Amos 2:6-7

6, 7a. Oppression of the poor.

Sold the righteous for silver This accusation is commonly interpreted as a separate count in the indictment, maladministration of justice. It is thought to refer to the acceptance of bribes on the part of the judges, for which they pronounce guilty the innocent and cause him to be sold into slavery. The next clause, “the poor for a pair of shoes,” is said to mark an advanced degree of corruption, when the judges do the same “for a pair of shoes” (see below). Others interpret the second clause as referring to the oppression of poor debtors by rich creditors; the latter sell the former into slavery, though the indebtedness involved may be insignificant. The latter interpretation of “(they sold) the poor for a pair of shoes” is to be preferred (Amos 8:6, but compare Amos 5:12; Isaiah 1:23; Isaiah 3:14-15); and it seems best to interpret the first clause also of the oppression of the poor by rich creditors rather than of maladministration of justice.

They The wealthy and powerful creditors.

Sold That is, into slavery. In a figurative sense the verb may be used of less severe treatment.

Righteous Not in an ethical but in a forensic sense innocent; those who have come into the control of their creditors without any fault of their own.

Silver The money for which they are said to be indebted.

Poor R.V., “needy.” Those who are unable to meet their obligations and have no one to take their part.

For a pair of shoes A proverbial expression for something of little value; equivalent to the modern “for a song.” “One of the commonest crimes of Amos’s day was that of land-grabbing on the part of the rich (Isaiah 5:8), and it is this that Amos is here denouncing.”

The greed of the rich is further described in 7a, in Hebrew in the form of a participial clause, reproduced in English by a relative clause, connected with “they” of Amos 2:6.

Pant after the dust of the earth on the head of the poor A peculiar expression. If the text is correct, a twofold interpretation is possible. With both, “dust on the head” is a sign of distress and mourning (2 Samuel 1:2; 2 Samuel 15:32; Lamentations 2:10). The meaning, then, may be either that they are “so avaricious that they begrudge the poor even the little dust used as a token of mourning,” or, that they are so heartless that they yearn to see the poor reduced to a state of misery and distress in which they will sprinkle the dust upon their heads. Jerome reads a different, though similar, verb, “to crush” for “to pant,” and omits the preposition before “the head.” He reads, “who crush upon the dust of the earth the head of the poor,” which gives excellent sense, and is accepted by many as original. With this forceful figure of extreme cruelty may be compared Isaiah 3:15, “grind the faces of the poor,” and Micah 3:2-3, “strip the flesh off their bones.” Other emendations suggested are less probable.

Meek Simple-minded, God-fearing persons, who harm no one and who do not know the craftiness and deceitfulness of this world, to guard against it. Turn aside the way They place obstacles in the way of the meek; thus they prevent the carrying out of their plans and purposes, and throw them into difficulties where they become an easy prey.

7 b. Immoralities.

A man and his father will go in unto the same maid The addition of same, which is not in the original, is based upon a misapprehension. The emphasis is not upon the fact that the father and the son go in to the same girl, but upon the universality of the immoral practices. The article is used in a generic sense, to indicate that the maiden alluded to is a member of a well-known class (G.-K., 126g). In English the indefinite article may be used. The allusion is to the sacred prostitutes at the shrines of Ashtoreth, who were found even in those Hebrew sanctuaries where, nominally at least, Jehovah was worshiped (see on Hosea 4:13). A man and his father father and son; the practice is universal; there is no attempt to conceal it.

To profane my holy name A final clause, “in order to.” The Israelites should have known better (Amos 2:11), and Amos assumes that they did know better; therefore he represents the practice of these immoralities as deliberate premeditated acts in defiance of the well-known will of God, by which acts discredit and dishonor were brought purposely upon the name of Jehovah, that is, upon his character; for “God’s name is equivalent to the sum of his attributes as revealed to his chosen people” (Isaiah 57:15; Psalms 111:9; see on Micah 5:4). On profane see on Joel 2:17.

The immoralities condemned in 7b are those practiced in the name of religion; the excesses condemned in Amos 2:8 also are connected with the religious cult, though “clothes taken in pledge” goes back to the first count in the indictment. Lay themselves down… by [“beside”] every altar In drunken carousal (8b). There may be an allusion to the practice condemned in 7b.

Clothes laid to [“taken in”] pledge The term used denotes the outer garment, a large square cloth with a hood, thrown over the body and held together from the inside. To the poor people this garment served also as a covering at night, and since the nights are at times very cool it is indispensable. Sometimes the garment was given in pledge, but the humane law in Exodus 22:26, demands its return to the owner at sundown. This law the unrighteous nobles neglected to observe in their mad desire to satisfy their lusts.

They drink the wine At feasts connected with the peace and thank offerings (Amos 5:23; Exodus 32:6, etc.); these feasts had become occasions of revelry and debauchery.

Of the condemned Better R.V., “such as have been fined.” The wine was purchased with money received from fines; whether just or unjust Amos does not say; that in many cases they were unjust there can be no doubt.

The house of their god R.V., “God.” It is also possible to render “gods” or even “the houses of their gods.” The Hebrew is ambiguous. To Amos the chief earthly dwelling place of Jehovah was Jerusalem (Amos 1:2). Whether he considered all local sanctuaries illegitimate and the worship practiced there idolatry is not certain. At any rate, he evidently has in mind here the practices at such sanctuaries as Beth-el, Gilgal (Amos 4:4), and Beer-sheba (Amos 8:14); that he thinks of more than one place is indicated also by “beside every altar.”