The Ammonites also, the brother nation of the Moabites, (Gen_19:37) after centuries of various conflict (comp. Jdg_3:13; Jdg_10:7 sqq.; Jdg_11:32; 1 Samuel 11; 2 Samuel 10, 11; 2Sa_12:26; 2 Chronicles 20; 2Ch_26:8; 2Ch_27:5) in consequence of the deportation of the East-Jordanic tribes have appropriated a part of their territory. This fact forms the point of departure for the present prophecy. Older prophecies against Ammon are extant only by Amos (Jer_1:13-15) and Zephaniahin consequence of a declaration against Moab, (Jer_2:9-10). Of these Jeremiah has made considerable use of the prophecy of Amos. Comp. the exposition. There is at most an echo of the brief utterance of Zephaniah in the expressiondesolation, Jer_49:2. coll. Zep_2:9. Since Nebuchadnezzar and the Chaldeans are not named, the prophecy must be older than the battle of Carchemish, and since the beginning agrees in form with the beginning of the first prophecy against Egypt (Jer_46:2), and the prophecies against Moab (Jer_48:1), Edom (Jer_49:7) and Damascus (Jer_49:23), the supposition is natural that the date of its origin is the same as that of these prophecies.
1 Against the children of Ammon.
Thus saith Jehovah: Has then Israel no children, of has he no heir?
Why then does Malcom inherit Gad and his people dwell in his cities?
2 Therefore behold, the days come, saith Jehovah,
That I cause the war-shout to be heard against Rabbah of the children of Ammon;
And she shall become a desolated heap,
And her daughter shall be burned with fire:
And Israel shall be heir to his heirs, saith Jehovah.
3 How Heshbon, for devastated is Ai!
Cry, ye daughters of Rabbah, gird on sackcloth;
Lament and run to and fro on the walls;
For Malcom must go into captivity,
His priests and his princes together.
4 Why boastest thou of the valleys?
Thy valley is flowing away, thou rebellious daughter,
Who trusted in her treasures;—“Who will come to me?”
5 Behold, I bring fear upon thee, saith the Lord, Jehovah Zebaoth,
From all thy neighbors;
And ye shall be driven away, each one before him;
And there shall be no gatherer of the fugitives.
6 But nevertheless I will turn the captivity of the children of Ammon,
Saith Jehovah.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
Four parts may be plainly distinguished. In the first (Jer_49:1-2) the prophet alludes to the fact, from the theocratic point of view regarded as improper, that the Ammonites had taken possession of the Gadite territory (Jer_49:1), and declares that this cannot remain so. Ammon must be involved in war, the capital with the neighboring cities destroyed, and Israel again put into possession of his country (Jer_49:2). In the second part (Jer_49:3) a brief specification follows, in the third (Jer_49:4-5) a reason for the punitive judgment, with express indication, that the recompense would correspond exactly to the inculpation. In the fourth part (Jer_49:6) the prophet concludes with a consolatory outlook into the future.
Jer_49:1-2. Against … saith Jehovah.—The prophet here presupposes the possession of the Gadite territory by the Ammonites in consequence of the deportation of the East-Jordanic tribes by Tiglath-Pileser (2Ki_15:29; 1Ch_5:6; 1Ch_5:26. Comp. Introd. to Jeremiah 48). Amos refers to former attempts by the Ammonites for the same object (Jer_1:13).—Malcom. Jeremiah has Amo_1:15 in view. In this passage Malcom appears to me to be used in a double sense. Why should the king mentioned only with the people of the Ammonites? Why does Amos say of Damascus (Jer_49:5) and Philistia (Jer_49:8), “him that holdeth the sceptre,” and of Moab (Jer_2:3) “the judge?” Did he not wish it to be understood that the expression used only of Ammon, wes to be taken here in a special sense? I believe, then, that Malcom (Am. 1:16) refers primarily to the King, but in such wise that an allusion to the God is also intended. This allusion was all the plainer, if the Ammonites really, as Movers supposes (Phœnic., I., S. 323. Comp. Herzog, Real-Enc., IX., S. 714), called the god
îַìְëָּï
, i.e., our king. With reference to this he might fitly, when the Ammonites were spoken of, be called
îַìְëָּí
by the Israelites. It is, therefore, unnecessary here, and in Jer_49:3 to read
îִìְëֹּí
, as Ewald, Graf and Meier would do, after the example of the LXX. and Syr. Since we cannot express the specific meaning of the word by the translation, we have retained Malcom as if it were a proper name.—The war-shout, etc., is a reminiscence from Amo_1:14.—Rabbah Beni Ammon. This was the complete name of the city (comp. Deu_3:11; 2Sa_11:1; 2Sa_12:26 sqq). It was called Rabbah, the great, the capital, in contrast to the neighboring cities. Comp. Herz., R.-Enc. XII., S. 469.—A desolate heap, literally hill of desolation, therefore, heap of ruins. Comp. Jos_8:28 and Zep_2:9.—Burned with fire. This also reminds us of Amo_1:14 (comp. Olsh., § 242 b).
Jer_49:3. Howl Heshbon … princes together. The immediate consequences of the war-shout being heard are specified. Heshbon is to howl. It was then an Ammonitish city. Comp. rems. on Jer_48:2; Jer_48:45. It is given as a reason that Ai is destroyed. What city this was is not to be ascertained. Venema’s and Ewald’s explanation (Rabba ita vastata est, ut jam sit tumulus ruderum) is forced. Graf would read
òָø
with reference to Rabbah. But Rabbah could be called
òø
only in the appellative sense, and then it must have the article. To suppose that Ai is transferred hither from Jos_8:28, because there alone the expression “heap of desolation” occurs, is to attribute to the prophet either ignorance or carelessness. Many commentators therefore (J. D. Michaelis, Hitzig, comp. V. Raumer, S. 168, Anm. 150) are disposed to assume an East-Jordanic Ai, which expedient seems to me thus far the best.—There is no reason for taking daughters of Rabbah in a different sense here from Jer_49:2.—Sackcloth. Comp. rems. on Jer_48:37.—On the walls. I do not see why these should be regarded as the walls of a sheep-fold, as many would do. What is more natural in a city, against which the enemy is advancing, than to run up and down on the walls to take measures for defence? That the city walls may be meant is evident from Psa_89:41 : Eze_42:12—For Malcom, etc. These words are taken from Amo_1:15. Only in the present passage we have his priests for “he,” which is evidently not from misunderstanding, but to emphasize more plainly the intended meaning of Malcom. Comp. rems. on Jer_48:7.
Jer_49:4-5. Why boastest thou …. fugitives. Reason of the primitive judgment. The pride, the stubbornness, the security of Ammon must be correspondingly punished. Comp. Jer_48:26; Jer_48:30.—Rebellious daughter. Comp. Jer_31:22.—Who will come to me? The Ammonites’ boast, Who will come to us? The Lord tells them, the enemies will come upon them, and that from all sides, yea, oven behind them, so that the Ammonites will be driven, straight before them, and because the enemies come from all sides will be so scattered that no one will be in a condition to collect the fugitives again.—Fear. Comp. Jer_48:43-44.—Each one before him. Comp. “every man straight before him,” Jos_6:6; Jos_6:20; Jos_5:13.—Gatherer. Comp. Isa_13:14; Isa_56:8; Nah_3:18.
Jer_49:6. But nevertheless …. Jehovah. Ammon also is to share in the salvation of the future, which is to issue from Israel unto all nations. Comp. rems. on Jer_48:47 and Jer_49:39.
Footnotes:
Jer_49:3.—
äúùåèè
. On the form comp. OLSH ., § 67, Anm., 272, a.
Jer_49:4.—
äִúְäַìֵּì
. invariably denotes to boast, to brag. The object of the boasting is most frequently connected by
áְּ
. Comp. Jer_4:2; Jer_9:22-23; Psa_49:7, etc.
Jer_49:4.—
æë òî÷ê
. The explanation of Ewald and Graf, “of the luxuriance, the superfluity of thy valley” would suit the connection, but the abstract rendering of
æָë
is an objection, since this form (
÷ָí
) elsewhere is used almost wholly in the formation of participles, very rarely of substantives of concrete meaning, as
òָë
people,
æָá
city.
æָá
occurs (in the masc. form) only of a man with emission of seed (Lev_15:4), in the fem. of a woman with emission of blood (Lev_15:19), and of Canaan as a land flowing with milk and honey (Exo_3:8; Exo_3:17; Lev_20:24; Num_13:27, etc.) Hence the explanation: thy valley flows away, passes away, or redundat sanguine confossorum, does not correspond to the use of the word elsewhere. I would, therefore, explain with Schleussner quid gloriaris vallibus tuis? (quod scilicet) fœcunda sit vallis tua? Thus one idea is expressed independently of the preposition.
7. Prophecy against Edom (Jer_49:7-22)
On account of their relationship to the Israelites, the Edomites, in consequence of an express divine command, were not treated as enemies on the journey to Canaan (Deu_2:4; Deu_23:7). Saul, however, conquered them (1Sa_14:47). David subjected them entirely (2Sa_8:14). In this state of dependence they remained after Hadad’s attempt at revolution had failed (1Ki_11:14-22) till the reign of Joram, when they revolted (2Ki_8:20-22; 2Ch_21:8). Amaziah and Uzziah indeed made by no means unsuccessful attempts to bring them, again into subjection (2Ki_14:7; 2Ki_14:22), but their success was not lasting. In the reign of Ahaz the Edomites again invaded Judea (2Ch_28:17), and in the time of the Chaldeans we also find their ambassadors among those who came to Zedekiah to consult concerning means to be taken in common (Jer_27:3); but at the destruction of Jerusalem they are on the side of the Chaldeans, greeting the destruction of the long hostile city (comp.
àֵéáַú òåֹìí
, Eze_35:5) with scornful triumph (Lam_4:21; Eze_35:15; Eze_36:5; Psa_137:7).
As regards the date of out prophecy, the construction of the superscription (
ìֶֽàְãֶåֹí
), as well as the nonmention of the Chaldeans, point to the same. date at which the other portions with similar superscription, at the head of which is the first against Egypt (Jer_46:1-12), originated, i.e., the time immediately before the battle of Carchemish. Comp. rems. onJer_46:1-2, and Introd. to the Prophecies against the Nations.
Of special importance for our prophecy is its relation to the prophecy of Obadiah directed against Edom. They correspond to each other as follows:
Jer_49:7
and Oba_1:8.
Jer_49:9 and Oba_1:5.
Jer_49:10 and Oba_1:6-7.
Jer_49:14 and Oba_1:1.
Jer_49:15 and Oba_1:2.
Jer_49:16 and Oba_1:3-4.
That Jeremiah drew from Obadiah, and not vice versâ, has been shown by Caspari (Der Proph. Obadja ausgel. Leipzig, 1842) in such an exhaustive manner that there can be no further question on this point. The quotations then from Obadiah extend only to Jer_49:8of his prophecy. On the other hand, the following context (Oba_1:9 sqq.) has frequent points of contact with Joel, which is not the case in the previous context, and it is just in these verses that the indubitable references to the capture of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans are found (comp. Oba_1:10; Oba_1:16). Hence recently either the old theory has been retained (held by Augusti, Krahmer, Ewald, Meier in Zeller’s Jahrb. I. 3, S. 526) of the use of an older source in common on the part of Jeremiah and Obadiah (comp. Meier, die proph. BB. d. A. T. übersetzt u erk., S. 368 [The proph. Books of the O. T. transl. and explained]), or it is supposed that Oba_1:9-21was a later addition, composed after the Chaldean catastrophe. This is not the place to enter into this difficult investigation specially or with the precision which it requires. I content myself therefore with putting two questions: Is it then so decidedly demonstrated that Obadiah quotes Joel and not Joel ?Oba_1:2. How is it, that in Jer_49:12-14Edom is only warned against committing hostilities against Judah “in the day of their calamity?” Such hostilities had certainly been already committed (Jer_49:10-11; Jer_49:15-16). But is it not clear from the turn which the discourse takes (with
åְàַì
) in Jer_49:12that the prophet distinguishes two points of time, a past and a future? Once already have the Edomites greeted the calamity of Jerusalem with malicious joy. When now they are warned against doing this again, is it not presupposed that Jerusalem is still by no means wholly destroyed, but that the really great day of calamity is still impending (observe the
áָּéåֹí åé
repeated eight times inJer_49:12-14)? Would it not accordingly be exegetically more exact to suppose that the prophet, finding occasion in the hostility displayed by the Edomites in a transient occupation of Jerusalem, warns them from a repetition on the great day of Jerusalem, which he foresees as in evitable, and on the presupposition that this warning will not avail, threatened them with a just recompense?
Of the other older prophecies against Edom (Isa_34:5-17; Amo_1:11-12; Joel 4:19) Jeremiah hat made no use.
The whole prophecy is plainly to be discriminated into three parts. The first (Jer_49:7-13) has for its topic the judgment to be executed on Edom according to the elements of its outward appearance (Jer_49:7-10) and itsobjective inward ground, which is the decree of Jehovah. The second part (Jer_49:14-18) is predominantly occupied with the statement of the subjective ground of the visitation, i.e., with the guilt of Edom. The third part (Jer_49:19-22) brings before us the subject of the destination, that is, the instrument thereof, chosen by Jehovah.
1. The judgment on Edom in its external appearance and objective reason
Jer_49:7-13
7 Against Edom. Thus saith Jehovah Zebaoth:
Is there no longer wisdom in Teman?
Hath counsel vanished from the intelligent?
Is their wisdom expended?
8 Flee, turn, bow low, ye inhabitants of Dedan! For
the destruction of Esau I bring upon him,
The time, when I visit him.
9 If vintagers come to thee they will leave no gleanings,
If thieves by night they destroy their fill.
10 For I have stript Esau bare, discovered his hiding places,
And he cannot hide himself.
His seed is destroyed and his brethren and his neighbors.
And he is no more.
11 Leave thy orphans, I will preserve their life,
And let thy widows confide in me.
12 For thus saith Jehovah, Behold,
They, whose rule it was not to drink the cup, must drink it.
And art thou to remain unpunished?
No, but thou shalt drink.
13 For I have sworn by myself, saith Jehovah,
That Bozrah shall become a desolation,
A reproach, a desert and a curse;
And all her cities shall become desolate for ever.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
The destruction of Edom is described, 1. as it appears outwardly, 2. according to its inner reason in the divine decree. First the irresistible nature of the attack is set forth, in opposition to which all the renowned wisdom of Edom will be unavailing (Jer_49:7). The Dedanites, the neighbors and commercial allies of Edom, are warned to consult their own safety (Jer_49:8). The enemies will come, and, like vintagers or thieves, make a clean sweep (Jer_49:9). It will turn out that Edom’s material means of defence, his rock fortresses regarded as impregnable, together with his own and his allied offensive forces, cannot avert destruction (Jer_49:10). This must be so, because it is the will of Jehovah. This is seen in Jehovah’s taking charge, as it were, of the widows and children of the Edomites, which presupposes the death of their guardians (Jer_49:11). Jehovah must permit their death, as without being unjust, He cannot spare Edom the cup which Israel had to drink. Edom must therefore drain it irrevocably (Jer_49:12) for Jehovah in accordance with the imperative demands of His justice) has sworn, that Edom will be a prey to everlasting desolation (Jer_49:13). Thus the strophe concludes, and from the similarity of this conclusion with Jer_49:18 it is seen, that in both cases we have a larger section of the discourse.
Jer_49:7. Against Edom … expended. Wisdom and intelligence are necessary in carrying on war (Pro_24:6) and where these fail, all is lost. This lack is observable in Edom. This is the more striking since the wisdom of Edom and especially of Teman was celebrated from of old. Comp. Oba_1:8; Job_2:11 (Teman was the home of Eliphaz); Bar_3:22-23. On Teman comp. Herz., R.-Enc., III., S. 650. [Cowles on this verse.—S. R. A.]
Jer_49:8. Flee … visit him. On Dedan comp. rems. on Jer_25:23. They were not Edomites but neighbors (Eze_25:13), and at all events connected with them by mercantile intercourse (comp. Isa_21:13). Hence they are also threatened by the tempest which is breaking over Edom. They are therefore admonished to look to their own safety.—For, etc. Comp. Jer_49:32; Jer_46:21; Jer_6:15.
Jer_49:9-10. If vintagers … no more. Jer_49:9 is taken from Oba_1:5. The sense is clear. It could not be so if we should render the sentence interrogatively, as many do, in too servile adherence to the passage in Obadiah. Jer_49:10 reminds us of Oba_1:6, though there we read “searched out” and “sought up” for stript bare and discovered. These terms applied to Esau refer to the uncommonly strong fortress-dwellings, occupied by the Edomites. Comp. rems. on Jer_49:16.—His seed is destroyed, etc. “Both the real Edomites and the descendants of related and other nations, which were mingled with them, as the Amalekites, Gen_36:12; Horites, Gen_36:20; Simeonites, 1Ch_4:42 and neighboring tribes, as Dedan, Jer_49:8. Tema and Buz, Jer_25:23” are to be destroyed says Graf. He also justly remarks that the expression his brethren and his neighbors appears to have been occasioned by “men of thy confederacy” and “men of thy peace” in Oba_1:7.—And he is no more. Comp. Isa_19:7.
Jer_49:11-13. Leave thy orphans … desolate forever. Hitzig sees in Jer_49:11 a preliminary conclusion parallel to Jer_49:6; Jer_48:47. But Jer_49:11 is no conclusion, being followed by two sentences with for, Jer_49:12-13, of such a purport that no inference favorable to Edom can possibly be drawn from them. I therefore take Jer_49:11 with Theodoret, Neumann and others, as irony. The Edomites are called upon, the men, namely; to leave their widows and orphans. Observe that it is not said, wives and children. The death of the men is presupposed. When Jehovah immediately adds that He will care for the survivors, this is a poor consolation for the Edomites who do not believe in Jehovah. For what other care but such as slaves receive, can be expected from Him, who announces as his unalterable determination so total a destruction of Edom, as in Jer_49:13; Jer_49:17-18; Jer_49:20-21?—I will preserve, etc. Comp. Exo_1:17-18; 2Sa_12:3; 1Ki_18:5; Isa_7:21. We see from these passages that the meaning of the word is primarily negative: not kill, but secondarily positive: do what is necessary for the preservation of life.—Whose rule it was not, etc. It was an abnormal thing for Israel, the chosen people, to be obliged to drink the cup of wrath. I therefore take
îִùְׁáָּè
in the sense of norm, law, rule. Comp. Jer_30:11; Jer_8:7.—The cup. Comp. Jer_25:15 sqq.—Unpunished. Comp. Jer_25:29.—Have sworn, etc. Comp. Jer_22:5.—A desolation. Comp. Jer_25:11; Jer_25:18; Jer_44:6; Jer_44:22.—Bozrah (Isa_34:6; Isa_63:1; Amo_1:11-12) was one of the most important cities of Edom (comp. Jer_48:24) of which there are still remains under the name of Besseyra, i.e., Little Bozrah. Comp. Raumer, Pal., S. 278.—Desolate for ever. Comp. Jer_25:9.
Footnotes:
Jer_49:7.—
îáðéí
Part. Kal from
áִéï
Instead of the more usual Part. Niph.
ðִáֹðéí
(Gen_41:33; Gen_41:39, etc.). The form does not occur elsewhere.
Jer_49:7.—
îָøַç
is to overflow, overhang. So Exo_26:12 of the overhanging curtain; Eze_17:6,
âֶôֶï ñøַֹçַú
, vitis patula, late effusa. Part. Pual
ñָøåּçַ
, poured out, stretched out on the couch, Amo_6:4; Amo_6:7.
ñְøåּçֵé èְáåּìִéí
, Eze_23:15, redundantes mitris d. i. gestantes mitras longe dependentes. Hence Niph. (which occurs here only), profusum, effusum esse,
ðָּáַ÷
from
áַָ÷÷
, Isa_19:3 coll. Jer_19:7.
Jer_49:8.—As
ðֻñåּ
can only be Imperative,
äֶֽòֱîִé÷åּ
and
äָôְּðåּ
must also be taken as such. The former (on the construction with the Inf. comp. Naegelsb. Gr., § 95, e) is also used in Jer_49:30 as an Imperative. Other instances,
äֶֽçֱùׁåּ
2Ki_2:3; 2Ki_2:5;
äֵàúָéåּ
, 2Ki_12:19; comp. Olsh., § 256, a, b.
äָôְðåּ
is likewise a rare form, but not impossible or without analogy. Comp.
äָùְׁëּáָä
, Eze_32:19;
äַùַּîּåּ
, Job_21:5; Olsh., § 260, coll. S. 631.
Jer_49:10.—
åðçáä
.
ìä×
for
ìà
, comp. Olsh., § 263, b. The perfect would hare to be translated: and does he hide himself, he cannot, which is forced. We should expect at least
åְìֹà é×
Ewald and Graf would punctuate
ðַøְáֹּä
,comp. forms like
ðַäְúּåֹí ðøְîäֹ ðִ÷ְøֹà
(Olsh., § 263, c), and as regards the construction, Jer_49:23. This expedient removes at least the great grammatical difficulties which
ðֶçְëָּä
affords.
Jer_49:11.—On the Imperative form comp. Olshausen, § 234, a.
Jer_49:11.—
úëñçå
. Comp. Eze_37:7. Except in connection with suffixes, we find only this and
àçéä
as examples of the abnormal affirmative. Comp. Olsh., S. 452 3.
Jer_49:12.—
àúä äåà
. Thou, such an one! Jer_14:22; Psa_44:6, comp. Naegelsb. Gr., § 79, 3.
Jer_49:13.—Instead of
çֹøֶá
we find
çָøְáָּä
in the parallel passages.
2. THE JUDGMENT ON EDOM ACCORDING TO ITS SUBJECTIVE REASON
Jer_49:14-18
14 I have heard a report from Jehovah,
And a messenger is sent among the nations:
“Assemble yourselves and come up against her,
And rise ye for the war.”
15 For behold, I make thee small among the nations;
Despised among men.
16 Thy object of horror deceived thee,
The pride of thy heart,
Thou that dwellest in the clefts of the rock,
Thou that occupiest the height of the hill.
Even though, like an eagle, thou buildest thy nest high,
I will bring thee down from thence, saith Jehovah.
17 And Edom shall become a wilderness;
Every one that passeth by shall be horrified,
And jeer on account of all her strokes.
18 As in the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah,
And their neighboring cities, saith Jehovah,
No man will dwell there,
Nor a son of man sojourn in her.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
Jeremiah proclaims in the words of Obadiah, that nations will be summoned to make war upon Edom, to make her small and despised (Jer_49:14-15). To such a procedure has Edom given occasion by her idolatrous abominations and her pride. This pride is now to be punished (Jer_49:16 and Edom is now to become a horrible waste and like Sodom and Gomorrah (Jer_49:17-18). These verses are taken with modifications from Oba_1:1-4. The main thought is evidently expressed in Jer_49:16; the statement of the subjective cause of the punitive judgment, impending over Edom.
Jer_49:14-15. I have heard … among men. Hemistich 1 is taken from Oba_1:1 only with the alteration of “we have heard” (Israel) to “I have heard,” and “arise ye” to “assemble yourselves.” The report which the prophet bears directly from the Lord and the message (
òִéø
viator, nutius, Pro_18:17; Pro_25:13; Isa_18:2; Isa_57:9) which is sent among the nations are of the same purport. We must regard the report however as expressing not only the command itself, but also that it has been issued. Hemist. 2 is extended in Jeremiah. It reads in Obadiah “Arise ye, and let us rise up against her in battle.” Jer_49:15, taken from Oba_1:2, states the object of the war, for the attainment of which the nations are summoned. The words correspond to Jer_49:11-13, expressing the decree of Jehovah concerning Edom, the execution of which is the object of the war. “For” is wanting in Obadiah. In small and despised there is evidently an antithesis to Edom’s pride (Jer_49:16). Hemist. 2 reads in Obadiah, “thou art greatly despised.”
Jer_49:16. Thy object of horror … saith Jehovah. We evidently have here the kernel of the strophe, that by which it is distinguished from the context, viz., the guilt of Edom is here stated, the subjective reason of her destruction. While Obadiah mentions as this reason only “the pride of thine heart” (Jer_49:3), Jeremiah mentions also the “being a terror,” or, as I understand the word, the horror, i.e., the idol. We may well conceive that wishing to extend the text of his source the prophet would insert a word which would state the ground of Edom’s moral corruption. Whence does arise the moral pollution of the heathen world? According to Romans 1. from idolatry. Here also Jeremiah would say that it was really the idol which deceived Edom, pride being involved in idolatry.—The pride of thy heart is then in apposition to horror. It is in accordance with this that inaccessible rock-castles are designated as the ground of pride, for, were not all heathen idols local deities? Was not then the idol who had built these rocks and continually protected them the real lord on whom their proud confidence was founded?—Clefts of the rocks, etc. It appears to me beyond doubt that Jeremiah had here in view the peculiar character of the Edomite cities, especially the capital, which was called Sela (2Ki_14:7; Isa_16:1). Comp, the remarks on Bozrah, Jer_49:13. The second hemistich is abbreviated from Oba_1:4. Comp. Amo_9:2.
[“The descriptive points in this verse are wonderfully accurate. Petra, the ancient capital of Edom, for ages the main thoroughfare of the great trade and travel between India and Mesopotamia on the East, and Egypt and North Africa on the South-West; the seat therefore of wealth and art, perhaps of wisdom also, and culture, held a position of great military strength. It was built in a vast ravine, partly on the broad area inclosed by lofty precipitous walls of rock, which by some of nature’s mighty convulsions had been rent asunder, and partly in those very fronts of lofty rock, chiseled out with immense labor, so that the pillars of the temples and the apartments of its tombs and dwellings were wholly cut from the solid, eternal rock. Here—her nests built high in these crags like the eagle’s—old Petra eat in her pride and her strength, cherishing the vain fancy that no power could ever bring her down. But the Almighty spake and it was done!—The site of ancient Petra, for ages unknown, has been brought to light during the present century. A number of travelers have visited and explored it. Laborde, Dr. Robinson and others, have given full and precise statements of its wonderful ruins, placing Petra in the front rank of those ancient witnesses who bear their silent but resistless testimony to the precision of the old prophetic descriptions, and to the marvellous correspondence in the most minute details between prophecy and history—the prophecy of twenty centuries ago and the history of to-day.” Cowles.—S. R. A.]
Jer_49:17-18. And Edom … sojourn in her. These verses do not contain any reminiscences from Obadiah, but they do from Jeremiah himself and from other writings.—And Edom, etc., is formed after Jer_25:11; Jer_25:38. Comp. Jer_50:13.—Every one that passeth. Comp. Jer_19:8.—As in the overthrow, etc., is from Deu_29:22. Comp. Isa_13:19; Jer_50:40. The expression neighboring cities points to Deu_29:22, where Admah and Zeboim are mentioned with Sodom and Gomorrah. Comp. Hos_11:8.—No man will dwell, etc. Comp. Jer_49:33; Jer_50:40; Jer_51:43.
Footnotes:
Jer_49:16.—
úִּôְìֶöֶú
does not occur elsewhere. It is usually taken in the sense of terror =
ôַìָּöåּú
(Jer_21:4) and understood to mean the terror which Edom inspires. But because the following verb is in the masc. some have thought it necessary to separate
úôìöúê
from it and regard it as an isolated exclamation (comp.
äôëëí
, Isa_29:16), which Schleussner renders O arrogantiam tuam; Hitzig, “fear to thee;” Graf, “horror at thee.” But this exclamation appears somewhat exaggerated. Why should a people, who are deceived by pride, be especially inspired with fear? Is not this very common! Was the pride of Edom greater than that of Moab (Jer_48:29)? Or was it threatened with a worse fate? I find it more suitable to take
úôìöú
in the sense of
îôìöú
. The latter word in 1Ki_15:13; 2Ch_15:16 designates an idol, an idol-image. This is called a terror, an object of holy horror, as frequently
ôúַø
, Gen_31:42;
ôַçַø
, Isa_8:13;
àֵéîִéí
, Jer_50:38 are used in an analogous sense. The LXX. may have the same idea, translating
çðáéãíὶá óïõ
, i.e., risus, jocus tuus. According to Schleussner, they had Priapus in mind, for which also Jerome holds
îôּìöú
in 1 Kings 15. and 2 Kings 15. Rabbis also, according to Kimchi’s testimony, have understood the word of
òֲëֹøָä æָøָä
i.e., idolatry. Among the moderns, J. D. Michaelis and Meier adopt this view. The gender of the verb is no hinderance, for the prophet could properly use the masc. when thinking of the person of the idol. Comp. Naegelsb. Gr., § 60, 4.
3. THE INSTRUMENT CHOSEN BY JEHOVAH FOR THE DESTRUCTION OF EDOM
Jer_49:19-22
19 Behold, as a lion he cometh up
From the pride of Jordan to the evergreen pasturage,
For in a twinkling I drive him (Edom) from thence.
And who is chosen? Him will I set over him.
For who is like me? And who will appoint me the time?
And who is the shepherd that would stand before me?
20 Therefore hear the counsel of Jehovah which He hath counselled against Edom,
And His thoughts, which he has thought concerning the inhabitants of Teman:
Verily they will be dragged along, the feeble little sheep;
Verily their pasturage will be astounded at them.
21 At the sound of their fall the earth trembles.
Crying! The sound of it is heard on the Red Sea.
22 Behold, as an eagle he ascends and flies,
And extends his wings over Bozrah;
And the heart of the heroes of Edom on that day
Will be as the heart of a woman in anguish.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
This strophe also describes the destruction of Edom, but in such wise that the instrument in the hand of the Lord is prominent, without being mentioned by name. As a lion from the reed thickets of the Jordan falls upon a flock, which is pasturing on the luxuriant, ever-green meadows of the Gôr, so shall Edom be surprised in his rock-dwelling and be driven away in a twinkling. So shall a new shepherd, chosen ad hoc by the Lord Himself, be set over Edom, for the previous shepherds of Edom have no prerogative to maintain their position in spite of the Lord (Jer_49:19). The new Shepherd, however, will not pasture the flock in the old way peaceably, but will drag them away, so that their pasturage will be astounded at the disappearance of the flock (Jer_49:20). Thus the fall of Edom will be a violent one, so much so that the sound of it will be heard afar (Jer_49:20). Again, in conclusion, the one who is called to the destruction of Edom is compared with an eagle (after Deu_28:49), who will extend his wings over Bozrah, which, is fortified indeed, but powerless against such an enemy, so that on that day even the heroes of Edom will be as faint-hearted as parturient women.
Jer_49:19. Behold as a lion … before me. As in Jer_46:18 with Carmel, and in Jer_48:40 with an eagle, so here the instrument of the Lord is compared with a lion, one who lurks in the reedy margin of the Jordan (the pride of Jordan, “the luxuriant bushes and reeds growing on its banks, by which it is enclosed as by a green garland.” Köhler on Zec_11:3coll.Jer_12:5; Raumer, Pal. S. 58; Herzog, R.-Enc., VII., S. 8) and from thence makes his inroads on the flocks pasturing on the luxuriant evergreen meadows of the Jordan valley. For the Gor, though in general arid and infertile, where brooks flow down from the mountains to the Jordan has oases, which under the influence of the tropical climate are exceedingly fertile. Comp. Arnold in Herzog, R.-Enc., S. 10, etc. I am therefore of opinion that
ðְåֵú àֵéúָï
does not directly signify the land of Edom, and thus is neither to be taken as “rock-dwelling” nor as “evergreen pasturage” with sole reference to the undisturbed possession of the land for centuries. I take it in the latter meaning, but I think that the expression is chosen because it admits of a double reference, to the oases of the Jordanic valley and to Edom itself, which may be thus designated both as the ancient residence of the Edomite nation, and with reference to the strength and indestructibility of its national defences (comp. Num_24:21; Mic_6:2). In referring the expression at the same time to Edom, a transition is formed from the comparison to the thing compared.—For in a twinkling. From the “For” we see that the prophet has in view the suddenness of the attack as a tertium comparationis. From the thickets of the Jordan lions could easily fall upon herds feeding near the bank (comp. Herzog, R-Enc. XI. S. 29). In like manner shall Edom be suddenly assailed and driven away from his pasturage.—And who is chosen? We see from this expression that the prophet had no definite person in view. He does not yet know who the chosen one is, but only that there will be one. Whoever it is will really obtain the supremacy over Edom, appointed to him. (Jer_15:3; Jer_51:27). The elder commentators understood Nebuchadnezzar, or even (interprete Luthero, as Förster says) Alexander the Great.—For who is like me? Edom’s princes of ancient and illustrious descent (Genesis 36.) might well be caught in the delusion of inviolable security. Here they are told that they have a higher power above them, who can remove them, and set others more pleasing to him in their place—Jehovah, namely, who has none like unto Him, (Comp. Caspari, Micha der Morast, S. 14 sqq.; Exo_15:11), whom no one can bring to an account (Job_9:19), whom no earthly national shepherd (Jer_10:21; Jer_25:34; Jer_23:1) can defy. [“To ‘appoint one the time’ is the ancient phrase for a legal indictment and summons. Who shall prosecute me before the court for this proceeding, i.e., set himself against me as an opponent, or an antagonist.” Cowles—S. R. A.]
Jer_49:20-21. Therefore hear … Red Sea. As it is, therefore, undeniable that the Lord has power over all kingdoms of the nations, it is solemnly made known to all the world as the decree of the highest Majesty; the Edomites shall suffer the same fate from Him, who shall attack them like a lion, as the lion brings upon the weaker animals, i.e., they shall be dragged away (Jer_15:3; Jer_22:19)—carried into captivity. Thus will the land be desolated, as the prophet poetically expresses it in the words, the land will be horrified at the sudden stillness and desolation. There is a similar personification in Job_7:10, (Psa_103:16). From this it follows 1. that the entire representation of these two verses is based on a figure of a place of pasturage; 2. that by the new shepherd, a conqueror is understood who will desolate the land and carry the people into captivity; 3. that the sentence with therefore, occasioned by the emphatic causal sentence of three clauses, Jer_49:19, b, contains no more than an emphatically repeated inference (A, then B, therefore A), consequently the same thought in substance, which was already expressed in I will drive him from thence. On Jer_49:20 a comp. Jer_49:30; Jer_18:11; Jer_29:11; Isa_14:26-27; Isa_19:12—Teman, comp. Jer_49:7. The city lay according to Jerome, five, according to Eusebius, fifteen Roman miles from Petra, comp. Raumer, Pal. S. 279.
The little sheep. Comp. Jer_14:3; Jer_48:4. The “smallest of the flock” are the weakest, most helpless, who are least adapted for flight or resistance, and most for being dragged away.—[Henderson adheres to the A. V., making “the smallest of the flock” the nominative.—S. R. A.]—At the sound, &c., immediate effect of the overthrow of the power of Edom. Comp. Eze_26:15; Eze_31:16; Isa_13:13; Jer_51:29.—The whole passage, Jer_49:19-21, is repeated and applied to Babylon (Jer_50:44-46).
Jer_49:22. Behold … in anguish. That which is in Jer_49:19 declared by means of a figure taken from a lion, is here repeated in the form of a figure derived from an eagle. The first half of the verse is taken from Jer_48:40, the second from Jer_48:41. The reason of the assailer of Bozrah appearing here as an eagle may be that the “castellated rock” of this city is designated as accessible only to an eagle. Comp. Raumer, Pal. S. 278; Schubert, Reise in das Morgenland. II. S. 426.
Footnotes:
Jer_49:19.—The construction as in Zep_3:7coll.Pro_12:19. Comp. Naegelsb. Gr., § 95 g, Anm.—
îֵòָìֶéäִָ
is undoubtedly to be referred to
ðָåֶä
, although this word is elsewhere used as a masc. (Isa_27:10; Isa_33:20), since the idea of “country” lies at its basis. Comp. rems, on
úôìöú
Jer_49:16.
Jer_49:19.—
îִé
is used as e.g. in Exo_24:14. Comp. Naegelsb. Gr., § 79, 6.—
àֵìֶéäָ
for
òָìֶéäָ
. Comp. remarks on Jer_10:1.
Jer_49:20.—
éùׁéí
Hiphil (on. the form comp. Olsh., S. 577, 8; Num_21:30) is to be taken as the direct causative: stuporem efficere, to produce astonishment and horror not in others, but in one’s self, i.e., to be horrified. Comp. Naegelsb. Gr., § 18, 3. [“
àִñÎìֹà
if not, a strong mode of asseveration for the purpose of expressing the certainty of any event.” Henderson.—S. R. A.]
Jer_49:20.—
ðִôìָí
is infinitive. Comp. 2Sa_1:10; Olshausen, § 245 b.
Jer_49:21.—
öְòָ÷ָä
the main idea placed emphatically in advance, which is more accurately defined in the following context. Comp. Ewald, § 309, b.
Jer_49:21.—[“For
÷åֹìָäּ
which refers to
öְָòָ÷ä
, we find the less appropriate reading
÷åֹìָí
in eighty-four MSS.: it has been originally in fourteen more; it is in three by correction, and is in the text of twenty-one printed editions. The only version which supports it is the Targum.” Henderson. Hitzig however approves of this reading as the more difficult, referring it to
çàøõ
, the land, i.e. the population thereof.—S. R. A.]
8. Prophecy against Damascus
Jer_49:23-27
Out of a large number of small kingdoms (thirty-two are mentioned in1Ki_21:1; 1Ki_21:16) with which the Israelites after the period of the Judges had to endure many conflicts, (Jdg_3:8; 1Sa_14:47; 2Sa_8:10.), a large one was formed after David’s death by Rezon, with Damascus for its capital (1Ki_11:23-24). With this great Syrian kingdom also the two kingdoms of Israel had to endure many and severe conflicts, (1Ki_15:18 sqq.;1Ki_20:1 sqq.;1Ki_22:1 sqq.; 2Ki_5:1 sqq.; 1Ki_6:8 sqq.; 1Ki_8:28-29; 1Ki_12:17; 1Ki_13:3; 1Ki_14:25; 1Ki_16:5-6), till at last the Assyrians, solicited by Ahaz of Judah, (2Ki_16:7-10), fell upon Syria and brought the country permanently under their dominion (2Ki_16:9). We need not seek the fulfilment of Jeremiah’s prophecy of the destruction of Damascus in a particular “conquest and devastation of the country by Nebuchadnezzar.” (Graf). For even if Nebuchadnezzar did seize Syria and Damascus and treat them with a certain degree of hostility (whether as an Assyrian province or as an Egyptian tributary) yet the prophet’s perspective extends over the whole future of Damascus (comp. the Introd. to chh. 50, 51.). He sees in one picture what in the fulfilment will be divided into many stages, comp. Herzog R.-Enc. III., S. 260.
As regards the date of the prophecy both the superscription and the purport of it indicate that it formed part of that Sepher, beginning withJer_46:1, which owes its origin to the period before the battle of Carchemish. Comp. Introd. to the Prophecies against the Nations
23 Against Damascus.
Ashamed are Hamath and Arpad,
For a bad report have they heard: they are dissolved.
In the sea there is terror, it cannot rest.
24 Enfeebled is Damascus, she turns to flee,
And terror seizes her,
Anguish and sorrow lay hold on her like a parturient.
25 How! Is not the city of renown abandoned,
The place of my delight?
26 Hence her youths fall in the streets,
And all men of war shall perish, on that day, saith Jehovah Zebaoth,
27 And I kindle a fire in the wall of Damascus,
Which shall devour the palaces of Benhadad.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
An enemy coming from the north threatens first Hamath and Arpad, which are thus thrown into commotion, like a tempestuous sea (Jer_49:23). This agitation reaches also Damascus, hence discouragement, anxiety, in part flight (Jer_49:24). The city is not abandoned by all the troops (Jer_49:25), hence a great blood-bath and destruction of the army in the streets (Jer_49:26) and destruction of the city by fire (Jer_49:27).
Jer_49:23. Against Damascus … cannot rest. The superscription is as in Jer_46:2; Jer_48:1; Jer_49:1; Jer_49:7. I cannot at all discover that the superscription is too limited, as Graf supposes, for in fact this brief utterance is occupied only with Damascus, the cities Hamath and Arpad being mentioned only to designate the successive advance of the calamity and the direction in which the enemy comes. It is a matter of course that the fall of the capital involves that of the kingdom, hence the superscription is incorrect neither in itself nor in relation to the purport of the passage. According to Num_34:8 Hamath is to be the northern limit of the land to be occupied by Israel. The boundaries were also really extended thus far at times. Comp. 2Ki_14:28 with 2Ch_8:4. The city was situated on the Orontes to the North of Damascus, and was afterwards called Epiphania by the Greeks. Comp. Jerome on Amo_6:2; Amo_6:14. Arpad, which is always named together with Hamath (Isa_10:9, comp. Delitzsch on the passage; Jer_36:19; Jer_37:13), must have been situated in the neighborhood of this city. We thus see that the prophet expects the enemy from the North, as it was natural that the army of the Egyptians then in northern Syria should turn his gaze in that direction. Hamath and Arpad stand confounded in consequence of the evil tidings. They flow away, dissolve, pass away with anguish.—The following words are taken verbatim from Isa_57:20. Jeremiah has doubtless from this passage the idea of the sea in general in his mind. The expression
ðָîֹâåּ
had directed his thoughts to that passage and still exerts some influence. He thus imagines these cities as a wildly agitated sea. In the swaying hither and thither of the waves is mirrored the inward unrest and anguish. It is not then the real sea that is meant (Hitzig), but the human multitude compared to a sea. (Comp. Isa_17:12; Isa_8:7-8).
Jer_49:24-27. Enfeebled … Benhadad. The bad report reaches even the capital, and this in consequence falls into critical agitation. Despair seizes on the inhabitants. A part turns to flight. (Comp. rems. on Jer_46:5; Jer_46:21). Anguish takes hold upon them.—How? Is not, etc. We are not justified in regarding the negative as a strong affirmation, or taking abandoned in the sense of, left free, spared. Rather does the prophet say really: how then is the city not forsaken? (Comp. 2Sa_1:14). He is astonished and complains, that it has not been abandoned. This would have been better for the Syrians. For just because it has not been, their youths fall in their streets and their whole army is destroyed. Flight might have saved them.—City of renown, etc. Comp. Jer_51:41; Isa_60:18; Isa_62:7.—My refers to the prophet and there is no irony in it. He lamented that the city was not abandoned. He has a human pity for the destroyed city as he has a human joy in its beauty. Comp. rems. on Jer_48:31. [The Vulg., Syr., Chald., omit my. Boothroyd maintains that this omission is necessary to make good sense!—S. R. A.].—The youths. Comp. Jer_9:20.
Jer_49:27. And I kindle. The whole verse in its main constituents is taken from Amo_1:2. Comp. Amo_1:4; Amo_1:7; Amo_1:10; Amo_1:12; Amo_1:14; Amo_2:2; Amo_2:5.—In the wall, not on the wall, for the wall itself does not burn, but within the wall, so that all which the wall includes is consumed by the fire. The palaces of Benhadad are the royal palaces, since Benhadad (there were three of them, 1Ki_15:18; 1Ki_15:20; 1Ki_20:1-3; 2Ki_6:24; 2Ki_8:7; 2Ki_8:9; 2Ki_13:3; 2Ki_13:24-25) was the best known name of Syrian kings.
Footnotes:
Jer_49:23.—
ðָîֹâ
used frequently of the effect of fear in loosening the compagines corporis; Exo_15:15; Jos_2:9; Jos_2:24; Psa_75:4; Isa_14:31.
Jer_49:23.—
áéí øàâä
Since the following words
äַùְׁ÷ֵè ìֹà éåּëָì
are taken verbatim from Isa_57:20, the previous words in Isaiah may rule the previous words here. There we read
åְäָøְùָׁòִéí áַּéíָ ðִâְøָùׁ
. It would now be certainly most convenient to read
ëַּéָí
in the present passage instead of
áַּéָí
. Jeremiah however does not quote the last words accurately as a whole. And
ëéí
also is not without difficulty. We should expect it to be in the construct state. I therefore think that the reading in the text is the correct one.—
øְּàָâָä
is fear, terror, unrest. Comp. Jos_22:24; Pro_12:25; Eze_4:16; Eze_12:18-19. The subst. in Jeremiah here only; the verb in Jer_17:8; Jer_38:19; Jer_42:16.
Jer_49:24.—
øֶèֶè
.
ἅð
.
ëåã
. a Syrian word, without doubt chosen purposely. Comp.
øְúֵú
, Hos_13:1.
Jer_49:24.—
äֲâְֶæִé÷ָäּ
is so punctuated by the Masoretes that it is evident they took Damascus for the subject (terrorem prehendit) having in view passages like Isa_13:8; Job_18:20; Job_21:6. But the punctuation
äֶֽçֶæִé÷ָä
would correspond better to Jeremiah’s usage. Comp. Jer_6:24; Jer_8:21; Jer_50:43.
9. Prophecy against Kedar and the Kingdoms of Hazor
Jer_49:28-33
From Damascus the prophet turns his gaze eastward to the bordering Arabians, comprised in the designation of the title. InJer_25:23-24Jeremiah mentions among the populations to be subdued by Nebuchadnezzar several Arabian tribes. We feel impelled to suppose that the limits of the Arabian conquests of Nebuchadnezzar were undefined in the mind of the prophet, for we shall be obliged to distinguish a real and ideal dominion of that ruler, though the boundary line between the two is a vague one. It is unnecessary to inquire after a special occasion for this prophecy. Nebuchadnezzar being now universal ruler, the Arabs, being the immed
