... will energize his carrying out of his plan. The plan that apparently is in mind here is the plan to use the Babylonians to judge his sinful people. The false message of the false prophets will not hinder the coming judgment. The people will understand this clearly in the future; namely, after God puts the plan into effect. This oracle will be repeated in a different context in 30:23–24. This particular oracle ends with the reiterated assertion that these false prophets did not come from the Lord. They ...
... of Jehoiakim (Jer. 36:9). A surface reading of the Babylonian Chronicle appears to support this opinion. According to Hartman and Di Lella (The Book of Daniel [New York: Doubleday, 1978], p. 48), the second-century author of Daniel was confused and misled by his understanding of 2 Chronicles 36:6–7 in connection with 2 Kings 24:1. D. J. Wiseman (Notes on Some Problems in the Book of Daniel [Wheaton, Ill.: Tyndale, 1965], pp.16–18) countered this argument by reminding us that there were two systems of ...
... of horror, scorn, and cursing. At the end of the verse is an intriguing clause that simply states: as they are today. Clearly that means that Judah and Jerusalem already exhibit the horrifying conditions described in the verse, but it is less clear exactly how to understand it. Fretheim (Jeremiah, p. 358) suggests that this indicates that this is an oracle that was delivered to an exilic audience. If this is so, it makes one wonder why God now wants to get them to drink the cup to make them a ruin. Thompson ...
... and Dan. 1:1–2 for a similar dynamic). 27:7 This verse indicates that Babylon’s dominance will not last forever. The verse specifies that Babylonian power will last beyond Nebuchadnezzar’s time through that of his son and grandson. We can and should understand this phrase as simply meaning for an extended period of time. While Nebuchadnezzar’s son, Amel-Marduk (mentioned in 2 Kgs. 25:27 [Evil-Merodach]) did succeed him in 562 B.C. and ruled for two years, he was deposed and replaced by Neriglissar ...
... prohibited in reference to “the dead.” In the last passage, the practice is not specified as relating to the dead, but it is forbidden for priests. However, even granting that this practice was not legitimate, it does not seem likely that we should understand Ishmael as a kind of Jehu figure who was killing to purify Israel from false worship. The stance of the text seems decidedly anti-Ishmael. It does not extol him, but portrays him as a wild-eyed murderer. His killing of defenseless worshipers, even ...
... get ready for war (take your positions and get ready). The command is ironic because the speaker knows full well that such preparations are going to be futile. Verse 15 is problematic in translation and interpretation (see Additional Notes). In our understanding, the verse contains a question that mocks Egypt by imagining the flight of one of its most potent representations of deity, namely the Apis bull. This bull represented fertility and important annual rituals surrounded it. But here it is conceived as ...
... of Assyria facing destruction at the hands of Babylon. Obviously in times when women fight in all manner of armed forces, calling enemy troops “women” does not have the same force today as it would have when originally written, but we can still understand the point. The reason for Moab’s destruction is because they have defied the LORD. The rebellion may specifically be linked to false worship (v. 35), but also mischievous behavior toward God’s people. The oracle then turns to hunting images—the ...
... like a woman in labor, in terror and great pain. Verse 25 presents a special problem in that it seems the first person speaker takes an empathetic view toward 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 ...
... forced departure would be particularly difficult for the native population that remained behind. And many did remain behind, as we learn from Jeremiah 40–41. It is also possible that this number refers only to adult males. At least that is the way many understand the discrepancy between the number given for the 597 exiles here in Jeremiah (832) and the number given for the same period in 2 Kings 24:14 (10,000). The exile of 582 persons likely refers to the almost certain Babylonian retaliation for the ...
... people (or perhaps since the prayer is in the singular [I] personified Jerusalem standing for the people) plaintively speak to God to pay attention to their horrid situation. 1:12 Lamed. The verse opens with personified Jerusalem questioning (see Additional Notes for an alternative understanding) those who pass by. Those who pass by are likely thought to be those who would walk by and marvel at the frightful sight of a destroyed city. At the same time, those who walk by might be likened to those who walk by ...
... enemies the LORD sends against you. He will put an iron yoke on your neck until he has destroyed you. The LORD will bring a nation against you from far away, from the ends of the earth, like an eagle swooping down, a nation whose language you will not understand, a fierce-looking nation without respect for the old or pity for the young. (Deut. 28:45–50) God had planned that if his people broke the covenant, he would treat them in such a way, and since they did fail God in that way, he fulfilled his word ...
... this oracle into three, verse 9–10, 11–12 (or 13a), 13 (or 13b)–15. However, it is one piece, held together by the central figure of the yoke, verse 11. By its rearrangement of lines and mistranslation of verse 11, the NIV has considerably muddled the understanding of the whole, however. The Hebrew of verse 11 reads: Ephraim was a trained heifer that loved to thresh, and I spared her fair neck; but I will put Ephraim to the yoke, Judah must plow, Jacob must harrow for himself. (So too the RSV.) What ...
... Hosea, death is an instrument of judgment (cf. Rom. 6:23). Why? Because, God says, “Compassion is hid from my eyes” (so reads the Hebrew). The meaning of verse 15a is obscure, and many have emended it to read, “Though he flourishes among rushes,” understandingʾāḥû as “reeds” or “rushes” on the basis of Ugaritic (so Wolff, Hosea, p. 15; instead of ʾaḥîm, brothers). The image is then given of a reed plant that flourishes in waters, but that will be dried up by the east wind—the hot ...
... influenced by the sights and sounds of the locust horde that invaded Judah, just as the day pictured in Revelation 9:2–11 was similarly influenced. But it must also be said that the locust plague is a thing of the past in Joel—that is absolutely necessary for understanding the book. And the army portrayed in Joel 2:1–11 is no natural foe or even an historical one. No, the army that approaches in the prophet’s vision is the enemy from the North, foretold by Jeremiah (Jer. 1:13–15; 4:5–22, 29–31 ...
“But Even Now” (2:12-14): 2:12–14 This is one passage in Joel where it is absolutely necessary that we understand what the original Hebrew says, because the NIV translation has missed the force of the opening words. Verse 12 begins with “But even now,” the “but” being translated from what is known as a waw adversative, and it is that “but” that is all important. If God had not said “ ...
... Babylonian Empire having been conquered by that ruler; but many Jews settled abroad and remained dispersed throughout the ancient Near East. All of the prophets preceding Joel considered the exiling of Israel to be punishment for its sin, but verse 2 here also understands Israel’s captivity as a sinful work of the foreign nations. Second, God charges the foreign nations with taking portions of God’s land of Palestine for themselves, verse 2. As we saw in connection with 1:5–7, the OT never considered ...
... note below). The NRSV takes the meaning to be that God will avenge the slaying of the Israelites by their enemies. If that is the proper interpretation, then the line may belong after verse 19, as many scholars have suggested. On the other hand, the NIV understands the verse as referring to God’s forgiveness of the people for their bloodguilt, i.e., for their shedding of innocent blood, but such a thought has appeared nowhere else in Joel and is intrusive here. One can either omit the line, or place it ...
... pities his children and came to rescue us in Jesus Christ. 7:1–3 While the NIV has drastically altered the original text here (cf. the RSV), it has correctly interpreted the meaning of the original and made verses 1–2 considerably easier to understand. The time of this vision of locusts is late spring, when the second planting of seeded crops, as well as wild growth, are just appearing—all vegetation is meant. Apparently the royal house had first claim on what was planted, although the evidence for ...
The Command and the Flight (1:1-3): 1:1–3 The NIV has omitted several rhetorical devices in these first three verses that are significant for an understanding of Jonah. Verse 1:1 begins with way e hî, which may be translated, “Now it came to pass,” or simply “Now.” The word is a sure indication that what follows is a story or narrative (cf. MT of Josh. 1:1; Judg. 1:1). Verse 2 begins with “arise” ( ...
... thanks” in Hebrew thought was “to confess,” and so God was not properly thanked until the deliverance was recounted in the congregation and it too was inspired to praise God’s name. To comprehend the content of this psalm, we need to have some understanding of the Hebrew worldview, of the symbol of the sea/deep/flood, and of the OT conception of death. According to the portrayal of the world that we find in Genesis 1 and throughout the Scriptures, the universe was three-storied, with heaven above ...
... :4; 2 Chron. 30:9; cf. Num. 14:18; Nah. 1:3; Ps. 112:4 margin). The adjectives “gracious” and “merciful” (NIV: compassionate) both appear thirteen times in the OT and are used only of God (Limburg, Jonah, pp. 90, 91). In short, the heart of Israel’s understanding of God is set forth here in one brief sentence. Yahweh of Israel is a God who would rather forgive than destroy, who takes pity on all who have need, who is not quick to condemn and when condemning is not quick to act in judgment, and who ...
... , who rules in the strength of God, will reign over a universal kingdom (Ps. 2:8; 18:43; 72:8; 89:25), and his people will live in security (Hebrew: “dwell”) in everlasting fulfillment of 2 Samuel 7:10. Luke 2:4 and John 7:42 both understand Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem of Judea as a fulfillment of this prophecy, and Micah 5:2–4 is quoted from the LXX version in Matthew 2:6. Thus, the Christian church has always understood Jesus Christ to be this Messiah promised by the prophet. Certainly he is the ...
... 14 whom Israel is to shun (cf. Ezek. 13:6). The images, stone pillars, and Asherah poles that Micah 5:13–14 marks for God’s destruction were all used in foreign and specifically Canaanite cult practices. Contrary to our usual understanding, it was not believed by the foreign peoples that such idols contained their deities. Rather such objects were considered to be transparent bearers of divine revelation. They marked the sacred spot where the deity was present, and they were transparent objects through ...
... plans (using expressions related to Nahum’s) against Judah. But this king will find that there is a higher authority making plans concerning his destiny. And that is because he plans “evil” and counsels “wickedness” (beliyaʿal). Nahum’s hearers could understand that word to mean “worthlessness” (beli and yaʿal). But the preceding talk of “an overwhelming flood” and the “darkness” of death (v. 8) might make them think about Death as the one who swallows up (balaʿ) and/or of not ...
... 8 and the earlier description of world creation in Genesis 1 (see, e.g., Gen. 1:26; 6:7). This is not merely a terrible harvest but a reprise of the undoing of creation at the flood. The reason for the destruction comes in the fourth line; however we understand it (see the additional note), it takes the thought and language in a new direction and marks the end of the subsection. 1:3b–6 So is Yahweh revoking the commitment never again to cut off humanity from the face of the earth (cf. Gen. 9:11 for this ...