Intercession: the power to shape the future and its limits
Amos 7:1-9
After a tsunami hit Samoa in 2009, many there had physical injuries and/or suffered mentally in the aftermath of the disaster. When the little daughter of a plastic surgeon in New Zealand heard what had happened, she earnestly said to him, ‘Daddy, you’ve got to go and help those people!’. With the support of his family, the surgeon did go, together with a medical team that included other doctors, nurses and counsellors. We, like this little girl, also see needs in our world and turn to our Heavenly Father for help. Yet, there is a difference between the two examples. No doubt the plastic surgeon above was already thinking of going to Samoa and what is touching is his daughter’s trust in him that he could help and that he would want to. While this is true of us as we seek the Lord, intercession can achieve an even greater shift.
The power of intercession in shaping the future
The Lord shows the prophet a vision about the future, a locust plague that will hit after the first crop has been given to the king, probably as tax (Amos 7:1). The utter desolation of the land will leave the people without food. Amos cries out to God for mercy and appeals to the smallness of Israel (Amos 7:2). The reference to Jacob, the nation’s ancestor, makes the appeal relatable by bringing to the forefront an individual standing for the nation. While we remember Jacob as a cheat and a deceiver, his life story speaks of a man who always felt too small and fearful to confront others openly. Israel may have thought of themselves as powerful, but Amos knows better. When God is about to bring destruction, everyone is cut down to size. Astonishingly, God changes His mind so that the future in the vision will not happen (Amos 7:3). The second vision about a devastating fire follow the same pattern: vision, appeal and God changing His mind (Amos 7:4-6). Prayer has the power to change the future.
The limits of intercession
The final vision (vv.7-9), however, is different. Traditionally, it has been understood as God standing with a plumb-line measuring up the moral-spiritual failures of the nation and deciding on judgment. The Hebrew word ’anakh only occurs here in the Bible and it was thought to mean ‘tin’ or ‘lead’ (hence ‘plumb-line’). However, it is recognised today that the word only means ‘tin’. Nevertheless, the traditional interpretation persists because it is well-known and readily appreciated while the significance of ‘tin’ is harder to understand (see the ‘For Interest’ section below for options). Whatever the exact meaning, the message though is clear enough. God will spare His people no more (Amos 7:8), their worship centres will be demolished, and the dynasty of the king eliminated.[1] Intercession is no longer an option.
Trusting God’s wisdom and desire for mercy
Perhaps the most staggering aspect of this passage is the Lord’s willingness to listen to our requests and change His plans as a result. How humbling to think that God involves us in His will and that through our prayers we may have a part to play in shaping the future. This does not mean that the Lord is inconsistent, dithering, or makes mistakes that need correcting. Rather, when He does change His mind, it is always in response to what we do and say. When the Ninevites repented, God relented and did not bring judgment on them (Jonah 3:10). When Moses interceded for the people after they worshipped the golden calf, God again changed His mind (Exod 32:9-11, 14).[2] At the same time, we cannot twist God round our little finger; He is the sovereign Lord of the universe, and we are not in control. He is. While we cannot always understand His reasons, we must trust His wisdom. God’s willingness to reconsider His plans for judgment earlier highlight that He is a reluctant judge who does not relish punishing His children (Ezek 18:32). In fact, His judgement elsewhere is called His ‘unusual work’ (Isa 28:21-22) because His usual stance is grace, and His desire is to show mercy. May we be encouraged and bring our requests to the Lord trusting in His compassion and love.
[1] High places are shrines and the reference to Isaac’s high places may point to Beer-sheba in Judah (mentioned in Amos 5:5) because the patriarch Isaac spent much of his time in that place. Jeroboam II’s dynasty was eliminated shortly after his death when his son was assassinated after just six months of rule (2 Kings 15:8-10). In fact, there were six kings from the death of Jeroboam II until the Assyrian captivity and all except one were killed by conspirators (2 Kings 15:8-31; Hoshea was the last king).
[2] In all these examples the same Hebrew verb, niḥam, is used (in the niphal) meaning ‘relent’, ‘change his mind’.
For interest: Understanding Amos 7:7-9 – plumbline or tin?
As mentioned above, the well-known interpretation of God standing on a wall with a plumbline in His hand (Amos 7:7-8) is based on the understanding that the Hebrew word ’anakh means ‘lead’ here and it therefore stands for the ‘plummet’ tied to the end of a string to measure the straightness of a wall. The plumbline interpretation goes as far back as medieval Jewish commentators, but it has no basis in etymology. The Hebrew is a loanword from the Akkadian anāku (the language of Assyria at this time). While it was thought earlier to mean either ‘tin’ or ‘lead’, it is now established that the word only means ‘tin’. Stuart also points out that ‘plummet’ in Hebrew is mishqolet (2 Kings 21:13; Isa 28:17) and the ‘line’ holding it is qav (Isa 28:17).[1] Nevertheless, translations continue to use ‘plumbline’ simply because it is a readily understandable image. The verses in a simple translation of the Hebrew read like this.
7 Thus He showed me, and, look, the Lord stood on a wall of tin and in His hand was tin. 8 The LORD said to me, ‘What do you see, Amos?’ And I said, ‘Tin.’ And the Lord said, ‘Look, I am putting tin in the midst of My people Israel. I will no longer pass them by [i.e. spare them].
The difficult part for the plumbline interpretation (apart from the issue of the word meaning ‘tin’, not ‘lead’) is how to explain the phrase ‘a wall of a plumbline’ because the phrase most naturally reads as a wall made of a particular material. The difficulty is evident in translations that pad out the expression as ‘a wall made with/by a plumbline’ or simply drop ‘plumbline’ and only mention God standing on the wall (or even on a stone wall!) with a plumbline in His hand (see Amos 7:7 on BibleGateway for the variations).
If we take ‘tin’ as the meaning of ’anakh, however, we still face difficulties because the significance of this is not immediately obvious. Stuart suggests that ‘tin’ is a wordplay between two similar sounding words, so that tin does not need to be a meaningful image. The Hebrew ’anaq (moaning) sounds almost exactly the same as ’anakh (the difference is between a hard ‘k’ sound and a guttural ‘h’). In other words, the point is that Amos sees ‘tin’ because it symbolises that God will put ‘moaning/grief’ in the midst of Israel. This is similar to the word-play in Amos 8:1-2, where Amos sees ‘summer fruit’ (qayitz), which signals ‘the end’ (qetz).[2] The objection to this view is that Amos 7:7-8 only uses one of the words (’anakh) throughout, so the word-play is less obvious. On the other hand, given that this prophecy would have been delivered orally, it is possible that listeners would have heard ‘moaning’ as an echo behind Amos’ words about ‘tin’.
Another option is to see the wall of metal as a metaphor for military strength. Thus, in other ancient Near Eastern documents a pharaoh describes himself as a ‘wall of iron’ for his troops, another pharaoh is called ‘a wall of bronze’. This is Niehaus’ preferred interpretation, who also cites OT parallels from Jeremiah 15:20 (the prophet will be ‘a fortified wall of bronze’) and Ezekiel 4:3 (where the prophet enacts the siege of Jerusalem and uses an iron wall facing the city as an image of the attacking army). Thus, Niehaus argues that ‘the tin’ is a reference to Assyria (the loanword for it comes from their language). God standing over the wall of tin expresses His authority over Assyria, i.e. He is in charge, bringing them against His people. Having ‘tin’ in His hand anticipates how God is going to put ‘tin’ (Assyria) among Israel so they will be conquered.[3] This would be a satisfactory solution except tin is a fairly soft metal, so not especially associated with strength.
Alternatively, Shalom Paul argues that ‘the wall of tin’ refers to Israel’s military strength, or rather, to their weakness.[4] This would fit in better with the association of tin as a malleable metal. It also creates a pathetic image of Israel’s capabilities, which contrasts sharply with how they see themselves in their arrogance, confident in their fortifications and boasting about their conquests at a time of relative stability (Amos 6:8, 13). Yet, God holds ‘tin’, their weakness in His hands and He will indeed give them ‘tin’ (i.e. weakness) in the run-up to the conquest. The solidity of Jeroboam’s reign will give way to conspiracies and an ever-changing scene of different kings sitting on the throne, sometimes for no longer than a month (2 Kings 15:13)! With Assyria’s growing power, Israel’s kings will find themselves having to pay tribute to this expanding northern empire (2 Kings 15:19-20). A series of Assyrian conquests of Israel’s land will occur along with a first wave of captives taken to Assyria (2 Kings 15:29). Finally, the last king of Israel, Hoshea, will rebel against Assyria and be swept away into Assyrian prison along with the rest of Israel who will be taken captive never to return (2 Kings 17:3-6). This interpretation, I believe, makes the best sense of the evidence.
[1] Douglas Stuart, Hosea-Jonah, WBC 31 (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1987), 373.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Jeffery J. Niehaus, “Amos” in The Minor Prophets I: A Commentary on Hosea, Joel, Amos, ed. Thomas Edward McComiskey (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 1992), 456.
[4] Shalom M. Paul, Amos, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991), 234-35.