If the solution to the problem of verse 1 is to have the LORD begin speaking at verse 2, then an expression like “The LORD says” or “He says” may be needed here to introduce verse 2. It must be clear also that the following words are spoken now, not during the time when the people were being brought out of Egypt.

You only/Of all the nations on earth, you … only. The Good News Translation is a correct translation of the Hebrew here. The meaning is not “more than” the other nations.

Have I known/I have known and cared for. The Hebrew word for “known” has several important parts to its meaning, including personal knowledge, intimate knowledge, care, and choice. In this particular context the meaning of intimate knowledge and care should be translated. I have known and cared for, “cared for” (New English Bible, Moffatt), “I have known intimately” (The Translator’s Old Testament). The Hebrew, furthermore, has considerable overlapping with another Hebrew word for “choose,” “elect,” so that it may very well be translated. “I have chosen.” In fact, this may be the best translation in many languages, as very often a verb to “choose” implies personal intimate knowledge and care. The way in which this is expressed should contribute to the tone of sorrow: “the only ones I have really known and cared for,” “the only ones I have ever really chosen and cared for as my own.”

This knowledge and care of the LORD does not refer only to the past, but also to his revelation which continues in the present: “I have always cared for,” “I am continually caring.” In some languages the continuation could be expressed through two different tenses: “I have cared and care for.”

Therefore/That is why. The meaning is that God punishes because he knows and cares for. Because the LORD knows the people of Israel intimately and cares for them, the people in its turn should know the LORD intimately and want to do his will. Because of his special care, their sins are more terrible.

Iniquities/ sins. The Hebrew word is different from the one used in chapters 1 and 2. There the emphasis was on the evil nature of man, whereas here (and only here in Amos) the emphasis is on the damage caused by doing wrong or the guilt of the person who causes damage through doing wrong. “Guilty behavior” or “doing wrong” would be good translations, although it may be difficult to make this kind of difference in many languages.

Quoted with permission from de Waard, Jan & Smalley, William A. A Handbook on Amos. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1979. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .