Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Jeremiah 32:31

For this city hath been to me [as] a provocation of mine anger and of my fury from the day that they built it even unto this day; that I should remove it from before my face,

31. from the day that they built it ] a somewhat loose expression (as it existed in Canaanitish times; see 2Sa 5:6 ff.) for its earliest days as an Israelitish city.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Solomon finished the building of Jerusalem, and he at least suffered idolatry in it, 1Ki 11:4,8. People have always been so fond of worshipping God according to their own fancies and inventions, that even in Judah (except in Davids time) the worship of God could hardly be preserved pure during the entire reign of one king. As if they had done it on purpose to provoke me to destroy the city, and cast the people of it out. Nothing more easy than for people to keep close to the Divine rule, as to external acts in worship; nothing is more provocative of God than their doing the contrary. Yet nothing hath been more rarely done in any nation, as if men had set themselves to dare a jealous God.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

31. provocation of mineangerliterally, “for mine anger.” CALVIN,therefore, connects these words with those at the end of the verse,”this city has been to me an object for mine anger(namely, by reason of the provocations mentioned, Jer32:30, c.), that I should remove it,” &c. Thus, therewill not be the repetition of the sentiment, Jer32:30, as in English Version the Hebrew also favorsthis rendering. However, Jeremiah delights in repetitions. In EnglishVersion the words, “that I should remove it,” c., standindependently, as the result of what precedes. The time is ripe fortaking vengeance on them (2Ki23:27).

from the day that they builtitSolomon completed the building of the city and it was hewho, first of the Jewish kings, turned to idolatry. It was originallybuilt by the idolatrous Canaanites.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

For this city hath been tame [as] a provocation of mine anger and of my fury,…. Or, “upon mine anger, and upon my fury this city was to me” h; that is, it was upon his heart, and in his mind and purpose, being provoked to anger and wrath by their sins, to have destroyed it long ago, though he had deferred it to this time; the inhabitants of this city had been always a provoking people to him; and he had thought to have poured out his wrath and fury upon them:

from the day they built it, even unto this day: when built and inhabited by the idolatrous Canaanites; possessed by the Jebusites; rebuilt by David; beautified with the temple and other stately buildings by Solomon, who was drawn it, to idolatry by his wives. It is a tradition of the Jews, mentioned both by Jarchi and Kimchi, that the same day that the foundation of the temple was laid, Solomon married Pharaoh’s daughter; and which was the foundation of his idolatry; and which was more or less practised in every reign afterwards, to this time; and which so provoked the Lord, that he took up this resolution early, though he did not put it in execution; expressed as follows:

that I should remove it from before my face; as a man does that which is nauseous and abominable to him; meaning the removing the inhabitants of it into other lands, or causing them to go into captivity; so the Targum.

h “super naso meo, et super ira mea fuit mihi civitas haec”, Montanus; “in furore meo, et in ira mea”, Pagninus, Vatablus.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

He confirms what we have just said, even that God, however, severely he might punish the Jews, would not yet exceed due limits in his judgment, because their iniquity had reached the highest pitch. It was a dreadful judgment when the city was wholly demolished by fire, and the Temple destroyed. Hence the atrocity of the punishment might have driven many to complain that God was too severe. Here he checks all such complaints, and says, that the city had been built as it were for this end, even to provoke him, as we say in French, Elle a este faite pour me depiter, pour me facher. Some read, “Reduced to me has been the city;” but they pervert and obscure the meaning. It might more properly be rendered, “The city has been destined to me for my wrath and indignation.” But the meaning which I have given is simpler. Thus the words אפי, aphi, and חמתי chemeti, are to be taken passively, even that the city Jerusalem had been in a manner devoted to this madness, so that it ceased not to inflame more and more against itself the vengeance of God. In a word, he repeats in other words what he had before said, even that the children of Israel did nothing else than provoke God by their misdeeds.

There is then nothing new said here, but as it was a thing difficult to be believed, the Prophet dwells on it, and says, that the city Jerusalem had been for the wrath and indignation of God, from the time in which it had been founded And we may gather from the end of the verse that this is the true meaning, for he says, Even to this day, that I should remove it from my sight; as though he had said, that the Jews had made no end of sinning, so that it was now quite the time to punish a people so wicked, whose impiety was un-healable. And he points out their persistency when he says, even to this day (70) For the people had not only begun to sin in the wilderness, but they pursued in a regular course, so to speak, their impiety, so that at no age, in no year, in no day, did they cease from their vices. Here then is pointed out their constant habit of sinning. It follows —

(70) It has been found difficult to render this verse literally, though the general meaning is evident, and is given in our version, which is more paraphrastic than usual. If we take על for עלה, in its Chaldee sense, as in Dan 6:5, we shall find the version easy, —

31. For the occasion of my wrath, and the occasion of my indignation, has this city been to me from the day that they have built it even

32. to this day; so that I shall remove it from my sight on account of all the wickedness of the children of Israel, etc. etc.

So the latter part of Jer 32:31 ought to be connected with the following verse. The verb for “remove” is in the infinitive mood preceded by ל. It is an elliptical phrase, as is sometimes the case, where a resolution, obligation, or duty is intended. — Ed

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

(31) From the day that they built it . . .The words confirm the inference already drawn in the preceding note, that the thoughts of the prophet turn to the time when Israel was yet one people under David and Solomon. Even then, he seems to say, the city had fallen far short of the holiness which it ought to have attained. and which David sought for it (Psalms 15-24), and had only been for anger and for fury to the Lord. There is no Hebrew word answering to provocation. It is noticeable that the prophet, as if forgetting that Jerusalem had been a Jebusite city before David took possession (2Sa. 5:6-10), speaks as if it had been built by Israel. It is obvious, however, that it was so much enlarged and altered after this capture, that the words which so describe it may have been not only practically, but almost literally, true.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

31. For this city hath been to me a provocation The construction here is unusual and difficult. The exact force of the original is, For upon my anger and upon my fury was for me this city, etc. The meaning seems to be, Jerusalem has been a burden on my wrath; that is, it has called it forth, so that it has been hard to bear with it.

From the day that they built it An individualizing phrase for “from the earliest times.” Of course the meaning is limited to Jerusalem as a Jewish city.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments