22<\/strong>. But, etc<\/em>.] better as mg., Unless thou<\/em> and art, etc<\/em>. The whole sentence is an hypothesis not to be accepted as fact. God’s anger cannot last for ever, and thus there is yet hope.<\/p>\n Although the Book does in fact close with the language of hope, that is so little apparent on the first reading that in the synagogues Lam 5:21<\/em><\/span> was repeated at the end, that its words might thus be the last to fall upon the ear. A similar expedient is used in the case of Ecclesiastes, Isaiah, Malachi. See note on Jer 52:34<\/span>.<\/p>\n Literally, Unless thou hast utterly rejected us, unless thou art very wroth against us. This is stated as a virtual impossibility. Gods anger can be but temporary Psa 30:5<\/span>, and therefore the very supposition is an indirect expression of hope.<\/P> This verse speaks of the possibility of an utter rejection through Gods wrath. Therefore, to remove so painful a thought, and to make the book more suited for public reading, Lam 5:21<\/span> is repeated in many manuscripts intended for use in the synagogue. The same rule is observed in the synagogue with the two last verses of Ecclesiastes, Isaiah, and Malachi.<\/P> <\/p>\n Verse 22<\/span>. But thou hast utterly rejected us<\/B><\/I>] It appears as if thou hadst sealed our final reprobation, because thou showest against us exceeding great wrath<\/I>. But convert us, O Lord, unto<\/I> thee, and we shall be converted<\/I>. We are now greatly humbled, feel<\/I> our sin<\/I>, and see<\/I> our folly<\/I>: once more restore us, and we shall never again forsake thee! He heard the prayer; and at the end of seventy<\/I> years they were restored to their own land.<\/P> <\/P> This last verse is well rendered in the first printed edition of our Bible, 1535: – Renue our daies as in olde tyme, for thou hast<\/I> now banished us longe ynough, and bene sore displeased at us<\/I>.<\/P> <\/P> My old MS. Bible is not less nervous: Newe thou our dais as fro<\/I> the begynnyng: bot castand aweie thou put us out: thou wrathedist<\/I> ugein us hugely<\/I>.<\/P> <\/P> Dr. Blayney<\/I> translates, “For surely thou hast cast us off altogether:” and adds, ” ki<\/I> ought certainly to be rendered as causal<\/I>; God’s having rejected his people, and expressed great indignation against them, being the cause<\/I> and ground<\/I> of the preceding application, in which they pray to be restored to his favour, and the enjoyment of their ancient privileges.”<\/P> <\/P> Pareau<\/I> thinks no good sense can be made of this place unless we translate interrogatively, as in Jer 14:19<\/span>: – <\/P> “Hast thou utterly rejected Judah?<\/P> Hath thy soul loathed Sion?”<\/P> <\/P> On this ground he translates here,<\/P> <\/P> An enim prorsus nos rejecisses?<\/P> Nobis iratus esses usque adeo?<\/P> <\/P> “Hast thou indeed utterly cast us off?<\/P> Wilt thou be angry with us for ever?”<\/P> Wilt thou extend thy wrath against us so as to show us no more mercy? This agrees well with the state and feelings of the complainants. <\/P> MASORETIC NOTES<\/B><\/P> <\/P> Number of verses in this Book, 154.<\/P> <\/P> Middle verse, La 3:34<\/span>.<\/P> In one of my oldest MSS., the twenty-first<\/I> verse is repeated at the conclusion of the twenty-second<\/I> verse. In another, yet older, there is only the first word of it, hashibenu, Convert us<\/I>!<\/P> <\/P> Having given in the preceding preface<\/I> and notes<\/I> what I judge necessary to explain the principal difficulties in this very fine and affecting poem, very fitly termed THE LAMENTATIONS, as it justly stands at the head<\/I> of every composition of the kind, I shall add but a few words, and these shall be by way of recapitulation chiefly.<\/P> <\/P> The Hebrews were accustomed to make lamentations<\/I> or mourning<\/I> songs<\/I> upon the death of great men, princes, and heroes, who had distinguished themselves in arms; and upon any occasion of public<\/I> miseries and calamities<\/I>. Calmet<\/I> thinks they had collections<\/I> of these sorts of Lamentations: and refers in proof to 2Ch 35:25<\/span>: “And Jeremiah lamented for Josiah; and all the singing men and the singing women spake of Josiah in their lamentations, to this day; and made them an ordinance in Israel: and, behold, they are written in the Lamentations.”<\/P> <\/P> From this verse it is evident, that Jeremiah had composed a funeral elegy on Josiah<\/I>: but, from the complexion of this Book<\/I>, it is most evident that it<\/I> was not composed on the death of Josiah<\/I>, but upon the desolations of Jerusalem<\/I>, c., as has already been noted. His lamentation for Josiah<\/I> is therefore lost. It appears also, that on particular occasions, perhaps anniversaries<\/I>, these lamentations<\/I> were sung by men and women singers, who performed their several parts<\/I> for these were all alternate<\/I> or responsive<\/I> songs<\/I>. And it is very likely, that this book was sung in the same way; the men<\/I> commencing with aleph<\/I>, the women<\/I> responding with beth<\/I> and so on. Several of this sort of songs are still extant. We have those which David composed on the death of his son Absalom<\/I>, and on the death of his friend Jonathan<\/I>. And we have those made by Isaiah, Jeremiah<\/I>, and Ezekiel<\/I>, on the desolation of Egypt, Tyre, Sidon<\/I>, and Babylon<\/I>. See Isa 14:4-5<\/span>; Isa 15:1-9<\/span>; Isa 16:1-14<\/span>; Jer 7:29<\/span>; Jer 9:10<\/span>; Jer 48:32<\/span>; Eze 19:1<\/span>; Eze 28:11<\/span>; Eze 32:2<\/span>; Jer 9:17<\/span>. Besides these, we have fragments<\/I> of others in different places; and references to some, which are now finally lost.<\/P> <\/P> In the two<\/I> first chapters<\/I> of this book, the prophet describes, principally, the calamities of the siege of Jerusalem.<\/P> <\/P> In the third<\/I>, he deplores the persecutions which he himself had suffered; though he may in this be personifying<\/I> the city and state; many of his own sufferings being illustrative of the calamities that fell generally upon the city and people at large.<\/P> <\/P> The fourth<\/I> chapter is employed chiefly on the ruin and desolation of the city and temple; and upon the misfortunes of Zedekiah<\/I>, of whom he speaks in a most respectful, tender, and affecting manner: – <\/P> “The anointed of Jehovah, the breadth of our<\/P> nostrils, was taken in their toils,<\/P> Under whose shadow we said, We shall live<\/P> among the nations.”<\/P> At the end he speaks of the cruelty of the Edomites, who had insulted Jerusalem in her miseries, and contributed to its demolition. These he threatens with the wrath of God.<\/P> <\/P> The fifth<\/I> chapter is a kind of form of prayer<\/I> for the Jews, in their dispersions and captivity. In the conclusion of it, he speaks of their fallen royalty; attributes all their calamities to their rebellion and wickedness; and acknowledges that there can be no end to their misery, but in their restoration to the Divine favour.<\/P> <\/P> This last chapter was probably written some considerable time after<\/I> the rest: for it supposes the temple to be so deserted, that the foxes walked undisturbed among its ruins<\/I>, and that the people were already in captivity.<\/P> <\/P> The poem is a monument of the people’s<\/I> iniquity and rebellion; of the displeasure and judgment of GOD against them; and of the piety, eloquence, and incomparable ability of the poet<\/I>.<\/P><\/p>\n Our translators have here so rendered the particle <\/span> that the words seem to express some diffidence in the prophet of Gods mercy in restoring the people to their former state, some expressions of which nature we find falling from the most eminent servants of God in an hour of great temptation; but where such a sense is not necessary, it is hard to put it upon a text. Some therefore expound <\/span> in this place by But if. Others translate them, Although thou hast, &c. Mr. Calvin preferreth the translation of them by Nisi, Unless thou hast utterly rejected us, and thinks that by this expression the prophet confirmeth himself against temptations of diffidence, because it was impossible God should utterly cast off his people, Rom 11:2<\/span>. Others read it interrogatively, Hast thou utterly rejected us? which doth not suppose that the prophet believed he had, though his present providence showed him very angry with them. <\/P> <\/p>\n 22.<\/B> Rather, “Unless haplyThou hast utterly rejected us, and art beyond measure wroth againstus,” that is, Unless Thou art implacable, which is impossible,hear our prayer [CALVIN].Or, as Margin,<\/I> “For wouldest Thou utterly reject us?”c.No that cannot be. The Jews, in this book, and in Isaiah andMalachi, to avoid the ill-omen of a mournful closing sentence, repeatthe verse immediately preceding the last [CALVIN].<\/P><\/p>\n But thou hast utterly rejected us<\/strong>,…. That looks as if they had no hope, and were in despair of having their petitions granted; since God had entirely rejected them from being his people, and would never more have mercy on them; but the words may be rendered, “though thou hast in rejecting rejected us” e; or else, “unless thou hast utterly rejected us” f; or rather by an interrogation, “for wilt thou utterly reject”, or “despise us?” g surely thou wilt not; such is thy grace and goodness:<\/p>\n thou art very wroth against us<\/strong>; thou hast been, and still continuest to be: or, “wilt thou be exceeding wroth against us?” h or continue thy wrath to extremity, and for ever? thou wait not; it is not consistent with, thy mercy and grace, truth and faithfulness; and so it is an argument of faith in prayer, and not an expression of despondency; though the Jews, because they would not have the book end in what is sorrowful and distressing, repeat the foregoing verse; and the like method they take at the end of Ecclesiastes, and the prophecies of Isaiah and Malachi, as Jarchi observes.<\/p>\n e “quamvis detestatione detestatus es nos”, Targ. f “Nisi forte repudiando repudiasti nos”, Calvin. g “Nam an omnino sperneres nos?” Junius & Tremellius. h – “effervesceres contra nos admodum?” Junius & Tremellius.<\/p>\n The two words כי אם, ki am, are differently explained: some render them, “but if,” or “certainly if,” and thus separate the verse into two parts, “Surely if thou hast rejected us, thou art very angry;” but this is a forced meaning, not intended, as I think, by the Prophet. And these seem to have been compelled by necessity to pervert the Prophet’s words; because it appears hard simply to declare that the people had been wholly rejected by God. As, then, this harshness offended them, they contrived this comment, “If thou hast rejected us, thou art very angry.” But as I have said, this exposition I do not approve of, because it is a very forced one; and the greater part of interpreters follow what I stated in the first place, for they take כי אם, ki am, adversatively. The two particles are often connected together, and rendered, “though” or although, — “Though thou hast rejected us:” and hence the last verse has been repeated. <\/p>\n For the Jews labor under this superstition, that when a book ends with a hard and severe sentence, or one containing a dreadful threatening, grating to the ears, in order to avoid the sad omen, they repeat the last verse but one. So they do at the end of Isaiah, and at the end of Malachi. As Isaiah says, “It shall be a horror (or abomination) to all flesh;” they therefore repeat the previous verse. So in Malachi; as he says, “Lest I come and smite the earth with a curse — חרם, cherem, ” they think that as he pronounces there an anathema, it is a sort of charm that may absorb this curse, to have the previous verse repeated after it. There is, then, no doubt but that they took this passage in the same sense, “Though thou hast rejected us,” etc. <\/p>\n If this explanation be approved, we must hold that the Prophet here exceeded due limits, as also the faithful, in their prayers, do not always so restrain themselves, but that some heat bubbles up; for we see how David, in the Psalms, too often shewed this kind of feeling; and it is hence evident, that his mind was not always sufficiently calm. We must then say, that the Prophet was impelled by a turbulent feeling when he uttered these words. <\/p>\n But כי אם, ki am, may also be rendered, “Unless,” or except’ and it is singular that no one has perceived this, though it be not an unsuitable meaning, “Except it may be thou rejecting hast rejected us, and hast become very angry with us,” or above measure angry; for עד מאד, od mad in Hebrew, means the same as above measure ( supra modum) in Latin. Though the Prophet seems to speak doubtingly, by laying down t, his condition, there is vet no doubt but that he struggled against all unbelief, when he said, Except it may be; for he reasons from what is impossible, “Turn thou us to thee and we shall be turned, renew our days as formerly; except it may be thou hast rejected us:” but this was impossible. Then, as I have said, the Prophet here strengthens himself by setting up a shield against all the assaults of temptations when he says, Except it may be thou hast rejected us (240) <\/p>\n But it cannot be that God will reject his people, and be so angry with them, as never to be reconciled. We hence see that the Prophet does not simply set down the condition, as though he said, “O God, if thou art to be perpetually angry with us, and wilt never be reconciled, it is there all over with our salvation; but if thou wilt be reconciled to us, we shall then entertain good hope.” No, the Prophet did not thus keep his own mind and the minds of others in suspense, but had a sure confidence as to God’s favor; for it cannot be that God will ever forsake those whom he has chosen, as Paul also shews in the eleventh chapter of the Epistle to the Romans. <\/p>\n As it has so seemed good to the brethren, I will begin tomorrow the explanation of Ezekiel. <\/p>\n (240) The particles, כי אם, seem to have the meaning of “except,” as in Gen 32:26<\/span>, “except thou bless me.” But the exposition is too refined. The usual meaning of the particles is, but in truth, for surely, when indeed. See 1Sa 21:5<\/span>; Pro 23:18<\/span>; Exo 22:23<\/span>. They are rendered here, “for,” by the Sept., Syr., and Arab; “but,” by the Vulg. , and “although,” by the Targ. The version of Blayney and Henderson is, “For surely.” The Prophet assigns a reason for his petition in the preceding verse; as though he had said, “I ask for restoration to thy favor and to our land, because thou hast clearly manifested thy rejection of us, and thy displeasure towards us.” <\/p>\n For surely rejecting thou hast rejected us, Thou hast been wroth with us exceedingly, <\/p>\n or, more literally, <\/p>\n Thou hast foamed against us exceedingly. <\/p>\n The first line here corresponds with the latter part of the previous verse, “Restore us to our land, and renew the ancient days,” — “Thou hast wholly rejected us.” He speaks of things as they were then. Then the last line in this verse bears a relation to the first part of the preceding verse, “Restore us to thy favor,” — “Thou hast been exceedingly displeased with us.” Thus, for displeasure he asked favor, and for repudiation, a restoration. — Ed. <\/p>\n <\/p>\n (22) But thou hast . . .<\/strong>The Authorised version represents the mourner as falling back from the hopeful prayer into the depths of despair. For but we should, however, read unless. <\/em>The hypothesis of utter rejection is just stated as the only thing that could prevent renewal and restoration, and it is stated as per impossible; <\/em>God has not rejected, and therefore He will renew.<\/p>\n It may be noted that in Synagogue use, and in many MSS., Lam. 5:21<\/span> is repeated after Lam. 5:22<\/span>, so that the book may not end with words of so terrible a significance. The same practice obtained in the case of the last verse of Isaiah, Ecclesiastes, and Malachi.<\/p>\n Lam 5:22 But thou hast utterly rejected us; thou art very wroth against us.<\/p>\n Ver. 22. But thou hast utterly rejected us.<\/strong> ] This is a sad catastrophe, or close of this doleful ditty, a<\/em> Sometimes God’s suppliants are put hard to it in the course of their prayers; the last grain of their faith and patience seemeth to be put into the scale. When the Son of man cometh with deliverance to his praying people, shall he find faith in the earth? Hard and scarce; and yet he comes oft when they have even done looking for him. He is seen in the mount; he helpeth those that are forsaken of their hopes: hallelujah. Sure it is that God cannot utterly reject his people whom he hath chosen. Rom 11:2-5 Tremellius rendereth it – and so the margin of our Bibles hath it, and I think better – For wilt thou utterly reject us, or be extremely wroth with us – scil., <\/em> supra modulum nostrum<\/em> – according to thine infinite power, and above all that we are able to bear? I cannot think it, neither doth it consist with thy covenant. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n Here (as also at the end of Ecclesiastes, Isaiah, and Malachi) many of the Hebrew Bibles repeat the foregoing verse, Turn thou us unto thee, O Lord, &c., yet without points, lest anything should seem added thereby to the holy Scriptures. Hebrew Text Note<\/em> The reason hereof read in the end of the prophecy of Isaiah. See Trapp on “<\/em> Isa 66:24 “<\/em> This is also here observed by the most renowned Mr Thomas Gataker, whom, for honour’s sake, I name, and to whose most accurate and elaborate annotations upon Isaiah and Jeremiah I have been not a little beholden all along. These he finished not long before his death, to the great glory of God and good of his Church. And of him, and this worthy work of his, I may fitly say, as a learned man doth of Magellan of Portugal (that great navigator), that the strait or sea now called by his name – Fretum Magellanicum – una navigatione simul et immortalem gloriam et mortem ei attulerit<\/em> – was both his death and his never dying monument. b<\/em> <\/p>\n “Hitherto hath the Lord helped us.” – 1Sa 7:12 <\/p>\n<\/p>\n a<\/em> Est aposiopesis ad pathos.<\/em> <\/p>\n b<\/em> Boxhorn Histor. Universal.<\/p>\n art = hast been. <\/p>\n In the public reading of the Hebrew text Lam 5:21 is repeated after Lam 5:22, so that the book may end with comfort. The same is the case with Ecclesiastes, Isaiah, and Malachi. The synagogue use appoints this book to be read on the Fast of Ab, which commemorates the destruction of Jerusalem. <\/p>\n But thou hast utterly rejected us: or, For wilt thou utterly reject us, Psa 44:9, Psa 60:1, Psa 60:2, Jer 15:1-5, Eze 37:11, Hos 1:6 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: Isa 5:25 – the anger Jer 6:30 – the Lord Jer 12:11 – it mourneth Jer 14:19 – utterly Eze 36:3 – they have made Mic 2:4 – a doleful lamentation Mat 22:11 – which<\/p>\n Lam 5:22. The book and chapter closes with a repetition of the terrible state of mind possessed by the cast-off nation of God. The expressions rep-resent the personal feelings of the righteous Jeremiah, a faithful prophet, and also those of the sinful nation who were suffering the just chastisement for their evil conduct.<\/p>\n The only reason the Lord might not restore Israel was if<\/span> He had fully and permanently rejected His people because He was so angry with them. By mentioning this possibility at the very end of the book, Jeremiah led his readers to recall God’s promises that He would never completely abandon His chosen people.<\/p>\n Because this last verse of the book is so negative, many Hebrew manuscripts of Lamentations end by repeating Lam 5:21 after Lam 5:22. It also became customary, when the Jews read the book in synagogue worship, for them to repeat Lam 5:21 at the end. They also did this when they read other books that end on a negative note (i.e., Ecclesiastes, Isaiah, and Malachi).<\/p>\n In view of God’s promises to Israel, He would not abandon the nation completely. He would bless them in the future (cf. Lev 26:44; Jer 31:31-37; Rom 11:1-2; 2Ti 2:13). Nevertheless the focus of this book is on the misery that sin produces, not the hope of future deliverance.<\/p>\n "The theological message of Lamentations may be summarized as follows: God’s angry disciplinary judgment of His people, while severe and deserved, was not final." [Note: Chisholm, p. 359.] <\/span><\/p>\n But thou hast utterly rejected us; thou art very wroth against us. 22. But, etc.] better as mg., Unless thou and art, etc. The whole sentence is an hypothesis not to be accepted as fact. God’s anger cannot last for ever, and thus there is yet hope. Although the Book does in fact close with … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Lamentations 5:22”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-20475","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20475","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=20475"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20475\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=20475"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=20475"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=20475"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
<\/P>
<\/P>
<\/P> Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"