Visual Audio
The words of Amos, who was among the sheepherders from Tekoa, which he envisioned in visions concerning Israel in the days of Uzziah Amos 1:1
Envisioned in Visions – Think of it like this: the Old Testament is audio, Yeshua is visual, the Spirit returns us to audio. God reveals Himself in words, but of course, they aren’t usually written words. They are the sounds of His voice. That’s what Israel heard at Sinai. That’s what compelled Abraham to leave Ur. That’s what Yeshua heard during His ministry. So, we should be surprised to find that Amos sees God’s words. The verb is chazah. It does mean “see” but it is also translated “perceive.” This seems much more likely. The addition “in visions” tries to help us understand that Amos saw something. But it’s much more understandable when we realize that Amos perceived in some way (since there is no description of visions) a message concerning Israel.
So what? Why do we care if Amos saw a vision or perceived a message? Does it really matter? Well, it might not matter to Amos now. After all, he knows exactly what happened even if we have to guess. But here’s what does matter: how Amos understood what God wanted him to say is a mystery. God didn’t deliver a telegram. He didn’t speak words. Somehow, God caused Amos to perceive His will. Amos knew it was God’s message, but very few of his contemporaries believed him. How do we know it was God’s message? Because we have perfect hindsight. History proves that Amos was right.
This is the biggest problem with prophetic utterance. From our perspective, we don’t know if it’s true until after the fact. Why should people believe Amos? He was one voice among many. He wasn’t like Moses, the confirmed, absolute authority of the community. Or maybe he was. After all, when Moses came back to Egypt, he made a lot of claims that didn’t seem to come true. The people complained mightily. They only believed after the plagues began.
What can we offer as help in the midst of this dilemma? There are a few characteristics that seem to be common among the real prophets. First, none of them really wanted the job. They were reluctant, sometimes even fearful. They knew that the path ahead was filled with persecution. None of them stepped forward desiring the glory of being God’s man on the scene. Any “prophet” today who loves the title must be crazy, stupid or a phony.
Second, none of the prophets brought messages that were comfortable for the audience. They spoke often of the urgency of repentance, the demand for obedience and the necessity of self-denial. Any prophet who misses this emphasis is out of sync with biblical themes.
Finally, prophets rarely spoke about the future. The preoccupation with “future telling” really began in the Greek-based church of 300 AD. Prophets were usually those who unpacked and revealed God’s will and it was most often about what needed to be done right now.
Maybe we need to be reminded about these characteristics in the days when it seems so important to have prophetic insight. Maybe we need to listen with biblically-attuned ears.
Topical Index: Prophet
