Amos 5:11

Forasmuch therefore - (Since they rejected reproof, he pronounces the sentence of God upon them,) “as your treading is upon the poor.” This expresses more habitual trampling on the poor, than if he had said, “ye tread upon the poor.” They were ever trampling on those who were already of low and depressed condition. “And ye take from him burdens of wheat, presents of wheat.” The word always signifies presents, voluntary , or involuntary , what was carried, offered to anyone. They received “wheat” from the poor, cleansed, winnowed, and “sold the refuse Amos 8:6, requiring what it was wrong to receive, and selling what at the least it was disgraceful not to give. God had expressly forbidden to “lend food for interest” Leviticus 25:37; Deuteronomy 23:19. It may be that, in order to evade the law, the interest was called “a present.”

Ye have built house of hewn stone - The houses of Israel were, perhaps most commonly, built of brick dried in the sun only. As least, houses built of hewn stone, like most of our’s, are proverbially contrasted with them, as the more solid with the more ordinary building. “The white bricks are fallen down, and we will build with hewn, stones” Isaiah 9:10. And Ezekiel is bidden to dig through the wall of his house Ezekiel 12:5, Ezekiel 12:7. Houses of stone there were, as appears from the directions as to the unhealthy accretions, called the leprosy of the house Leviticus 14:34. It may be, however, that their houses of “hewn stone,” had a smoothed surface, like our “ashlar.” Anyhow, the sin of luxury is not simply measured by the things themselves, but by their relation to ourselves and our condition also; and wrong is not estimated by the extent of the gain and loss of the two parties only, but by the injury inflicted.

These men, who built houses, luxurious for them, had wrung from the poor their living, as those do, who beat down the wages of the poor. Therefore they were not to take possession of what was their own; as Ahab, who by murder possessed himself of Naboth’s vineyard, forfeited his throne and his life. God, in the law, consulted for the feeling which desires to enter into the fruit of a man’s toil. When they should go to war they were to proclaim, “what man” is there that hath built a new house, and hath not dedicated it? let him go and return to his house, lest he die in the battle, and another man dedicate it. And what man is he that hath planted a vineyard and hath not eaten of it? let him go. and return unto his house, lest he die in the battle and another man eat of it” Deuteronomy 20:5. Now God reversed all this, and withdrew the tender love, whereby He had provided it. The words, from their proverbial character, express a principle of God’s judgments, that wrong dealing, whereby a man would secure himself or enlarge his inheritance, destroys both. Who poorer than our Lord, bared of all upon the Cross, of whom it had been written, “They persecuted the poor helpless man, that they might slay him who was vexed at the heart” Psalms 109:15, and of whom the Jews said, “Come let us kill Him, that the inheritance may be ours?” Matthew 21:38. They killed Him, they said, “lest the Romans take away our place and nation” John 11:48. “The vineyard was taken from them;” their “place” destroyed, their “nation” dispersed.