The Sovereign LORD has sworn by his holiness: "The time will surely come when you will be taken away with hooks, the last of you with fishhooks." – Amos 4:2

Today's Scripture Reading (February 12, 2023): Amos 4

"Let them eat cake." The French phrase, more precisely translated as "Let them eat Brioche," an expensive pastry enriched with eggs and butter, has commonly been attributed to Marie Antoinette, the wife of King Louis XVI. Marie Antoinette had become increasingly unpopular in France because of the lavish lifestyle she demanded the state provide for herself. While the people lived in poverty, the Queen was catered to, having all of her wants to be fulfilled. But despite the people's anger toward the Queen, it seems unlikely that she actually made the comment. The people's dislike of Antoinette was likely the main reason the phrase has been attributed to her, but it is not proof that she said it. The actual quote was from Jean-Jacques Rousseau in his book "Confessions." In the book, he tells a story about seeking bread to go with the wine he had stolen. At the time, he felt that he was way overdressed to go into a common bakery. And it was at that moment that he remembered a phrase he had heard was spoken by an unnamed "great princess." Rousseau wrote, "At length I remembered the last resort of a great princess who, when told that the peasants had no bread, replied: 'Then let them eat brioches.'" Confessions was written in 1765, but it was not published until 1782. Marie Antoinette is thought to have spoken the phrase in 1789 during one of the famines that occurred in France during her husband's reign, seven years after Rousseau published his book.

Whether the phrase was spoken by Marie Antoinette or some other "great princess" of France, the phrase is used as evidence of an out-of-touch, privileged class. For Antoinette, or whatever princess made the comment, the substitute of bread for brioche seemed logical. The fact that if the peasants couldn't afford bread, there was absolutely no way they could afford the more expensive brioche escaped them. The economic situation the peasants suffered through seemed beyond the comprehension of at least some of the privileged class.

Amos addresses a similar privileged class in Israel. He calls these privileged women of Israel "cows of Bashan." These women have no craving outside of their desire to have their wants served. While the poor struggled with the basic needs of life, all these princesses wanted was for their husbands to bring them more drinks (Amos 4:1). Amos wanted to speak directly to these "cows of Samaria." He says that the Sovereign Lord has sworn by his holiness. There is no more solemn a vow that God could take than to swear by his holiness, which is at the core of his being. Amos indicates that this means that the events he is speaking of will happen; there can be no doubt. These exotically dressed women would be taken away with hooks, and Amos wants them to know this will happen.

A little more than four decades after Amos had written these words, the words that God had sworn by his holiness became a reality for the "Cows of Bashan." It must have been a shock to these privileged women to have the Assyrians take them captive. They would have been stripped of their expensive clothes and then had hooks inserted into their lips so that they could be connected to each other and led naked into their new lives in Assyria. Once, they had been envied for all they had, but now they had less than the poorest of the people they had previously ignored.

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: Amos 5

 

Hear this word, people of Israel, the word the LORD has spoken against you—against the whole family I brought up out of Egypt: - Amos 3:1

Today's Scripture Reading (February 11, 2023): Amos 3

In modern society, we sometimes seem to have lost the idea of loyalty. Friendships are temporary alliances; they exist for a time, but in the end, friendships are betrayed, and we seem to think it is okay to walk away and pretend that we never knew them. The idea of lifelong friends appears to have been replaced by a strict "what have you done for me lately" attitude.

It is an attitude that seems to be reflected in an old Paul Simon song. In "You're Kind," Simon writes,

You're kind; You're so kind
You rescued me when I was blind
And you put me on your pillow
When I was on the wall
You're kind, So kind, So kind

And you're good; You're so good
You introduced me to your neighborhood
Seems like I ain't never had so many friends before
That's because you're good; you're so good.

But in the next verse, Simon gives us the plot twist, After promises of loving you forever, Simon writes.

So goodbye, goodbye
I'm gonna leave you now
And here's the reason why
I like to sleep with the window open
And you keep the window closed

So goodbye, Goodbye (Paul Simon).

Of course, the song seems to be sung from a cat's perspective or maybe some other household pet. I have heard some fans argue that they think it might be a dog singing the song, but I think dogs would be much more loyal than whatever animal it is that Simon is personifying. So, maybe that is our problem; we are becoming much more like cats than dogs. But Simon seems to point out that it is often the small things that tear us apart, which, if you are the one being left, makes the experience much more painful.

Amos tells Israel that God has spoken against them. God declares his anger is "against the whole family I brought up out of Egypt." God's reminder to the descendants of Jacob is, "you left me; I didn't leave you. And what makes this even more painful is that I was the one who rescued you and redeemed you; I brought you out of Egypt." The main act of redemption in the Hebrew Bible is the exodus from Egypt. It is a point to which the Hebrew Bible frequently returns. But loyalty to the author of that redemption is often lacking. In the Christian Testament, the main act of redemption is found in the cross of Christ. And the Christian Testament frequently returns to that main event. As Christians, we believe that Jesus died for our sins. We have been redeemed, so we owe our loyalty to him, regardless of what the circumstances of our lives might be.

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: Amos 4

This is what the LORD says: "For three sins of Moab, even for four, I will not relent. Because he burned to ashes the bones of Edom's king." – Amos 2:1

Today's Scripture Reading (February 10, 2023): Amos 2

John Wycliffe (1328-1384) was an early dissenter working within the Roman Catholic Church. One of his main arguments with the Catholic Church regarded the infallibility of the Popes. He argued that some Popes had gained the papacy through distinctly unspiritual actions and, therefore, could not be considered the spiritual pinnacle of human activity. Wycliffe also had an answer for what should be the pinnacle of the Christian life; the Bible. But the common Bible at the time was written in Latin. If the people were going to use the Bible to govern their lives, it needed to be written in a language the people understood. And so, Wycliffe, with the help of some like-minded friends, began the long process of translating the Bible from Latin into English. The translation was not a high version of English that might have been spoken in privileged circles but rather the common English of the people. It was a radical idea and so revolutionary that the Roman Catholic Authorities took a while before they reacted against it.

The Wycliffe Bible started to appear in the people's hands around 1382. John Wycliffe died on New Year's Eve 1384 from a stroke he had suffered a few days earlier. But that didn't mean the argument over his beliefs died with him. The persecution of Wycliffe and his followers continued long after Wycliffe's death. In 1401, the Anti-Wycliffe Statute extended the persecution. The "Constitutions of Oxford" made translating the Bible into English punishable by charges of heresy. The "Council of Constance" declared Wycliffe a heretic and banned his writings. Wycliffe was excommunicated from the Catholic Church, his body was to be removed from consecrated ground, and his works were to be burned. In 1428, thirteen years after the Council of Constance and almost forty years after Wycliffe's death, Wycliffe's body was exhumed, his bones were burned, and the ashes were thrown into the River Swift. It was the final insult the Church could deliver against the discredited theologian. By burning the bones and throwing them in the river, they were trying to eradicate Wycliffe from history.

God's anger against Moab was because they had attempted the same thing to a past King of Edom. They had taken the bones of an Edomite hero and burned them, trying to erase him from the people's memory. It was the worst thing that the Moabites could do to this Edomite, and it was something for which God declared that they needed to pay, and God would not relent until they did.

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: Amos 3

 

I will break down the gate of Damascus; I will destroy the king who is in the Valley of Aven and the one who holds the scepter in Beth Eden. The people of Aram will go into exile to Kir," says the LORD. – Amos 1:5

Today's Scripture Reading (February 9, 2023): Amos 1

Tiglath-Pileser III rose to power in Assyria in 745 B.C.E., although there isn't enough information to tell us how he came to power. Still, there is some evidence to suggest that he took the kingdom from the descendants of his predecessor Ashur-nirari V. Some think that he was part of the Royal Family but that he jumped to the head of the list of succession through violent actions. In contrast, others believe he had no familial connection to Ashur-nirari and his family. Even Tiglath-Pileser states in his inscriptions that he received the throne of Assyria by divine selection rather than royal ancestry. But by whatever method he used to get there, after the death of Ashur-nirari V, Tiglath-Pileser III became King.

The other thing that is known about Tiglath-Pileser III is that he didn't lack confidence. Among the titles that Tiglath-Pileser claimed were King of Assyria, King of Babylon, King of Sumer and Akkad, and then Tiglath-Pileser added King of the Four Corners of the World and King of the Universe. But the reality was that Tigleth-Pileser III was the bully on the block of the known world. While the King of the Four Corners of the World and the Universe might have been a bit of a stretch, in 729 B.C.E., he became the first person to claim to be both the King of Assyria and the King of Babylon.

But his reign began with a revolt by Rezin of Aram, who conspired with other Levantine Kings to try to rid themselves of Assyrian rule. According to the biblical Book of  Kings, King Ahaz of Judah saw the conspiracy and evidentially believed he had a choice. Ahaz could stand alone and risk being attacked by the Levantine kings, join with Rezin and the other Kings in revolting against Assyria, or lead Judah in a subject nation of Assyria and rely on them for defense from the other kings. Ahaz chose the last option and sent offerings from the Temple and the treasury to Tigleth-Pilesar III, volunteering Judah as a subject nation of the Assyrian empire. It seems likely that at the same time, Ahaz told the Assyrian King of the rebellion that was brewing against him. As a result of this news, Tigleth-Pilesar attacked Aram and the other Levantine Kings, sacking Damascus and executing Rezin in 739 B.C.E.

But maybe the bigger question is, did Ahaz have to sell himself into a subject relationship with Assyria to calm the threat presented by Rezin and the other Levantine Kings? In 766 B.C.E., Amos had already prophesied that exactly this would happen. God would break down the gate of Damascus and destroy the King who is in the Valley of Aven. And you have to think that God could have done that, whether or not Ahaz decided to bribe the King of the Universe.

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: Amos 2

He did what was right in the eyes of the LORD, just as his father Amaziah had done. – 2 Chronicles 26:4

Today's Scripture Reading (February 8, 2023): 2 Chronicles 26

Succession is never an easy process. And it is an error to think it is only a royal problem. Succession happens any time a significant leader steps down or dies and is replaced by someone else. The problem is that separating the new leader from the old is almost always impossible. If the previous leader did a great job at whatever the task was, then the new leader is forever trying to measure up to the leader that was. In many ways, this is precisely the task with which King Charles III has been presented. Queen Elizabeth II turned out to be a good and long-reigning monarch. And everything that Charles does will be compared to her legacy, whether that is fair or not.

But if a leader follows a bad or incapable leader, then a level of trust must be earned before the new leader is allowed to move forward. Neither of these are easy situations, but they are the reality of life, and new leaders often have to learn to overcome the reign of the one who went before.

The biblical record indicates that Amaziah had been a good king, at least mostly. The hesitancy when talking about the reign of Amaziah is that he refused to remove the high places. And toward the end of his life, he made a series of bad decisions. He was the first Judean king to hire mercenaries, 100,000 soldiers, to help him with a war against Edom, an act for which an unnamed prophet condemned him. Amaziah repented and didn't use the mercenaries in his fight with Edom. Instead, he depended on God for the victory, and he defeated Edom. But the mercenaries didn't react well to not being used in the battle. They turned to attack and loot several of the towns in Judea. Amaziah, elated by his victory over Edom, decided to attack Jehoash, King of Israel. In his arrogance, Amaziah was soundly defeated by Israel, and he was taken captive by the Northern Kingdom. Then the Northern Kingdom attacked Jerusalem, tearing a portion of the city wall down and looting the Temple for some of its treasure. When Amaziah was finally released from Israel and returned home, he was murdered, suffering a similar fate to that of his father, Joash.

And it was into this situation that the sixteen-year-old Uzziah stepped. That the Chronicler can assert that Uzziah did what was right in the eyes of God is a bit of a miracle considering what was going on in Judah. The addition of "just as his father Amaziah had done" is a bit of a mystery. There is no doubt that Amaziah had started well. But his finish was a bit of a disaster, something that Uzziah would want to avoid in his reign.

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: Amos 1

 

He was twenty-five years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem sixteen years. His mother's name was Jerusha daughter of Zadok. – 2 Kings 15:33

Today's Scripture Reading (February 7, 2023): 2 Kings 15

Every Christmas, families dig into their family Christmas movies, search the television listings, or the various "On Demand" streaming services to find "It's a Wonderful Life." The film was originally purchased by RKO pictures, who intended it to be a vehicle for Cary Grant. But that movie never materialized, and finally, RKO sold the rights to the film to Liberty Films. Liberty Films produced the movie, but it cost them dearly. The movie was a commercial disaster, mainly because of the high initial cost of making the film and the stiff competition at the Box Office from the eventual Best Picture winner, "The Best Days of Our Lives." And then, "It's a Wonderful Life" fell into movie oblivion with all the other movies that failed during their brief lives in the theaters, most of which have long since been forgotten. "It's a Wonderful Life" faded into obscurity, and nobody bothered to renew its copyright. I mean, why would they? But then, television began to take hold, and television stations began to realize that they could show "It's a Wonderful Life," marketing the film as a Christmas movie, and it wouldn't cost them anything. As a result, we started to watch the film. Since then, it has become a Christmas classic. Few of us have ever seen "The Best Days of Our Lives," but most have seen or at least know the storyline of "It's Wonderful Life."

The story centers around hapless George Bailey, who puts his life on hold in order to fulfill family business obligations. He takes care of the family until it seems that life has passed him by. A series of events leads him to the decision that his life is useless, and George Bailey decides to attempt to end his life, only to be saved by a clumsy angel in training named Clarence. Clarence shows George that his life has meaning, and at the end of the film, George's friends show up to support him and bail him out of one of the worst moments of his life. Clarence sums up the movie's moral in the inscription of a book he gives to George – "Remember, George: no man is a failure who has friends."

At first glance, it is hard to see King Jotham in the same light as George Bailey, but there may be a connection. Even though he reigned in Jerusalem for sixteen years, we know very little about him as King. And there might be a good reason for that. Jotham's reign was mostly just an extension of the reign of his Father, King Uzziah. Uzziah reigned for fifty-two years, but for the last eleven years of his reign, Uzziah was sick with leprosy. The Bible describes Uzziah's illness as a punishment from God for his sin in the Temple. Leprosy meant he could no longer be the face of the Kingdom, but it didn't stop him from being the power behind the throne. Jotham became a king without real power until his father's death eleven years into his reign. Jotham put his life on hold so that he could lend his face to the reign of his father, Uzziah.

There must have also been a level of frustration inside Jotham. He could no longer live the life he wanted to live. Because he was the king, he had daily responsibilities that had to be carried out. But, at the same time, he didn't have the power to rule because Uzziah was still alive, which may have made him more of a George Bailey than we realize.

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: 2 Chronicles 26

See Also 21 Chronicles 27:1

He did what was right in the eyes of the LORD, but not wholeheartedly. – 2 Chronicles 25:2

Today's Scripture Reading (February 6, 2023): 2 Chronicles 25

Rules. I am convinced that we have a love-hate relationship with them. We like to complain that are too many rules or regulations that we have to follow, but the reality is that staying within the rules is easy. We know if we are right or wrong at a glance. Maybe we can decide that, in this instance, we want to be in the wrong, or we can rationalize why the rule is incorrect, but the point is that we know. Rules do that for us.

I have a friend who has not always been on the right side of the law. He has lived a life where the police are often seen as the enemy and people who are trying to prove where you have lived outside of society's rules. And if they can't find anything, they are not beyond inventing crimes to accuse you of because they know you are guilty of something. Recently, a visitor to his house called the police to do a wellness check on him. My friend was not amused. He knew where he had been outside the law in the past, and he understood where he was outside of the rules now, and the police were nothing more than people who brought with them more rules he would have to live his life by or risk arrest. Since the visit, my friend has lived by looking over his shoulder, worried about the next rule keeper to enter his life. And yet, in his own way, my friend is also a rule keeper, and he lives by rules, often keeping regulations to which I am not even faithful.

I know the whole thing is complicated and hard to understand. So let me complicate it a little more. The main focus of our lives as Christians is not to follow the rules but to live our lives following the heart of God. The rules can get us part of the way, but not all the way we need to go with our spiritual lives. Please, don't be offended, but if you are following rules as a Christian, and worrying about the rules you break, then you are still in the infancy of your faith. God wants so much more for you and from you.

The author of Chronicles tells us that Amaziah did what was right, but not wholeheartedly. What that means is that he was a rule follower. He followed the letter of the law of God but never bothered to get beyond the rules to search out the heart of God. Amaziah was a king who kept his roles compartmentalized. He lived up to the expectations placed on him but never allowed those expectations to take him any further. He made the worship of the God of Abraham important-, while never bothering to remove the high places where the people were sacrificing to pagan gods. He loved his people but never allowed his commitment to God to make him want what was best for them. He followed the rules but not the heart of God.

Rules are a great starting place, but we seek the heart of God so we can become more like him. And that is something that rules will never do for us.

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: 2 Kings 15