Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.comKeil and Delitzsch Commentary - Lamentations 3:19 - 3:19
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Consideration of God's compassion and His omnipotence as displayed at critical junctures in the affairs of men. C. B. Michaelis has correctly perceived, and thus set forth, the transition from the complaint, bordering on despair, to hope, as given in Lam 3:19 : luctatur hic contra desperationis adfectum, quo tentatus fuerat, Lam 3:18, mix inde per fidem emersurus. In like manner it is said in the Berleburger Bibel, "In Lam 3:19 he struggles with despair, to which he had been tempted, and in the following verse soars up once more into the region of faith." By the resumption of עֳנִי from Lam 3:1, and of לַעֲנָה and רֹאשׁ from Lam 3:15 and Lam 3:5, the contents of the whole preceding lamentation are given in a summary, and by זְכֹר are presented to God in prayer. "Mine affliction" is intensified by the addition of "my persecution" (see on Lam 1:7), and the contents of the lamentation thereby more plainly pointed out. This connection of the verse has been misunderstood in many ways. An old interpretation of the words, still maintained by Böttcher and Thenius, makes זְכֹר an infinitive; according to this view, Lam 3:19 would require to be conjoined with the preceding, and the inf. without לְ would stand for the ground, recordando, "while I think of," - which is grammatically impossible.
(Note: Seb. Münster long since said: Secundum quosdam est זְכֹר infinit., ut sit sensus: periit spes mea, recordante me afflictionis meae. Calvin also gives the preference to this view, with the remark: Videtur enim hic propheta exprimere, quomodo fere a spe exciderit, ut nihil reperiret amplius fortitudinis in Deo, quia scilicet oppressus erat malis; in support of which he affirms that it is valde absurdum, eos qui experti sunt aliquando Dei misericordiam, sic omnem spem abjicere, ut non statuant amplius sibi esse refugium ad Deum.)
The same remark applies to the assumption that זְכֹר is an infinitive which is resumed in Lam 3:20 : "it thinks of my misery...yes, my soul thinks thereon" (Böttcher, Thenius). Gerlach very properly remarks concerning this view that such a construction is unexampled, and, as regards the change in the form of the infinitive (constr. and abs.), would be unintelligible. The objection of Thenius, however, that the imperative meaning usually attached to זְכֹר is against the whole context, and quite inappropriate here, is connected with the erroneous assumption that Lam 3:19 and Lam 3:20 form a continuation of what precedes, and that the idea of the speaker's being completely overwhelmed by the thought of all that he had suffered and still suffers, forms the proper conclusion of the first part, after which, from Lam 3:21 onwards, there follows relief. Gerlach has rightly opposed to these arguments the following considerations: (1) That, after the outburst of despair in Lam 3:18, "my strength is gone, and my hope from Jahveh," the words "my soul is bowed down in me" form far too feeble a conclusion; (2) That it is undoubtedly more correct to make the relief begin with a prayer breathed out through sighs (Lam 3:19), than with such a reflection as is expressed in Lam 3:21. Ewald also is right in taking זְכֹר as an imperative, but is mistaken in the notion that the speaker addresses any one who is ready to hear him; this view is shown to be erroneous by the simple fact that, in what precedes and succeeds, the thoughts of the speaker are directed to God only.
Lam 3:20-23
The view taken of this verse will depend on the answer to the question whether תִּזְכֹר is second or third pers. fem. Following in the wake of Luther ("Thou wilt assuredly think thereon"), C. B. Michaelis, Pareau, Rosenmüller, and Kalkschmidt take it as second pers.: "Think, yea, think wilt Thou, that my soul is bowed down in me," or "that my soul is at rest within me" (Nägelsbach). But it is impossible to maintain either of these views in the face of the language employed. To take the ו before תָּשִׁיחַ in the meaning of quod is characterized by Nägelsbach as an arbitrary procedure, unwarranted either by Gen 30:27 or Eze 13:11; but neither can the meaning of resting, being at east, which is attributed to שׁוּחַ or שִׁיחַ by that writer, be established. The verb means to sink down, Pro 2:18, and metaphorically, to be bowed down, Psa 44:26. The latter meaning is required in the present passage, from the simple fact that the sentence undeniably refers to Psa 42:6.
(Note: Luther's translation, "for my soul tells me," is founded on the circumstance that the lxx have mistaken שִׁיחַ for שִׂיחַ: καταδολεσχήσει ἐπ ̓ ἐμὲ ἡ ψυχή μου.)
וְתָּשִׁיחַ expresses the consequence of זָכֹר תִּזְכֹר, which therefore can only be the third pers., and "my soul" the subject of both clauses; for there is no logical consecution of the meaning given by such a rendering as, "If Thou wilt remember, my soul shall be bowed within me." The expression, "If my soul duly meditates thereon (on the deep suffering), it becomes depressed within me," forms the foundation of the request that God would think of his distress, his misery; and Lam 3:21, "I will lay this to heart," connects itself with the leading thought set forth in Lam 3:19, the reason for which is given in Lam 3:20, viz., that my soul is only bowed down within me over the thought of my distress, and must complain of it to God, that He may think of it and alleviate it: This will I lay to heart and set my hope upon. עַל־כֵּן is a strong inferential expression: "therefore," because God alone can help, will I hope. This self-encouragement begins with Lam 3:22, inasmuch as the prophet strengthens his hope by a consideration of the infinite compassion of the Lord. (It is) חַסְדֵי, "the mercies of God," i.e., proofs of His mercy (cf. Psa 89:2; Psa 107:43; Isa 63:7), "that we are not utterly consumed," as Luther and similarly our English translators have excellently rendered תָּמְנוּ. This form stands for תַּמֹּונוּ, as in Jer 44:18; Num 17:1-13 :28, not for תַּמּוּ, third pers., as Pareau, Thenius, Vaihinger, and Ewald, referring to his Grammar, §84, b, would take it. The proofs of the grace of God have their foundation in His compassion, from which they flow. In Lam 3:23 we take חַסְדֵי as the subject of חֲדָשִׁים; it is the proofs of the grace of God that are new every morning, not "His compassions," although the idea remains the same. לַבְּקָרִים, every morning, as in Isa 33:2; Psa 73:14. Ubi sol et dies oritur, simul et radii hujus inexhaustae bonitatis erumpunt (Tarnovius in Rosenmüller). The consciousness of this constant renewal of the divine favour impels to the prayerful exclamation, "great is Thy faithfulness;" cf. Psa 36:6.
Lam 3:24-28
"My portion is Jahveh:" this is a reminiscence from Psa 16:5; Psa 73:26; Psa 142:6; cf. Psa 119:57, where the expression found here is repeated almost verbatim. The expression is based on Num 18:20, where the Lord says to Aaron, "I am thy portion and thine inheritance;" i.e., Jahveh will be to the tribe of Levi what the other tribes receive in their territorial possessions in Canaan; Levi shall have his possession and enjoyment in Jahveh. The last clause, "therefore will I hope," etc., is a repetition of what is in Lam 3:21, as if by way of refrain.
This hope cannot be frustrated, Lam 3:25. The fundamental idea of the section contained in Lam 3:25-33 is thus stated by Nägelsbach: "The Lord is well disposed towards the children of men under all circumstances; for even when He smites them, He seeks their highest interest: they ought so to conduct themselves in adversity, that it is possible for Him to carry out His designs." On Lam 3:25, cf. Psa 34:9; Psa 86:5; and on the general meaning, also Psa 25:3; Psa 69:7. If the Lord is kind to those who hope in Him, then it is good for man to wait patiently for His help in suffering. Such is the mode in which Lam 3:26 is attached to Lam 3:25. טֹוב, Lam 3:26 and Lam 3:27, followed by לְ dat., means to be good for one, i.e., beneficial. Some expositors (Gesenius, Rosenmüller, Maurer, Nägelsbach) take יָחִיל as a noun-form, substantive or adjective; דּוּמָם is then also taken in the same way, and ו - ו as correlative: "it is good both to wait and be silent." But although there are analogous cases to support the view that יָחִיל is a noun-form, the constant employment of דּוּמָם as an adverb quite prevents us from taking it as an adjective. Moreover, "to be silent for the help of the Lord," would be a strange expression, and we would rather expect "to be silent and wait for;" and finally, waiting and silence are so closely allied, that the disjunctive ו - ו et - et appears remarkable. We prefer, then, with Ewald (Gram. §235, a) and others, to take יָחִיל as a verbal form, and that, too, in spite of the i in the jussive form of the Hiphil for יָחֵל, from חוּל, in the meaning of יָחַל, to wait, tarry. "It is good that he (man) should wait, and in silence too (i.e., without complaining), for the help of the Lord." On the thought presented here, cf. Psa 38:7 and Isa 30:15. Hence it is also good for man to bear a yoke in youth (Lam 3:27), that he may exercise himself in calm waiting on the help of the Lord. In the present context the yoke is that of sufferings, and the time of youth is mentioned as the time of freshness and vigour, which render the bearing of burdens more easy. He who has learned in youth to bear sufferings, will not sink into despair should they come on him in old age. Instead of בִּנְעוּרָיו, Theodotion has ἐκ νεότητος αὐτοῦ, which is also the reading of the Aldine edition of the lxx; and some codices have מִנְּעוּרָיו. But this reading is evidently a correction, prompted by the thought that Jeremiah, who composed the Lamentations in his old age, had much suffering to endure from the time of his call to the prophetic office, in the earlier portion of his old age; nor is it much better than the inference of J. D. Michaelis, that Jeremiah composed this poem when a youth, on the occasion of King Josiah's death. - In Lam 3:28-30, the effect of experience by suffering is set forth, yet not in such a way that the verses are to be taken as still dependent on כִּי in Lam 3:27 (Luther, Pareau, De Wette, Maurer, and Thenius): "that he should sit alone and be silent," etc. Such a combination is opposed to the independent character of each separate alphabetic strophe. Rather, the result of early experience in suffering and patience is developed in a cohortative form. The connection of thought is simply as follows: Since it is good for man that he should learn to endure suffering, let him sit still and bear it patiently, when God puts such a burden on him. Let him sit solitary, as becomes those in sorrow (see on Lam 1:1), and be silent, without murmuring (cf. Lam 3:26), when He lays a burden on him. There is no object to נָטַל expressly mentioned, but it is easily understood from the notion of the verb (if He lays anything on him), or from עֹל in Lam 3:27 (if He lays a yoke on him). We are forbidden to consider the verbs as indicatives ("he sits alone and is silent;" Gerlach, Nägelsbach) by the apocopated form יִתֵּן in Lam 3:29, Lam 3:30, which shows that יֵשֵׁב and יִדֹּם are also cohortatives.
Lam 3:29
"Let him put his mouth in the dust," i.e., humbly bow beneath the mighty hand of God. The expression is derived from the Oriental custom of throwing oneself in the most reverential manner on the ground, and involves the idea of humble silence, because the mouth, placed in the dust, cannot speak. The clause, "perhaps there is hope," indicates the frame of mind to be observed in the submission. While the man is to show such resignation, he is not to give up the hope that God will deliver him from trouble; cf. Job 11:18; Jer 31:17.
Lam 3:30-36
Let him also learn patiently to bear abuse and reviling from men. Let him present his cheek to him who smites him, as was done by Job (Job 16:10) and the servant of Jahveh (Isa 50:6); cf. Mat 5:39. On Lam 3:30, cf. Psa 88:4; Psa 123:3, etc. There is a certain gradation in the three verses that it quite unmistakeable. The sitting alone and in silence is comparatively the easiest; it is harder to place the mouth in the dust, and yet cling to hope; it is most difficult of all to give the cheek to the smiter, and to satiate oneself with dishonour (Nägelsbach). In Lam 3:31-33 follow the grounds of comfort. The first is in Lam 3:31 : the sorrow will come to an end; the Lord does not cast off for ever; cf. Jer 3:5, Jer 3:12. The second is in Lam 3:32 : when He has caused sorrow, He shows pity once more, according to the fulness of His grace. Compassion outweighs sorrow. On this subject, cf. Psa 30:6; Job 5:18; Isa 54:8. The third ground of comfort is in Lam 3:33 : God does not send affliction willingly, as if it brought Him joy (cf. Jer 32:41), but merely because chastisement is necessary to sinful man for the increase of his spiritual prosperity; cf. Act 14:22; 2Co 4:17. וַיַּגֶּה is for וַיְיַגֶּה: cf. Ewald, §232, f; Gesenius, §69, 3, Rem. 6.
That he may bring home to the hearts of God's people the exhortation to bear suffering with patience and resignation, and that he may lead them to see that the weight of sorrow under which they are sighing has been sent from the Lord as a chastisement for their sins, the prophet carries out the thought, in Lam 3:34-39, that every wrong committed upon earth is under the divine control (Lam 3:34-36), and generally that nothing happens without God's permission; hence man ought not to mourn over the suffering that befalls him, but rather over his sins (Lam 3:37-39).
Lam 3:34-36
These verses form one connected sentence: while the subject and predicate for the three infinitival clauses do not follow till the words אֲדֹנָי לֹא רָאָה, the infinitives with their objects depend on רָאָה. If there were any foundation for the assertion of Böttcher in his Aehrenlese, that רָאָה never occurs in construction with לְ, we could take the infinitives with לְ as the objects of רָאָה, in the sense, "As to the crushing of all the prisoners," etc. But the assertion is devoid of truth, and disproved by 1Sa 16:7, הָאָדָם יִרְאֶה לְעֵינַיִם ויהוה יִרְאֶה. In the three infinitival clauses three modes of unjust dealing are set forth. The treading down to the earth of all prisoners under his (the treader's) feet, refers to cruel treatment of the Jews by the Chaldeans at the taking of Jerusalem and Judah, and generally to deeds of violence perpetrated by victors in war. This explains כֹּל, which Kalkschmidt and Thenius incorrectly render "all captives of the land (country)." Those intended are prisoners generally, who in time of war are trodden down to the earth, i.e., cruelly treated. The other two crimes mentioned, vv. 35 and 36, are among the sins of which Judah and Israel have been guilty, - the former being an offence against the proper administration of justice, and the latter falling under the category of unjust practices in the intercourse of ordinary life. "To pervert the right of a man before the face of the Most High" does not mean, in general, proterve, et sine ullâ numinis inspectantis reverentiâ (C. B. Michaelis, Rosenmüller); but just as הַטֹות מִשְׁפָּט is taken from the law (Exo 23:6; Num 16:19, etc.), so also is נֶגֶד פְּנֵי עֶלְיֹון to be explained in accordance with the directions given in the law (Exo 22:7, Exo 22:9), that certain clauses were to be brought before הָֽאֱלֹהִים, where this word means the judge or judges pronouncing sentence in the name of God; cf. Psa 82:6, where the judges, as God's representatives, are called אֱלֹהִים and בְּנֵי אֱלֹהִים. "Before the face of the Most High" thus means, before the tribunal which is held in the name of the Most High. "To turn aside a man in his cause" means to pervert his right in a dispute (cf. Job 8:3; Job 34:12, etc.), which may also be done in contested matters that do not come before the public tribunal. The meaning of the three verses depends on the explanation given of אֲדֹנָי לֹא רָאָה, which is a disputed point. רָאָה with לְ, "to look on something," may mean to care for it, be concerned about it, but not to select, choose, or to resolve upon, approve (Michaelis, Ewald, Thenius). Nor can the prophet mean to say, "The Lord does not look upon the treading down of the prisoners, the perversion of justice." If any one be still inclined, with Rosenmüller and others, to view the words as the expression of a fact, then he must consider them as an exception taken by those who murmur against God, but repelled in Lam 3:37. Moreover, he must, in some such way as the following, show the connection between Lam 3:33 and Lam 3:34, by carrying out the idea presented in the exhortation to hope for compassion: "But will any one say that the Lord knows nothing of this - does not trouble Himself about such sufferings?" Whereupon, in Lam 3:37, the answer follows: "On the contrary, nothing happens without the will of God" (Gerlach). But there is no point of attachment that can possibly be found in the words of the text for showing such a connection; we must therefore reject this view as being artificial, and forced upon the text. The difficulty is solved in a simple manner, by taking the words אֲדֹנָי לֹא as a question, just as has been already done in the Chaldee paraphrase: fierine potest ut in conspectu Jovae non reveletur? The absence of the interrogative particle forms no objection to this, inasmuch as a question is pretty often indicated merely by the tone. Lam 3:38 must also be taken interrogatively. Böttcher and Thenius, indeed, think that the perfect רָאָה is incompatible with this; but the objection merely tells against the rendering, "Should not the Lord see it?" (De Wette, Maurer, Kalkschmidt), which of course would require יִרְאֶה. But the idea rather is, "Hath not the Lord looked upon this?" The various acts of injustice mentioned in the three verses are not set forth merely as possible events, but as facts that have actually occurred.
Lam 3:37-39
Lam 3:37 brings the answer to this question in a lively manner, and likewise in an interrogative form: "Who hath spoken, and it came to pass, which the Lord hath not commanded?" The thought here presented reminds us of the word of the Creator in Gen 1:3. The form of the expression is an imitation of Psa 33:9. Rosenmüller gives the incorrect rendering, Quis est qui dixit: factum est (i.e., quis audeat dicere fieri quicquam), non praecipiente Deo; although the similar but more free translation of Luther, "Who dares to say that such a thing happens without the command of the Lord?" gives the sense in a general way. The meaning is as follows: Nothing takes place on the earth which the Lord has not appointed; no man can give and execute a command against the will of God. From this it further follows (Lam 3:38), that evil and good will proceed from the mouth of the Lord, i.e., be wrought by Him; on this point, cf. Isa 45:7; Amo 3:6. לֹא תֵצֵא gives no adequate meaning unless it be taken interrogatively, and as indicating what is usual - wont to be. And then there is established from this, in Lam 3:39, the application of the general principle to the particular case in question, viz., the grievous suffering of individuals at the downfall of the kingdom of Judah. "Why does a man sigh as long as he lives? Let every one [sigh] for his sins." Man is not to sigh over suffering and sorrow, but only over his sin. הִתְאֹונֵן occurs only here and in Num 11:1, and signifies to sigh, with the accessory notion of murmuring, complaining. חָי appended to אָדָם is more of a predicate than a simple attributive: man, as long as he lives, i.e., while he is in this life. The verse is viewed in a different light by Pareau, Ewald, Neumann, and Gerlach, who combine both members into one sentence, and render it thus: "Why doth a man complain, so long as he lives, - a man over the punishment of his sins?" [Similar is the rendering of our "Authorized" Version.] Neumann translates: "A man in the face of [Ger. bei] his sins." But this latter rendering is lexically inadmissible, because עַל esua in this connection cannot mean "in view of." The other meaning assigned is improbable, though there is nothing against it, lexically considered. For though חֵטְא, sin, may also signify the punishment of sin, the latter meaning does not suit the present context, because in what precedes it is not said that the people suffer for their sins, but merely that their suffering has been appointed by God. If, then, in what follows, there is an exhortation to return to the Lord (Lam 3:40.), and in Lam 3:42 a confession of sins made; if, moreover, Lam 3:39 forms the transition from Lam 3:33-38 to the exhortation that succeeds (Lam 3:40.); then it is not abstinence from murmuring or sighing over the punishment of sins that forms the true connecting link of the two lines of thought, but merely the refraining from complaint over sufferings, coupled with the exhortation to sigh over their won sins. Tarnov also has viewed the verse in this way, when he deduces from it the advice to every soul labouring under a weight of sorrows: est igitur optimus ex malis emergendi modus Deum excusare et se ipsum accusare.