The first part of chapter 7 sets forth the three visions of Amos. Amos comes from Tekoa, a marginal land of Judea of desolate wilderness on the coast of the Dead Sea. He journeys to the cities of Israel to sell his frugal wares in the bazaars and to declare his burning words in the market. He then returns to the isolation of his farm to brood over the ills of his day in consultation with Yahweh. Does this suggest that we should all make meditation a daily practice? Amos uses the experience of farm life with locusts, fire, and plumb line to warn of the pending national disaster. He compassionately sees Israel as a little child just learning to walk. “O Lord God, forgive, I beseech thee! How can Jacob stand? He is so small!” While locust and fire are acts of God, defective walls are works of human hands. Amos simply observes Yahweh with the plumb line as he observes the sagging wall. He does not speak. Like Jesus, Martin Luther, and Martin Luther King, Amos’ criticism of the government has consequences. The charges are brought against Amos, not by the king, but by Amaziah. Is this really a conflict of church and state or a conflict of the vocation of priest and prophet? “O seer, go, flee, away to the land of Judah, and eat bread there, and prophesy there; but never again prophesy at Bethel…” He called him a seer? And, Bethel. It is a holy place, a temple site like Jerusalem. So is the conflict a territorial conflict within the institution church? Does this story sound familiar? Who was really responsible for the death of Jesus? Was it imperial Rome or institutional church under the guise of Judaism? The story differs in that Amos delivers a response that leaves no doubt in anyone’s mind of his authenticity and authority as a prophet, the prophet whom the Lord “took from following the flock”. I wonder if the disciples thought of the story of Amos when Jesus said he would make them fishers of men. The vision of “a basket of summer fruit” is a pithy prophecy about the consequence of total corruption likened to the consequence of leaving fruit in a desert sun all day to ripen. Amos is adamant in his sense of urgency of ridding the world of poverty and war. He directs the figure of speech, famine, to those who will not listen. “Not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord….They shall run to and fro, to seek the word of the Lord, but they shall not find it.” It is not simply an opinion or strongly held belief that Amos utters. “I saw the Lord standing beside the altar…” Amos’ words are the words of God! Israel is not exempt. Are we?
The first part of chapter 7 sets forth the three visions of Amos. Amos comes from Tekoa, a marginal land of Judea of desolate wilderness on the coast of the Dead Sea. He journeys to the cities of Israel to sell his frugal wares in the bazaars and to declare his burning words in the market. He then returns to the isolation of his farm to brood over the ills of his day in consultation with Yahweh. Does this suggest that we should all make meditation a daily practice? Amos uses the experience of farm life with locusts, fire, and plumb line to warn of the pending national disaster. He compassionately sees Israel as a little child just learning to walk. “O Lord God, forgive, I beseech thee! How can Jacob stand? He is so small!” While locust and fire are acts of God, defective walls are works of human hands. Amos simply observes Yahweh with the plumb line as he observes the sagging wall. He does not speak. Like Jesus, Martin Luther, and Martin Luther King, Amos’ criticism of the government has consequences. The charges are brought against Amos, not by the king, but by Amaziah. Is this really a conflict of church and state or a conflict of the vocation of priest and prophet? “O seer, go, flee, away to the land of Judah, and eat bread there, and prophesy there; but never again prophesy at Bethel…” He called him a seer? And, Bethel. It is a holy place, a temple site like Jerusalem. So is the conflict a territorial conflict within the institution church? Does this story sound familiar? Who was really responsible for the death of Jesus? Was it imperial Rome or institutional church under the guise of Judaism? The story differs in that Amos delivers a response that leaves no doubt in anyone’s mind of his authenticity and authority as a prophet, the prophet whom the Lord “took from following the flock”. I wonder if the disciples thought of the story of Amos when Jesus said he would make them fishers of men. The vision of “a basket of summer fruit” is a pithy prophecy about the consequence of total corruption likened to the consequence of leaving fruit in a desert sun all day to ripen. Amos is adamant in his sense of urgency of ridding the world of poverty and war. He directs the figure of speech, famine, to those who will not listen. “Not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord….They shall run to and fro, to seek the word of the Lord, but they shall not find it.” It is not simply an opinion or strongly held belief that Amos utters. “I saw the Lord standing beside the altar…” Amos’ words are the words of God! Israel is not exempt. Are we?
ReplyDelete