An Evangelical Response To The Preaching Of Amos

Finley,Thomas John (Talbot Theol. Sem.)

Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, 1985, 28(4), 411-420.

Allen Johnson

Rt. 1, Box 119-B

Dunmore, West Virginia 24934

Theology of the Minor Prophets

Eastern Baptist Theological Seminary

Dr. Tom McDaniel

Fall, 1994

It is a cliche', not without basis, that (so-called) liberal Christians attack sin as rooted in social structures while their conservative brothers and sisters castigate sin in its personal dimensions. What then is the message of Amos when viewed through each respective prism? How does Amos, the quintessential thundering prophet, view sin and response in its essence?

Thomas John Finley attempts in this work to propose an evangelical interpretation to the preaching of Amos. As I read this piece I increasingly sensed that Finley seemed to have an underlying strategy and goal, however, and that to set-up evangelicals to assent to Amos' teachings as authoritative in terms of personal sin and personal accountability to God, and then extrapolate toward Amos' critique of social sin and accountability. Interestingly, he quotes extensively Eastern Baptist Theological Seminary professor Dr. Ron Sider, a recognized proponent of a wholistic gospel that involves both personal and corporate accountability.

Finley says that the charges of Amos are of two interrelated categories: He cries out against mistreatment of the poor, upholding human relationships as integral to covenant faithfulness. Corollary to this is an expose of pretense worship in which cultic ritual flourishes while worshipers' hearts remain callous and unmoved. I am reminded of the two great commandments of Jesus, to love God and derivatively to love one's neighbor.

Amos peers into the heart of true religion to an essence of relationship—with God, with neighbor. Religion becomes a mockery whenever this relationship is snapped. One cannot love God and scorn one's brother. To pretend otherwise only compounds sin.

Finley describes at some length four Hebrew terms interpreted as "poor" in the book of Amos. Saddiq is descriptive of one who is a victim of an oppressor, and occurs twice in Amos (2:6; 5:12) (p. 413). Somewhat related to this term is a second signification for the poor, ’ebyôn, which indicates one who is lacking basic necessities of life such as food, water, shelter. The ’ebyônim are in need, and because of their need are vulnerable to exploitation. I am reminded of loan sharks, scam artists, and (dare I say) state lotteries which prey upon those in financial straits.

The dal are those who are poor in relative comparison to the rich. These are the "have-nots" who grind out their needs of bare-bones existence. In our society I think of the working poor such as a single mother with limited education cleaning motel rooms at minimum wage.

The last classification is ‘anawîm, the afflicted, distressed, suffering poor. Finley suggests this term is most frequently paired with ’ebyôn, the needy. I am reminded of the holocaust victims.

By studying contextual use of these four terms for the poor in other Old Testament passages, Finley arrives at conclusions that contribute to an understanding of Amos. "The covenant between Yahweh and Israel demanded a compassion toward these people. The innocent should be acquitted, the needy fed, the poor respected, the afflicted comforted. Instead the injustice of the Israelites contributed to the problem. For this sin Amos preached the judgment of God" (p. 415).

Having studied the interpretive nuances of "the poor", Finley delves into the nature of oppression that Amos so emphatically denounces. "Trampling on the poor (2:7; 8:4) so as to 'destroy' them" is generally descriptive (p. 415). The rich conspire, the corrupt jucicial system collaborates, and the poor are exploited, stripped, and discarded. Pointed sins include enslavement on petty debt (2:6; 8:6), crooked weights and measures (8:5), and heavy grain levies (5:11). The rich and powerful enlarge their surfeit at the expense of the poor, disdaining the "Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt" (Lev. 19:36). I am reminded of Jesus' prayer, "Forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors." To know God is to walk in the way of grace and mercy.

It is at this locus that Amos' theology is clarified. God has delivered a ragamuffin band of Israelites out of Egypt into a land of plenty. The covenant of Yahweh with his people is one permeated with mercy and deliverance to the needy. So shall derivatively this be the rule for interrelationship with the people. Inasmuch as the rich scorn and abuse the needy they demonstrate their utter lack of understanding of the heart of the covenant, irrespective of any cultic ritual they otherwise might engage.

Finley contends that Amos went beyond justice in terms of fairness. Even to stop cheating and extortion of the poor would be inadequate. Justice demanded generosity, compassion, advocacy, and engagement in behalf of the poor. Even more, Amos points to entering into the world of the poor. Extravagant lifestyles of the wealthy inculcate insensitivity and callousness.

This most helpful study illuminates the core of Amos' preaching, a word the church need hear yet today. Worship of God only has integrity when coupled with compassionate acts in behalf of the poor. To act otherwise shams God, incurring His wrath. In this Amos points to Jesus' judgment of the nations (Matt. 25:31-46).

Evangelicals style themselves as people committed to the authority of all scripture. A responsible reading and hearing of Amos can only lead to a conclusion that fidelity to God requires compassionate advocacy and action on behalf of the needy that goes beyond a superficial charitable offering into a penetrating critical analysis of systemic economic and social structures.