... hybrid) or extravagant (the flowers named are significant in biblical floral imagery). In either case, her reference to herself as a flower recalls her metaphorical identification of her lover with myrrh and henna blossoms. In 2:2, the man affirms and heightens her claim. She is indeed a lily. What is more, she is a lily among thorns, beauty amidst plainness, softness among prickly things, and uniquely fragrant. The woman responds in kind in 2:3. She says he is like a fruit tree, fruitful among trees ...
... sense of the reference to multiple queens and concubines depends on whether, with most interpreters, one understands the central couple to be commoners, or whether one believes that Solomon is the central man. If a commoner, the man, as the lover of only one woman, claims that he would rather have her than the many that are available for a king. If Solomon, he may be saying that of all the women in his harem, this one is uniquely lovely. The admiration of the maidens for the central woman here corresponds ...
... . Israel was special among the nations of the world in that they had an intimate relationship with God. This intimate relationship meant that any other nation who disturbed Israel would feel divine displeasure. Continuing the firstfruit metaphor, the text claims that anyone who devoured the Israelites would be declared guilty and disaster would overtake them. In other words, Israel was the recipient of God’s special protection. Additional Notes 2:2–3 Jeremiah focuses on the marriage metaphor in this ...
... stealing, murder, perjury, adultery, and worshiping other gods. These are direct offenses toward the heart of God’s covenant law as expressed in the Ten Commandments. Nonetheless, these people still come to the temple (the house that bears my Name) and claim it as a refuge against outside attack. Strikingly, God accuses the people of turning his temple into a den of robbers. The Judean country-side was filled with caves that occasionally served as a hideout for thieves. Since the people and priests ...
Light Turns to Darkness (13:15-17): 13:15–17 In this next oracle, Jeremiah begins by calling his hearers, the people of Judah, to pay attention. He claims to speak for the Lord, and calls on them to acknowledge the Lord by giving him his proper glory. But there is a time limit of unspecified duration for them to do this. Soon God will bring his judgment on the people, the judgment signified by a coming darkness. In ...
... a prophet in the womb (Jer. 1:5), this statement also throws a note of sarcasm on his prophetic task. Additional Notes 20:11 The image of God as a mighty warrior is a pervasive one in the Bible (Longman and Reid, God is a Warrior). Here Jeremiah claims that the warrior is with him personally in his battle against those who try to subvert his prophecy. It seems to be a pattern that the Divine Warrior makes his presence known to his prophets on the occasion that the kings become apostate (see 2 Kgs. 6:8–23 ...
... announces his intention to break the yoke off the neck of his people. The metaphor of the yoke as a metaphor for political oppression is one with which readers are familiar from chapter 28, in the fight between Jeremiah and Hananiah. The latter’s claim that God was going to break the yoke from the neck of his people rang hollow because he proclaimed that freedom would come in short order and before further judgment. But God himself here announces their future freedom from political oppression (no longer ...
... saying that God had told him not to eat or drink until he returned from the northern to the southern kingdom. On the way home, however, an old prophet greets him and invites him to eat and drink. When the unnamed prophet declines, the old prophet claims that he has a new prophetic word that would allow the unnamed prophet to eat and drink. The unnamed prophet does so, but is condemned for listening to the false words of the older prophet. He should have known that a later divine oracle would not contradict ...
... in Judah. It is possible, though only speculation, that the reason why Ishmael is taking these women to Ammon is because Baalis, who is directing Ishmael here, is interested in marrying into the family of David in order to have some kind of claim on the land. Perhaps Baalis is foolishly thinking that if he, through Ishmael, destroyed the Babylonian garrison and its Judean puppets he might be able to exert hegemony over the area. This might be the significance behind the fact that Ishmael took them captive ...
... country as far as Aroer, near Rabbah” (Josh. 13:28). Internecine war plagued Ammon and Israel all throughout their common history. There are numerous examples in the Bible. The judge Jephthah had to counter Ammon’s attempt to push into territory Israel claimed (Judg. 10–11). Saul fought with Nahash the Ammonite king over the city of Jabesh Gilead (1 Sam. 11). It was while Joab was leading the armies of Israel against the Ammonites that David impregnated Bathsheba (2 Sam. 10). Jehoshaphat engaged in ...
... Damascus even calling it the town in which I delight. Perhaps the best solution here is to understand the verse to be a quote from a Syrian. There is never any indication elsewhere that Damascus is the object of God’s special concern. Indeed, it is God who claims responsibility for the burning of that city and its fortresses. Additional Notes 49:27 Three kings of Syria are known to have borne the name Ben-Hadad. Ben-Hadad 1 (ca. 900–860 B.C.), Ben-Hadad II (874–853 B.C.), and Ben-Hadad III (ca. 805 ...
... many of the other oracles, this one is dated, specifically to early in the reign of Zedekiah king of Judah. This would indicate a time soon after Zedekiah took the throne in 597 B.C. 49:35–39 In the oracle against Elam, God claims responsibility for the destruction of that nation. This assertion does not preclude God’s use of secondary causes, and there is some reason to think that the prophecy has a Babylonian conquest in mind. There is some evidence, though not determinative, that Nebuchadnezzar ...
... and to exploit (Ps. 80:12; 89:41). The most telling use of the phrase comes in Jeremiah (18:16; 19:8; 22:8; 49:17; 50:13), where those who pass by a ruined city are appalled. Speaking to those who pass by, personified Jerusalem claims to have experienced unprecedented suffering and even more importantly attributes the suffering to none other than God himself. God’s anger is the explanation for the horrific condition of the city. 1:13 Mem. Though on the human level it was the Babylonian army that destroyed ...
... allotted to the tribes as their portion and associates the word with the word “inheritance” (nahala). The Levites had God as their special portion (Deut. 10:9), since they did not receive land, and now the man of affliction on behalf of the community lays claim to the same type of relationship. 3:25–27 Tet. All three verses not only begin with the same letter of the Hebrew alphabet (tet), but the very same word tob, “good.” The poet presents three things that are good for those who are faithful ...
... fulfillment of the demands of a relationship, and very often Yahweh’s “righteousness” consists in his salvation of his people, which fulfills the demands of his covenant relation with them. Justice signifies the fulfillment of those legal rights and claims appropriate to the relationship. Ḥesed is that steadfast love and devotion given within a covenant relation. “Mercy” is sympathy and help toward the dependent. Faithfulness or ʾemûnâ comes from the same stem as our word “amen,” and is ...
... his people. To be sure, Yahweh says in verse 2, the people cry out to him in their distress, in cult and in private. The actual Hebrew reading is important here. Verse 2 reads: “To me they cry; ‘My God, we, Israel, know you’!” Each individual claims that his or her relationship with Yahweh is still an intimate one of knowledge and obedience. But Yahweh knows better. Israel has rejected the good, verse 3. That which is good, according to the Bible, is God (cf. Mark 10:18 and parallels). He is the ...
... is that Judah has not hitherto known. Rather, if the prophet’s name is any indication, Judah has gone after other gods. Apostasy has been its sin, in violation of the first commandment. The word of the LORD . . . came to Joel. All of the prophets make that claim—that they are speaking words that the Lord God has given them to speak. When we study the writings of the prophets, it is clear that the word of God comes to them from outside of themselves. This is emphasized in Jeremiah 15:16 and Ezekiel 3:1 ...
... call on his name are the ones who will stand in the last day (Rom. 10:9–13). That means, in our time and in every time, that we are therefore to worship only the God revealed to us in Jesus Christ through the Scriptures. Many false gods and goddesses claim our allegiance in our society. But “there is no other name under heaven given to men (and women) by which we must be saved” than the name of Jesus Christ (Acts 4:12). To call on his name means to live by his will and not by our own, and ...
... culture and cult because he sees it as an outsider whose sensitivities are outraged by its contrast to the simple life” (“Words about the Words of Amos,” p. 266). Similarly, the fashion in some liberation theologies of the present day has been to claim that only the poor can properly understand the word of God. Such a view would eliminate Amos from the canon, not to mention Isaiah of Jerusalem, with his entrance to kings’ courts. God chooses those to whom he will reveal himself. The superscription ...
... ). Because of the work of Jesus Christ, which has grafted us into the root of Israel (Rom. 11:17–24), made us citizens of Israel’s commonwealth (Eph. 2:11–22), and allowed us to share the name of “the Israel of God” (Gal. 6:16), we Christians can now claim to be among the elect (cf. Rom. 8:33; 2 Tim. 2:10; 2 Pet. 1:10). But as our Lord tells us in Luke 12:48, “From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more ...
... word is always one of hope and restoration and salvation. With God alone, however, rest all our hopes for salvation. Significantly, Amos 9:12 emphasizes that it is the Lord alone who will do these things. Enslaved to our sinful injustice and empty worship practices and proud claims that we can save ourselves, we cannot bring in the kingdom of God on earth. But Yahweh Elohim Sebaoth can bring it and is doing so. The promises of Amos 9:11–15 center on the fulfillment of the promise to David and on God’s ...
... eyes.” Jonah has gotten all worked up over a plant for which he did not labor, which he did not cause to grow, and which is here today and gone tomorrow. The plant has been solely an undeserved gift from God, its creator and owner. Jonah has had no claim on it whatsoever. Yet Jonah has had not a shred of pity for the great city of Nineveh, in which there are 120,000 people too ignorant and helpless to know their right hand from their left, not to mention all of their innocent cattle, verse 11. Nineveh and ...
... :1): 1:1 The superscription has been affixed to the prophecies of Micah by an unknown editor and is, in its initial phrase (The word of the LORD that came to Micah) the same form as that found in Hosea 1:1; Joel 1:1; and Zephaniah 1:1. The claim that what follows is “the word of the LORD” is intended to apply to the entire book. Not just selected portions of the book, and not just portions that scholars judge to stem from the prophet himself are to be understood as words from God. No. All seven chapters ...
... 9 is very clear. The powerful dispossess poor widows of their sheltering homes by foreclosing on loans or by simply evicting them with no cause, again a violation of the law (cf. Exod. 22:22; Mark 12:40). The women and their children are thereby left with no claim to property or rights or dignity (hādār) in the community. The NIV has translated hādār with blessing, which is loosely correct, but hādār can be connected with the ownership of land (Jer. 3:19). 2:10–11 Having specified their sins, Micah ...
... ruler comes from God and not from the Jerusalem succession of Davidic kings is emphasized, however, by the statement that his tribe or clan, which designated an association of extended families, was one of the smallest in Israel, verse 2b. Similarly humble backgrounds are claimed for Saul (1 Sam. 9:21) and Gideon (Judg. 6:15). Repeatedly the Scripture emphasizes what the Apostle Paul put into words: God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong, God chose what is low and despised in the world ...