It is obvious that the point under consideration is that when you see two people walking together, it is as the result of an appointment to meet at a stated time. The purpose of the meeting is not under consideration. They might meet to debate their differences as they walk along together, but the fact they are walking along together, indicates an agreement to meet. It is possible, that in our thickly populated areas of today, one might run into an acquaintance and walk along with him, but Amos did not live in such an area. If two people were seen walking along together in the desolate regions with which Amos was familiar it might be assumed they had not met by chance.
Nothing happens by chance.
There is a reason and cause for Israel's calamities. There is not one thing in the definition given by Strong which has to do with absolute agreement as two people walk together. The original word relates to an initial engagement to meet, regardless of the purpose. I might agree to meet my dentist at a certain time, and we might be together by appointment, but that does not argue that I am in harmony with all of his views or techniques. I do not argue that absolute conformity upon all matters of interpretation is not an ideal for which we should labor.