing properly national work. Many a time the progress of truth and justice has been arrested by our political expediency. It is the polestar by which our statesmen too long have steered; and to God alone we owe it that our vessel is not a wreck. Their lies cause them to err. (James Mackay, B. D.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Lies in society<\/strong><\/p>\n In <\/em>all civilised communities there are many usages of society with which it is convenient and proper to comply, so far as they involve no compromise of principle. The mainspring of all mens conduct is selfishness. Selfishness may develop itself in many forms which appear to be interesting and amiable: <\/strong>it is the foundation of some of our most beautiful natural instincts; and these instincts are not unfrequently mistaken for virtues. In society certain false principles are recognised–lies which cause men to err.<\/p>\n Verse 4<\/span>. For three transgressions of Judah<\/B><\/I>] We may take the three<\/I> and 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>Despising the law of the lord. The law of the Lord includes the whole revelation of His will. No truth is more plainly enforced in the Bible than this,–that national chastisenients are the consequence of national sins. But is this generally believed? Has it any practical influence upon the character and conduct of a tithe of those who profess to believe it? It is too true that, as a nation, we despise the law of the Lord.<\/p>\n
II. <\/strong>Not keeping his commandments. This follows naturally the contempt of His law. Contempt of the law and disobedience are not the same thing. One may sincerely acknowledge the justice, and respect the value, of a law which his bad passions often tempt him to break. On the other hand, one may have an inward contempt for a law which he may still consider it expedient or proper to obey. But he who despises the law of God, or wilfully continues to disobey it, has no part or lot in the righteousness which is of God by faith. In every case in which the law is despised, the obedience of the heart is impossible, and any other obedience than that which proceeds from love and reverence is utterly worthless in the sight of God.<\/p>\n
III. <\/strong>Wandering after lies, in imitation of their fathers. Instead of lies, some read idols; for the same Hebrew term stands for both. An idol is a lie. Wealth, pomp, luxury, literature, fame, power,–these are our idols, and they were the idols of our forefathers, taken collectively. In each succeeding age, the great majority have been heart idolaters–giving to various objects the place in their affections which of right belonged only to God. If there be admonition without effect, we may look for punishment without mercy. (James Mackay, B. D.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
I.<\/strong> <\/em><\/strong>Intemperance. This weighs like a millstone round the neck of the Church in this country. We are not, as a rule, sensible of the awful magnitude of this evil–of the gigantic proportions to which it has attained.<\/p>\n
II. <\/strong>Infidelity. That this evil exists and is active amongst us, requires no proof. It exists in our midst in every shape, form, and degree, from the avowed Atheism, which openly blasphemes the name of God, to the refined Rationalism, which, while professing belief in Divine revelation, explains away, and empties of all their real significance, its most vital and momentous truths.<\/p>\n
III. <\/strong>Superstition. While many nations of Europe–such as Austria and Italy–are casting off the yoke of superstition, this country, which was wont to be regarded as the very centre of Gospel light, and the home of spiritual freedom, would seem as if about to relinquish the position she took up after a struggle which cost tears, agonies, and the blood of some of her best and noblest sons.<\/p>\n
IV. <\/strong>Indifferentism. Beyond question the most prevalent evil of our time. For one who is tainted with Infidelity, or enslaved by Superstition, there are tens of thousands utterly indifferent to their highest interests. They may give a formal and periodical attention to religious duties, but practically they are living without God in the world. To moot these special evils, special agencies must be used. (R. W. Forrest, M. A.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
<\/strong><\/p>\n
I. <\/strong>Wealth is the chief good. This is a main article in the creed of society as a whole, in every country in the world. The advantages of wealth are, in a temporal point of view, very great. Wealth is power. It secures for its possessor every gratification that can minister to the appetites, the senses, and the taste.<\/p>\n
II. <\/strong>It is possible to serve God and mammon. Religion, instead of being the chief business of life, is used simply as a means of quieting the conscience and establishing a good name. The heart is set on the world exclusively; yet hopes are entertained of inheriting the kingdom of heaven.<\/p>\n
III. <\/strong>A mans possessions are his own; he may do with them what he likes. They are not <\/em>his own. They are only lent him as a steward for God. But the idea of acting as a steward for God would be denounced by people in general as fanatical.<\/p>\n
IV. <\/strong>Human nature is not so depraved as theologians would have us believe. Instincts are taken for virtues, and are referred to as proofs that the language of Scripture has been overstrained.<\/p>\n
V. <\/strong>Zeal in the cause of Christ is fanaticism. Few would use these words, but multitudes entertain the idea which they express. Lukewarmness is commended as prudence, and while zeal is not tolerated, indifference is overlooked or excused.<\/p>\n
VI. <\/strong>If a man lives a good life, it matters not what his opinions may be. But no human being lives a good life, unless the love of God is his governing motive.<\/p>\n
VII. <\/strong>Forgiveness of injuries is weak and unmanly. This is directly opposed to the teaching and example of Christ.<\/p>\n
VII. <\/strong>The forbearance of God can never be exhausted. Men talk of Gods mercy who forget that they are taught to believe in His holiness. By presuming upon Gods mercy men may lose their souls.<\/p>\n
IX. <\/strong>Religion is not a proper subject for ordinary conversation. Satan closes our lips on the greatest of all topics, and thus isolates us from one another, lest social intercourse should promote the success of the Gospel.<\/p>\n
X. <\/strong>We ought to pray, but we need not wait on god for an answer. This betokens the absence of a real belief in the efficacy of prayer. He encourages us to expect an answer, as often as we offer our petitions. These are ten of the most prevalent errors about religion which are countenanced and cherished by society. Let us take care that it is not true of us–Their lies cause them to err, after the which their fathers have walked. (James Mackay, B. D.<\/em>)<\/p>\nFuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n