📖 Biblia online

Citește Biblia

Biblia audio Planuri audio structurate — ascultă Biblia zilnică

Plângerile lui Ieremia 2

¹ Vai! în ce întunecime a aruncat Domnul, în mânia Lui, pe fiica Sionului. A asvârlit din cer pe pământ podoaba lui Israel, şi nu Şi-a mai adus aminte de scaunul picioarelor Lui, în ziua mâniei Lui!

² Domnul a nimicit, fără milă, toate locuinţele lui Iacov. În urgia Lui, a dărâmat întăriturile fiicei lui Iuda, şi le-a prăvălit la pământ; a făcut de ocară împărăţia şi căpeteniile ei.

³ În mânia Lui aprinsă, a doborât toată puterea lui Israel; Şi-a tras înapoi dela el dreapta, înaintea vrăjmaşului, şi a aprins în Iacov o văpaie de foc care mistuieşte toate dejurâmprejur.

⁴ Şi-a încordat arcul ca un vrăjmaş, Şi-a ridicat dreapta ca un asupritor, şi a prăpădit tot ce era plăcut privirilor, Şi-a vărsat ca un foc urgia peste cortul fiicei Sionului.

⁵ Ca un vrăjmaş a ajuns Domnul, a nimicit pe Israel, i-a dărâmat toate palatele, i-a prăbuşit întăriturile, şi a umplut pe fiica lui Iuda de jale şi suspin.

⁶ I-a pustiit cortul sfânt ca pe o grădină, a nimicit locul adunării sale; Domnul a făcut să se uite în Sion sărbătorile şi Sabatul, şi, în mânia Lui năpraznică a lepădat pe împărat şi pe preot.

⁷ Domnul Şi-a dispreţuit altarul, Şi-a lepădat locaşul Său cel sfânt. A dat în mânile vrăjmaşului zidurile palatelor Sionului; au răsunat strigătele în casa Domnului, ca într-o zi de sărbătoare.

⁸ Şi-a pus de gând Domnul să dărâme zidurile fiicei Sionului; a întins sfoara de măsurat, şi nu Şi-a tras mâna până nu le-a nimicit. A cufundat în jale întăritura şi zidurile, cari nu mai sânt, toate, decât nişte dărâmături triste.

⁹ Porţile îi sânt cufundate în pământ; i-a nimicit şi rupt zăvoarele. Împăratul şi căpeteniile sale sânt între neamuri. Lege nu mai au,

¹⁰ Bătrânii fiicei Sionului şed pe pământ şi tac; şi-au presărat ţărână pe cap, s-au încins cu saci; fecioarele Ierusalimului îşi pleacă la pământ capul.

¹¹ Mi s-au strors ochii de lacrămi, îmi fierb măruntaiele, mi se varsă ficatul pe pământ, din pricina prăpădului fiicei poporului meu, din pricina copiilor şi pruncilor de ţîţă leşinaţi pe uliţele cetăţii.

¹² Ei ziceau către mamele lor: ,,Unde este pâne şi vin?`` Şi cădeau leşinaţi ca nişte răniţi pe uliţele cetăţii, îşi dădeau sufletul la pieptul mamelor lor.

¹³ ,,Cu ce să te îmbărbătez şi cu ce să te asemăn, fiica Ierusalimului? Cu cine să te pun alături, şi cu ce să te mângâi, fecioară, fiica Sionului? Căci rana ta este mare ca marea: cine va putea să te vindece?

¹⁴ Proorocii tăi ţi-au proorocit vedenii deşarte şi amăgitoare, nu ţi-au dat pe faţă nelegiuirea, ca să abată astfel robia dela tine, ci ţi-au făcut proorocii mincinoase şi înşelătoare.

¹⁵ Toţi trecătorii bat din palme asupra ta, şuieră şi dau din cap împotriva fiicei Ierusalimului, şi zic: ,,Aceasta este cetatea despre care se zicea că este cea mai frumoasă, şi bucuria întregului pământ?``

¹⁶ Toţi vrăjmaşii tăi deschid gura împotriva ta, fluieră, scrîşnesc din dinţi, şi zic: ,,Am înghiţit-o!`` ,,Da, aceasta este ziua pe care o aşteptam, am ajuns-o şi o vedem!``

¹⁷ Domnul a înfăptuit ce hotărâse, a împlinit cuvântul pe care-l sorocise de multă vreme, a nimicit fără milă; a făcut din tine bucuria vrăjmaşului, a înălţat tăria asupritorilor tăi!

¹⁸ Inima lor strigă către Domnul... Zid al fiicei Sionului, varsă zi şi noapte şiroaie de lacrămi! Nu-ţi da niciun răgaz, şi ochiul tău să n-aibă odihnă!

¹⁹ Scoală-te şi gemi noaptea când încep străjile! Varsă-ţi inima ca nişte apă, înaintea Domnului! Ridică-ţi mâinile spre El pentru viaţa copiilor tăi, cari mor de foame la toate colţurile uliţelor!

²⁰ Uită-Te, Doamne, şi priveşte: cui i-ai făcut Tu aşa? Să mănânce femeile rodul pântecelui lor, pruncii desmierdaţi de mânile lor? Să fie măcelăriţi preoţii şi proorocii în Locaşul cel sfânt al Domnului?

²¹ Copiii şi bătrânii stau culcaţi pe pământ în uliţe; fecioarele şi tinerii mei au căzut ucişi de sabie; i-ai ucis, în ziua mâniei Tale, şi i-ai jungheat fără milă.

²² Ai chemat groaza din toate părţile peste mine, ca la o zi de sărbătoare. În ziua mâniei Domnului, n-a scăpat unul şi n-a rămas cu viaţă. Pe cei îngrijiţi şi crescuţi de mine, mi i-a nimicit vrăjmaşul!``

{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":12569,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Footstool","title_en":"Footstool","content_ro":"<h3>FOOTSTOOL<\/h3>\nLow stool used to support one’s feet. Part of King Solomon’s great revenue of gold was used to fashion a footstool for his ivory throne (2 Chr 9:18). The word is frequently used metaphorically. Both the ark of the covenant and the temple are referred to as God’s footstool because they were places where God rested (his glory resided there) and reigned (1 Chr 28:2; Pss 99:5; 132:7; Lam 2:1; cf. Is 60:13). The enemies of the Messiah were to become his footstool; that is, they would be fully subjected to him by the power of God (Ps 110:1). Many of the NT references to a footstool (lit. “something under the foot”) parallel the OT expectation of the final conquest of Messiah’s enemies (Mt 22:44; Mk 12:36; Lk 20:43; Acts 2:35; Heb 1:13; 10:13).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FOOTSTOOL<\/h3>\nLow stool used to support one’s feet. Part of King Solomon’s great revenue of gold was used to fashion a footstool for his ivory throne (2 Chr 9:18). The word is frequently used metaphorically. Both the ark of the covenant and the temple are referred to as God’s footstool because they were places where God rested (his glory resided there) and reigned (1 Chr 28:2; Pss 99:5; 132:7; Lam 2:1; cf. Is 60:13). The enemies of the Messiah were to become his footstool; that is, they would be fully subjected to him by the power of God (Ps 110:1). Many of the NT references to a footstool (lit. “something under the foot”) parallel the OT expectation of the final conquest of Messiah’s enemies (Mt 22:44; Mk 12:36; Lk 20:43; Acts 2:35; Heb 1:13; 10:13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"FOOTSTOOL Low stool used to support one’s feet. Part of King Solomon’s great revenue of gold was used to fashion a footstool for his ivory throne (2 Chr 9:18). The word is frequently used metaphorically. Both the ark of the covenant and the temple are referred to as God’s footstool because they were places where God rested (his glory resided there) and reigned (1 Chr 28:2; Pss 99:5; 132:7; Lam 2:1; cf. Is 60:13). The enemies of the Messiah were to become his footstool; that is, they would be ...","summary_en":"FOOTSTOOL Low stool used to support one’s feet. Part of King Solomon’s great revenue of gold was used to fashion a footstool for his ivory throne (2 Chr 9:18). The word is frequently used metaphorically. Both the ark of the covenant and the temple are referred to as God’s footstool because they were places where God rested (his glory resided there) and reigned (1 Chr 28:2; Pss 99:5; 132:7; Lam 2:1; cf. Is 60:13). The enemies of the Messiah were to become his footstool; that is, they would be ...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":22448,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Lamentations","title_en":"Book of Lamentations","content_ro":"<h3>LAMENTATIONS, Book of<\/h3>\nBook consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Structure<\/p>\n• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint.<\/p>\nThe Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different literary styles of the books of Jeremiah and Lamentations and the alleged conflicting viewpoints in the two books.<\/p>\nThe literary styles of these books are strikingly different. The prophecies of the book of Jeremiah are flowing pronouncements that create an impression of spontaneity and are quite unlike the contrived literary structures of Lamentations. But it is somewhat arbitrary to assert that Jeremiah could not have written the book of Lamentations on the basis of style. The choice of the acrostic form would naturally limit the scope of the writer’s freedom and profoundly affect his style. It is clear from 2 Chronicles 35:25 that Jeremiah composed the same type of material as that found in Lamentations. Since the sermons of the book of Jeremiah were intended for public proclamation, they would naturally have a spontaneity that the book of Lamentations would not possess. Certainly, the sensitive nature reflected in Jeremiah’s prophecies characterized the author of Lamentations as well.<\/p>\nTypical of the alleged differences of viewpoint used to deny Jeremaic authorship is the role of the nations in the destruction of Jerusalem. In his prophecy Jeremiah saw the invading Babylonians as a tool of God’s punishment, and appealed to the Jews to surrender to the invaders (Jer 28:3). The book of Lamentations seems to make God the direct author of the punishment and sees the enemy nations only as onlookers who will also experience God’s wrath (Lam 1:21; 3:59-66). It must be noted, however, that the enemies referred to in Lamentations are not only the Babylonians but all of the hostile powers that threatened Judah and gloated over its destruction (1:21). The assurance that God will judge these enemies is not a denial of the message of the book of Jeremiah, for it would be artificial for Jeremiah to suppose that the Babylonians, even though they were an instrument of God’s anger, were exempt from punishment. Such a concept is at variance with Jeremiah 12:14-17.<\/p>\nA number of phrases used in the book of Jeremiah are found in Lamentations as well. The expressions “terrors on every side” (Lam 2:22; cf. Jer 6:25; 20:10) and “wormwood” (Lam 3:15, 19; cf. Jer 9:15; 23:15) are examples of these. This fact lends support to the concept of Jeremaic authorship of the book.<\/p>\nOther reasons cited for the denial of Jeremaic authorship are the absence of the name of Jeremiah in Lamentations and the position of the book in the Writings, not the Prophets, in the Hebrew Bible. The absence of Jeremiah’s name is not a cogent argument against his authorship; there are a significant number of OT books whose authors are not cited. Since the book of Lamentations is a formal dirge, and is thus unlike the book of Jeremiah with its numerous autobiographical references, one would not expect personal allusions by the author.<\/p>\nThe position of Lamentations in the third division of the Hebrew Bible is sometimes appealed to by those who question Jeremaic authorship. Since Jeremiah is in the second division, it is argued that Lamentations was written too late for it to have been authored by Jeremiah. It should be noted, however, that there is a lack of unity in the early lists of the canonical books in the third division. It is difficult to assign a late date to a book of the third division only because of its inclusion in that division. The early church father Jerome indicated that Lamentations was once on the same scroll with Jeremiah.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nIf the book of Lamentations was written by Jeremiah, the time of writing would be shortly after the fall of Jerusalem (586 BC<\/span>). It is extremely difficult to imagine an author living in later times writing such a poignant lament over Jerusalem’s fall. The vivid descriptions of the suffering endured by the inhabitants of Jerusalem support the position that the book was written by an eyewitness to the events.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nAfter many months of siege by the Babylonian armies, Jerusalem fell, and the final deportation of the people of Judah took place. Extrabiblical confirmation of the devastation caused by the Babylonian invasion may be found in the Lachish letters, which record the message from a soldier in the field who indicates that he is watching for the signals of Lachish but cannot see the signals of Azekah (cf. Jer 34:7).<\/p>\nThe time preceding Jerusalem’s fall was one of internal strife and political intrigue. Jeremiah counseled surrender, while the chauvinistic leaders of Jerusalem tried to encourage the Judahites to fight on against the Babylonian onslaught. The role of Jeremiah in those final events was a tenuous one. His life was threatened, and he suffered numerous imprisonments.<\/p>\nThe fall of Jerusalem meant more than ignominious defeat and exile. While these would have been hard to bear, the theological emergency brought about by the event would have been the most difficult thing for believing Jews to comprehend. The fall of the city in which God chose to reveal himself would have signaled the end of God’s promises. The OT clearly set forth a glorious future for Jerusalem. It was to be the center of the messianic kingdom in the end time (Mi 4). The destruction of the city would cause many to question the veracity of God’s Word. The laments in this book are not only for the suffering that accompanied the fall of the city but also for the deep spiritual questions posed by its demise.<\/p>\nStructure<\/p>\nEach poem has a distinct symmetrical pattern. The first (Lam 1) is an elaborate acrostic composed of three-line segments. There are 22 segments, each beginning with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, proceeding in order from the first to the last. The second poem (ch 2) is similar except for a transposition of two Hebrew letters. The third poem (ch 3) is also composed of three-line segments, but each line begins with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, rather than only the first line of each segment as in the first two poems. The same Hebrew letters are transposed. The fourth poem (ch 4) is an acrostic composed of two-line segments. The first line of each segment begins with the appropriate Hebrew letter. The last poem (ch 5) is not an acrostic, but it contains the same number of letters as the Hebrew alphabet.<\/p>\nThe reason for this complex structure is unknown. It has been suggested that it is a device to aid memorization. Another suggestion is that the Hebrews may have seen the alphabet as representing the concept of totality or completeness. This idea derives from the fact that the Hebrew alphabet represented numbers as well as letters. This concept of totality may be reflected in the reference to the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet in Revelation 1:8: “I am the Alpha and the Omega.” It is quite possible that the expression of lamentation in the structure of the Hebrew alphabet could have represented the full range of sorrow felt by the author as he pondered the fall of the city of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPurpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\nA major purpose of the book of Lamentations was to give expression to the deep grief that Jeremiah felt as a result of Jerusalem’s catastrophe. By writing the book, he expressed the grief of all the Jews of his time and gave them a vehicle that would give vent to their sorrow.<\/p>\nThe book does not contain only lamentation, however, for it expresses hope and comfort as well. Thus another of its purposes was to lift the hearts of the people and point them to God, the source of all comfort. One of the greatest expressions of hope in the book is found in 3:22-23: “The unfailing love of the Lord<\/span> never ends! By his mercies we have been kept from complete destruction. Great is his faithfulness; his mercies begin afresh each day” (nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nPerhaps the most important purpose of the book was to explain the theological reason for the catastrophe. The book places the reason for Jerusalem’s fall in clear focus and demonstrates what can be learned about God from this. The reason given for Jerusalem’s demise is the sin of the people (1:8-9, 14; 4:13). The fall of the city is a vivid illustration of God’s justice in not overlooking sin even in those who are his own (1:18). It demonstrates the fact that God may seem like an enemy to his people when they are disobedient (2:5-7). It shows that the catastrophe was not outside the purposes of God (v 17) and vividly describes the results that can come from willful disobedience. But God is envisioned as a God of mercy and faithfulness as well. Even though Jeremiah saw his beloved homeland crumbling about him, there remained one great element of stability: God’s loyalty to his promises. Jeremiah knew that this was not the end, for he trusted in the steadfast love of the Lord and learned to wait quietly for God to act in his time (3:22-27).<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\nThe first chapter is a lamentation over the captivity of the citizens of Jerusalem and the resultant desolation of the city.<\/p>\nThe author alludes to Deuteronomy 28:64-65 at the beginning of the first lamentation (Lam 1:3). In that passage Moses warned the people that their disobedience to God would result in their dispersion among the nations, with no resting place. Lamentations 1:3 says that this warning has been realized.<\/p>\nThe cause of Israel’s misfortune was their sin (1:8a). This is a remarkable example of the results of disobedience to God. The dire results of sin permeate this first lamentation in a series of pictures of deep pathos (vv 11-12, 16-17). In the midst of this suffering Israel confesses that God was in the right (v 18). The righteousness of God involves his acting in integrity. He punishes sin even in his own people.<\/p>\nThe first lamentation ends with a prayer in which the people cry out for God’s judgment on their enemies (1:21-22). Such imprecations are the OT believer’s way of expressing his longing for an end to evil as it was personified in the godless nations.<\/p>\nThe second lamentation also concerns the destruction of Jerusalem but places more emphasis on God’s judgment. The tone is more strident than in the previous lamentation. Throughout the passage words expressing anger appear (2:1-3, 6-7). It is as though the terrible wrath of God evident in the destruction of the city is still vivid in the mind of the writer.<\/p>\nThe author lays the blame for God’s anger squarely on the false prophets (2:14); but he does not exempt the people from guilt, as is clear from other passages (e.g., 1:5, 8). It was the false prophets of the time who failed to warn the people of the results of their sin (2:14). Because of this, destruction came, and the writer can give no comfort to the people (v 13).<\/p>\nThe second lamentation begins with a reference to God’s footstool (2:1), probably referring to the ark of the covenant (1 Chr 28:2). The ark was the focal point of God’s revelation of himself. This verse reflects the theological emergency of the time; the writer laments the fact that God has not remembered his “footstool.” Even the holy ark, which marked God’s presence with his people, has not prevented God from destroying Jerusalem.<\/p>\nThe same thought is expressed in verses 6-7, where the traditional aspects of Israelite worship, as well as the sanctuary, are seen as having been destroyed by God. This important truth demonstrates the viewpoint of the whole book, which sees God as the direct cause of the misfortune.<\/p>\nThe third lamentation is very personal. At its conclusion, sorrow and complaint pass into a prayer of assurance (3:61-66). In the first 18 verses of this chapter, the writer describes how the Lord has afflicted him. He refers to God in the third person, not addressing him as Lord until he speaks the words of verse 18. Only after he has poured out his grief in this fashion can he speak the name of the Lord. This poignant grief suddenly changes to an expression of joy. He can affirm the covenant faithfulness of the Lord, and in the midst of the deepening sorrow, he sees God’s mercies as new every morning (vv 22-24). The chapter closes with a sudden burst of assurance (vv 58-66), in which the writer affirms his belief that God will vindicate him before his enemies. Only after he meditates on the nature of God’s loving-kindness (vv 22-27) can he speak these words. The desperate isolation and separation from God expressed in verses 1-17 give way as he affirms God’s goodness. Assurance comes as he reflects on the nature and goodness of God.<\/p>\nThe fourth lamentation emphasizes the fact that the judgment was well deserved. The author describes the various classes of the population (4:1-16) and indicates how each has been affected by Jerusalem’s downfall. Verses 12-20 affirm that the judgment of God is a direct consequence of sin. This lamentation also becomes a joyous statement of hope (vv 21-22), as the writer affirms that God will punish Israel’s enemies. Israel’s sin will be forgiven, and the guilt of “the daughter of Edom” will be punished. The “daughter of Edom” undoubtedly stands for all the enemy nations. (Edom is used in Isaiah 63:1 in the same fashion.) This salvation of the nation of Judah will not take place until their guilt is atoned for. It occurs when God conquers the godless nations. This conquest of the nations is an event that takes place in the end time, according to numerous OT and NT passages. It represents the manifestation of God’s total sovereignty over his creation.<\/p>\nThe last chapter is a poignant prayer in which the author describes their sufferings and asks God to restore the fortunes of the people. It begins with a request to God, asking him to consider all that has befallen the people (5:1-18). Part of the ignominy of the captive Jews is that “slaves” rule over them (v 8). This is an apparent reference to the Babylonian captors, who themselves were subject to despotic rule for many decades. The author’s perspective changes in verse 19, where he affirms that the Lord reigns forever. While Jerusalem, the earthly dwelling place of the Lord, has come to an end, the Lord’s throne endures forever. Because his throne is everlasting, the author asks, “Why do you continue to forget us? Why have you forsaken us for so long? Restore us, O Lord<\/span>, and bring us back to you again! Give us back the joys we once had! Or have you utterly rejected us? Are you angry with us still?” (5:20-22, nlt<\/span>). The question is based on the belief that because God’s reign is eternal, he cannot utterly forsake his people. He will restore his kingdom.<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations is neglected by many Christians. It deserves to be studied more. Its powerful statement concerning the blessings that may come from tragedy is a relevant message in any age, and it is one of the most powerful illustrations of the results of sin to be found in the OT. Its theology is clear and precise, painting a brilliant picture of God’s faithfulness against the dark background of the collapse of the city of Zion.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jeremiah (Person) #1; Jeremiah, Book of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LAMENTATIONS, Book of<\/h3>\nBook consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Structure<\/p>\n• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint.<\/p>\nThe Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different literary styles of the books of Jeremiah and Lamentations and the alleged conflicting viewpoints in the two books.<\/p>\nThe literary styles of these books are strikingly different. The prophecies of the book of Jeremiah are flowing pronouncements that create an impression of spontaneity and are quite unlike the contrived literary structures of Lamentations. But it is somewhat arbitrary to assert that Jeremiah could not have written the book of Lamentations on the basis of style. The choice of the acrostic form would naturally limit the scope of the writer’s freedom and profoundly affect his style. It is clear from 2 Chronicles 35:25 that Jeremiah composed the same type of material as that found in Lamentations. Since the sermons of the book of Jeremiah were intended for public proclamation, they would naturally have a spontaneity that the book of Lamentations would not possess. Certainly, the sensitive nature reflected in Jeremiah’s prophecies characterized the author of Lamentations as well.<\/p>\nTypical of the alleged differences of viewpoint used to deny Jeremaic authorship is the role of the nations in the destruction of Jerusalem. In his prophecy Jeremiah saw the invading Babylonians as a tool of God’s punishment, and appealed to the Jews to surrender to the invaders (Jer 28:3). The book of Lamentations seems to make God the direct author of the punishment and sees the enemy nations only as onlookers who will also experience God’s wrath (Lam 1:21; 3:59-66). It must be noted, however, that the enemies referred to in Lamentations are not only the Babylonians but all of the hostile powers that threatened Judah and gloated over its destruction (1:21). The assurance that God will judge these enemies is not a denial of the message of the book of Jeremiah, for it would be artificial for Jeremiah to suppose that the Babylonians, even though they were an instrument of God’s anger, were exempt from punishment. Such a concept is at variance with Jeremiah 12:14-17.<\/p>\nA number of phrases used in the book of Jeremiah are found in Lamentations as well. The expressions “terrors on every side” (Lam 2:22; cf. Jer 6:25; 20:10) and “wormwood” (Lam 3:15, 19; cf. Jer 9:15; 23:15) are examples of these. This fact lends support to the concept of Jeremaic authorship of the book.<\/p>\nOther reasons cited for the denial of Jeremaic authorship are the absence of the name of Jeremiah in Lamentations and the position of the book in the Writings, not the Prophets, in the Hebrew Bible. The absence of Jeremiah’s name is not a cogent argument against his authorship; there are a significant number of OT books whose authors are not cited. Since the book of Lamentations is a formal dirge, and is thus unlike the book of Jeremiah with its numerous autobiographical references, one would not expect personal allusions by the author.<\/p>\nThe position of Lamentations in the third division of the Hebrew Bible is sometimes appealed to by those who question Jeremaic authorship. Since Jeremiah is in the second division, it is argued that Lamentations was written too late for it to have been authored by Jeremiah. It should be noted, however, that there is a lack of unity in the early lists of the canonical books in the third division. It is difficult to assign a late date to a book of the third division only because of its inclusion in that division. The early church father Jerome indicated that Lamentations was once on the same scroll with Jeremiah.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nIf the book of Lamentations was written by Jeremiah, the time of writing would be shortly after the fall of Jerusalem (586 BC<\/span>). It is extremely difficult to imagine an author living in later times writing such a poignant lament over Jerusalem’s fall. The vivid descriptions of the suffering endured by the inhabitants of Jerusalem support the position that the book was written by an eyewitness to the events.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nAfter many months of siege by the Babylonian armies, Jerusalem fell, and the final deportation of the people of Judah took place. Extrabiblical confirmation of the devastation caused by the Babylonian invasion may be found in the Lachish letters, which record the message from a soldier in the field who indicates that he is watching for the signals of Lachish but cannot see the signals of Azekah (cf. Jer 34:7).<\/p>\nThe time preceding Jerusalem’s fall was one of internal strife and political intrigue. Jeremiah counseled surrender, while the chauvinistic leaders of Jerusalem tried to encourage the Judahites to fight on against the Babylonian onslaught. The role of Jeremiah in those final events was a tenuous one. His life was threatened, and he suffered numerous imprisonments.<\/p>\nThe fall of Jerusalem meant more than ignominious defeat and exile. While these would have been hard to bear, the theological emergency brought about by the event would have been the most difficult thing for believing Jews to comprehend. The fall of the city in which God chose to reveal himself would have signaled the end of God’s promises. The OT clearly set forth a glorious future for Jerusalem. It was to be the center of the messianic kingdom in the end time (Mi 4). The destruction of the city would cause many to question the veracity of God’s Word. The laments in this book are not only for the suffering that accompanied the fall of the city but also for the deep spiritual questions posed by its demise.<\/p>\nStructure<\/p>\nEach poem has a distinct symmetrical pattern. The first (Lam 1) is an elaborate acrostic composed of three-line segments. There are 22 segments, each beginning with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, proceeding in order from the first to the last. The second poem (ch 2) is similar except for a transposition of two Hebrew letters. The third poem (ch 3) is also composed of three-line segments, but each line begins with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, rather than only the first line of each segment as in the first two poems. The same Hebrew letters are transposed. The fourth poem (ch 4) is an acrostic composed of two-line segments. The first line of each segment begins with the appropriate Hebrew letter. The last poem (ch 5) is not an acrostic, but it contains the same number of letters as the Hebrew alphabet.<\/p>\nThe reason for this complex structure is unknown. It has been suggested that it is a device to aid memorization. Another suggestion is that the Hebrews may have seen the alphabet as representing the concept of totality or completeness. This idea derives from the fact that the Hebrew alphabet represented numbers as well as letters. This concept of totality may be reflected in the reference to the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet in Revelation 1:8: “I am the Alpha and the Omega.” It is quite possible that the expression of lamentation in the structure of the Hebrew alphabet could have represented the full range of sorrow felt by the author as he pondered the fall of the city of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPurpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\nA major purpose of the book of Lamentations was to give expression to the deep grief that Jeremiah felt as a result of Jerusalem’s catastrophe. By writing the book, he expressed the grief of all the Jews of his time and gave them a vehicle that would give vent to their sorrow.<\/p>\nThe book does not contain only lamentation, however, for it expresses hope and comfort as well. Thus another of its purposes was to lift the hearts of the people and point them to God, the source of all comfort. One of the greatest expressions of hope in the book is found in 3:22-23: “The unfailing love of the Lord<\/span> never ends! By his mercies we have been kept from complete destruction. Great is his faithfulness; his mercies begin afresh each day” (nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nPerhaps the most important purpose of the book was to explain the theological reason for the catastrophe. The book places the reason for Jerusalem’s fall in clear focus and demonstrates what can be learned about God from this. The reason given for Jerusalem’s demise is the sin of the people (1:8-9, 14; 4:13). The fall of the city is a vivid illustration of God’s justice in not overlooking sin even in those who are his own (1:18). It demonstrates the fact that God may seem like an enemy to his people when they are disobedient (2:5-7). It shows that the catastrophe was not outside the purposes of God (v 17) and vividly describes the results that can come from willful disobedience. But God is envisioned as a God of mercy and faithfulness as well. Even though Jeremiah saw his beloved homeland crumbling about him, there remained one great element of stability: God’s loyalty to his promises. Jeremiah knew that this was not the end, for he trusted in the steadfast love of the Lord and learned to wait quietly for God to act in his time (3:22-27).<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\nThe first chapter is a lamentation over the captivity of the citizens of Jerusalem and the resultant desolation of the city.<\/p>\nThe author alludes to Deuteronomy 28:64-65 at the beginning of the first lamentation (Lam 1:3). In that passage Moses warned the people that their disobedience to God would result in their dispersion among the nations, with no resting place. Lamentations 1:3 says that this warning has been realized.<\/p>\nThe cause of Israel’s misfortune was their sin (1:8a). This is a remarkable example of the results of disobedience to God. The dire results of sin permeate this first lamentation in a series of pictures of deep pathos (vv 11-12, 16-17). In the midst of this suffering Israel confesses that God was in the right (v 18). The righteousness of God involves his acting in integrity. He punishes sin even in his own people.<\/p>\nThe first lamentation ends with a prayer in which the people cry out for God’s judgment on their enemies (1:21-22). Such imprecations are the OT believer’s way of expressing his longing for an end to evil as it was personified in the godless nations.<\/p>\nThe second lamentation also concerns the destruction of Jerusalem but places more emphasis on God’s judgment. The tone is more strident than in the previous lamentation. Throughout the passage words expressing anger appear (2:1-3, 6-7). It is as though the terrible wrath of God evident in the destruction of the city is still vivid in the mind of the writer.<\/p>\nThe author lays the blame for God’s anger squarely on the false prophets (2:14); but he does not exempt the people from guilt, as is clear from other passages (e.g., 1:5, 8). It was the false prophets of the time who failed to warn the people of the results of their sin (2:14). Because of this, destruction came, and the writer can give no comfort to the people (v 13).<\/p>\nThe second lamentation begins with a reference to God’s footstool (2:1), probably referring to the ark of the covenant (1 Chr 28:2). The ark was the focal point of God’s revelation of himself. This verse reflects the theological emergency of the time; the writer laments the fact that God has not remembered his “footstool.” Even the holy ark, which marked God’s presence with his people, has not prevented God from destroying Jerusalem.<\/p>\nThe same thought is expressed in verses 6-7, where the traditional aspects of Israelite worship, as well as the sanctuary, are seen as having been destroyed by God. This important truth demonstrates the viewpoint of the whole book, which sees God as the direct cause of the misfortune.<\/p>\nThe third lamentation is very personal. At its conclusion, sorrow and complaint pass into a prayer of assurance (3:61-66). In the first 18 verses of this chapter, the writer describes how the Lord has afflicted him. He refers to God in the third person, not addressing him as Lord until he speaks the words of verse 18. Only after he has poured out his grief in this fashion can he speak the name of the Lord. This poignant grief suddenly changes to an expression of joy. He can affirm the covenant faithfulness of the Lord, and in the midst of the deepening sorrow, he sees God’s mercies as new every morning (vv 22-24). The chapter closes with a sudden burst of assurance (vv 58-66), in which the writer affirms his belief that God will vindicate him before his enemies. Only after he meditates on the nature of God’s loving-kindness (vv 22-27) can he speak these words. The desperate isolation and separation from God expressed in verses 1-17 give way as he affirms God’s goodness. Assurance comes as he reflects on the nature and goodness of God.<\/p>\nThe fourth lamentation emphasizes the fact that the judgment was well deserved. The author describes the various classes of the population (4:1-16) and indicates how each has been affected by Jerusalem’s downfall. Verses 12-20 affirm that the judgment of God is a direct consequence of sin. This lamentation also becomes a joyous statement of hope (vv 21-22), as the writer affirms that God will punish Israel’s enemies. Israel’s sin will be forgiven, and the guilt of “the daughter of Edom” will be punished. The “daughter of Edom” undoubtedly stands for all the enemy nations. (Edom is used in Isaiah 63:1 in the same fashion.) This salvation of the nation of Judah will not take place until their guilt is atoned for. It occurs when God conquers the godless nations. This conquest of the nations is an event that takes place in the end time, according to numerous OT and NT passages. It represents the manifestation of God’s total sovereignty over his creation.<\/p>\nThe last chapter is a poignant prayer in which the author describes their sufferings and asks God to restore the fortunes of the people. It begins with a request to God, asking him to consider all that has befallen the people (5:1-18). Part of the ignominy of the captive Jews is that “slaves” rule over them (v 8). This is an apparent reference to the Babylonian captors, who themselves were subject to despotic rule for many decades. The author’s perspective changes in verse 19, where he affirms that the Lord reigns forever. While Jerusalem, the earthly dwelling place of the Lord, has come to an end, the Lord’s throne endures forever. Because his throne is everlasting, the author asks, “Why do you continue to forget us? Why have you forsaken us for so long? Restore us, O Lord<\/span>, and bring us back to you again! Give us back the joys we once had! Or have you utterly rejected us? Are you angry with us still?” (5:20-22, nlt<\/span>). The question is based on the belief that because God’s reign is eternal, he cannot utterly forsake his people. He will restore his kingdom.<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations is neglected by many Christians. It deserves to be studied more. Its powerful statement concerning the blessings that may come from tragedy is a relevant message in any age, and it is one of the most powerful illustrations of the results of sin to be found in the OT. Its theology is clear and precise, painting a brilliant picture of God’s faithfulness against the dark background of the collapse of the city of Zion.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jeremiah (Person) #1; Jeremiah, Book of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LAMENTATIONS, Book of Book consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem. Preview • Author • Date • Background • Structure • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author The book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint. The Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different ...","summary_en":"LAMENTATIONS, Book of Book consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem. Preview • Author • Date • Background • Structure • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author The book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint. The Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different ...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52874,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:1","content_ro":"2:1-22<\/strong> This chapter graphically portrays the Lord as Jerusalem’s destroyer.<\/p>","content_en":"2:1-22<\/strong> This chapter graphically portrays the Lord as Jerusalem’s destroyer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1-22 This chapter graphically portrays the Lord as Jerusalem’s destroyer.","summary_en":"2:1-22 This chapter graphically portrays the Lord as Jerusalem’s destroyer.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52875,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:1","content_ro":"2:1<\/strong> the heights of heaven:<\/em> Jerusalem’s buildings were splendid, adorned with precious metals and jewels. Jerusalem had the reputation of being the sacred city of the Lord. • his Temple<\/em> (literally his footstool<\/em>): Cp. 1 Chr 28:2; Pss 99:5; 132:7.<\/p>","content_en":"2:1<\/strong> the heights of heaven:<\/em> Jerusalem’s buildings were splendid, adorned with precious metals and jewels. Jerusalem had the reputation of being the sacred city of the Lord. • his Temple<\/em> (literally his footstool<\/em>): Cp. 1 Chr 28:2; Pss 99:5; 132:7.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1 the heights of heaven: Jerusalem’s buildings were splendid, adorned with precious metals and jewels. Jerusalem had the reputation of being the sacred city of the Lord. • his Temple (literally his footstool): Cp. 1 Chr 28:2; Pss 99:5; 132:7.","summary_en":"2:1 the heights of heaven: Jerusalem’s buildings were splendid, adorned with precious metals and jewels. Jerusalem had the reputation of being the sacred city of the Lord. • his Temple (literally his footstool): Cp. 1 Chr 28:2; Pss 99:5; 132:7.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80500,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:1","content_ro":"2:1-22<\/strong> This chapter graphically portrays the Lord as Jerusalem’s destroyer.<\/p>","content_en":"2:1-22<\/strong> This chapter graphically portrays the Lord as Jerusalem’s destroyer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1-22 This chapter graphically portrays the Lord as Jerusalem’s destroyer.","summary_en":"2:1-22 This chapter graphically portrays the Lord as Jerusalem’s destroyer.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80501,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:1","content_ro":"2:1<\/strong> the heights of heaven:<\/em> Jerusalem’s buildings were splendid, adorned with precious metals and jewels. Jerusalem had the reputation of being the sacred city of the Lord. • his Temple<\/em> (literally his footstool<\/em>): Cp. 1 Chr 28:2; Pss 99:5; 132:7.<\/p>","content_en":"2:1<\/strong> the heights of heaven:<\/em> Jerusalem’s buildings were splendid, adorned with precious metals and jewels. Jerusalem had the reputation of being the sacred city of the Lord. • his Temple<\/em> (literally his footstool<\/em>): Cp. 1 Chr 28:2; Pss 99:5; 132:7.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1 the heights of heaven: Jerusalem’s buildings were splendid, adorned with precious metals and jewels. Jerusalem had the reputation of being the sacred city of the Lord. • his Temple (literally his footstool): Cp. 1 Chr 28:2; Pss 99:5; 132:7.","summary_en":"2:1 the heights of heaven: Jerusalem’s buildings were splendid, adorned with precious metals and jewels. Jerusalem had the reputation of being the sacred city of the Lord. • his Temple (literally his footstool): Cp. 1 Chr 28:2; Pss 99:5; 132:7.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108126,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:1","content_ro":"2:1-22<\/strong> This chapter graphically portrays the Lord as Jerusalem’s destroyer.<\/p>","content_en":"2:1-22<\/strong> This chapter graphically portrays the Lord as Jerusalem’s destroyer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1-22 This chapter graphically portrays the Lord as Jerusalem’s destroyer.","summary_en":"2:1-22 This chapter graphically portrays the Lord as Jerusalem’s destroyer.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108127,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:1","content_ro":"2:1<\/strong> the heights of heaven:<\/em> Jerusalem’s buildings were splendid, adorned with precious metals and jewels. Jerusalem had the reputation of being the sacred city of the Lord. • his Temple<\/em> (literally his footstool<\/em>): Cp. 1 Chr 28:2; Pss 99:5; 132:7.<\/p>","content_en":"2:1<\/strong> the heights of heaven:<\/em> Jerusalem’s buildings were splendid, adorned with precious metals and jewels. Jerusalem had the reputation of being the sacred city of the Lord. • his Temple<\/em> (literally his footstool<\/em>): Cp. 1 Chr 28:2; Pss 99:5; 132:7.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1 the heights of heaven: Jerusalem’s buildings were splendid, adorned with precious metals and jewels. Jerusalem had the reputation of being the sacred city of the Lord. • his Temple (literally his footstool): Cp. 1 Chr 28:2; Pss 99:5; 132:7.","summary_en":"2:1 the heights of heaven: Jerusalem’s buildings were splendid, adorned with precious metals and jewels. Jerusalem had the reputation of being the sacred city of the Lord. • his Temple (literally his footstool): Cp. 1 Chr 28:2; Pss 99:5; 132:7.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135752,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:1","content_ro":"2:1-22<\/strong> This chapter graphically portrays the Lord as Jerusalem’s destroyer.<\/p>","content_en":"2:1-22<\/strong> This chapter graphically portrays the Lord as Jerusalem’s destroyer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1-22 This chapter graphically portrays the Lord as Jerusalem’s destroyer.","summary_en":"2:1-22 This chapter graphically portrays the Lord as Jerusalem’s destroyer.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135753,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:1","content_ro":"2:1<\/strong> the heights of heaven:<\/em> Jerusalem’s buildings were splendid, adorned with precious metals and jewels. Jerusalem had the reputation of being the sacred city of the Lord. • his Temple<\/em> (literally his footstool<\/em>): Cp. 1 Chr 28:2; Pss 99:5; 132:7.<\/p>","content_en":"2:1<\/strong> the heights of heaven:<\/em> Jerusalem’s buildings were splendid, adorned with precious metals and jewels. Jerusalem had the reputation of being the sacred city of the Lord. • his Temple<\/em> (literally his footstool<\/em>): Cp. 1 Chr 28:2; Pss 99:5; 132:7.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1 the heights of heaven: Jerusalem’s buildings were splendid, adorned with precious metals and jewels. Jerusalem had the reputation of being the sacred city of the Lord. • his Temple (literally his footstool): Cp. 1 Chr 28:2; Pss 99:5; 132:7.","summary_en":"2:1 the heights of heaven: Jerusalem’s buildings were splendid, adorned with precious metals and jewels. Jerusalem had the reputation of being the sacred city of the Lord. • his Temple (literally his footstool): Cp. 1 Chr 28:2; Pss 99:5; 132:7.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":52876,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:3","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:3","content_ro":"2:3-4<\/strong> bends his bow:<\/em> In the past, the Lord had been a mighty warrior on Israel’s behalf (see Exod 14:13–15:21; Josh 23:9-11; Judg 7; 2 Kgs 19:32-35); now he waged war against Jerusalem (see Isa 63:10; Ezek 24:25).<\/p>","content_en":"2:3-4<\/strong> bends his bow:<\/em> In the past, the Lord had been a mighty warrior on Israel’s behalf (see Exod 14:13–15:21; Josh 23:9-11; Judg 7; 2 Kgs 19:32-35); now he waged war against Jerusalem (see Isa 63:10; Ezek 24:25).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:3-4 bends his bow: In the past, the Lord had been a mighty warrior on Israel’s behalf (see Exod 14:13–15:21; Josh 23:9-11; Judg 7; 2 Kgs 19:32-35); now he waged war against Jerusalem (see Isa 63:10; Ezek 24:25).","summary_en":"2:3-4 bends his bow: In the past, the Lord had been a mighty warrior on Israel’s behalf (see Exod 14:13–15:21; Josh 23:9-11; Judg 7; 2 Kgs 19:32-35); now he waged war against Jerusalem (see Isa 63:10; Ezek 24:25).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80502,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:3","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:3","content_ro":"2:3-4<\/strong> bends his bow:<\/em> In the past, the Lord had been a mighty warrior on Israel’s behalf (see Exod 14:13–15:21; Josh 23:9-11; Judg 7; 2 Kgs 19:32-35); now he waged war against Jerusalem (see Isa 63:10; Ezek 24:25).<\/p>","content_en":"2:3-4<\/strong> bends his bow:<\/em> In the past, the Lord had been a mighty warrior on Israel’s behalf (see Exod 14:13–15:21; Josh 23:9-11; Judg 7; 2 Kgs 19:32-35); now he waged war against Jerusalem (see Isa 63:10; Ezek 24:25).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:3-4 bends his bow: In the past, the Lord had been a mighty warrior on Israel’s behalf (see Exod 14:13–15:21; Josh 23:9-11; Judg 7; 2 Kgs 19:32-35); now he waged war against Jerusalem (see Isa 63:10; Ezek 24:25).","summary_en":"2:3-4 bends his bow: In the past, the Lord had been a mighty warrior on Israel’s behalf (see Exod 14:13–15:21; Josh 23:9-11; Judg 7; 2 Kgs 19:32-35); now he waged war against Jerusalem (see Isa 63:10; Ezek 24:25).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108128,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:3","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:3","content_ro":"2:3-4<\/strong> bends his bow:<\/em> In the past, the Lord had been a mighty warrior on Israel’s behalf (see Exod 14:13–15:21; Josh 23:9-11; Judg 7; 2 Kgs 19:32-35); now he waged war against Jerusalem (see Isa 63:10; Ezek 24:25).<\/p>","content_en":"2:3-4<\/strong> bends his bow:<\/em> In the past, the Lord had been a mighty warrior on Israel’s behalf (see Exod 14:13–15:21; Josh 23:9-11; Judg 7; 2 Kgs 19:32-35); now he waged war against Jerusalem (see Isa 63:10; Ezek 24:25).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:3-4 bends his bow: In the past, the Lord had been a mighty warrior on Israel’s behalf (see Exod 14:13–15:21; Josh 23:9-11; Judg 7; 2 Kgs 19:32-35); now he waged war against Jerusalem (see Isa 63:10; Ezek 24:25).","summary_en":"2:3-4 bends his bow: In the past, the Lord had been a mighty warrior on Israel’s behalf (see Exod 14:13–15:21; Josh 23:9-11; Judg 7; 2 Kgs 19:32-35); now he waged war against Jerusalem (see Isa 63:10; Ezek 24:25).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135754,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:3","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:3","content_ro":"2:3-4<\/strong> bends his bow:<\/em> In the past, the Lord had been a mighty warrior on Israel’s behalf (see Exod 14:13–15:21; Josh 23:9-11; Judg 7; 2 Kgs 19:32-35); now he waged war against Jerusalem (see Isa 63:10; Ezek 24:25).<\/p>","content_en":"2:3-4<\/strong> bends his bow:<\/em> In the past, the Lord had been a mighty warrior on Israel’s behalf (see Exod 14:13–15:21; Josh 23:9-11; Judg 7; 2 Kgs 19:32-35); now he waged war against Jerusalem (see Isa 63:10; Ezek 24:25).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:3-4 bends his bow: In the past, the Lord had been a mighty warrior on Israel’s behalf (see Exod 14:13–15:21; Josh 23:9-11; Judg 7; 2 Kgs 19:32-35); now he waged war against Jerusalem (see Isa 63:10; Ezek 24:25).","summary_en":"2:3-4 bends his bow: In the past, the Lord had been a mighty warrior on Israel’s behalf (see Exod 14:13–15:21; Josh 23:9-11; Judg 7; 2 Kgs 19:32-35); now he waged war against Jerusalem (see Isa 63:10; Ezek 24:25).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":22457,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Lamentations","title_en":"Book of Lamentations","content_ro":"<h3>LAMENTATIONS, Book of<\/h3>\nBook consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Structure<\/p>\n• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint.<\/p>\nThe Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different literary styles of the books of Jeremiah and Lamentations and the alleged conflicting viewpoints in the two books.<\/p>\nThe literary styles of these books are strikingly different. The prophecies of the book of Jeremiah are flowing pronouncements that create an impression of spontaneity and are quite unlike the contrived literary structures of Lamentations. But it is somewhat arbitrary to assert that Jeremiah could not have written the book of Lamentations on the basis of style. The choice of the acrostic form would naturally limit the scope of the writer’s freedom and profoundly affect his style. It is clear from 2 Chronicles 35:25 that Jeremiah composed the same type of material as that found in Lamentations. Since the sermons of the book of Jeremiah were intended for public proclamation, they would naturally have a spontaneity that the book of Lamentations would not possess. Certainly, the sensitive nature reflected in Jeremiah’s prophecies characterized the author of Lamentations as well.<\/p>\nTypical of the alleged differences of viewpoint used to deny Jeremaic authorship is the role of the nations in the destruction of Jerusalem. In his prophecy Jeremiah saw the invading Babylonians as a tool of God’s punishment, and appealed to the Jews to surrender to the invaders (Jer 28:3). The book of Lamentations seems to make God the direct author of the punishment and sees the enemy nations only as onlookers who will also experience God’s wrath (Lam 1:21; 3:59-66). It must be noted, however, that the enemies referred to in Lamentations are not only the Babylonians but all of the hostile powers that threatened Judah and gloated over its destruction (1:21). The assurance that God will judge these enemies is not a denial of the message of the book of Jeremiah, for it would be artificial for Jeremiah to suppose that the Babylonians, even though they were an instrument of God’s anger, were exempt from punishment. Such a concept is at variance with Jeremiah 12:14-17.<\/p>\nA number of phrases used in the book of Jeremiah are found in Lamentations as well. The expressions “terrors on every side” (Lam 2:22; cf. Jer 6:25; 20:10) and “wormwood” (Lam 3:15, 19; cf. Jer 9:15; 23:15) are examples of these. This fact lends support to the concept of Jeremaic authorship of the book.<\/p>\nOther reasons cited for the denial of Jeremaic authorship are the absence of the name of Jeremiah in Lamentations and the position of the book in the Writings, not the Prophets, in the Hebrew Bible. The absence of Jeremiah’s name is not a cogent argument against his authorship; there are a significant number of OT books whose authors are not cited. Since the book of Lamentations is a formal dirge, and is thus unlike the book of Jeremiah with its numerous autobiographical references, one would not expect personal allusions by the author.<\/p>\nThe position of Lamentations in the third division of the Hebrew Bible is sometimes appealed to by those who question Jeremaic authorship. Since Jeremiah is in the second division, it is argued that Lamentations was written too late for it to have been authored by Jeremiah. It should be noted, however, that there is a lack of unity in the early lists of the canonical books in the third division. It is difficult to assign a late date to a book of the third division only because of its inclusion in that division. The early church father Jerome indicated that Lamentations was once on the same scroll with Jeremiah.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nIf the book of Lamentations was written by Jeremiah, the time of writing would be shortly after the fall of Jerusalem (586 BC<\/span>). It is extremely difficult to imagine an author living in later times writing such a poignant lament over Jerusalem’s fall. The vivid descriptions of the suffering endured by the inhabitants of Jerusalem support the position that the book was written by an eyewitness to the events.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nAfter many months of siege by the Babylonian armies, Jerusalem fell, and the final deportation of the people of Judah took place. Extrabiblical confirmation of the devastation caused by the Babylonian invasion may be found in the Lachish letters, which record the message from a soldier in the field who indicates that he is watching for the signals of Lachish but cannot see the signals of Azekah (cf. Jer 34:7).<\/p>\nThe time preceding Jerusalem’s fall was one of internal strife and political intrigue. Jeremiah counseled surrender, while the chauvinistic leaders of Jerusalem tried to encourage the Judahites to fight on against the Babylonian onslaught. The role of Jeremiah in those final events was a tenuous one. His life was threatened, and he suffered numerous imprisonments.<\/p>\nThe fall of Jerusalem meant more than ignominious defeat and exile. While these would have been hard to bear, the theological emergency brought about by the event would have been the most difficult thing for believing Jews to comprehend. The fall of the city in which God chose to reveal himself would have signaled the end of God’s promises. The OT clearly set forth a glorious future for Jerusalem. It was to be the center of the messianic kingdom in the end time (Mi 4). The destruction of the city would cause many to question the veracity of God’s Word. The laments in this book are not only for the suffering that accompanied the fall of the city but also for the deep spiritual questions posed by its demise.<\/p>\nStructure<\/p>\nEach poem has a distinct symmetrical pattern. The first (Lam 1) is an elaborate acrostic composed of three-line segments. There are 22 segments, each beginning with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, proceeding in order from the first to the last. The second poem (ch 2) is similar except for a transposition of two Hebrew letters. The third poem (ch 3) is also composed of three-line segments, but each line begins with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, rather than only the first line of each segment as in the first two poems. The same Hebrew letters are transposed. The fourth poem (ch 4) is an acrostic composed of two-line segments. The first line of each segment begins with the appropriate Hebrew letter. The last poem (ch 5) is not an acrostic, but it contains the same number of letters as the Hebrew alphabet.<\/p>\nThe reason for this complex structure is unknown. It has been suggested that it is a device to aid memorization. Another suggestion is that the Hebrews may have seen the alphabet as representing the concept of totality or completeness. This idea derives from the fact that the Hebrew alphabet represented numbers as well as letters. This concept of totality may be reflected in the reference to the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet in Revelation 1:8: “I am the Alpha and the Omega.” It is quite possible that the expression of lamentation in the structure of the Hebrew alphabet could have represented the full range of sorrow felt by the author as he pondered the fall of the city of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPurpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\nA major purpose of the book of Lamentations was to give expression to the deep grief that Jeremiah felt as a result of Jerusalem’s catastrophe. By writing the book, he expressed the grief of all the Jews of his time and gave them a vehicle that would give vent to their sorrow.<\/p>\nThe book does not contain only lamentation, however, for it expresses hope and comfort as well. Thus another of its purposes was to lift the hearts of the people and point them to God, the source of all comfort. One of the greatest expressions of hope in the book is found in 3:22-23: “The unfailing love of the Lord<\/span> never ends! By his mercies we have been kept from complete destruction. Great is his faithfulness; his mercies begin afresh each day” (nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nPerhaps the most important purpose of the book was to explain the theological reason for the catastrophe. The book places the reason for Jerusalem’s fall in clear focus and demonstrates what can be learned about God from this. The reason given for Jerusalem’s demise is the sin of the people (1:8-9, 14; 4:13). The fall of the city is a vivid illustration of God’s justice in not overlooking sin even in those who are his own (1:18). It demonstrates the fact that God may seem like an enemy to his people when they are disobedient (2:5-7). It shows that the catastrophe was not outside the purposes of God (v 17) and vividly describes the results that can come from willful disobedience. But God is envisioned as a God of mercy and faithfulness as well. Even though Jeremiah saw his beloved homeland crumbling about him, there remained one great element of stability: God’s loyalty to his promises. Jeremiah knew that this was not the end, for he trusted in the steadfast love of the Lord and learned to wait quietly for God to act in his time (3:22-27).<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\nThe first chapter is a lamentation over the captivity of the citizens of Jerusalem and the resultant desolation of the city.<\/p>\nThe author alludes to Deuteronomy 28:64-65 at the beginning of the first lamentation (Lam 1:3). In that passage Moses warned the people that their disobedience to God would result in their dispersion among the nations, with no resting place. Lamentations 1:3 says that this warning has been realized.<\/p>\nThe cause of Israel’s misfortune was their sin (1:8a). This is a remarkable example of the results of disobedience to God. The dire results of sin permeate this first lamentation in a series of pictures of deep pathos (vv 11-12, 16-17). In the midst of this suffering Israel confesses that God was in the right (v 18). The righteousness of God involves his acting in integrity. He punishes sin even in his own people.<\/p>\nThe first lamentation ends with a prayer in which the people cry out for God’s judgment on their enemies (1:21-22). Such imprecations are the OT believer’s way of expressing his longing for an end to evil as it was personified in the godless nations.<\/p>\nThe second lamentation also concerns the destruction of Jerusalem but places more emphasis on God’s judgment. The tone is more strident than in the previous lamentation. Throughout the passage words expressing anger appear (2:1-3, 6-7). It is as though the terrible wrath of God evident in the destruction of the city is still vivid in the mind of the writer.<\/p>\nThe author lays the blame for God’s anger squarely on the false prophets (2:14); but he does not exempt the people from guilt, as is clear from other passages (e.g., 1:5, 8). It was the false prophets of the time who failed to warn the people of the results of their sin (2:14). Because of this, destruction came, and the writer can give no comfort to the people (v 13).<\/p>\nThe second lamentation begins with a reference to God’s footstool (2:1), probably referring to the ark of the covenant (1 Chr 28:2). The ark was the focal point of God’s revelation of himself. This verse reflects the theological emergency of the time; the writer laments the fact that God has not remembered his “footstool.” Even the holy ark, which marked God’s presence with his people, has not prevented God from destroying Jerusalem.<\/p>\nThe same thought is expressed in verses 6-7, where the traditional aspects of Israelite worship, as well as the sanctuary, are seen as having been destroyed by God. This important truth demonstrates the viewpoint of the whole book, which sees God as the direct cause of the misfortune.<\/p>\nThe third lamentation is very personal. At its conclusion, sorrow and complaint pass into a prayer of assurance (3:61-66). In the first 18 verses of this chapter, the writer describes how the Lord has afflicted him. He refers to God in the third person, not addressing him as Lord until he speaks the words of verse 18. Only after he has poured out his grief in this fashion can he speak the name of the Lord. This poignant grief suddenly changes to an expression of joy. He can affirm the covenant faithfulness of the Lord, and in the midst of the deepening sorrow, he sees God’s mercies as new every morning (vv 22-24). The chapter closes with a sudden burst of assurance (vv 58-66), in which the writer affirms his belief that God will vindicate him before his enemies. Only after he meditates on the nature of God’s loving-kindness (vv 22-27) can he speak these words. The desperate isolation and separation from God expressed in verses 1-17 give way as he affirms God’s goodness. Assurance comes as he reflects on the nature and goodness of God.<\/p>\nThe fourth lamentation emphasizes the fact that the judgment was well deserved. The author describes the various classes of the population (4:1-16) and indicates how each has been affected by Jerusalem’s downfall. Verses 12-20 affirm that the judgment of God is a direct consequence of sin. This lamentation also becomes a joyous statement of hope (vv 21-22), as the writer affirms that God will punish Israel’s enemies. Israel’s sin will be forgiven, and the guilt of “the daughter of Edom” will be punished. The “daughter of Edom” undoubtedly stands for all the enemy nations. (Edom is used in Isaiah 63:1 in the same fashion.) This salvation of the nation of Judah will not take place until their guilt is atoned for. It occurs when God conquers the godless nations. This conquest of the nations is an event that takes place in the end time, according to numerous OT and NT passages. It represents the manifestation of God’s total sovereignty over his creation.<\/p>\nThe last chapter is a poignant prayer in which the author describes their sufferings and asks God to restore the fortunes of the people. It begins with a request to God, asking him to consider all that has befallen the people (5:1-18). Part of the ignominy of the captive Jews is that “slaves” rule over them (v 8). This is an apparent reference to the Babylonian captors, who themselves were subject to despotic rule for many decades. The author’s perspective changes in verse 19, where he affirms that the Lord reigns forever. While Jerusalem, the earthly dwelling place of the Lord, has come to an end, the Lord’s throne endures forever. Because his throne is everlasting, the author asks, “Why do you continue to forget us? Why have you forsaken us for so long? Restore us, O Lord<\/span>, and bring us back to you again! Give us back the joys we once had! Or have you utterly rejected us? Are you angry with us still?” (5:20-22, nlt<\/span>). The question is based on the belief that because God’s reign is eternal, he cannot utterly forsake his people. He will restore his kingdom.<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations is neglected by many Christians. It deserves to be studied more. Its powerful statement concerning the blessings that may come from tragedy is a relevant message in any age, and it is one of the most powerful illustrations of the results of sin to be found in the OT. Its theology is clear and precise, painting a brilliant picture of God’s faithfulness against the dark background of the collapse of the city of Zion.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jeremiah (Person) #1; Jeremiah, Book of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LAMENTATIONS, Book of<\/h3>\nBook consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Structure<\/p>\n• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint.<\/p>\nThe Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different literary styles of the books of Jeremiah and Lamentations and the alleged conflicting viewpoints in the two books.<\/p>\nThe literary styles of these books are strikingly different. The prophecies of the book of Jeremiah are flowing pronouncements that create an impression of spontaneity and are quite unlike the contrived literary structures of Lamentations. But it is somewhat arbitrary to assert that Jeremiah could not have written the book of Lamentations on the basis of style. The choice of the acrostic form would naturally limit the scope of the writer’s freedom and profoundly affect his style. It is clear from 2 Chronicles 35:25 that Jeremiah composed the same type of material as that found in Lamentations. Since the sermons of the book of Jeremiah were intended for public proclamation, they would naturally have a spontaneity that the book of Lamentations would not possess. Certainly, the sensitive nature reflected in Jeremiah’s prophecies characterized the author of Lamentations as well.<\/p>\nTypical of the alleged differences of viewpoint used to deny Jeremaic authorship is the role of the nations in the destruction of Jerusalem. In his prophecy Jeremiah saw the invading Babylonians as a tool of God’s punishment, and appealed to the Jews to surrender to the invaders (Jer 28:3). The book of Lamentations seems to make God the direct author of the punishment and sees the enemy nations only as onlookers who will also experience God’s wrath (Lam 1:21; 3:59-66). It must be noted, however, that the enemies referred to in Lamentations are not only the Babylonians but all of the hostile powers that threatened Judah and gloated over its destruction (1:21). The assurance that God will judge these enemies is not a denial of the message of the book of Jeremiah, for it would be artificial for Jeremiah to suppose that the Babylonians, even though they were an instrument of God’s anger, were exempt from punishment. Such a concept is at variance with Jeremiah 12:14-17.<\/p>\nA number of phrases used in the book of Jeremiah are found in Lamentations as well. The expressions “terrors on every side” (Lam 2:22; cf. Jer 6:25; 20:10) and “wormwood” (Lam 3:15, 19; cf. Jer 9:15; 23:15) are examples of these. This fact lends support to the concept of Jeremaic authorship of the book.<\/p>\nOther reasons cited for the denial of Jeremaic authorship are the absence of the name of Jeremiah in Lamentations and the position of the book in the Writings, not the Prophets, in the Hebrew Bible. The absence of Jeremiah’s name is not a cogent argument against his authorship; there are a significant number of OT books whose authors are not cited. Since the book of Lamentations is a formal dirge, and is thus unlike the book of Jeremiah with its numerous autobiographical references, one would not expect personal allusions by the author.<\/p>\nThe position of Lamentations in the third division of the Hebrew Bible is sometimes appealed to by those who question Jeremaic authorship. Since Jeremiah is in the second division, it is argued that Lamentations was written too late for it to have been authored by Jeremiah. It should be noted, however, that there is a lack of unity in the early lists of the canonical books in the third division. It is difficult to assign a late date to a book of the third division only because of its inclusion in that division. The early church father Jerome indicated that Lamentations was once on the same scroll with Jeremiah.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nIf the book of Lamentations was written by Jeremiah, the time of writing would be shortly after the fall of Jerusalem (586 BC<\/span>). It is extremely difficult to imagine an author living in later times writing such a poignant lament over Jerusalem’s fall. The vivid descriptions of the suffering endured by the inhabitants of Jerusalem support the position that the book was written by an eyewitness to the events.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nAfter many months of siege by the Babylonian armies, Jerusalem fell, and the final deportation of the people of Judah took place. Extrabiblical confirmation of the devastation caused by the Babylonian invasion may be found in the Lachish letters, which record the message from a soldier in the field who indicates that he is watching for the signals of Lachish but cannot see the signals of Azekah (cf. Jer 34:7).<\/p>\nThe time preceding Jerusalem’s fall was one of internal strife and political intrigue. Jeremiah counseled surrender, while the chauvinistic leaders of Jerusalem tried to encourage the Judahites to fight on against the Babylonian onslaught. The role of Jeremiah in those final events was a tenuous one. His life was threatened, and he suffered numerous imprisonments.<\/p>\nThe fall of Jerusalem meant more than ignominious defeat and exile. While these would have been hard to bear, the theological emergency brought about by the event would have been the most difficult thing for believing Jews to comprehend. The fall of the city in which God chose to reveal himself would have signaled the end of God’s promises. The OT clearly set forth a glorious future for Jerusalem. It was to be the center of the messianic kingdom in the end time (Mi 4). The destruction of the city would cause many to question the veracity of God’s Word. The laments in this book are not only for the suffering that accompanied the fall of the city but also for the deep spiritual questions posed by its demise.<\/p>\nStructure<\/p>\nEach poem has a distinct symmetrical pattern. The first (Lam 1) is an elaborate acrostic composed of three-line segments. There are 22 segments, each beginning with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, proceeding in order from the first to the last. The second poem (ch 2) is similar except for a transposition of two Hebrew letters. The third poem (ch 3) is also composed of three-line segments, but each line begins with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, rather than only the first line of each segment as in the first two poems. The same Hebrew letters are transposed. The fourth poem (ch 4) is an acrostic composed of two-line segments. The first line of each segment begins with the appropriate Hebrew letter. The last poem (ch 5) is not an acrostic, but it contains the same number of letters as the Hebrew alphabet.<\/p>\nThe reason for this complex structure is unknown. It has been suggested that it is a device to aid memorization. Another suggestion is that the Hebrews may have seen the alphabet as representing the concept of totality or completeness. This idea derives from the fact that the Hebrew alphabet represented numbers as well as letters. This concept of totality may be reflected in the reference to the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet in Revelation 1:8: “I am the Alpha and the Omega.” It is quite possible that the expression of lamentation in the structure of the Hebrew alphabet could have represented the full range of sorrow felt by the author as he pondered the fall of the city of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPurpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\nA major purpose of the book of Lamentations was to give expression to the deep grief that Jeremiah felt as a result of Jerusalem’s catastrophe. By writing the book, he expressed the grief of all the Jews of his time and gave them a vehicle that would give vent to their sorrow.<\/p>\nThe book does not contain only lamentation, however, for it expresses hope and comfort as well. Thus another of its purposes was to lift the hearts of the people and point them to God, the source of all comfort. One of the greatest expressions of hope in the book is found in 3:22-23: “The unfailing love of the Lord<\/span> never ends! By his mercies we have been kept from complete destruction. Great is his faithfulness; his mercies begin afresh each day” (nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nPerhaps the most important purpose of the book was to explain the theological reason for the catastrophe. The book places the reason for Jerusalem’s fall in clear focus and demonstrates what can be learned about God from this. The reason given for Jerusalem’s demise is the sin of the people (1:8-9, 14; 4:13). The fall of the city is a vivid illustration of God’s justice in not overlooking sin even in those who are his own (1:18). It demonstrates the fact that God may seem like an enemy to his people when they are disobedient (2:5-7). It shows that the catastrophe was not outside the purposes of God (v 17) and vividly describes the results that can come from willful disobedience. But God is envisioned as a God of mercy and faithfulness as well. Even though Jeremiah saw his beloved homeland crumbling about him, there remained one great element of stability: God’s loyalty to his promises. Jeremiah knew that this was not the end, for he trusted in the steadfast love of the Lord and learned to wait quietly for God to act in his time (3:22-27).<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\nThe first chapter is a lamentation over the captivity of the citizens of Jerusalem and the resultant desolation of the city.<\/p>\nThe author alludes to Deuteronomy 28:64-65 at the beginning of the first lamentation (Lam 1:3). In that passage Moses warned the people that their disobedience to God would result in their dispersion among the nations, with no resting place. Lamentations 1:3 says that this warning has been realized.<\/p>\nThe cause of Israel’s misfortune was their sin (1:8a). This is a remarkable example of the results of disobedience to God. The dire results of sin permeate this first lamentation in a series of pictures of deep pathos (vv 11-12, 16-17). In the midst of this suffering Israel confesses that God was in the right (v 18). The righteousness of God involves his acting in integrity. He punishes sin even in his own people.<\/p>\nThe first lamentation ends with a prayer in which the people cry out for God’s judgment on their enemies (1:21-22). Such imprecations are the OT believer’s way of expressing his longing for an end to evil as it was personified in the godless nations.<\/p>\nThe second lamentation also concerns the destruction of Jerusalem but places more emphasis on God’s judgment. The tone is more strident than in the previous lamentation. Throughout the passage words expressing anger appear (2:1-3, 6-7). It is as though the terrible wrath of God evident in the destruction of the city is still vivid in the mind of the writer.<\/p>\nThe author lays the blame for God’s anger squarely on the false prophets (2:14); but he does not exempt the people from guilt, as is clear from other passages (e.g., 1:5, 8). It was the false prophets of the time who failed to warn the people of the results of their sin (2:14). Because of this, destruction came, and the writer can give no comfort to the people (v 13).<\/p>\nThe second lamentation begins with a reference to God’s footstool (2:1), probably referring to the ark of the covenant (1 Chr 28:2). The ark was the focal point of God’s revelation of himself. This verse reflects the theological emergency of the time; the writer laments the fact that God has not remembered his “footstool.” Even the holy ark, which marked God’s presence with his people, has not prevented God from destroying Jerusalem.<\/p>\nThe same thought is expressed in verses 6-7, where the traditional aspects of Israelite worship, as well as the sanctuary, are seen as having been destroyed by God. This important truth demonstrates the viewpoint of the whole book, which sees God as the direct cause of the misfortune.<\/p>\nThe third lamentation is very personal. At its conclusion, sorrow and complaint pass into a prayer of assurance (3:61-66). In the first 18 verses of this chapter, the writer describes how the Lord has afflicted him. He refers to God in the third person, not addressing him as Lord until he speaks the words of verse 18. Only after he has poured out his grief in this fashion can he speak the name of the Lord. This poignant grief suddenly changes to an expression of joy. He can affirm the covenant faithfulness of the Lord, and in the midst of the deepening sorrow, he sees God’s mercies as new every morning (vv 22-24). The chapter closes with a sudden burst of assurance (vv 58-66), in which the writer affirms his belief that God will vindicate him before his enemies. Only after he meditates on the nature of God’s loving-kindness (vv 22-27) can he speak these words. The desperate isolation and separation from God expressed in verses 1-17 give way as he affirms God’s goodness. Assurance comes as he reflects on the nature and goodness of God.<\/p>\nThe fourth lamentation emphasizes the fact that the judgment was well deserved. The author describes the various classes of the population (4:1-16) and indicates how each has been affected by Jerusalem’s downfall. Verses 12-20 affirm that the judgment of God is a direct consequence of sin. This lamentation also becomes a joyous statement of hope (vv 21-22), as the writer affirms that God will punish Israel’s enemies. Israel’s sin will be forgiven, and the guilt of “the daughter of Edom” will be punished. The “daughter of Edom” undoubtedly stands for all the enemy nations. (Edom is used in Isaiah 63:1 in the same fashion.) This salvation of the nation of Judah will not take place until their guilt is atoned for. It occurs when God conquers the godless nations. This conquest of the nations is an event that takes place in the end time, according to numerous OT and NT passages. It represents the manifestation of God’s total sovereignty over his creation.<\/p>\nThe last chapter is a poignant prayer in which the author describes their sufferings and asks God to restore the fortunes of the people. It begins with a request to God, asking him to consider all that has befallen the people (5:1-18). Part of the ignominy of the captive Jews is that “slaves” rule over them (v 8). This is an apparent reference to the Babylonian captors, who themselves were subject to despotic rule for many decades. The author’s perspective changes in verse 19, where he affirms that the Lord reigns forever. While Jerusalem, the earthly dwelling place of the Lord, has come to an end, the Lord’s throne endures forever. Because his throne is everlasting, the author asks, “Why do you continue to forget us? Why have you forsaken us for so long? Restore us, O Lord<\/span>, and bring us back to you again! Give us back the joys we once had! Or have you utterly rejected us? Are you angry with us still?” (5:20-22, nlt<\/span>). The question is based on the belief that because God’s reign is eternal, he cannot utterly forsake his people. He will restore his kingdom.<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations is neglected by many Christians. It deserves to be studied more. Its powerful statement concerning the blessings that may come from tragedy is a relevant message in any age, and it is one of the most powerful illustrations of the results of sin to be found in the OT. Its theology is clear and precise, painting a brilliant picture of God’s faithfulness against the dark background of the collapse of the city of Zion.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jeremiah (Person) #1; Jeremiah, Book of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LAMENTATIONS, Book of Book consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem. Preview • Author • Date • Background • Structure • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author The book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint. The Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different ...","summary_en":"LAMENTATIONS, Book of Book consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem. Preview • Author • Date • Background • Structure • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author The book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint. The Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different ...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"6":[{"id":22466,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Lamentations","title_en":"Book of Lamentations","content_ro":"<h3>LAMENTATIONS, Book of<\/h3>\nBook consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Structure<\/p>\n• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint.<\/p>\nThe Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different literary styles of the books of Jeremiah and Lamentations and the alleged conflicting viewpoints in the two books.<\/p>\nThe literary styles of these books are strikingly different. The prophecies of the book of Jeremiah are flowing pronouncements that create an impression of spontaneity and are quite unlike the contrived literary structures of Lamentations. But it is somewhat arbitrary to assert that Jeremiah could not have written the book of Lamentations on the basis of style. The choice of the acrostic form would naturally limit the scope of the writer’s freedom and profoundly affect his style. It is clear from 2 Chronicles 35:25 that Jeremiah composed the same type of material as that found in Lamentations. Since the sermons of the book of Jeremiah were intended for public proclamation, they would naturally have a spontaneity that the book of Lamentations would not possess. Certainly, the sensitive nature reflected in Jeremiah’s prophecies characterized the author of Lamentations as well.<\/p>\nTypical of the alleged differences of viewpoint used to deny Jeremaic authorship is the role of the nations in the destruction of Jerusalem. In his prophecy Jeremiah saw the invading Babylonians as a tool of God’s punishment, and appealed to the Jews to surrender to the invaders (Jer 28:3). The book of Lamentations seems to make God the direct author of the punishment and sees the enemy nations only as onlookers who will also experience God’s wrath (Lam 1:21; 3:59-66). It must be noted, however, that the enemies referred to in Lamentations are not only the Babylonians but all of the hostile powers that threatened Judah and gloated over its destruction (1:21). The assurance that God will judge these enemies is not a denial of the message of the book of Jeremiah, for it would be artificial for Jeremiah to suppose that the Babylonians, even though they were an instrument of God’s anger, were exempt from punishment. Such a concept is at variance with Jeremiah 12:14-17.<\/p>\nA number of phrases used in the book of Jeremiah are found in Lamentations as well. The expressions “terrors on every side” (Lam 2:22; cf. Jer 6:25; 20:10) and “wormwood” (Lam 3:15, 19; cf. Jer 9:15; 23:15) are examples of these. This fact lends support to the concept of Jeremaic authorship of the book.<\/p>\nOther reasons cited for the denial of Jeremaic authorship are the absence of the name of Jeremiah in Lamentations and the position of the book in the Writings, not the Prophets, in the Hebrew Bible. The absence of Jeremiah’s name is not a cogent argument against his authorship; there are a significant number of OT books whose authors are not cited. Since the book of Lamentations is a formal dirge, and is thus unlike the book of Jeremiah with its numerous autobiographical references, one would not expect personal allusions by the author.<\/p>\nThe position of Lamentations in the third division of the Hebrew Bible is sometimes appealed to by those who question Jeremaic authorship. Since Jeremiah is in the second division, it is argued that Lamentations was written too late for it to have been authored by Jeremiah. It should be noted, however, that there is a lack of unity in the early lists of the canonical books in the third division. It is difficult to assign a late date to a book of the third division only because of its inclusion in that division. The early church father Jerome indicated that Lamentations was once on the same scroll with Jeremiah.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nIf the book of Lamentations was written by Jeremiah, the time of writing would be shortly after the fall of Jerusalem (586 BC<\/span>). It is extremely difficult to imagine an author living in later times writing such a poignant lament over Jerusalem’s fall. The vivid descriptions of the suffering endured by the inhabitants of Jerusalem support the position that the book was written by an eyewitness to the events.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nAfter many months of siege by the Babylonian armies, Jerusalem fell, and the final deportation of the people of Judah took place. Extrabiblical confirmation of the devastation caused by the Babylonian invasion may be found in the Lachish letters, which record the message from a soldier in the field who indicates that he is watching for the signals of Lachish but cannot see the signals of Azekah (cf. Jer 34:7).<\/p>\nThe time preceding Jerusalem’s fall was one of internal strife and political intrigue. Jeremiah counseled surrender, while the chauvinistic leaders of Jerusalem tried to encourage the Judahites to fight on against the Babylonian onslaught. The role of Jeremiah in those final events was a tenuous one. His life was threatened, and he suffered numerous imprisonments.<\/p>\nThe fall of Jerusalem meant more than ignominious defeat and exile. While these would have been hard to bear, the theological emergency brought about by the event would have been the most difficult thing for believing Jews to comprehend. The fall of the city in which God chose to reveal himself would have signaled the end of God’s promises. The OT clearly set forth a glorious future for Jerusalem. It was to be the center of the messianic kingdom in the end time (Mi 4). The destruction of the city would cause many to question the veracity of God’s Word. The laments in this book are not only for the suffering that accompanied the fall of the city but also for the deep spiritual questions posed by its demise.<\/p>\nStructure<\/p>\nEach poem has a distinct symmetrical pattern. The first (Lam 1) is an elaborate acrostic composed of three-line segments. There are 22 segments, each beginning with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, proceeding in order from the first to the last. The second poem (ch 2) is similar except for a transposition of two Hebrew letters. The third poem (ch 3) is also composed of three-line segments, but each line begins with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, rather than only the first line of each segment as in the first two poems. The same Hebrew letters are transposed. The fourth poem (ch 4) is an acrostic composed of two-line segments. The first line of each segment begins with the appropriate Hebrew letter. The last poem (ch 5) is not an acrostic, but it contains the same number of letters as the Hebrew alphabet.<\/p>\nThe reason for this complex structure is unknown. It has been suggested that it is a device to aid memorization. Another suggestion is that the Hebrews may have seen the alphabet as representing the concept of totality or completeness. This idea derives from the fact that the Hebrew alphabet represented numbers as well as letters. This concept of totality may be reflected in the reference to the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet in Revelation 1:8: “I am the Alpha and the Omega.” It is quite possible that the expression of lamentation in the structure of the Hebrew alphabet could have represented the full range of sorrow felt by the author as he pondered the fall of the city of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPurpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\nA major purpose of the book of Lamentations was to give expression to the deep grief that Jeremiah felt as a result of Jerusalem’s catastrophe. By writing the book, he expressed the grief of all the Jews of his time and gave them a vehicle that would give vent to their sorrow.<\/p>\nThe book does not contain only lamentation, however, for it expresses hope and comfort as well. Thus another of its purposes was to lift the hearts of the people and point them to God, the source of all comfort. One of the greatest expressions of hope in the book is found in 3:22-23: “The unfailing love of the Lord<\/span> never ends! By his mercies we have been kept from complete destruction. Great is his faithfulness; his mercies begin afresh each day” (nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nPerhaps the most important purpose of the book was to explain the theological reason for the catastrophe. The book places the reason for Jerusalem’s fall in clear focus and demonstrates what can be learned about God from this. The reason given for Jerusalem’s demise is the sin of the people (1:8-9, 14; 4:13). The fall of the city is a vivid illustration of God’s justice in not overlooking sin even in those who are his own (1:18). It demonstrates the fact that God may seem like an enemy to his people when they are disobedient (2:5-7). It shows that the catastrophe was not outside the purposes of God (v 17) and vividly describes the results that can come from willful disobedience. But God is envisioned as a God of mercy and faithfulness as well. Even though Jeremiah saw his beloved homeland crumbling about him, there remained one great element of stability: God’s loyalty to his promises. Jeremiah knew that this was not the end, for he trusted in the steadfast love of the Lord and learned to wait quietly for God to act in his time (3:22-27).<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\nThe first chapter is a lamentation over the captivity of the citizens of Jerusalem and the resultant desolation of the city.<\/p>\nThe author alludes to Deuteronomy 28:64-65 at the beginning of the first lamentation (Lam 1:3). In that passage Moses warned the people that their disobedience to God would result in their dispersion among the nations, with no resting place. Lamentations 1:3 says that this warning has been realized.<\/p>\nThe cause of Israel’s misfortune was their sin (1:8a). This is a remarkable example of the results of disobedience to God. The dire results of sin permeate this first lamentation in a series of pictures of deep pathos (vv 11-12, 16-17). In the midst of this suffering Israel confesses that God was in the right (v 18). The righteousness of God involves his acting in integrity. He punishes sin even in his own people.<\/p>\nThe first lamentation ends with a prayer in which the people cry out for God’s judgment on their enemies (1:21-22). Such imprecations are the OT believer’s way of expressing his longing for an end to evil as it was personified in the godless nations.<\/p>\nThe second lamentation also concerns the destruction of Jerusalem but places more emphasis on God’s judgment. The tone is more strident than in the previous lamentation. Throughout the passage words expressing anger appear (2:1-3, 6-7). It is as though the terrible wrath of God evident in the destruction of the city is still vivid in the mind of the writer.<\/p>\nThe author lays the blame for God’s anger squarely on the false prophets (2:14); but he does not exempt the people from guilt, as is clear from other passages (e.g., 1:5, 8). It was the false prophets of the time who failed to warn the people of the results of their sin (2:14). Because of this, destruction came, and the writer can give no comfort to the people (v 13).<\/p>\nThe second lamentation begins with a reference to God’s footstool (2:1), probably referring to the ark of the covenant (1 Chr 28:2). The ark was the focal point of God’s revelation of himself. This verse reflects the theological emergency of the time; the writer laments the fact that God has not remembered his “footstool.” Even the holy ark, which marked God’s presence with his people, has not prevented God from destroying Jerusalem.<\/p>\nThe same thought is expressed in verses 6-7, where the traditional aspects of Israelite worship, as well as the sanctuary, are seen as having been destroyed by God. This important truth demonstrates the viewpoint of the whole book, which sees God as the direct cause of the misfortune.<\/p>\nThe third lamentation is very personal. At its conclusion, sorrow and complaint pass into a prayer of assurance (3:61-66). In the first 18 verses of this chapter, the writer describes how the Lord has afflicted him. He refers to God in the third person, not addressing him as Lord until he speaks the words of verse 18. Only after he has poured out his grief in this fashion can he speak the name of the Lord. This poignant grief suddenly changes to an expression of joy. He can affirm the covenant faithfulness of the Lord, and in the midst of the deepening sorrow, he sees God’s mercies as new every morning (vv 22-24). The chapter closes with a sudden burst of assurance (vv 58-66), in which the writer affirms his belief that God will vindicate him before his enemies. Only after he meditates on the nature of God’s loving-kindness (vv 22-27) can he speak these words. The desperate isolation and separation from God expressed in verses 1-17 give way as he affirms God’s goodness. Assurance comes as he reflects on the nature and goodness of God.<\/p>\nThe fourth lamentation emphasizes the fact that the judgment was well deserved. The author describes the various classes of the population (4:1-16) and indicates how each has been affected by Jerusalem’s downfall. Verses 12-20 affirm that the judgment of God is a direct consequence of sin. This lamentation also becomes a joyous statement of hope (vv 21-22), as the writer affirms that God will punish Israel’s enemies. Israel’s sin will be forgiven, and the guilt of “the daughter of Edom” will be punished. The “daughter of Edom” undoubtedly stands for all the enemy nations. (Edom is used in Isaiah 63:1 in the same fashion.) This salvation of the nation of Judah will not take place until their guilt is atoned for. It occurs when God conquers the godless nations. This conquest of the nations is an event that takes place in the end time, according to numerous OT and NT passages. It represents the manifestation of God’s total sovereignty over his creation.<\/p>\nThe last chapter is a poignant prayer in which the author describes their sufferings and asks God to restore the fortunes of the people. It begins with a request to God, asking him to consider all that has befallen the people (5:1-18). Part of the ignominy of the captive Jews is that “slaves” rule over them (v 8). This is an apparent reference to the Babylonian captors, who themselves were subject to despotic rule for many decades. The author’s perspective changes in verse 19, where he affirms that the Lord reigns forever. While Jerusalem, the earthly dwelling place of the Lord, has come to an end, the Lord’s throne endures forever. Because his throne is everlasting, the author asks, “Why do you continue to forget us? Why have you forsaken us for so long? Restore us, O Lord<\/span>, and bring us back to you again! Give us back the joys we once had! Or have you utterly rejected us? Are you angry with us still?” (5:20-22, nlt<\/span>). The question is based on the belief that because God’s reign is eternal, he cannot utterly forsake his people. He will restore his kingdom.<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations is neglected by many Christians. It deserves to be studied more. Its powerful statement concerning the blessings that may come from tragedy is a relevant message in any age, and it is one of the most powerful illustrations of the results of sin to be found in the OT. Its theology is clear and precise, painting a brilliant picture of God’s faithfulness against the dark background of the collapse of the city of Zion.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jeremiah (Person) #1; Jeremiah, Book of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LAMENTATIONS, Book of<\/h3>\nBook consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Structure<\/p>\n• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint.<\/p>\nThe Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different literary styles of the books of Jeremiah and Lamentations and the alleged conflicting viewpoints in the two books.<\/p>\nThe literary styles of these books are strikingly different. The prophecies of the book of Jeremiah are flowing pronouncements that create an impression of spontaneity and are quite unlike the contrived literary structures of Lamentations. But it is somewhat arbitrary to assert that Jeremiah could not have written the book of Lamentations on the basis of style. The choice of the acrostic form would naturally limit the scope of the writer’s freedom and profoundly affect his style. It is clear from 2 Chronicles 35:25 that Jeremiah composed the same type of material as that found in Lamentations. Since the sermons of the book of Jeremiah were intended for public proclamation, they would naturally have a spontaneity that the book of Lamentations would not possess. Certainly, the sensitive nature reflected in Jeremiah’s prophecies characterized the author of Lamentations as well.<\/p>\nTypical of the alleged differences of viewpoint used to deny Jeremaic authorship is the role of the nations in the destruction of Jerusalem. In his prophecy Jeremiah saw the invading Babylonians as a tool of God’s punishment, and appealed to the Jews to surrender to the invaders (Jer 28:3). The book of Lamentations seems to make God the direct author of the punishment and sees the enemy nations only as onlookers who will also experience God’s wrath (Lam 1:21; 3:59-66). It must be noted, however, that the enemies referred to in Lamentations are not only the Babylonians but all of the hostile powers that threatened Judah and gloated over its destruction (1:21). The assurance that God will judge these enemies is not a denial of the message of the book of Jeremiah, for it would be artificial for Jeremiah to suppose that the Babylonians, even though they were an instrument of God’s anger, were exempt from punishment. Such a concept is at variance with Jeremiah 12:14-17.<\/p>\nA number of phrases used in the book of Jeremiah are found in Lamentations as well. The expressions “terrors on every side” (Lam 2:22; cf. Jer 6:25; 20:10) and “wormwood” (Lam 3:15, 19; cf. Jer 9:15; 23:15) are examples of these. This fact lends support to the concept of Jeremaic authorship of the book.<\/p>\nOther reasons cited for the denial of Jeremaic authorship are the absence of the name of Jeremiah in Lamentations and the position of the book in the Writings, not the Prophets, in the Hebrew Bible. The absence of Jeremiah’s name is not a cogent argument against his authorship; there are a significant number of OT books whose authors are not cited. Since the book of Lamentations is a formal dirge, and is thus unlike the book of Jeremiah with its numerous autobiographical references, one would not expect personal allusions by the author.<\/p>\nThe position of Lamentations in the third division of the Hebrew Bible is sometimes appealed to by those who question Jeremaic authorship. Since Jeremiah is in the second division, it is argued that Lamentations was written too late for it to have been authored by Jeremiah. It should be noted, however, that there is a lack of unity in the early lists of the canonical books in the third division. It is difficult to assign a late date to a book of the third division only because of its inclusion in that division. The early church father Jerome indicated that Lamentations was once on the same scroll with Jeremiah.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nIf the book of Lamentations was written by Jeremiah, the time of writing would be shortly after the fall of Jerusalem (586 BC<\/span>). It is extremely difficult to imagine an author living in later times writing such a poignant lament over Jerusalem’s fall. The vivid descriptions of the suffering endured by the inhabitants of Jerusalem support the position that the book was written by an eyewitness to the events.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nAfter many months of siege by the Babylonian armies, Jerusalem fell, and the final deportation of the people of Judah took place. Extrabiblical confirmation of the devastation caused by the Babylonian invasion may be found in the Lachish letters, which record the message from a soldier in the field who indicates that he is watching for the signals of Lachish but cannot see the signals of Azekah (cf. Jer 34:7).<\/p>\nThe time preceding Jerusalem’s fall was one of internal strife and political intrigue. Jeremiah counseled surrender, while the chauvinistic leaders of Jerusalem tried to encourage the Judahites to fight on against the Babylonian onslaught. The role of Jeremiah in those final events was a tenuous one. His life was threatened, and he suffered numerous imprisonments.<\/p>\nThe fall of Jerusalem meant more than ignominious defeat and exile. While these would have been hard to bear, the theological emergency brought about by the event would have been the most difficult thing for believing Jews to comprehend. The fall of the city in which God chose to reveal himself would have signaled the end of God’s promises. The OT clearly set forth a glorious future for Jerusalem. It was to be the center of the messianic kingdom in the end time (Mi 4). The destruction of the city would cause many to question the veracity of God’s Word. The laments in this book are not only for the suffering that accompanied the fall of the city but also for the deep spiritual questions posed by its demise.<\/p>\nStructure<\/p>\nEach poem has a distinct symmetrical pattern. The first (Lam 1) is an elaborate acrostic composed of three-line segments. There are 22 segments, each beginning with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, proceeding in order from the first to the last. The second poem (ch 2) is similar except for a transposition of two Hebrew letters. The third poem (ch 3) is also composed of three-line segments, but each line begins with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, rather than only the first line of each segment as in the first two poems. The same Hebrew letters are transposed. The fourth poem (ch 4) is an acrostic composed of two-line segments. The first line of each segment begins with the appropriate Hebrew letter. The last poem (ch 5) is not an acrostic, but it contains the same number of letters as the Hebrew alphabet.<\/p>\nThe reason for this complex structure is unknown. It has been suggested that it is a device to aid memorization. Another suggestion is that the Hebrews may have seen the alphabet as representing the concept of totality or completeness. This idea derives from the fact that the Hebrew alphabet represented numbers as well as letters. This concept of totality may be reflected in the reference to the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet in Revelation 1:8: “I am the Alpha and the Omega.” It is quite possible that the expression of lamentation in the structure of the Hebrew alphabet could have represented the full range of sorrow felt by the author as he pondered the fall of the city of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPurpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\nA major purpose of the book of Lamentations was to give expression to the deep grief that Jeremiah felt as a result of Jerusalem’s catastrophe. By writing the book, he expressed the grief of all the Jews of his time and gave them a vehicle that would give vent to their sorrow.<\/p>\nThe book does not contain only lamentation, however, for it expresses hope and comfort as well. Thus another of its purposes was to lift the hearts of the people and point them to God, the source of all comfort. One of the greatest expressions of hope in the book is found in 3:22-23: “The unfailing love of the Lord<\/span> never ends! By his mercies we have been kept from complete destruction. Great is his faithfulness; his mercies begin afresh each day” (nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nPerhaps the most important purpose of the book was to explain the theological reason for the catastrophe. The book places the reason for Jerusalem’s fall in clear focus and demonstrates what can be learned about God from this. The reason given for Jerusalem’s demise is the sin of the people (1:8-9, 14; 4:13). The fall of the city is a vivid illustration of God’s justice in not overlooking sin even in those who are his own (1:18). It demonstrates the fact that God may seem like an enemy to his people when they are disobedient (2:5-7). It shows that the catastrophe was not outside the purposes of God (v 17) and vividly describes the results that can come from willful disobedience. But God is envisioned as a God of mercy and faithfulness as well. Even though Jeremiah saw his beloved homeland crumbling about him, there remained one great element of stability: God’s loyalty to his promises. Jeremiah knew that this was not the end, for he trusted in the steadfast love of the Lord and learned to wait quietly for God to act in his time (3:22-27).<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\nThe first chapter is a lamentation over the captivity of the citizens of Jerusalem and the resultant desolation of the city.<\/p>\nThe author alludes to Deuteronomy 28:64-65 at the beginning of the first lamentation (Lam 1:3). In that passage Moses warned the people that their disobedience to God would result in their dispersion among the nations, with no resting place. Lamentations 1:3 says that this warning has been realized.<\/p>\nThe cause of Israel’s misfortune was their sin (1:8a). This is a remarkable example of the results of disobedience to God. The dire results of sin permeate this first lamentation in a series of pictures of deep pathos (vv 11-12, 16-17). In the midst of this suffering Israel confesses that God was in the right (v 18). The righteousness of God involves his acting in integrity. He punishes sin even in his own people.<\/p>\nThe first lamentation ends with a prayer in which the people cry out for God’s judgment on their enemies (1:21-22). Such imprecations are the OT believer’s way of expressing his longing for an end to evil as it was personified in the godless nations.<\/p>\nThe second lamentation also concerns the destruction of Jerusalem but places more emphasis on God’s judgment. The tone is more strident than in the previous lamentation. Throughout the passage words expressing anger appear (2:1-3, 6-7). It is as though the terrible wrath of God evident in the destruction of the city is still vivid in the mind of the writer.<\/p>\nThe author lays the blame for God’s anger squarely on the false prophets (2:14); but he does not exempt the people from guilt, as is clear from other passages (e.g., 1:5, 8). It was the false prophets of the time who failed to warn the people of the results of their sin (2:14). Because of this, destruction came, and the writer can give no comfort to the people (v 13).<\/p>\nThe second lamentation begins with a reference to God’s footstool (2:1), probably referring to the ark of the covenant (1 Chr 28:2). The ark was the focal point of God’s revelation of himself. This verse reflects the theological emergency of the time; the writer laments the fact that God has not remembered his “footstool.” Even the holy ark, which marked God’s presence with his people, has not prevented God from destroying Jerusalem.<\/p>\nThe same thought is expressed in verses 6-7, where the traditional aspects of Israelite worship, as well as the sanctuary, are seen as having been destroyed by God. This important truth demonstrates the viewpoint of the whole book, which sees God as the direct cause of the misfortune.<\/p>\nThe third lamentation is very personal. At its conclusion, sorrow and complaint pass into a prayer of assurance (3:61-66). In the first 18 verses of this chapter, the writer describes how the Lord has afflicted him. He refers to God in the third person, not addressing him as Lord until he speaks the words of verse 18. Only after he has poured out his grief in this fashion can he speak the name of the Lord. This poignant grief suddenly changes to an expression of joy. He can affirm the covenant faithfulness of the Lord, and in the midst of the deepening sorrow, he sees God’s mercies as new every morning (vv 22-24). The chapter closes with a sudden burst of assurance (vv 58-66), in which the writer affirms his belief that God will vindicate him before his enemies. Only after he meditates on the nature of God’s loving-kindness (vv 22-27) can he speak these words. The desperate isolation and separation from God expressed in verses 1-17 give way as he affirms God’s goodness. Assurance comes as he reflects on the nature and goodness of God.<\/p>\nThe fourth lamentation emphasizes the fact that the judgment was well deserved. The author describes the various classes of the population (4:1-16) and indicates how each has been affected by Jerusalem’s downfall. Verses 12-20 affirm that the judgment of God is a direct consequence of sin. This lamentation also becomes a joyous statement of hope (vv 21-22), as the writer affirms that God will punish Israel’s enemies. Israel’s sin will be forgiven, and the guilt of “the daughter of Edom” will be punished. The “daughter of Edom” undoubtedly stands for all the enemy nations. (Edom is used in Isaiah 63:1 in the same fashion.) This salvation of the nation of Judah will not take place until their guilt is atoned for. It occurs when God conquers the godless nations. This conquest of the nations is an event that takes place in the end time, according to numerous OT and NT passages. It represents the manifestation of God’s total sovereignty over his creation.<\/p>\nThe last chapter is a poignant prayer in which the author describes their sufferings and asks God to restore the fortunes of the people. It begins with a request to God, asking him to consider all that has befallen the people (5:1-18). Part of the ignominy of the captive Jews is that “slaves” rule over them (v 8). This is an apparent reference to the Babylonian captors, who themselves were subject to despotic rule for many decades. The author’s perspective changes in verse 19, where he affirms that the Lord reigns forever. While Jerusalem, the earthly dwelling place of the Lord, has come to an end, the Lord’s throne endures forever. Because his throne is everlasting, the author asks, “Why do you continue to forget us? Why have you forsaken us for so long? Restore us, O Lord<\/span>, and bring us back to you again! Give us back the joys we once had! Or have you utterly rejected us? Are you angry with us still?” (5:20-22, nlt<\/span>). The question is based on the belief that because God’s reign is eternal, he cannot utterly forsake his people. He will restore his kingdom.<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations is neglected by many Christians. It deserves to be studied more. Its powerful statement concerning the blessings that may come from tragedy is a relevant message in any age, and it is one of the most powerful illustrations of the results of sin to be found in the OT. Its theology is clear and precise, painting a brilliant picture of God’s faithfulness against the dark background of the collapse of the city of Zion.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jeremiah (Person) #1; Jeremiah, Book of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LAMENTATIONS, Book of Book consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem. Preview • Author • Date • Background • Structure • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author The book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint. The Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different ...","summary_en":"LAMENTATIONS, Book of Book consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem. Preview • Author • Date • Background • Structure • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author The book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint. The Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different ...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":40396,"type":"textbox","type_label":"Notă explicativă","type_icon":"💡","type_color":"#8b5cf6","title_ro":"What Happened to the Ark?","title_en":"What Happened to the Ark?","content_ro":"<h3>What Happened to the Ark?<\/h3>\n<blockquote>Little is known about the ark’s history after the time of Solomon. What happened to it when Judah was exiled to Babylon is a mystery. It may have been destroyed when Nebuchadnezzar destroyed the temple and the whole city of Jerusalem in 586 BC<\/span>. The new temple built after return from the exile had no ark. There is a legend in the Apocrypha that Jeremiah hid the ark in a cave on Mt Nebo until a time when God would again restore his people (2 Macc 2:4-8).<\/p><\/blockquote>\nThe disappearance of the ark at the exile, however, was providential. For not only had the presence of God disappeared from above the mercy seat, but God had long since rejected worship as it was offered at the temple (Lam 2:6, 7; Is 1:11-14). Moreover, the very purpose and significance of the ark was ultimately to be fulfilled in the person and work of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\nWith the coming of Jesus Christ, the yearly sprinkling of the mercy seat with the blood of bulls and goats was no longer necessary. Christ, with the shedding of his own blood, secured an eternal redemption (Heb 9:11-14). Consequently, those who trust in him are encouraged to come with boldness before the God of grace enthroned above the mercy seat (Heb 4:14-16). Whereas before, the veil hung as a barrier between men and the ark, Christ through his death tore the veil in two and passed through it (Mt 27:51; Heb 10:20), opening the way for all worshipers to see the ark of God’s covenant (Rv 11:19).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>What Happened to the Ark?<\/h3>\n<blockquote>Little is known about the ark’s history after the time of Solomon. What happened to it when Judah was exiled to Babylon is a mystery. It may have been destroyed when Nebuchadnezzar destroyed the temple and the whole city of Jerusalem in 586 BC<\/span>. The new temple built after return from the exile had no ark. There is a legend in the Apocrypha that Jeremiah hid the ark in a cave on Mt Nebo until a time when God would again restore his people (2 Macc 2:4-8).<\/p><\/blockquote>\nThe disappearance of the ark at the exile, however, was providential. For not only had the presence of God disappeared from above the mercy seat, but God had long since rejected worship as it was offered at the temple (Lam 2:6, 7; Is 1:11-14). Moreover, the very purpose and significance of the ark was ultimately to be fulfilled in the person and work of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\nWith the coming of Jesus Christ, the yearly sprinkling of the mercy seat with the blood of bulls and goats was no longer necessary. Christ, with the shedding of his own blood, secured an eternal redemption (Heb 9:11-14). Consequently, those who trust in him are encouraged to come with boldness before the God of grace enthroned above the mercy seat (Heb 4:14-16). Whereas before, the veil hung as a barrier between men and the ark, Christ through his death tore the veil in two and passed through it (Mt 27:51; Heb 10:20), opening the way for all worshipers to see the ark of God’s covenant (Rv 11:19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"What Happened to the Ark? Little is known about the ark’s history after the time of Solomon. What happened to it when Judah was exiled to Babylon is a mystery. It may have been destroyed when Nebuchadnezzar destroyed the temple and the whole city of Jerusalem in 586 BC. The new temple built after return from the exile had no ark. There is a legend in the Apocrypha that Jeremiah hid the ark in a cave on Mt Nebo until a time when God would again restore his people (2 Macc 2:4-8). The disappeara...","summary_en":"What Happened to the Ark? Little is known about the ark’s history after the time of Solomon. What happened to it when Judah was exiled to Babylon is a mystery. It may have been destroyed when Nebuchadnezzar destroyed the temple and the whole city of Jerusalem in 586 BC. The new temple built after return from the exile had no ark. There is a legend in the Apocrypha that Jeremiah hid the ark in a cave on Mt Nebo until a time when God would again restore his people (2 Macc 2:4-8). The disappeara...","source":"Textboxes\/Textboxes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52877,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:6","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:6","content_ro":"2:6<\/strong> A garden shelter<\/em> was a temporary structure that harvesters put up to provide shade. God had promised to take care of his Temple<\/em> forever (1 Kgs 9:3), but now it seemed that he had abandoned it.<\/p>","content_en":"2:6<\/strong> A garden shelter<\/em> was a temporary structure that harvesters put up to provide shade. God had promised to take care of his Temple<\/em> forever (1 Kgs 9:3), but now it seemed that he had abandoned it.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:6 A garden shelter was a temporary structure that harvesters put up to provide shade. God had promised to take care of his Temple forever (1 Kgs 9:3), but now it seemed that he had abandoned it.","summary_en":"2:6 A garden shelter was a temporary structure that harvesters put up to provide shade. God had promised to take care of his Temple forever (1 Kgs 9:3), but now it seemed that he had abandoned it.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80503,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:6","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:6","content_ro":"2:6<\/strong> A garden shelter<\/em> was a temporary structure that harvesters put up to provide shade. God had promised to take care of his Temple<\/em> forever (1 Kgs 9:3), but now it seemed that he had abandoned it.<\/p>","content_en":"2:6<\/strong> A garden shelter<\/em> was a temporary structure that harvesters put up to provide shade. God had promised to take care of his Temple<\/em> forever (1 Kgs 9:3), but now it seemed that he had abandoned it.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:6 A garden shelter was a temporary structure that harvesters put up to provide shade. God had promised to take care of his Temple forever (1 Kgs 9:3), but now it seemed that he had abandoned it.","summary_en":"2:6 A garden shelter was a temporary structure that harvesters put up to provide shade. God had promised to take care of his Temple forever (1 Kgs 9:3), but now it seemed that he had abandoned it.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108129,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:6","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:6","content_ro":"2:6<\/strong> A garden shelter<\/em> was a temporary structure that harvesters put up to provide shade. God had promised to take care of his Temple<\/em> forever (1 Kgs 9:3), but now it seemed that he had abandoned it.<\/p>","content_en":"2:6<\/strong> A garden shelter<\/em> was a temporary structure that harvesters put up to provide shade. God had promised to take care of his Temple<\/em> forever (1 Kgs 9:3), but now it seemed that he had abandoned it.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:6 A garden shelter was a temporary structure that harvesters put up to provide shade. God had promised to take care of his Temple forever (1 Kgs 9:3), but now it seemed that he had abandoned it.","summary_en":"2:6 A garden shelter was a temporary structure that harvesters put up to provide shade. God had promised to take care of his Temple forever (1 Kgs 9:3), but now it seemed that he had abandoned it.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135755,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:6","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:6","content_ro":"2:6<\/strong> A garden shelter<\/em> was a temporary structure that harvesters put up to provide shade. God had promised to take care of his Temple<\/em> forever (1 Kgs 9:3), but now it seemed that he had abandoned it.<\/p>","content_en":"2:6<\/strong> A garden shelter<\/em> was a temporary structure that harvesters put up to provide shade. God had promised to take care of his Temple<\/em> forever (1 Kgs 9:3), but now it seemed that he had abandoned it.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:6 A garden shelter was a temporary structure that harvesters put up to provide shade. God had promised to take care of his Temple forever (1 Kgs 9:3), but now it seemed that he had abandoned it.","summary_en":"2:6 A garden shelter was a temporary structure that harvesters put up to provide shade. God had promised to take care of his Temple forever (1 Kgs 9:3), but now it seemed that he had abandoned it.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"7":[{"id":52878,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:7","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:7","content_ro":"2:7<\/strong> The Temple was destroyed because the sins that the priests and the people had committed within its walls had defiled its holiness (cp. Jer 7:3-15; 26:3-6, 12-13; Ezek 24:21).<\/p>","content_en":"2:7<\/strong> The Temple was destroyed because the sins that the priests and the people had committed within its walls had defiled its holiness (cp. Jer 7:3-15; 26:3-6, 12-13; Ezek 24:21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:7 The Temple was destroyed because the sins that the priests and the people had committed within its walls had defiled its holiness (cp. Jer 7:3-15; 26:3-6, 12-13; Ezek 24:21).","summary_en":"2:7 The Temple was destroyed because the sins that the priests and the people had committed within its walls had defiled its holiness (cp. Jer 7:3-15; 26:3-6, 12-13; Ezek 24:21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80504,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:7","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:7","content_ro":"2:7<\/strong> The Temple was destroyed because the sins that the priests and the people had committed within its walls had defiled its holiness (cp. Jer 7:3-15; 26:3-6, 12-13; Ezek 24:21).<\/p>","content_en":"2:7<\/strong> The Temple was destroyed because the sins that the priests and the people had committed within its walls had defiled its holiness (cp. Jer 7:3-15; 26:3-6, 12-13; Ezek 24:21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:7 The Temple was destroyed because the sins that the priests and the people had committed within its walls had defiled its holiness (cp. Jer 7:3-15; 26:3-6, 12-13; Ezek 24:21).","summary_en":"2:7 The Temple was destroyed because the sins that the priests and the people had committed within its walls had defiled its holiness (cp. Jer 7:3-15; 26:3-6, 12-13; Ezek 24:21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108130,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:7","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:7","content_ro":"2:7<\/strong> The Temple was destroyed because the sins that the priests and the people had committed within its walls had defiled its holiness (cp. Jer 7:3-15; 26:3-6, 12-13; Ezek 24:21).<\/p>","content_en":"2:7<\/strong> The Temple was destroyed because the sins that the priests and the people had committed within its walls had defiled its holiness (cp. Jer 7:3-15; 26:3-6, 12-13; Ezek 24:21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:7 The Temple was destroyed because the sins that the priests and the people had committed within its walls had defiled its holiness (cp. Jer 7:3-15; 26:3-6, 12-13; Ezek 24:21).","summary_en":"2:7 The Temple was destroyed because the sins that the priests and the people had committed within its walls had defiled its holiness (cp. Jer 7:3-15; 26:3-6, 12-13; Ezek 24:21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135756,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:7","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:7","content_ro":"2:7<\/strong> The Temple was destroyed because the sins that the priests and the people had committed within its walls had defiled its holiness (cp. Jer 7:3-15; 26:3-6, 12-13; Ezek 24:21).<\/p>","content_en":"2:7<\/strong> The Temple was destroyed because the sins that the priests and the people had committed within its walls had defiled its holiness (cp. Jer 7:3-15; 26:3-6, 12-13; Ezek 24:21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:7 The Temple was destroyed because the sins that the priests and the people had committed within its walls had defiled its holiness (cp. Jer 7:3-15; 26:3-6, 12-13; Ezek 24:21).","summary_en":"2:7 The Temple was destroyed because the sins that the priests and the people had committed within its walls had defiled its holiness (cp. Jer 7:3-15; 26:3-6, 12-13; Ezek 24:21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"8":[{"id":52879,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:8","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:8","content_ro":"2:8<\/strong> Ramparts<\/em> were stone walls or mounds of earth built around a city to protect it from assault by an enemy army.<\/p>","content_en":"2:8<\/strong> Ramparts<\/em> were stone walls or mounds of earth built around a city to protect it from assault by an enemy army.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:8 Ramparts were stone walls or mounds of earth built around a city to protect it from assault by an enemy army.","summary_en":"2:8 Ramparts were stone walls or mounds of earth built around a city to protect it from assault by an enemy army.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80505,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:8","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:8","content_ro":"2:8<\/strong> Ramparts<\/em> were stone walls or mounds of earth built around a city to protect it from assault by an enemy army.<\/p>","content_en":"2:8<\/strong> Ramparts<\/em> were stone walls or mounds of earth built around a city to protect it from assault by an enemy army.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:8 Ramparts were stone walls or mounds of earth built around a city to protect it from assault by an enemy army.","summary_en":"2:8 Ramparts were stone walls or mounds of earth built around a city to protect it from assault by an enemy army.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108131,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:8","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:8","content_ro":"2:8<\/strong> Ramparts<\/em> were stone walls or mounds of earth built around a city to protect it from assault by an enemy army.<\/p>","content_en":"2:8<\/strong> Ramparts<\/em> were stone walls or mounds of earth built around a city to protect it from assault by an enemy army.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:8 Ramparts were stone walls or mounds of earth built around a city to protect it from assault by an enemy army.","summary_en":"2:8 Ramparts were stone walls or mounds of earth built around a city to protect it from assault by an enemy army.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135757,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:8","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:8","content_ro":"2:8<\/strong> Ramparts<\/em> were stone walls or mounds of earth built around a city to protect it from assault by an enemy army.<\/p>","content_en":"2:8<\/strong> Ramparts<\/em> were stone walls or mounds of earth built around a city to protect it from assault by an enemy army.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:8 Ramparts were stone walls or mounds of earth built around a city to protect it from assault by an enemy army.","summary_en":"2:8 Ramparts were stone walls or mounds of earth built around a city to protect it from assault by an enemy army.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"9":[{"id":52880,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:9","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:9","content_ro":"2:9<\/strong> no more visions:<\/em> Daniel and Ezekiel were prophets<\/em> of the Lord who had visions while they lived among the exiles far from the land of Judah (Ezek 1:1; Dan 7:1). This verse refers to prophets in Jerusalem who claimed to have visions that proved to be false.<\/p>","content_en":"2:9<\/strong> no more visions:<\/em> Daniel and Ezekiel were prophets<\/em> of the Lord who had visions while they lived among the exiles far from the land of Judah (Ezek 1:1; Dan 7:1). This verse refers to prophets in Jerusalem who claimed to have visions that proved to be false.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:9 no more visions: Daniel and Ezekiel were prophets of the Lord who had visions while they lived among the exiles far from the land of Judah (Ezek 1:1; Dan 7:1). This verse refers to prophets in Jerusalem who claimed to have visions that proved to be false.","summary_en":"2:9 no more visions: Daniel and Ezekiel were prophets of the Lord who had visions while they lived among the exiles far from the land of Judah (Ezek 1:1; Dan 7:1). This verse refers to prophets in Jerusalem who claimed to have visions that proved to be false.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80506,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:9","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:9","content_ro":"2:9<\/strong> no more visions:<\/em> Daniel and Ezekiel were prophets<\/em> of the Lord who had visions while they lived among the exiles far from the land of Judah (Ezek 1:1; Dan 7:1). This verse refers to prophets in Jerusalem who claimed to have visions that proved to be false.<\/p>","content_en":"2:9<\/strong> no more visions:<\/em> Daniel and Ezekiel were prophets<\/em> of the Lord who had visions while they lived among the exiles far from the land of Judah (Ezek 1:1; Dan 7:1). This verse refers to prophets in Jerusalem who claimed to have visions that proved to be false.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:9 no more visions: Daniel and Ezekiel were prophets of the Lord who had visions while they lived among the exiles far from the land of Judah (Ezek 1:1; Dan 7:1). This verse refers to prophets in Jerusalem who claimed to have visions that proved to be false.","summary_en":"2:9 no more visions: Daniel and Ezekiel were prophets of the Lord who had visions while they lived among the exiles far from the land of Judah (Ezek 1:1; Dan 7:1). This verse refers to prophets in Jerusalem who claimed to have visions that proved to be false.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108132,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:9","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:9","content_ro":"2:9<\/strong> no more visions:<\/em> Daniel and Ezekiel were prophets<\/em> of the Lord who had visions while they lived among the exiles far from the land of Judah (Ezek 1:1; Dan 7:1). This verse refers to prophets in Jerusalem who claimed to have visions that proved to be false.<\/p>","content_en":"2:9<\/strong> no more visions:<\/em> Daniel and Ezekiel were prophets<\/em> of the Lord who had visions while they lived among the exiles far from the land of Judah (Ezek 1:1; Dan 7:1). This verse refers to prophets in Jerusalem who claimed to have visions that proved to be false.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:9 no more visions: Daniel and Ezekiel were prophets of the Lord who had visions while they lived among the exiles far from the land of Judah (Ezek 1:1; Dan 7:1). This verse refers to prophets in Jerusalem who claimed to have visions that proved to be false.","summary_en":"2:9 no more visions: Daniel and Ezekiel were prophets of the Lord who had visions while they lived among the exiles far from the land of Judah (Ezek 1:1; Dan 7:1). This verse refers to prophets in Jerusalem who claimed to have visions that proved to be false.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135758,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:9","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:9","content_ro":"2:9<\/strong> no more visions:<\/em> Daniel and Ezekiel were prophets<\/em> of the Lord who had visions while they lived among the exiles far from the land of Judah (Ezek 1:1; Dan 7:1). This verse refers to prophets in Jerusalem who claimed to have visions that proved to be false.<\/p>","content_en":"2:9<\/strong> no more visions:<\/em> Daniel and Ezekiel were prophets<\/em> of the Lord who had visions while they lived among the exiles far from the land of Judah (Ezek 1:1; Dan 7:1). This verse refers to prophets in Jerusalem who claimed to have visions that proved to be false.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:9 no more visions: Daniel and Ezekiel were prophets of the Lord who had visions while they lived among the exiles far from the land of Judah (Ezek 1:1; Dan 7:1). This verse refers to prophets in Jerusalem who claimed to have visions that proved to be false.","summary_en":"2:9 no more visions: Daniel and Ezekiel were prophets of the Lord who had visions while they lived among the exiles far from the land of Judah (Ezek 1:1; Dan 7:1). This verse refers to prophets in Jerusalem who claimed to have visions that proved to be false.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"10":[{"id":15558,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Head","title_en":"Head","content_ro":"<h3>HEAD<\/h3>\nThe uppermost portion of the body, containing the brain, major sense organs, and the mouth. It appears many times in the Bible as a physical description. The Hebrew term for head<\/em> is also used figuratively in the Old Testament. Frequently, it designates prominence or authority.<\/p>\nTo raise one’s head was considered an act of pride (Ps 140:9) or honor (Gn 40:20; Pss 3:3; 27:6). Bowing the head signified humility (Is 58:5) or sadness (Lam 2:10). The Hebrew word is used metaphorically of mountain peaks (Gn 8:5), the tops of buildings (Gn 11:4) or trees (2 Sm 5:24), and river sources (Gn 2:10). The term was commonly used to designate positions of political, military, or familiar authority. In this sense the “head” exercised control over all those subjected to him (Jgs 10:18; 1 Sm 15:17; Ps 18:43; Is 7:8-9; Jer 31:7; Hos 1:11). David was called the “keeper of mine head” (kjv<\/span>) when he served as the bodyguard of Achish (1 Sm 28:2; cf. Jgs 9:53; Ps 68:21).<\/p>\nGreek philosophers used the image of the body to represent the universe. The head of this body—called Zeus or Reason—was considered responsible for the creation and sustenance of the remaining members (celestial beings, humans, animals, plants, and inanimate objects). The universe, or “body,” owed its existence to the “head.”<\/p>\nBetween 460 BC<\/span> (the date usually ascribed to the first writings of Hippocrates) and AD<\/span> 200 (the death of Galen, who developed Hippocrates’ findings), Greek medical science came to understand the head as the seat of intelligence. The body was able to operate efficiently only because the brain was capable of interpreting data received from the body (eyes, ears, skin, and so on), and because it was able to send out appropriate impulses to the various members of the body, based upon the data received. The ability of the brain to interpret and direct made the existence of the body completely dependent upon it.<\/p>\nIn the NT, the term refers to the actual human head (Mt 5:36; 6:17; 14:8; 26:7; Mk 6:27; 14:3; Lk 7:46; Jn 13:9; 20:7), to apocalyptic beings (Rv 1:14; 4:4; 12:1), and to animals (Rv 9:7, 17, 19; 12:3). Furthermore, it appears in such expressions as “to heap coals of fire upon the head,” meaning to return good for evil (Rom 12:20; cf. Mt 5:44); to “shear” or “anoint the head” expressing a vow (Acts 21:24); and “to lay down the head,” meaning to sleep (Mt 8:20; Lk 9:58).<\/p>\nThe apostle Paul drew from the OT metaphorical understanding of the term to express the headship of God over Christ, Christ over man, and man over woman (1 Cor 11:3-16; cf. Eph 5:23). In the light of these relationships, Paul encouraged women at Corinth to wear veils in worship. The veil gave a woman the authority to worship as an equal with men before God. The term is used again with the meaning “authority” to express the lordship of Christ over the universe (Eph 1:21-22; Col 2:10).<\/p>\nPaul used the image of the head and body to express the relationship between Christ and his church (Eph 4:15; 5:23; cf. 1 Cor 12:12-27). In addition to the OT sense, the contributions of medical science in Paul’s day may provide insight into this image, for Christ is not only the dominant ruler over the church but also the dynamic force that provides its direction and unity. The ability of the church to exist and the focal point of its activity are rooted in the work of its “head,” Jesus Christ. In this light, various modern exegetes have argued that headship does not mean “authority” as much as it means “source,” as in the term “fountainhead.” Thus, he who is the head is the source, the supplier. These interpreters see God as being Christ’s supplier, and Christ being the church’s supplier, and man being woman’s supplier.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HEAD<\/h3>\nThe uppermost portion of the body, containing the brain, major sense organs, and the mouth. It appears many times in the Bible as a physical description. The Hebrew term for head<\/em> is also used figuratively in the Old Testament. Frequently, it designates prominence or authority.<\/p>\nTo raise one’s head was considered an act of pride (Ps 140:9) or honor (Gn 40:20; Pss 3:3; 27:6). Bowing the head signified humility (Is 58:5) or sadness (Lam 2:10). The Hebrew word is used metaphorically of mountain peaks (Gn 8:5), the tops of buildings (Gn 11:4) or trees (2 Sm 5:24), and river sources (Gn 2:10). The term was commonly used to designate positions of political, military, or familiar authority. In this sense the “head” exercised control over all those subjected to him (Jgs 10:18; 1 Sm 15:17; Ps 18:43; Is 7:8-9; Jer 31:7; Hos 1:11). David was called the “keeper of mine head” (kjv<\/span>) when he served as the bodyguard of Achish (1 Sm 28:2; cf. Jgs 9:53; Ps 68:21).<\/p>\nGreek philosophers used the image of the body to represent the universe. The head of this body—called Zeus or Reason—was considered responsible for the creation and sustenance of the remaining members (celestial beings, humans, animals, plants, and inanimate objects). The universe, or “body,” owed its existence to the “head.”<\/p>\nBetween 460 BC<\/span> (the date usually ascribed to the first writings of Hippocrates) and AD<\/span> 200 (the death of Galen, who developed Hippocrates’ findings), Greek medical science came to understand the head as the seat of intelligence. The body was able to operate efficiently only because the brain was capable of interpreting data received from the body (eyes, ears, skin, and so on), and because it was able to send out appropriate impulses to the various members of the body, based upon the data received. The ability of the brain to interpret and direct made the existence of the body completely dependent upon it.<\/p>\nIn the NT, the term refers to the actual human head (Mt 5:36; 6:17; 14:8; 26:7; Mk 6:27; 14:3; Lk 7:46; Jn 13:9; 20:7), to apocalyptic beings (Rv 1:14; 4:4; 12:1), and to animals (Rv 9:7, 17, 19; 12:3). Furthermore, it appears in such expressions as “to heap coals of fire upon the head,” meaning to return good for evil (Rom 12:20; cf. Mt 5:44); to “shear” or “anoint the head” expressing a vow (Acts 21:24); and “to lay down the head,” meaning to sleep (Mt 8:20; Lk 9:58).<\/p>\nThe apostle Paul drew from the OT metaphorical understanding of the term to express the headship of God over Christ, Christ over man, and man over woman (1 Cor 11:3-16; cf. Eph 5:23). In the light of these relationships, Paul encouraged women at Corinth to wear veils in worship. The veil gave a woman the authority to worship as an equal with men before God. The term is used again with the meaning “authority” to express the lordship of Christ over the universe (Eph 1:21-22; Col 2:10).<\/p>\nPaul used the image of the head and body to express the relationship between Christ and his church (Eph 4:15; 5:23; cf. 1 Cor 12:12-27). In addition to the OT sense, the contributions of medical science in Paul’s day may provide insight into this image, for Christ is not only the dominant ruler over the church but also the dynamic force that provides its direction and unity. The ability of the church to exist and the focal point of its activity are rooted in the work of its “head,” Jesus Christ. In this light, various modern exegetes have argued that headship does not mean “authority” as much as it means “source,” as in the term “fountainhead.” Thus, he who is the head is the source, the supplier. These interpreters see God as being Christ’s supplier, and Christ being the church’s supplier, and man being woman’s supplier.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HEAD The uppermost portion of the body, containing the brain, major sense organs, and the mouth. It appears many times in the Bible as a physical description. The Hebrew term for head is also used figuratively in the Old Testament. Frequently, it designates prominence or authority. To raise one’s head was considered an act of pride (Ps 140:9) or honor (Gn 40:20; Pss 3:3; 27:6). Bowing the head signified humility (Is 58:5) or sadness (Lam 2:10). The Hebrew word is used metaphorically of mounta...","summary_en":"HEAD The uppermost portion of the body, containing the brain, major sense organs, and the mouth. It appears many times in the Bible as a physical description. The Hebrew term for head is also used figuratively in the Old Testament. Frequently, it designates prominence or authority. To raise one’s head was considered an act of pride (Ps 140:9) or honor (Gn 40:20; Pss 3:3; 27:6). Bowing the head signified humility (Is 58:5) or sadness (Lam 2:10). The Hebrew word is used metaphorically of mounta...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33475,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sackcloth","title_en":"Sackcloth","content_ro":"<h3>SACKCLOTH<\/h3>\nPoor quality material or a garment of goat hair usually worn as a symbol of mourning, but also worn by some prophets and captives.<\/p>\nSackcloth was coarse and probably dark in color (Is 50:3; Rv 6:12). The shape of the garment is disputed. Two views are prominent. One view is that the garment was rectangular, sewn on both sides and one end with spaces left for the head and arms. This shape resembles the grain sacks used by Joseph’s brothers in Egypt (Gn 42:25-27, 35) and the sacks used by the Gibeonites (Jos 9:4; cf. Lv 11:32). A second view is that sackcloth was a small garment resembling a loincloth. Asiatic captives are pictured in such garb. The Hebrew practices of girding the loins with sackcloth (2 Sm 3:31; Is 15:3; 22:12; Jer 4:8) and the placing of sackcloth on the loins (Gn 37:34; 1 Kgs 20:31; Jer 48:37) support this view, though more than one type of garment could have been made from sackcloth. Sackcloth was associated primarily with mourning (Gn 37:34; 1 Kgs 21:27; Lam 2:10). National (2 Kgs 6:30; Neh 9:1; Is 37:1; Jon 3:8) as well as personal crises constituted times for the wearing of sackcloth. Kings (1 Kgs 21:27; 2 Kgs 6:30), priests (Jl 1:13), elders (Lam 2:10), prophets (Is 20:2; Zec 13:4), and cattle (Jon 3:8) all wore sackcloth. Sackcloth was found on the penitent (Neh 9:1; Jer 6:26; cf. Mt 11:21) though such usage was not restricted to Israel (Is 15:3; Jer 49:3; Ez 27:31; Jon 3:5). It has been suggested that the coarse fabric produced physical discomfort and was used to inflict self-punishment on the wearer. There is no evidence, however, to support this position.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Burial, Burial Customs; Mourning.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SACKCLOTH<\/h3>\nPoor quality material or a garment of goat hair usually worn as a symbol of mourning, but also worn by some prophets and captives.<\/p>\nSackcloth was coarse and probably dark in color (Is 50:3; Rv 6:12). The shape of the garment is disputed. Two views are prominent. One view is that the garment was rectangular, sewn on both sides and one end with spaces left for the head and arms. This shape resembles the grain sacks used by Joseph’s brothers in Egypt (Gn 42:25-27, 35) and the sacks used by the Gibeonites (Jos 9:4; cf. Lv 11:32). A second view is that sackcloth was a small garment resembling a loincloth. Asiatic captives are pictured in such garb. The Hebrew practices of girding the loins with sackcloth (2 Sm 3:31; Is 15:3; 22:12; Jer 4:8) and the placing of sackcloth on the loins (Gn 37:34; 1 Kgs 20:31; Jer 48:37) support this view, though more than one type of garment could have been made from sackcloth. Sackcloth was associated primarily with mourning (Gn 37:34; 1 Kgs 21:27; Lam 2:10). National (2 Kgs 6:30; Neh 9:1; Is 37:1; Jon 3:8) as well as personal crises constituted times for the wearing of sackcloth. Kings (1 Kgs 21:27; 2 Kgs 6:30), priests (Jl 1:13), elders (Lam 2:10), prophets (Is 20:2; Zec 13:4), and cattle (Jon 3:8) all wore sackcloth. Sackcloth was found on the penitent (Neh 9:1; Jer 6:26; cf. Mt 11:21) though such usage was not restricted to Israel (Is 15:3; Jer 49:3; Ez 27:31; Jon 3:5). It has been suggested that the coarse fabric produced physical discomfort and was used to inflict self-punishment on the wearer. There is no evidence, however, to support this position.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Burial, Burial Customs; Mourning.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SACKCLOTH Poor quality material or a garment of goat hair usually worn as a symbol of mourning, but also worn by some prophets and captives. Sackcloth was coarse and probably dark in color (Is 50:3; Rv 6:12). The shape of the garment is disputed. Two views are prominent. One view is that the garment was rectangular, sewn on both sides and one end with spaces left for the head and arms. This shape resembles the grain sacks used by Joseph’s brothers in Egypt (Gn 42:25-27, 35) and the sacks used...","summary_en":"SACKCLOTH Poor quality material or a garment of goat hair usually worn as a symbol of mourning, but also worn by some prophets and captives. Sackcloth was coarse and probably dark in color (Is 50:3; Rv 6:12). The shape of the garment is disputed. Two views are prominent. One view is that the garment was rectangular, sewn on both sides and one end with spaces left for the head and arms. This shape resembles the grain sacks used by Joseph’s brothers in Egypt (Gn 42:25-27, 35) and the sacks used...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52881,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:10","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:10","content_ro":"2:10<\/strong> Burlap<\/em> (or sackcloth<\/em>) was made of goat or camel hair and was often used for grain sacks or for items to be carried on pack animals. Poor people wore it as clothing because it was inexpensive, and people in mourning wore it as a sign of their deep sorrow (its dark color matched their mood, and its roughness matched their discomfort). • Throwing dust on their<\/em> heads<\/em> and clothing was a sign to neighbors that a family member had died.<\/p>","content_en":"2:10<\/strong> Burlap<\/em> (or sackcloth<\/em>) was made of goat or camel hair and was often used for grain sacks or for items to be carried on pack animals. Poor people wore it as clothing because it was inexpensive, and people in mourning wore it as a sign of their deep sorrow (its dark color matched their mood, and its roughness matched their discomfort). • Throwing dust on their<\/em> heads<\/em> and clothing was a sign to neighbors that a family member had died.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:10 Burlap (or sackcloth) was made of goat or camel hair and was often used for grain sacks or for items to be carried on pack animals. Poor people wore it as clothing because it was inexpensive, and people in mourning wore it as a sign of their deep sorrow (its dark color matched their mood, and its roughness matched their discomfort). • Throwing dust on their heads and clothing was a sign to neighbors that a family member had died.","summary_en":"2:10 Burlap (or sackcloth) was made of goat or camel hair and was often used for grain sacks or for items to be carried on pack animals. Poor people wore it as clothing because it was inexpensive, and people in mourning wore it as a sign of their deep sorrow (its dark color matched their mood, and its roughness matched their discomfort). • Throwing dust on their heads and clothing was a sign to neighbors that a family member had died.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80507,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:10","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:10","content_ro":"2:10<\/strong> Burlap<\/em> (or sackcloth<\/em>) was made of goat or camel hair and was often used for grain sacks or for items to be carried on pack animals. Poor people wore it as clothing because it was inexpensive, and people in mourning wore it as a sign of their deep sorrow (its dark color matched their mood, and its roughness matched their discomfort). • Throwing dust on their<\/em> heads<\/em> and clothing was a sign to neighbors that a family member had died.<\/p>","content_en":"2:10<\/strong> Burlap<\/em> (or sackcloth<\/em>) was made of goat or camel hair and was often used for grain sacks or for items to be carried on pack animals. Poor people wore it as clothing because it was inexpensive, and people in mourning wore it as a sign of their deep sorrow (its dark color matched their mood, and its roughness matched their discomfort). • Throwing dust on their<\/em> heads<\/em> and clothing was a sign to neighbors that a family member had died.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:10 Burlap (or sackcloth) was made of goat or camel hair and was often used for grain sacks or for items to be carried on pack animals. Poor people wore it as clothing because it was inexpensive, and people in mourning wore it as a sign of their deep sorrow (its dark color matched their mood, and its roughness matched their discomfort). • Throwing dust on their heads and clothing was a sign to neighbors that a family member had died.","summary_en":"2:10 Burlap (or sackcloth) was made of goat or camel hair and was often used for grain sacks or for items to be carried on pack animals. Poor people wore it as clothing because it was inexpensive, and people in mourning wore it as a sign of their deep sorrow (its dark color matched their mood, and its roughness matched their discomfort). • Throwing dust on their heads and clothing was a sign to neighbors that a family member had died.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108133,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:10","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:10","content_ro":"2:10<\/strong> Burlap<\/em> (or sackcloth<\/em>) was made of goat or camel hair and was often used for grain sacks or for items to be carried on pack animals. Poor people wore it as clothing because it was inexpensive, and people in mourning wore it as a sign of their deep sorrow (its dark color matched their mood, and its roughness matched their discomfort). • Throwing dust on their<\/em> heads<\/em> and clothing was a sign to neighbors that a family member had died.<\/p>","content_en":"2:10<\/strong> Burlap<\/em> (or sackcloth<\/em>) was made of goat or camel hair and was often used for grain sacks or for items to be carried on pack animals. Poor people wore it as clothing because it was inexpensive, and people in mourning wore it as a sign of their deep sorrow (its dark color matched their mood, and its roughness matched their discomfort). • Throwing dust on their<\/em> heads<\/em> and clothing was a sign to neighbors that a family member had died.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:10 Burlap (or sackcloth) was made of goat or camel hair and was often used for grain sacks or for items to be carried on pack animals. Poor people wore it as clothing because it was inexpensive, and people in mourning wore it as a sign of their deep sorrow (its dark color matched their mood, and its roughness matched their discomfort). • Throwing dust on their heads and clothing was a sign to neighbors that a family member had died.","summary_en":"2:10 Burlap (or sackcloth) was made of goat or camel hair and was often used for grain sacks or for items to be carried on pack animals. Poor people wore it as clothing because it was inexpensive, and people in mourning wore it as a sign of their deep sorrow (its dark color matched their mood, and its roughness matched their discomfort). • Throwing dust on their heads and clothing was a sign to neighbors that a family member had died.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135759,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:10","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:10","content_ro":"2:10<\/strong> Burlap<\/em> (or sackcloth<\/em>) was made of goat or camel hair and was often used for grain sacks or for items to be carried on pack animals. Poor people wore it as clothing because it was inexpensive, and people in mourning wore it as a sign of their deep sorrow (its dark color matched their mood, and its roughness matched their discomfort). • Throwing dust on their<\/em> heads<\/em> and clothing was a sign to neighbors that a family member had died.<\/p>","content_en":"2:10<\/strong> Burlap<\/em> (or sackcloth<\/em>) was made of goat or camel hair and was often used for grain sacks or for items to be carried on pack animals. Poor people wore it as clothing because it was inexpensive, and people in mourning wore it as a sign of their deep sorrow (its dark color matched their mood, and its roughness matched their discomfort). • Throwing dust on their<\/em> heads<\/em> and clothing was a sign to neighbors that a family member had died.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:10 Burlap (or sackcloth) was made of goat or camel hair and was often used for grain sacks or for items to be carried on pack animals. Poor people wore it as clothing because it was inexpensive, and people in mourning wore it as a sign of their deep sorrow (its dark color matched their mood, and its roughness matched their discomfort). • Throwing dust on their heads and clothing was a sign to neighbors that a family member had died.","summary_en":"2:10 Burlap (or sackcloth) was made of goat or camel hair and was often used for grain sacks or for items to be carried on pack animals. Poor people wore it as clothing because it was inexpensive, and people in mourning wore it as a sign of their deep sorrow (its dark color matched their mood, and its roughness matched their discomfort). • Throwing dust on their heads and clothing was a sign to neighbors that a family member had died.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"13":[{"id":22464,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Lamentations","title_en":"Book of Lamentations","content_ro":"<h3>LAMENTATIONS, Book of<\/h3>\nBook consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Structure<\/p>\n• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint.<\/p>\nThe Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different literary styles of the books of Jeremiah and Lamentations and the alleged conflicting viewpoints in the two books.<\/p>\nThe literary styles of these books are strikingly different. The prophecies of the book of Jeremiah are flowing pronouncements that create an impression of spontaneity and are quite unlike the contrived literary structures of Lamentations. But it is somewhat arbitrary to assert that Jeremiah could not have written the book of Lamentations on the basis of style. The choice of the acrostic form would naturally limit the scope of the writer’s freedom and profoundly affect his style. It is clear from 2 Chronicles 35:25 that Jeremiah composed the same type of material as that found in Lamentations. Since the sermons of the book of Jeremiah were intended for public proclamation, they would naturally have a spontaneity that the book of Lamentations would not possess. Certainly, the sensitive nature reflected in Jeremiah’s prophecies characterized the author of Lamentations as well.<\/p>\nTypical of the alleged differences of viewpoint used to deny Jeremaic authorship is the role of the nations in the destruction of Jerusalem. In his prophecy Jeremiah saw the invading Babylonians as a tool of God’s punishment, and appealed to the Jews to surrender to the invaders (Jer 28:3). The book of Lamentations seems to make God the direct author of the punishment and sees the enemy nations only as onlookers who will also experience God’s wrath (Lam 1:21; 3:59-66). It must be noted, however, that the enemies referred to in Lamentations are not only the Babylonians but all of the hostile powers that threatened Judah and gloated over its destruction (1:21). The assurance that God will judge these enemies is not a denial of the message of the book of Jeremiah, for it would be artificial for Jeremiah to suppose that the Babylonians, even though they were an instrument of God’s anger, were exempt from punishment. Such a concept is at variance with Jeremiah 12:14-17.<\/p>\nA number of phrases used in the book of Jeremiah are found in Lamentations as well. The expressions “terrors on every side” (Lam 2:22; cf. Jer 6:25; 20:10) and “wormwood” (Lam 3:15, 19; cf. Jer 9:15; 23:15) are examples of these. This fact lends support to the concept of Jeremaic authorship of the book.<\/p>\nOther reasons cited for the denial of Jeremaic authorship are the absence of the name of Jeremiah in Lamentations and the position of the book in the Writings, not the Prophets, in the Hebrew Bible. The absence of Jeremiah’s name is not a cogent argument against his authorship; there are a significant number of OT books whose authors are not cited. Since the book of Lamentations is a formal dirge, and is thus unlike the book of Jeremiah with its numerous autobiographical references, one would not expect personal allusions by the author.<\/p>\nThe position of Lamentations in the third division of the Hebrew Bible is sometimes appealed to by those who question Jeremaic authorship. Since Jeremiah is in the second division, it is argued that Lamentations was written too late for it to have been authored by Jeremiah. It should be noted, however, that there is a lack of unity in the early lists of the canonical books in the third division. It is difficult to assign a late date to a book of the third division only because of its inclusion in that division. The early church father Jerome indicated that Lamentations was once on the same scroll with Jeremiah.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nIf the book of Lamentations was written by Jeremiah, the time of writing would be shortly after the fall of Jerusalem (586 BC<\/span>). It is extremely difficult to imagine an author living in later times writing such a poignant lament over Jerusalem’s fall. The vivid descriptions of the suffering endured by the inhabitants of Jerusalem support the position that the book was written by an eyewitness to the events.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nAfter many months of siege by the Babylonian armies, Jerusalem fell, and the final deportation of the people of Judah took place. Extrabiblical confirmation of the devastation caused by the Babylonian invasion may be found in the Lachish letters, which record the message from a soldier in the field who indicates that he is watching for the signals of Lachish but cannot see the signals of Azekah (cf. Jer 34:7).<\/p>\nThe time preceding Jerusalem’s fall was one of internal strife and political intrigue. Jeremiah counseled surrender, while the chauvinistic leaders of Jerusalem tried to encourage the Judahites to fight on against the Babylonian onslaught. The role of Jeremiah in those final events was a tenuous one. His life was threatened, and he suffered numerous imprisonments.<\/p>\nThe fall of Jerusalem meant more than ignominious defeat and exile. While these would have been hard to bear, the theological emergency brought about by the event would have been the most difficult thing for believing Jews to comprehend. The fall of the city in which God chose to reveal himself would have signaled the end of God’s promises. The OT clearly set forth a glorious future for Jerusalem. It was to be the center of the messianic kingdom in the end time (Mi 4). The destruction of the city would cause many to question the veracity of God’s Word. The laments in this book are not only for the suffering that accompanied the fall of the city but also for the deep spiritual questions posed by its demise.<\/p>\nStructure<\/p>\nEach poem has a distinct symmetrical pattern. The first (Lam 1) is an elaborate acrostic composed of three-line segments. There are 22 segments, each beginning with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, proceeding in order from the first to the last. The second poem (ch 2) is similar except for a transposition of two Hebrew letters. The third poem (ch 3) is also composed of three-line segments, but each line begins with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, rather than only the first line of each segment as in the first two poems. The same Hebrew letters are transposed. The fourth poem (ch 4) is an acrostic composed of two-line segments. The first line of each segment begins with the appropriate Hebrew letter. The last poem (ch 5) is not an acrostic, but it contains the same number of letters as the Hebrew alphabet.<\/p>\nThe reason for this complex structure is unknown. It has been suggested that it is a device to aid memorization. Another suggestion is that the Hebrews may have seen the alphabet as representing the concept of totality or completeness. This idea derives from the fact that the Hebrew alphabet represented numbers as well as letters. This concept of totality may be reflected in the reference to the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet in Revelation 1:8: “I am the Alpha and the Omega.” It is quite possible that the expression of lamentation in the structure of the Hebrew alphabet could have represented the full range of sorrow felt by the author as he pondered the fall of the city of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPurpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\nA major purpose of the book of Lamentations was to give expression to the deep grief that Jeremiah felt as a result of Jerusalem’s catastrophe. By writing the book, he expressed the grief of all the Jews of his time and gave them a vehicle that would give vent to their sorrow.<\/p>\nThe book does not contain only lamentation, however, for it expresses hope and comfort as well. Thus another of its purposes was to lift the hearts of the people and point them to God, the source of all comfort. One of the greatest expressions of hope in the book is found in 3:22-23: “The unfailing love of the Lord<\/span> never ends! By his mercies we have been kept from complete destruction. Great is his faithfulness; his mercies begin afresh each day” (nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nPerhaps the most important purpose of the book was to explain the theological reason for the catastrophe. The book places the reason for Jerusalem’s fall in clear focus and demonstrates what can be learned about God from this. The reason given for Jerusalem’s demise is the sin of the people (1:8-9, 14; 4:13). The fall of the city is a vivid illustration of God’s justice in not overlooking sin even in those who are his own (1:18). It demonstrates the fact that God may seem like an enemy to his people when they are disobedient (2:5-7). It shows that the catastrophe was not outside the purposes of God (v 17) and vividly describes the results that can come from willful disobedience. But God is envisioned as a God of mercy and faithfulness as well. Even though Jeremiah saw his beloved homeland crumbling about him, there remained one great element of stability: God’s loyalty to his promises. Jeremiah knew that this was not the end, for he trusted in the steadfast love of the Lord and learned to wait quietly for God to act in his time (3:22-27).<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\nThe first chapter is a lamentation over the captivity of the citizens of Jerusalem and the resultant desolation of the city.<\/p>\nThe author alludes to Deuteronomy 28:64-65 at the beginning of the first lamentation (Lam 1:3). In that passage Moses warned the people that their disobedience to God would result in their dispersion among the nations, with no resting place. Lamentations 1:3 says that this warning has been realized.<\/p>\nThe cause of Israel’s misfortune was their sin (1:8a). This is a remarkable example of the results of disobedience to God. The dire results of sin permeate this first lamentation in a series of pictures of deep pathos (vv 11-12, 16-17). In the midst of this suffering Israel confesses that God was in the right (v 18). The righteousness of God involves his acting in integrity. He punishes sin even in his own people.<\/p>\nThe first lamentation ends with a prayer in which the people cry out for God’s judgment on their enemies (1:21-22). Such imprecations are the OT believer’s way of expressing his longing for an end to evil as it was personified in the godless nations.<\/p>\nThe second lamentation also concerns the destruction of Jerusalem but places more emphasis on God’s judgment. The tone is more strident than in the previous lamentation. Throughout the passage words expressing anger appear (2:1-3, 6-7). It is as though the terrible wrath of God evident in the destruction of the city is still vivid in the mind of the writer.<\/p>\nThe author lays the blame for God’s anger squarely on the false prophets (2:14); but he does not exempt the people from guilt, as is clear from other passages (e.g., 1:5, 8). It was the false prophets of the time who failed to warn the people of the results of their sin (2:14). Because of this, destruction came, and the writer can give no comfort to the people (v 13).<\/p>\nThe second lamentation begins with a reference to God’s footstool (2:1), probably referring to the ark of the covenant (1 Chr 28:2). The ark was the focal point of God’s revelation of himself. This verse reflects the theological emergency of the time; the writer laments the fact that God has not remembered his “footstool.” Even the holy ark, which marked God’s presence with his people, has not prevented God from destroying Jerusalem.<\/p>\nThe same thought is expressed in verses 6-7, where the traditional aspects of Israelite worship, as well as the sanctuary, are seen as having been destroyed by God. This important truth demonstrates the viewpoint of the whole book, which sees God as the direct cause of the misfortune.<\/p>\nThe third lamentation is very personal. At its conclusion, sorrow and complaint pass into a prayer of assurance (3:61-66). In the first 18 verses of this chapter, the writer describes how the Lord has afflicted him. He refers to God in the third person, not addressing him as Lord until he speaks the words of verse 18. Only after he has poured out his grief in this fashion can he speak the name of the Lord. This poignant grief suddenly changes to an expression of joy. He can affirm the covenant faithfulness of the Lord, and in the midst of the deepening sorrow, he sees God’s mercies as new every morning (vv 22-24). The chapter closes with a sudden burst of assurance (vv 58-66), in which the writer affirms his belief that God will vindicate him before his enemies. Only after he meditates on the nature of God’s loving-kindness (vv 22-27) can he speak these words. The desperate isolation and separation from God expressed in verses 1-17 give way as he affirms God’s goodness. Assurance comes as he reflects on the nature and goodness of God.<\/p>\nThe fourth lamentation emphasizes the fact that the judgment was well deserved. The author describes the various classes of the population (4:1-16) and indicates how each has been affected by Jerusalem’s downfall. Verses 12-20 affirm that the judgment of God is a direct consequence of sin. This lamentation also becomes a joyous statement of hope (vv 21-22), as the writer affirms that God will punish Israel’s enemies. Israel’s sin will be forgiven, and the guilt of “the daughter of Edom” will be punished. The “daughter of Edom” undoubtedly stands for all the enemy nations. (Edom is used in Isaiah 63:1 in the same fashion.) This salvation of the nation of Judah will not take place until their guilt is atoned for. It occurs when God conquers the godless nations. This conquest of the nations is an event that takes place in the end time, according to numerous OT and NT passages. It represents the manifestation of God’s total sovereignty over his creation.<\/p>\nThe last chapter is a poignant prayer in which the author describes their sufferings and asks God to restore the fortunes of the people. It begins with a request to God, asking him to consider all that has befallen the people (5:1-18). Part of the ignominy of the captive Jews is that “slaves” rule over them (v 8). This is an apparent reference to the Babylonian captors, who themselves were subject to despotic rule for many decades. The author’s perspective changes in verse 19, where he affirms that the Lord reigns forever. While Jerusalem, the earthly dwelling place of the Lord, has come to an end, the Lord’s throne endures forever. Because his throne is everlasting, the author asks, “Why do you continue to forget us? Why have you forsaken us for so long? Restore us, O Lord<\/span>, and bring us back to you again! Give us back the joys we once had! Or have you utterly rejected us? Are you angry with us still?” (5:20-22, nlt<\/span>). The question is based on the belief that because God’s reign is eternal, he cannot utterly forsake his people. He will restore his kingdom.<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations is neglected by many Christians. It deserves to be studied more. Its powerful statement concerning the blessings that may come from tragedy is a relevant message in any age, and it is one of the most powerful illustrations of the results of sin to be found in the OT. Its theology is clear and precise, painting a brilliant picture of God’s faithfulness against the dark background of the collapse of the city of Zion.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jeremiah (Person) #1; Jeremiah, Book of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LAMENTATIONS, Book of<\/h3>\nBook consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Structure<\/p>\n• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint.<\/p>\nThe Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different literary styles of the books of Jeremiah and Lamentations and the alleged conflicting viewpoints in the two books.<\/p>\nThe literary styles of these books are strikingly different. The prophecies of the book of Jeremiah are flowing pronouncements that create an impression of spontaneity and are quite unlike the contrived literary structures of Lamentations. But it is somewhat arbitrary to assert that Jeremiah could not have written the book of Lamentations on the basis of style. The choice of the acrostic form would naturally limit the scope of the writer’s freedom and profoundly affect his style. It is clear from 2 Chronicles 35:25 that Jeremiah composed the same type of material as that found in Lamentations. Since the sermons of the book of Jeremiah were intended for public proclamation, they would naturally have a spontaneity that the book of Lamentations would not possess. Certainly, the sensitive nature reflected in Jeremiah’s prophecies characterized the author of Lamentations as well.<\/p>\nTypical of the alleged differences of viewpoint used to deny Jeremaic authorship is the role of the nations in the destruction of Jerusalem. In his prophecy Jeremiah saw the invading Babylonians as a tool of God’s punishment, and appealed to the Jews to surrender to the invaders (Jer 28:3). The book of Lamentations seems to make God the direct author of the punishment and sees the enemy nations only as onlookers who will also experience God’s wrath (Lam 1:21; 3:59-66). It must be noted, however, that the enemies referred to in Lamentations are not only the Babylonians but all of the hostile powers that threatened Judah and gloated over its destruction (1:21). The assurance that God will judge these enemies is not a denial of the message of the book of Jeremiah, for it would be artificial for Jeremiah to suppose that the Babylonians, even though they were an instrument of God’s anger, were exempt from punishment. Such a concept is at variance with Jeremiah 12:14-17.<\/p>\nA number of phrases used in the book of Jeremiah are found in Lamentations as well. The expressions “terrors on every side” (Lam 2:22; cf. Jer 6:25; 20:10) and “wormwood” (Lam 3:15, 19; cf. Jer 9:15; 23:15) are examples of these. This fact lends support to the concept of Jeremaic authorship of the book.<\/p>\nOther reasons cited for the denial of Jeremaic authorship are the absence of the name of Jeremiah in Lamentations and the position of the book in the Writings, not the Prophets, in the Hebrew Bible. The absence of Jeremiah’s name is not a cogent argument against his authorship; there are a significant number of OT books whose authors are not cited. Since the book of Lamentations is a formal dirge, and is thus unlike the book of Jeremiah with its numerous autobiographical references, one would not expect personal allusions by the author.<\/p>\nThe position of Lamentations in the third division of the Hebrew Bible is sometimes appealed to by those who question Jeremaic authorship. Since Jeremiah is in the second division, it is argued that Lamentations was written too late for it to have been authored by Jeremiah. It should be noted, however, that there is a lack of unity in the early lists of the canonical books in the third division. It is difficult to assign a late date to a book of the third division only because of its inclusion in that division. The early church father Jerome indicated that Lamentations was once on the same scroll with Jeremiah.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nIf the book of Lamentations was written by Jeremiah, the time of writing would be shortly after the fall of Jerusalem (586 BC<\/span>). It is extremely difficult to imagine an author living in later times writing such a poignant lament over Jerusalem’s fall. The vivid descriptions of the suffering endured by the inhabitants of Jerusalem support the position that the book was written by an eyewitness to the events.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nAfter many months of siege by the Babylonian armies, Jerusalem fell, and the final deportation of the people of Judah took place. Extrabiblical confirmation of the devastation caused by the Babylonian invasion may be found in the Lachish letters, which record the message from a soldier in the field who indicates that he is watching for the signals of Lachish but cannot see the signals of Azekah (cf. Jer 34:7).<\/p>\nThe time preceding Jerusalem’s fall was one of internal strife and political intrigue. Jeremiah counseled surrender, while the chauvinistic leaders of Jerusalem tried to encourage the Judahites to fight on against the Babylonian onslaught. The role of Jeremiah in those final events was a tenuous one. His life was threatened, and he suffered numerous imprisonments.<\/p>\nThe fall of Jerusalem meant more than ignominious defeat and exile. While these would have been hard to bear, the theological emergency brought about by the event would have been the most difficult thing for believing Jews to comprehend. The fall of the city in which God chose to reveal himself would have signaled the end of God’s promises. The OT clearly set forth a glorious future for Jerusalem. It was to be the center of the messianic kingdom in the end time (Mi 4). The destruction of the city would cause many to question the veracity of God’s Word. The laments in this book are not only for the suffering that accompanied the fall of the city but also for the deep spiritual questions posed by its demise.<\/p>\nStructure<\/p>\nEach poem has a distinct symmetrical pattern. The first (Lam 1) is an elaborate acrostic composed of three-line segments. There are 22 segments, each beginning with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, proceeding in order from the first to the last. The second poem (ch 2) is similar except for a transposition of two Hebrew letters. The third poem (ch 3) is also composed of three-line segments, but each line begins with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, rather than only the first line of each segment as in the first two poems. The same Hebrew letters are transposed. The fourth poem (ch 4) is an acrostic composed of two-line segments. The first line of each segment begins with the appropriate Hebrew letter. The last poem (ch 5) is not an acrostic, but it contains the same number of letters as the Hebrew alphabet.<\/p>\nThe reason for this complex structure is unknown. It has been suggested that it is a device to aid memorization. Another suggestion is that the Hebrews may have seen the alphabet as representing the concept of totality or completeness. This idea derives from the fact that the Hebrew alphabet represented numbers as well as letters. This concept of totality may be reflected in the reference to the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet in Revelation 1:8: “I am the Alpha and the Omega.” It is quite possible that the expression of lamentation in the structure of the Hebrew alphabet could have represented the full range of sorrow felt by the author as he pondered the fall of the city of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPurpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\nA major purpose of the book of Lamentations was to give expression to the deep grief that Jeremiah felt as a result of Jerusalem’s catastrophe. By writing the book, he expressed the grief of all the Jews of his time and gave them a vehicle that would give vent to their sorrow.<\/p>\nThe book does not contain only lamentation, however, for it expresses hope and comfort as well. Thus another of its purposes was to lift the hearts of the people and point them to God, the source of all comfort. One of the greatest expressions of hope in the book is found in 3:22-23: “The unfailing love of the Lord<\/span> never ends! By his mercies we have been kept from complete destruction. Great is his faithfulness; his mercies begin afresh each day” (nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nPerhaps the most important purpose of the book was to explain the theological reason for the catastrophe. The book places the reason for Jerusalem’s fall in clear focus and demonstrates what can be learned about God from this. The reason given for Jerusalem’s demise is the sin of the people (1:8-9, 14; 4:13). The fall of the city is a vivid illustration of God’s justice in not overlooking sin even in those who are his own (1:18). It demonstrates the fact that God may seem like an enemy to his people when they are disobedient (2:5-7). It shows that the catastrophe was not outside the purposes of God (v 17) and vividly describes the results that can come from willful disobedience. But God is envisioned as a God of mercy and faithfulness as well. Even though Jeremiah saw his beloved homeland crumbling about him, there remained one great element of stability: God’s loyalty to his promises. Jeremiah knew that this was not the end, for he trusted in the steadfast love of the Lord and learned to wait quietly for God to act in his time (3:22-27).<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\nThe first chapter is a lamentation over the captivity of the citizens of Jerusalem and the resultant desolation of the city.<\/p>\nThe author alludes to Deuteronomy 28:64-65 at the beginning of the first lamentation (Lam 1:3). In that passage Moses warned the people that their disobedience to God would result in their dispersion among the nations, with no resting place. Lamentations 1:3 says that this warning has been realized.<\/p>\nThe cause of Israel’s misfortune was their sin (1:8a). This is a remarkable example of the results of disobedience to God. The dire results of sin permeate this first lamentation in a series of pictures of deep pathos (vv 11-12, 16-17). In the midst of this suffering Israel confesses that God was in the right (v 18). The righteousness of God involves his acting in integrity. He punishes sin even in his own people.<\/p>\nThe first lamentation ends with a prayer in which the people cry out for God’s judgment on their enemies (1:21-22). Such imprecations are the OT believer’s way of expressing his longing for an end to evil as it was personified in the godless nations.<\/p>\nThe second lamentation also concerns the destruction of Jerusalem but places more emphasis on God’s judgment. The tone is more strident than in the previous lamentation. Throughout the passage words expressing anger appear (2:1-3, 6-7). It is as though the terrible wrath of God evident in the destruction of the city is still vivid in the mind of the writer.<\/p>\nThe author lays the blame for God’s anger squarely on the false prophets (2:14); but he does not exempt the people from guilt, as is clear from other passages (e.g., 1:5, 8). It was the false prophets of the time who failed to warn the people of the results of their sin (2:14). Because of this, destruction came, and the writer can give no comfort to the people (v 13).<\/p>\nThe second lamentation begins with a reference to God’s footstool (2:1), probably referring to the ark of the covenant (1 Chr 28:2). The ark was the focal point of God’s revelation of himself. This verse reflects the theological emergency of the time; the writer laments the fact that God has not remembered his “footstool.” Even the holy ark, which marked God’s presence with his people, has not prevented God from destroying Jerusalem.<\/p>\nThe same thought is expressed in verses 6-7, where the traditional aspects of Israelite worship, as well as the sanctuary, are seen as having been destroyed by God. This important truth demonstrates the viewpoint of the whole book, which sees God as the direct cause of the misfortune.<\/p>\nThe third lamentation is very personal. At its conclusion, sorrow and complaint pass into a prayer of assurance (3:61-66). In the first 18 verses of this chapter, the writer describes how the Lord has afflicted him. He refers to God in the third person, not addressing him as Lord until he speaks the words of verse 18. Only after he has poured out his grief in this fashion can he speak the name of the Lord. This poignant grief suddenly changes to an expression of joy. He can affirm the covenant faithfulness of the Lord, and in the midst of the deepening sorrow, he sees God’s mercies as new every morning (vv 22-24). The chapter closes with a sudden burst of assurance (vv 58-66), in which the writer affirms his belief that God will vindicate him before his enemies. Only after he meditates on the nature of God’s loving-kindness (vv 22-27) can he speak these words. The desperate isolation and separation from God expressed in verses 1-17 give way as he affirms God’s goodness. Assurance comes as he reflects on the nature and goodness of God.<\/p>\nThe fourth lamentation emphasizes the fact that the judgment was well deserved. The author describes the various classes of the population (4:1-16) and indicates how each has been affected by Jerusalem’s downfall. Verses 12-20 affirm that the judgment of God is a direct consequence of sin. This lamentation also becomes a joyous statement of hope (vv 21-22), as the writer affirms that God will punish Israel’s enemies. Israel’s sin will be forgiven, and the guilt of “the daughter of Edom” will be punished. The “daughter of Edom” undoubtedly stands for all the enemy nations. (Edom is used in Isaiah 63:1 in the same fashion.) This salvation of the nation of Judah will not take place until their guilt is atoned for. It occurs when God conquers the godless nations. This conquest of the nations is an event that takes place in the end time, according to numerous OT and NT passages. It represents the manifestation of God’s total sovereignty over his creation.<\/p>\nThe last chapter is a poignant prayer in which the author describes their sufferings and asks God to restore the fortunes of the people. It begins with a request to God, asking him to consider all that has befallen the people (5:1-18). Part of the ignominy of the captive Jews is that “slaves” rule over them (v 8). This is an apparent reference to the Babylonian captors, who themselves were subject to despotic rule for many decades. The author’s perspective changes in verse 19, where he affirms that the Lord reigns forever. While Jerusalem, the earthly dwelling place of the Lord, has come to an end, the Lord’s throne endures forever. Because his throne is everlasting, the author asks, “Why do you continue to forget us? Why have you forsaken us for so long? Restore us, O Lord<\/span>, and bring us back to you again! Give us back the joys we once had! Or have you utterly rejected us? Are you angry with us still?” (5:20-22, nlt<\/span>). The question is based on the belief that because God’s reign is eternal, he cannot utterly forsake his people. He will restore his kingdom.<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations is neglected by many Christians. It deserves to be studied more. Its powerful statement concerning the blessings that may come from tragedy is a relevant message in any age, and it is one of the most powerful illustrations of the results of sin to be found in the OT. Its theology is clear and precise, painting a brilliant picture of God’s faithfulness against the dark background of the collapse of the city of Zion.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jeremiah (Person) #1; Jeremiah, Book of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LAMENTATIONS, Book of Book consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem. Preview • Author • Date • Background • Structure • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author The book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint. The Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different ...","summary_en":"LAMENTATIONS, Book of Book consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem. Preview • Author • Date • Background • Structure • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author The book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint. The Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different ...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":39443,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Daughter of Zion","title_en":"Daughter of Zion","content_ro":"<h3>ZION, Daughter of<\/h3>\nTerm used primarily in prophetic literature to designate the inhabitants of Jerusalem (Zion) and its surrounding regions. The term was further applied to those in Babylon who had been exiled from Jerusalem and the Judean countryside (Is 1:8; Jer 4:31; 6:2, 23). Since ancient cities were considered metaphorically to be the mother of their inhabitants, referring to the people of Jerusalem as “daughters of Zion” was entirely appropriate, particularly in poetic literature. While Israel was to be the “virgin daughter” of spiritual Zion (2 Kgs 19:21; Is 37:22; Lam 2:13), many of the prophetic contexts proclaim judgment on the unfaithful “daughters” (Is 3:16-17; 4:4; Mi 1:13). Although the “daughters of Zion” were judged for their unfaithfulness, the ultimate promise was that God would deliver them (Is 52:2; 62:11; Zec 9:9; Mt 21:5; Jn 12:15).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Zion.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ZION, Daughter of<\/h3>\nTerm used primarily in prophetic literature to designate the inhabitants of Jerusalem (Zion) and its surrounding regions. The term was further applied to those in Babylon who had been exiled from Jerusalem and the Judean countryside (Is 1:8; Jer 4:31; 6:2, 23). Since ancient cities were considered metaphorically to be the mother of their inhabitants, referring to the people of Jerusalem as “daughters of Zion” was entirely appropriate, particularly in poetic literature. While Israel was to be the “virgin daughter” of spiritual Zion (2 Kgs 19:21; Is 37:22; Lam 2:13), many of the prophetic contexts proclaim judgment on the unfaithful “daughters” (Is 3:16-17; 4:4; Mi 1:13). Although the “daughters of Zion” were judged for their unfaithfulness, the ultimate promise was that God would deliver them (Is 52:2; 62:11; Zec 9:9; Mt 21:5; Jn 12:15).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Zion.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ZION, Daughter of Term used primarily in prophetic literature to designate the inhabitants of Jerusalem (Zion) and its surrounding regions. The term was further applied to those in Babylon who had been exiled from Jerusalem and the Judean countryside (Is 1:8; Jer 4:31; 6:2, 23). Since ancient cities were considered metaphorically to be the mother of their inhabitants, referring to the people of Jerusalem as “daughters of Zion” was entirely appropriate, particularly in poetic literature. While...","summary_en":"ZION, Daughter of Term used primarily in prophetic literature to designate the inhabitants of Jerusalem (Zion) and its surrounding regions. The term was further applied to those in Babylon who had been exiled from Jerusalem and the Judean countryside (Is 1:8; Jer 4:31; 6:2, 23). Since ancient cities were considered metaphorically to be the mother of their inhabitants, referring to the people of Jerusalem as “daughters of Zion” was entirely appropriate, particularly in poetic literature. While...","source":"Articles\/Z.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52882,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:13","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:13","content_ro":"2:13<\/strong> Who can heal you?<\/em> Reputed healers and prophets were all liars and frauds (Jer 6:13-14).<\/p>","content_en":"2:13<\/strong> Who can heal you?<\/em> Reputed healers and prophets were all liars and frauds (Jer 6:13-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:13 Who can heal you? Reputed healers and prophets were all liars and frauds (Jer 6:13-14).","summary_en":"2:13 Who can heal you? Reputed healers and prophets were all liars and frauds (Jer 6:13-14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80508,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:13","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:13","content_ro":"2:13<\/strong> Who can heal you?<\/em> Reputed healers and prophets were all liars and frauds (Jer 6:13-14).<\/p>","content_en":"2:13<\/strong> Who can heal you?<\/em> Reputed healers and prophets were all liars and frauds (Jer 6:13-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:13 Who can heal you? Reputed healers and prophets were all liars and frauds (Jer 6:13-14).","summary_en":"2:13 Who can heal you? Reputed healers and prophets were all liars and frauds (Jer 6:13-14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108134,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:13","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:13","content_ro":"2:13<\/strong> Who can heal you?<\/em> Reputed healers and prophets were all liars and frauds (Jer 6:13-14).<\/p>","content_en":"2:13<\/strong> Who can heal you?<\/em> Reputed healers and prophets were all liars and frauds (Jer 6:13-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:13 Who can heal you? Reputed healers and prophets were all liars and frauds (Jer 6:13-14).","summary_en":"2:13 Who can heal you? Reputed healers and prophets were all liars and frauds (Jer 6:13-14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135760,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:13","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:13","content_ro":"2:13<\/strong> Who can heal you?<\/em> Reputed healers and prophets were all liars and frauds (Jer 6:13-14).<\/p>","content_en":"2:13<\/strong> Who can heal you?<\/em> Reputed healers and prophets were all liars and frauds (Jer 6:13-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:13 Who can heal you? Reputed healers and prophets were all liars and frauds (Jer 6:13-14).","summary_en":"2:13 Who can heal you? Reputed healers and prophets were all liars and frauds (Jer 6:13-14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":62964,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Zion","title_en":"Zion","content_ro":"<h3>Zion<\/h3>\nZion is the Hebrew name for the mountain in Jerusalem where the Temple was located (2 Sam 5:7; see also 2 Chr 3:1). Zion is used as a synonym for Jerusalem, and the NLT often translates Zion<\/em> as “Jerusalem” (e.g., Pss 69:35; 87:2; 97:8; 132:13). Thus Zion can refer to the actual, physical city of Jerusalem that was destroyed in 586 BC<\/span> (see 102:13; 126:1; 137:1) and again in AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nZion also signifies the city of God that transcends geographical location. Zion is God’s universal kingdom, the city in which he dwells (74:2; 76:2; 84:7; 135:21; see Isa 26). This city embodies trust, justice, righteousness, and commitment, for the Lord does not tolerate impurity, uncleanness, idolatry, injustice, or unrighteousness (Isa 1:21-28). The prophets and poets of Israel speak of the city of God as being more extensive than the physical city. The citizens of this city come from Judah, Israel, and the nations (see Ps 87:5-6; Heb 12:22-24). Zion is on a high mountain (Ps 48:2) at the center of God’s kingdom on earth (99:2; 132:13), and God’s throne is there (9:11). Therefore, godly prayers and praise focus on Zion (53:6; 65:1; 147:12; 149:2), and redemption is sought there (14:7; 20:2; 50:2; 53:6). David’s descendants are the legitimate heirs who rule over Zion to establish God’s universal kingdom (2:6; 110:2).<\/p>\nZion is symbolic of God’s protection and blessings (Pss 46:4-11; 48:1-14; 51:18; 128:5; 134:3). Anyone who trusts in the Lord is as secure as Mount Zion (125:1), but those who reject the Lord also reject the security of Zion and have no future (129:5-8).<\/p>\nThe New Testament speaks of Mount Zion as a heavenly Jerusalem, the spiritual home of those from all nations who have been reborn through faith in Jesus Christ (Heb 12:22-24; see also Gal 4:24-26; Rev 3:12; 21:2-4). Abraham looked forward in faith to “a city with eternal foundations” (Heb 11:10), a city in which all men and women of faith are citizens (Heb 12:22-24). Because the Lord knows no geographical limitations (1 Kgs 8:27), the true Zion he inhabits is the hearts of all who worship him.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Sam 5:7; 1 Kgs 8:1; Pss 14:7; 48:1-14; 50:2; 51:18; 68:16; 78:68; 87:2, 5; 125:1; 128:5; 132:13; 133:3; 135:21; 147:12; Isa 1:27; 2:3; 3:16-17, 26; 4:3-5; 8:18; 10:12, 24, 32; 16:1; 24:23; 29:8; 30:19; 31:4, 9; 33:20; 37:22, 32; 40:9; 41:27; 52:1-2; 60:14; 62:1; 64:10; Jer 26:18; 51:35; Lam 2:13; Joel 2:32; 3:16-17; Amos 1:2; Obad 1:21; Mic 3:12; 4:2; Zeph 3:14, 16; Zech 1:14, 17; 2:7; 8:2-3; 9:9; Heb 12:22; Rev 14:1<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Zion<\/h3>\nZion is the Hebrew name for the mountain in Jerusalem where the Temple was located (2 Sam 5:7; see also 2 Chr 3:1). Zion is used as a synonym for Jerusalem, and the NLT often translates Zion<\/em> as “Jerusalem” (e.g., Pss 69:35; 87:2; 97:8; 132:13). Thus Zion can refer to the actual, physical city of Jerusalem that was destroyed in 586 BC<\/span> (see 102:13; 126:1; 137:1) and again in AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nZion also signifies the city of God that transcends geographical location. Zion is God’s universal kingdom, the city in which he dwells (74:2; 76:2; 84:7; 135:21; see Isa 26). This city embodies trust, justice, righteousness, and commitment, for the Lord does not tolerate impurity, uncleanness, idolatry, injustice, or unrighteousness (Isa 1:21-28). The prophets and poets of Israel speak of the city of God as being more extensive than the physical city. The citizens of this city come from Judah, Israel, and the nations (see Ps 87:5-6; Heb 12:22-24). Zion is on a high mountain (Ps 48:2) at the center of God’s kingdom on earth (99:2; 132:13), and God’s throne is there (9:11). Therefore, godly prayers and praise focus on Zion (53:6; 65:1; 147:12; 149:2), and redemption is sought there (14:7; 20:2; 50:2; 53:6). David’s descendants are the legitimate heirs who rule over Zion to establish God’s universal kingdom (2:6; 110:2).<\/p>\nZion is symbolic of God’s protection and blessings (Pss 46:4-11; 48:1-14; 51:18; 128:5; 134:3). Anyone who trusts in the Lord is as secure as Mount Zion (125:1), but those who reject the Lord also reject the security of Zion and have no future (129:5-8).<\/p>\nThe New Testament speaks of Mount Zion as a heavenly Jerusalem, the spiritual home of those from all nations who have been reborn through faith in Jesus Christ (Heb 12:22-24; see also Gal 4:24-26; Rev 3:12; 21:2-4). Abraham looked forward in faith to “a city with eternal foundations” (Heb 11:10), a city in which all men and women of faith are citizens (Heb 12:22-24). Because the Lord knows no geographical limitations (1 Kgs 8:27), the true Zion he inhabits is the hearts of all who worship him.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Sam 5:7; 1 Kgs 8:1; Pss 14:7; 48:1-14; 50:2; 51:18; 68:16; 78:68; 87:2, 5; 125:1; 128:5; 132:13; 133:3; 135:21; 147:12; Isa 1:27; 2:3; 3:16-17, 26; 4:3-5; 8:18; 10:12, 24, 32; 16:1; 24:23; 29:8; 30:19; 31:4, 9; 33:20; 37:22, 32; 40:9; 41:27; 52:1-2; 60:14; 62:1; 64:10; Jer 26:18; 51:35; Lam 2:13; Joel 2:32; 3:16-17; Amos 1:2; Obad 1:21; Mic 3:12; 4:2; Zeph 3:14, 16; Zech 1:14, 17; 2:7; 8:2-3; 9:9; Heb 12:22; Rev 14:1<\/p>","summary_ro":"Zion Zion is the Hebrew name for the mountain in Jerusalem where the Temple was located (2 Sam 5:7; see also 2 Chr 3:1). Zion is used as a synonym for Jerusalem, and the NLT often translates Zion as “Jerusalem” (e.g., Pss 69:35; 87:2; 97:8; 132:13). Thus Zion can refer to the actual, physical city of Jerusalem that was destroyed in 586 BC (see 102:13; 126:1; 137:1) and again in AD 70. Zion also signifies the city of God that transcends geographical location. Zion is God’s universal kingdom, t...","summary_en":"Zion Zion is the Hebrew name for the mountain in Jerusalem where the Temple was located (2 Sam 5:7; see also 2 Chr 3:1). Zion is used as a synonym for Jerusalem, and the NLT often translates Zion as “Jerusalem” (e.g., Pss 69:35; 87:2; 97:8; 132:13). Thus Zion can refer to the actual, physical city of Jerusalem that was destroyed in 586 BC (see 102:13; 126:1; 137:1) and again in AD 70. Zion also signifies the city of God that transcends geographical location. Zion is God’s universal kingdom, t...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":90590,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Zion","title_en":"Zion","content_ro":"<h3>Zion<\/h3>\nZion is the Hebrew name for the mountain in Jerusalem where the Temple was located (2 Sam 5:7; see also 2 Chr 3:1). Zion is used as a synonym for Jerusalem, and the NLT often translates Zion<\/em> as “Jerusalem” (e.g., Pss 69:35; 87:2; 97:8; 132:13). Thus Zion can refer to the actual, physical city of Jerusalem that was destroyed in 586 BC<\/span> (see 102:13; 126:1; 137:1) and again in AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nZion also signifies the city of God that transcends geographical location. Zion is God’s universal kingdom, the city in which he dwells (74:2; 76:2; 84:7; 135:21; see Isa 26). This city embodies trust, justice, righteousness, and commitment, for the Lord does not tolerate impurity, uncleanness, idolatry, injustice, or unrighteousness (Isa 1:21-28). The prophets and poets of Israel speak of the city of God as being more extensive than the physical city. The citizens of this city come from Judah, Israel, and the nations (see Ps 87:5-6; Heb 12:22-24). Zion is on a high mountain (Ps 48:2) at the center of God’s kingdom on earth (99:2; 132:13), and God’s throne is there (9:11). Therefore, godly prayers and praise focus on Zion (53:6; 65:1; 147:12; 149:2), and redemption is sought there (14:7; 20:2; 50:2; 53:6). David’s descendants are the legitimate heirs who rule over Zion to establish God’s universal kingdom (2:6; 110:2).<\/p>\nZion is symbolic of God’s protection and blessings (Pss 46:4-11; 48:1-14; 51:18; 128:5; 134:3). Anyone who trusts in the Lord is as secure as Mount Zion (125:1), but those who reject the Lord also reject the security of Zion and have no future (129:5-8).<\/p>\nThe New Testament speaks of Mount Zion as a heavenly Jerusalem, the spiritual home of those from all nations who have been reborn through faith in Jesus Christ (Heb 12:22-24; see also Gal 4:24-26; Rev 3:12; 21:2-4). Abraham looked forward in faith to “a city with eternal foundations” (Heb 11:10), a city in which all men and women of faith are citizens (Heb 12:22-24). Because the Lord knows no geographical limitations (1 Kgs 8:27), the true Zion he inhabits is the hearts of all who worship him.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Sam 5:7; 1 Kgs 8:1; Pss 14:7; 48:1-14; 50:2; 51:18; 68:16; 78:68; 87:2, 5; 125:1; 128:5; 132:13; 133:3; 135:21; 147:12; Isa 1:27; 2:3; 3:16-17, 26; 4:3-5; 8:18; 10:12, 24, 32; 16:1; 24:23; 29:8; 30:19; 31:4, 9; 33:20; 37:22, 32; 40:9; 41:27; 52:1-2; 60:14; 62:1; 64:10; Jer 26:18; 51:35; Lam 2:13; Joel 2:32; 3:16-17; Amos 1:2; Obad 1:21; Mic 3:12; 4:2; Zeph 3:14, 16; Zech 1:14, 17; 2:7; 8:2-3; 9:9; Heb 12:22; Rev 14:1<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Zion<\/h3>\nZion is the Hebrew name for the mountain in Jerusalem where the Temple was located (2 Sam 5:7; see also 2 Chr 3:1). Zion is used as a synonym for Jerusalem, and the NLT often translates Zion<\/em> as “Jerusalem” (e.g., Pss 69:35; 87:2; 97:8; 132:13). Thus Zion can refer to the actual, physical city of Jerusalem that was destroyed in 586 BC<\/span> (see 102:13; 126:1; 137:1) and again in AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nZion also signifies the city of God that transcends geographical location. Zion is God’s universal kingdom, the city in which he dwells (74:2; 76:2; 84:7; 135:21; see Isa 26). This city embodies trust, justice, righteousness, and commitment, for the Lord does not tolerate impurity, uncleanness, idolatry, injustice, or unrighteousness (Isa 1:21-28). The prophets and poets of Israel speak of the city of God as being more extensive than the physical city. The citizens of this city come from Judah, Israel, and the nations (see Ps 87:5-6; Heb 12:22-24). Zion is on a high mountain (Ps 48:2) at the center of God’s kingdom on earth (99:2; 132:13), and God’s throne is there (9:11). Therefore, godly prayers and praise focus on Zion (53:6; 65:1; 147:12; 149:2), and redemption is sought there (14:7; 20:2; 50:2; 53:6). David’s descendants are the legitimate heirs who rule over Zion to establish God’s universal kingdom (2:6; 110:2).<\/p>\nZion is symbolic of God’s protection and blessings (Pss 46:4-11; 48:1-14; 51:18; 128:5; 134:3). Anyone who trusts in the Lord is as secure as Mount Zion (125:1), but those who reject the Lord also reject the security of Zion and have no future (129:5-8).<\/p>\nThe New Testament speaks of Mount Zion as a heavenly Jerusalem, the spiritual home of those from all nations who have been reborn through faith in Jesus Christ (Heb 12:22-24; see also Gal 4:24-26; Rev 3:12; 21:2-4). Abraham looked forward in faith to “a city with eternal foundations” (Heb 11:10), a city in which all men and women of faith are citizens (Heb 12:22-24). Because the Lord knows no geographical limitations (1 Kgs 8:27), the true Zion he inhabits is the hearts of all who worship him.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Sam 5:7; 1 Kgs 8:1; Pss 14:7; 48:1-14; 50:2; 51:18; 68:16; 78:68; 87:2, 5; 125:1; 128:5; 132:13; 133:3; 135:21; 147:12; Isa 1:27; 2:3; 3:16-17, 26; 4:3-5; 8:18; 10:12, 24, 32; 16:1; 24:23; 29:8; 30:19; 31:4, 9; 33:20; 37:22, 32; 40:9; 41:27; 52:1-2; 60:14; 62:1; 64:10; Jer 26:18; 51:35; Lam 2:13; Joel 2:32; 3:16-17; Amos 1:2; Obad 1:21; Mic 3:12; 4:2; Zeph 3:14, 16; Zech 1:14, 17; 2:7; 8:2-3; 9:9; Heb 12:22; Rev 14:1<\/p>","summary_ro":"Zion Zion is the Hebrew name for the mountain in Jerusalem where the Temple was located (2 Sam 5:7; see also 2 Chr 3:1). Zion is used as a synonym for Jerusalem, and the NLT often translates Zion as “Jerusalem” (e.g., Pss 69:35; 87:2; 97:8; 132:13). Thus Zion can refer to the actual, physical city of Jerusalem that was destroyed in 586 BC (see 102:13; 126:1; 137:1) and again in AD 70. Zion also signifies the city of God that transcends geographical location. Zion is God’s universal kingdom, t...","summary_en":"Zion Zion is the Hebrew name for the mountain in Jerusalem where the Temple was located (2 Sam 5:7; see also 2 Chr 3:1). Zion is used as a synonym for Jerusalem, and the NLT often translates Zion as “Jerusalem” (e.g., Pss 69:35; 87:2; 97:8; 132:13). Thus Zion can refer to the actual, physical city of Jerusalem that was destroyed in 586 BC (see 102:13; 126:1; 137:1) and again in AD 70. Zion also signifies the city of God that transcends geographical location. Zion is God’s universal kingdom, t...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":118216,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Zion","title_en":"Zion","content_ro":"<h3>Zion<\/h3>\nZion is the Hebrew name for the mountain in Jerusalem where the Temple was located (2 Sam 5:7; see also 2 Chr 3:1). Zion is used as a synonym for Jerusalem, and the NLT often translates Zion<\/em> as “Jerusalem” (e.g., Pss 69:35; 87:2; 97:8; 132:13). Thus Zion can refer to the actual, physical city of Jerusalem that was destroyed in 586 BC<\/span> (see 102:13; 126:1; 137:1) and again in AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nZion also signifies the city of God that transcends geographical location. Zion is God’s universal kingdom, the city in which he dwells (74:2; 76:2; 84:7; 135:21; see Isa 26). This city embodies trust, justice, righteousness, and commitment, for the Lord does not tolerate impurity, uncleanness, idolatry, injustice, or unrighteousness (Isa 1:21-28). The prophets and poets of Israel speak of the city of God as being more extensive than the physical city. The citizens of this city come from Judah, Israel, and the nations (see Ps 87:5-6; Heb 12:22-24). Zion is on a high mountain (Ps 48:2) at the center of God’s kingdom on earth (99:2; 132:13), and God’s throne is there (9:11). Therefore, godly prayers and praise focus on Zion (53:6; 65:1; 147:12; 149:2), and redemption is sought there (14:7; 20:2; 50:2; 53:6). David’s descendants are the legitimate heirs who rule over Zion to establish God’s universal kingdom (2:6; 110:2).<\/p>\nZion is symbolic of God’s protection and blessings (Pss 46:4-11; 48:1-14; 51:18; 128:5; 134:3). Anyone who trusts in the Lord is as secure as Mount Zion (125:1), but those who reject the Lord also reject the security of Zion and have no future (129:5-8).<\/p>\nThe New Testament speaks of Mount Zion as a heavenly Jerusalem, the spiritual home of those from all nations who have been reborn through faith in Jesus Christ (Heb 12:22-24; see also Gal 4:24-26; Rev 3:12; 21:2-4). Abraham looked forward in faith to “a city with eternal foundations” (Heb 11:10), a city in which all men and women of faith are citizens (Heb 12:22-24). Because the Lord knows no geographical limitations (1 Kgs 8:27), the true Zion he inhabits is the hearts of all who worship him.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Sam 5:7; 1 Kgs 8:1; Pss 14:7; 48:1-14; 50:2; 51:18; 68:16; 78:68; 87:2, 5; 125:1; 128:5; 132:13; 133:3; 135:21; 147:12; Isa 1:27; 2:3; 3:16-17, 26; 4:3-5; 8:18; 10:12, 24, 32; 16:1; 24:23; 29:8; 30:19; 31:4, 9; 33:20; 37:22, 32; 40:9; 41:27; 52:1-2; 60:14; 62:1; 64:10; Jer 26:18; 51:35; Lam 2:13; Joel 2:32; 3:16-17; Amos 1:2; Obad 1:21; Mic 3:12; 4:2; Zeph 3:14, 16; Zech 1:14, 17; 2:7; 8:2-3; 9:9; Heb 12:22; Rev 14:1<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Zion<\/h3>\nZion is the Hebrew name for the mountain in Jerusalem where the Temple was located (2 Sam 5:7; see also 2 Chr 3:1). Zion is used as a synonym for Jerusalem, and the NLT often translates Zion<\/em> as “Jerusalem” (e.g., Pss 69:35; 87:2; 97:8; 132:13). Thus Zion can refer to the actual, physical city of Jerusalem that was destroyed in 586 BC<\/span> (see 102:13; 126:1; 137:1) and again in AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nZion also signifies the city of God that transcends geographical location. Zion is God’s universal kingdom, the city in which he dwells (74:2; 76:2; 84:7; 135:21; see Isa 26). This city embodies trust, justice, righteousness, and commitment, for the Lord does not tolerate impurity, uncleanness, idolatry, injustice, or unrighteousness (Isa 1:21-28). The prophets and poets of Israel speak of the city of God as being more extensive than the physical city. The citizens of this city come from Judah, Israel, and the nations (see Ps 87:5-6; Heb 12:22-24). Zion is on a high mountain (Ps 48:2) at the center of God’s kingdom on earth (99:2; 132:13), and God’s throne is there (9:11). Therefore, godly prayers and praise focus on Zion (53:6; 65:1; 147:12; 149:2), and redemption is sought there (14:7; 20:2; 50:2; 53:6). David’s descendants are the legitimate heirs who rule over Zion to establish God’s universal kingdom (2:6; 110:2).<\/p>\nZion is symbolic of God’s protection and blessings (Pss 46:4-11; 48:1-14; 51:18; 128:5; 134:3). Anyone who trusts in the Lord is as secure as Mount Zion (125:1), but those who reject the Lord also reject the security of Zion and have no future (129:5-8).<\/p>\nThe New Testament speaks of Mount Zion as a heavenly Jerusalem, the spiritual home of those from all nations who have been reborn through faith in Jesus Christ (Heb 12:22-24; see also Gal 4:24-26; Rev 3:12; 21:2-4). Abraham looked forward in faith to “a city with eternal foundations” (Heb 11:10), a city in which all men and women of faith are citizens (Heb 12:22-24). Because the Lord knows no geographical limitations (1 Kgs 8:27), the true Zion he inhabits is the hearts of all who worship him.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Sam 5:7; 1 Kgs 8:1; Pss 14:7; 48:1-14; 50:2; 51:18; 68:16; 78:68; 87:2, 5; 125:1; 128:5; 132:13; 133:3; 135:21; 147:12; Isa 1:27; 2:3; 3:16-17, 26; 4:3-5; 8:18; 10:12, 24, 32; 16:1; 24:23; 29:8; 30:19; 31:4, 9; 33:20; 37:22, 32; 40:9; 41:27; 52:1-2; 60:14; 62:1; 64:10; Jer 26:18; 51:35; Lam 2:13; Joel 2:32; 3:16-17; Amos 1:2; Obad 1:21; Mic 3:12; 4:2; Zeph 3:14, 16; Zech 1:14, 17; 2:7; 8:2-3; 9:9; Heb 12:22; Rev 14:1<\/p>","summary_ro":"Zion Zion is the Hebrew name for the mountain in Jerusalem where the Temple was located (2 Sam 5:7; see also 2 Chr 3:1). Zion is used as a synonym for Jerusalem, and the NLT often translates Zion as “Jerusalem” (e.g., Pss 69:35; 87:2; 97:8; 132:13). Thus Zion can refer to the actual, physical city of Jerusalem that was destroyed in 586 BC (see 102:13; 126:1; 137:1) and again in AD 70. Zion also signifies the city of God that transcends geographical location. Zion is God’s universal kingdom, t...","summary_en":"Zion Zion is the Hebrew name for the mountain in Jerusalem where the Temple was located (2 Sam 5:7; see also 2 Chr 3:1). Zion is used as a synonym for Jerusalem, and the NLT often translates Zion as “Jerusalem” (e.g., Pss 69:35; 87:2; 97:8; 132:13). Thus Zion can refer to the actual, physical city of Jerusalem that was destroyed in 586 BC (see 102:13; 126:1; 137:1) and again in AD 70. Zion also signifies the city of God that transcends geographical location. Zion is God’s universal kingdom, t...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":145842,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Zion","title_en":"Zion","content_ro":"<h3>Zion<\/h3>\nZion is the Hebrew name for the mountain in Jerusalem where the Temple was located (2 Sam 5:7; see also 2 Chr 3:1). Zion is used as a synonym for Jerusalem, and the NLT often translates Zion<\/em> as “Jerusalem” (e.g., Pss 69:35; 87:2; 97:8; 132:13). Thus Zion can refer to the actual, physical city of Jerusalem that was destroyed in 586 BC<\/span> (see 102:13; 126:1; 137:1) and again in AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nZion also signifies the city of God that transcends geographical location. Zion is God’s universal kingdom, the city in which he dwells (74:2; 76:2; 84:7; 135:21; see Isa 26). This city embodies trust, justice, righteousness, and commitment, for the Lord does not tolerate impurity, uncleanness, idolatry, injustice, or unrighteousness (Isa 1:21-28). The prophets and poets of Israel speak of the city of God as being more extensive than the physical city. The citizens of this city come from Judah, Israel, and the nations (see Ps 87:5-6; Heb 12:22-24). Zion is on a high mountain (Ps 48:2) at the center of God’s kingdom on earth (99:2; 132:13), and God’s throne is there (9:11). Therefore, godly prayers and praise focus on Zion (53:6; 65:1; 147:12; 149:2), and redemption is sought there (14:7; 20:2; 50:2; 53:6). David’s descendants are the legitimate heirs who rule over Zion to establish God’s universal kingdom (2:6; 110:2).<\/p>\nZion is symbolic of God’s protection and blessings (Pss 46:4-11; 48:1-14; 51:18; 128:5; 134:3). Anyone who trusts in the Lord is as secure as Mount Zion (125:1), but those who reject the Lord also reject the security of Zion and have no future (129:5-8).<\/p>\nThe New Testament speaks of Mount Zion as a heavenly Jerusalem, the spiritual home of those from all nations who have been reborn through faith in Jesus Christ (Heb 12:22-24; see also Gal 4:24-26; Rev 3:12; 21:2-4). Abraham looked forward in faith to “a city with eternal foundations” (Heb 11:10), a city in which all men and women of faith are citizens (Heb 12:22-24). Because the Lord knows no geographical limitations (1 Kgs 8:27), the true Zion he inhabits is the hearts of all who worship him.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Sam 5:7; 1 Kgs 8:1; Pss 14:7; 48:1-14; 50:2; 51:18; 68:16; 78:68; 87:2, 5; 125:1; 128:5; 132:13; 133:3; 135:21; 147:12; Isa 1:27; 2:3; 3:16-17, 26; 4:3-5; 8:18; 10:12, 24, 32; 16:1; 24:23; 29:8; 30:19; 31:4, 9; 33:20; 37:22, 32; 40:9; 41:27; 52:1-2; 60:14; 62:1; 64:10; Jer 26:18; 51:35; Lam 2:13; Joel 2:32; 3:16-17; Amos 1:2; Obad 1:21; Mic 3:12; 4:2; Zeph 3:14, 16; Zech 1:14, 17; 2:7; 8:2-3; 9:9; Heb 12:22; Rev 14:1<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Zion<\/h3>\nZion is the Hebrew name for the mountain in Jerusalem where the Temple was located (2 Sam 5:7; see also 2 Chr 3:1). Zion is used as a synonym for Jerusalem, and the NLT often translates Zion<\/em> as “Jerusalem” (e.g., Pss 69:35; 87:2; 97:8; 132:13). Thus Zion can refer to the actual, physical city of Jerusalem that was destroyed in 586 BC<\/span> (see 102:13; 126:1; 137:1) and again in AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\nZion also signifies the city of God that transcends geographical location. Zion is God’s universal kingdom, the city in which he dwells (74:2; 76:2; 84:7; 135:21; see Isa 26). This city embodies trust, justice, righteousness, and commitment, for the Lord does not tolerate impurity, uncleanness, idolatry, injustice, or unrighteousness (Isa 1:21-28). The prophets and poets of Israel speak of the city of God as being more extensive than the physical city. The citizens of this city come from Judah, Israel, and the nations (see Ps 87:5-6; Heb 12:22-24). Zion is on a high mountain (Ps 48:2) at the center of God’s kingdom on earth (99:2; 132:13), and God’s throne is there (9:11). Therefore, godly prayers and praise focus on Zion (53:6; 65:1; 147:12; 149:2), and redemption is sought there (14:7; 20:2; 50:2; 53:6). David’s descendants are the legitimate heirs who rule over Zion to establish God’s universal kingdom (2:6; 110:2).<\/p>\nZion is symbolic of God’s protection and blessings (Pss 46:4-11; 48:1-14; 51:18; 128:5; 134:3). Anyone who trusts in the Lord is as secure as Mount Zion (125:1), but those who reject the Lord also reject the security of Zion and have no future (129:5-8).<\/p>\nThe New Testament speaks of Mount Zion as a heavenly Jerusalem, the spiritual home of those from all nations who have been reborn through faith in Jesus Christ (Heb 12:22-24; see also Gal 4:24-26; Rev 3:12; 21:2-4). Abraham looked forward in faith to “a city with eternal foundations” (Heb 11:10), a city in which all men and women of faith are citizens (Heb 12:22-24). Because the Lord knows no geographical limitations (1 Kgs 8:27), the true Zion he inhabits is the hearts of all who worship him.<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n2 Sam 5:7; 1 Kgs 8:1; Pss 14:7; 48:1-14; 50:2; 51:18; 68:16; 78:68; 87:2, 5; 125:1; 128:5; 132:13; 133:3; 135:21; 147:12; Isa 1:27; 2:3; 3:16-17, 26; 4:3-5; 8:18; 10:12, 24, 32; 16:1; 24:23; 29:8; 30:19; 31:4, 9; 33:20; 37:22, 32; 40:9; 41:27; 52:1-2; 60:14; 62:1; 64:10; Jer 26:18; 51:35; Lam 2:13; Joel 2:32; 3:16-17; Amos 1:2; Obad 1:21; Mic 3:12; 4:2; Zeph 3:14, 16; Zech 1:14, 17; 2:7; 8:2-3; 9:9; Heb 12:22; Rev 14:1<\/p>","summary_ro":"Zion Zion is the Hebrew name for the mountain in Jerusalem where the Temple was located (2 Sam 5:7; see also 2 Chr 3:1). Zion is used as a synonym for Jerusalem, and the NLT often translates Zion as “Jerusalem” (e.g., Pss 69:35; 87:2; 97:8; 132:13). Thus Zion can refer to the actual, physical city of Jerusalem that was destroyed in 586 BC (see 102:13; 126:1; 137:1) and again in AD 70. Zion also signifies the city of God that transcends geographical location. Zion is God’s universal kingdom, t...","summary_en":"Zion Zion is the Hebrew name for the mountain in Jerusalem where the Temple was located (2 Sam 5:7; see also 2 Chr 3:1). Zion is used as a synonym for Jerusalem, and the NLT often translates Zion as “Jerusalem” (e.g., Pss 69:35; 87:2; 97:8; 132:13). Thus Zion can refer to the actual, physical city of Jerusalem that was destroyed in 586 BC (see 102:13; 126:1; 137:1) and again in AD 70. Zion also signifies the city of God that transcends geographical location. Zion is God’s universal kingdom, t...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"14":[{"id":22462,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Lamentations","title_en":"Book of Lamentations","content_ro":"<h3>LAMENTATIONS, Book of<\/h3>\nBook consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Structure<\/p>\n• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint.<\/p>\nThe Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different literary styles of the books of Jeremiah and Lamentations and the alleged conflicting viewpoints in the two books.<\/p>\nThe literary styles of these books are strikingly different. The prophecies of the book of Jeremiah are flowing pronouncements that create an impression of spontaneity and are quite unlike the contrived literary structures of Lamentations. But it is somewhat arbitrary to assert that Jeremiah could not have written the book of Lamentations on the basis of style. The choice of the acrostic form would naturally limit the scope of the writer’s freedom and profoundly affect his style. It is clear from 2 Chronicles 35:25 that Jeremiah composed the same type of material as that found in Lamentations. Since the sermons of the book of Jeremiah were intended for public proclamation, they would naturally have a spontaneity that the book of Lamentations would not possess. Certainly, the sensitive nature reflected in Jeremiah’s prophecies characterized the author of Lamentations as well.<\/p>\nTypical of the alleged differences of viewpoint used to deny Jeremaic authorship is the role of the nations in the destruction of Jerusalem. In his prophecy Jeremiah saw the invading Babylonians as a tool of God’s punishment, and appealed to the Jews to surrender to the invaders (Jer 28:3). The book of Lamentations seems to make God the direct author of the punishment and sees the enemy nations only as onlookers who will also experience God’s wrath (Lam 1:21; 3:59-66). It must be noted, however, that the enemies referred to in Lamentations are not only the Babylonians but all of the hostile powers that threatened Judah and gloated over its destruction (1:21). The assurance that God will judge these enemies is not a denial of the message of the book of Jeremiah, for it would be artificial for Jeremiah to suppose that the Babylonians, even though they were an instrument of God’s anger, were exempt from punishment. Such a concept is at variance with Jeremiah 12:14-17.<\/p>\nA number of phrases used in the book of Jeremiah are found in Lamentations as well. The expressions “terrors on every side” (Lam 2:22; cf. Jer 6:25; 20:10) and “wormwood” (Lam 3:15, 19; cf. Jer 9:15; 23:15) are examples of these. This fact lends support to the concept of Jeremaic authorship of the book.<\/p>\nOther reasons cited for the denial of Jeremaic authorship are the absence of the name of Jeremiah in Lamentations and the position of the book in the Writings, not the Prophets, in the Hebrew Bible. The absence of Jeremiah’s name is not a cogent argument against his authorship; there are a significant number of OT books whose authors are not cited. Since the book of Lamentations is a formal dirge, and is thus unlike the book of Jeremiah with its numerous autobiographical references, one would not expect personal allusions by the author.<\/p>\nThe position of Lamentations in the third division of the Hebrew Bible is sometimes appealed to by those who question Jeremaic authorship. Since Jeremiah is in the second division, it is argued that Lamentations was written too late for it to have been authored by Jeremiah. It should be noted, however, that there is a lack of unity in the early lists of the canonical books in the third division. It is difficult to assign a late date to a book of the third division only because of its inclusion in that division. The early church father Jerome indicated that Lamentations was once on the same scroll with Jeremiah.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nIf the book of Lamentations was written by Jeremiah, the time of writing would be shortly after the fall of Jerusalem (586 BC<\/span>). It is extremely difficult to imagine an author living in later times writing such a poignant lament over Jerusalem’s fall. The vivid descriptions of the suffering endured by the inhabitants of Jerusalem support the position that the book was written by an eyewitness to the events.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nAfter many months of siege by the Babylonian armies, Jerusalem fell, and the final deportation of the people of Judah took place. Extrabiblical confirmation of the devastation caused by the Babylonian invasion may be found in the Lachish letters, which record the message from a soldier in the field who indicates that he is watching for the signals of Lachish but cannot see the signals of Azekah (cf. Jer 34:7).<\/p>\nThe time preceding Jerusalem’s fall was one of internal strife and political intrigue. Jeremiah counseled surrender, while the chauvinistic leaders of Jerusalem tried to encourage the Judahites to fight on against the Babylonian onslaught. The role of Jeremiah in those final events was a tenuous one. His life was threatened, and he suffered numerous imprisonments.<\/p>\nThe fall of Jerusalem meant more than ignominious defeat and exile. While these would have been hard to bear, the theological emergency brought about by the event would have been the most difficult thing for believing Jews to comprehend. The fall of the city in which God chose to reveal himself would have signaled the end of God’s promises. The OT clearly set forth a glorious future for Jerusalem. It was to be the center of the messianic kingdom in the end time (Mi 4). The destruction of the city would cause many to question the veracity of God’s Word. The laments in this book are not only for the suffering that accompanied the fall of the city but also for the deep spiritual questions posed by its demise.<\/p>\nStructure<\/p>\nEach poem has a distinct symmetrical pattern. The first (Lam 1) is an elaborate acrostic composed of three-line segments. There are 22 segments, each beginning with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, proceeding in order from the first to the last. The second poem (ch 2) is similar except for a transposition of two Hebrew letters. The third poem (ch 3) is also composed of three-line segments, but each line begins with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, rather than only the first line of each segment as in the first two poems. The same Hebrew letters are transposed. The fourth poem (ch 4) is an acrostic composed of two-line segments. The first line of each segment begins with the appropriate Hebrew letter. The last poem (ch 5) is not an acrostic, but it contains the same number of letters as the Hebrew alphabet.<\/p>\nThe reason for this complex structure is unknown. It has been suggested that it is a device to aid memorization. Another suggestion is that the Hebrews may have seen the alphabet as representing the concept of totality or completeness. This idea derives from the fact that the Hebrew alphabet represented numbers as well as letters. This concept of totality may be reflected in the reference to the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet in Revelation 1:8: “I am the Alpha and the Omega.” It is quite possible that the expression of lamentation in the structure of the Hebrew alphabet could have represented the full range of sorrow felt by the author as he pondered the fall of the city of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPurpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\nA major purpose of the book of Lamentations was to give expression to the deep grief that Jeremiah felt as a result of Jerusalem’s catastrophe. By writing the book, he expressed the grief of all the Jews of his time and gave them a vehicle that would give vent to their sorrow.<\/p>\nThe book does not contain only lamentation, however, for it expresses hope and comfort as well. Thus another of its purposes was to lift the hearts of the people and point them to God, the source of all comfort. One of the greatest expressions of hope in the book is found in 3:22-23: “The unfailing love of the Lord<\/span> never ends! By his mercies we have been kept from complete destruction. Great is his faithfulness; his mercies begin afresh each day” (nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nPerhaps the most important purpose of the book was to explain the theological reason for the catastrophe. The book places the reason for Jerusalem’s fall in clear focus and demonstrates what can be learned about God from this. The reason given for Jerusalem’s demise is the sin of the people (1:8-9, 14; 4:13). The fall of the city is a vivid illustration of God’s justice in not overlooking sin even in those who are his own (1:18). It demonstrates the fact that God may seem like an enemy to his people when they are disobedient (2:5-7). It shows that the catastrophe was not outside the purposes of God (v 17) and vividly describes the results that can come from willful disobedience. But God is envisioned as a God of mercy and faithfulness as well. Even though Jeremiah saw his beloved homeland crumbling about him, there remained one great element of stability: God’s loyalty to his promises. Jeremiah knew that this was not the end, for he trusted in the steadfast love of the Lord and learned to wait quietly for God to act in his time (3:22-27).<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\nThe first chapter is a lamentation over the captivity of the citizens of Jerusalem and the resultant desolation of the city.<\/p>\nThe author alludes to Deuteronomy 28:64-65 at the beginning of the first lamentation (Lam 1:3). In that passage Moses warned the people that their disobedience to God would result in their dispersion among the nations, with no resting place. Lamentations 1:3 says that this warning has been realized.<\/p>\nThe cause of Israel’s misfortune was their sin (1:8a). This is a remarkable example of the results of disobedience to God. The dire results of sin permeate this first lamentation in a series of pictures of deep pathos (vv 11-12, 16-17). In the midst of this suffering Israel confesses that God was in the right (v 18). The righteousness of God involves his acting in integrity. He punishes sin even in his own people.<\/p>\nThe first lamentation ends with a prayer in which the people cry out for God’s judgment on their enemies (1:21-22). Such imprecations are the OT believer’s way of expressing his longing for an end to evil as it was personified in the godless nations.<\/p>\nThe second lamentation also concerns the destruction of Jerusalem but places more emphasis on God’s judgment. The tone is more strident than in the previous lamentation. Throughout the passage words expressing anger appear (2:1-3, 6-7). It is as though the terrible wrath of God evident in the destruction of the city is still vivid in the mind of the writer.<\/p>\nThe author lays the blame for God’s anger squarely on the false prophets (2:14); but he does not exempt the people from guilt, as is clear from other passages (e.g., 1:5, 8). It was the false prophets of the time who failed to warn the people of the results of their sin (2:14). Because of this, destruction came, and the writer can give no comfort to the people (v 13).<\/p>\nThe second lamentation begins with a reference to God’s footstool (2:1), probably referring to the ark of the covenant (1 Chr 28:2). The ark was the focal point of God’s revelation of himself. This verse reflects the theological emergency of the time; the writer laments the fact that God has not remembered his “footstool.” Even the holy ark, which marked God’s presence with his people, has not prevented God from destroying Jerusalem.<\/p>\nThe same thought is expressed in verses 6-7, where the traditional aspects of Israelite worship, as well as the sanctuary, are seen as having been destroyed by God. This important truth demonstrates the viewpoint of the whole book, which sees God as the direct cause of the misfortune.<\/p>\nThe third lamentation is very personal. At its conclusion, sorrow and complaint pass into a prayer of assurance (3:61-66). In the first 18 verses of this chapter, the writer describes how the Lord has afflicted him. He refers to God in the third person, not addressing him as Lord until he speaks the words of verse 18. Only after he has poured out his grief in this fashion can he speak the name of the Lord. This poignant grief suddenly changes to an expression of joy. He can affirm the covenant faithfulness of the Lord, and in the midst of the deepening sorrow, he sees God’s mercies as new every morning (vv 22-24). The chapter closes with a sudden burst of assurance (vv 58-66), in which the writer affirms his belief that God will vindicate him before his enemies. Only after he meditates on the nature of God’s loving-kindness (vv 22-27) can he speak these words. The desperate isolation and separation from God expressed in verses 1-17 give way as he affirms God’s goodness. Assurance comes as he reflects on the nature and goodness of God.<\/p>\nThe fourth lamentation emphasizes the fact that the judgment was well deserved. The author describes the various classes of the population (4:1-16) and indicates how each has been affected by Jerusalem’s downfall. Verses 12-20 affirm that the judgment of God is a direct consequence of sin. This lamentation also becomes a joyous statement of hope (vv 21-22), as the writer affirms that God will punish Israel’s enemies. Israel’s sin will be forgiven, and the guilt of “the daughter of Edom” will be punished. The “daughter of Edom” undoubtedly stands for all the enemy nations. (Edom is used in Isaiah 63:1 in the same fashion.) This salvation of the nation of Judah will not take place until their guilt is atoned for. It occurs when God conquers the godless nations. This conquest of the nations is an event that takes place in the end time, according to numerous OT and NT passages. It represents the manifestation of God’s total sovereignty over his creation.<\/p>\nThe last chapter is a poignant prayer in which the author describes their sufferings and asks God to restore the fortunes of the people. It begins with a request to God, asking him to consider all that has befallen the people (5:1-18). Part of the ignominy of the captive Jews is that “slaves” rule over them (v 8). This is an apparent reference to the Babylonian captors, who themselves were subject to despotic rule for many decades. The author’s perspective changes in verse 19, where he affirms that the Lord reigns forever. While Jerusalem, the earthly dwelling place of the Lord, has come to an end, the Lord’s throne endures forever. Because his throne is everlasting, the author asks, “Why do you continue to forget us? Why have you forsaken us for so long? Restore us, O Lord<\/span>, and bring us back to you again! Give us back the joys we once had! Or have you utterly rejected us? Are you angry with us still?” (5:20-22, nlt<\/span>). The question is based on the belief that because God’s reign is eternal, he cannot utterly forsake his people. He will restore his kingdom.<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations is neglected by many Christians. It deserves to be studied more. Its powerful statement concerning the blessings that may come from tragedy is a relevant message in any age, and it is one of the most powerful illustrations of the results of sin to be found in the OT. Its theology is clear and precise, painting a brilliant picture of God’s faithfulness against the dark background of the collapse of the city of Zion.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jeremiah (Person) #1; Jeremiah, Book of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LAMENTATIONS, Book of<\/h3>\nBook consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Structure<\/p>\n• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint.<\/p>\nThe Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different literary styles of the books of Jeremiah and Lamentations and the alleged conflicting viewpoints in the two books.<\/p>\nThe literary styles of these books are strikingly different. The prophecies of the book of Jeremiah are flowing pronouncements that create an impression of spontaneity and are quite unlike the contrived literary structures of Lamentations. But it is somewhat arbitrary to assert that Jeremiah could not have written the book of Lamentations on the basis of style. The choice of the acrostic form would naturally limit the scope of the writer’s freedom and profoundly affect his style. It is clear from 2 Chronicles 35:25 that Jeremiah composed the same type of material as that found in Lamentations. Since the sermons of the book of Jeremiah were intended for public proclamation, they would naturally have a spontaneity that the book of Lamentations would not possess. Certainly, the sensitive nature reflected in Jeremiah’s prophecies characterized the author of Lamentations as well.<\/p>\nTypical of the alleged differences of viewpoint used to deny Jeremaic authorship is the role of the nations in the destruction of Jerusalem. In his prophecy Jeremiah saw the invading Babylonians as a tool of God’s punishment, and appealed to the Jews to surrender to the invaders (Jer 28:3). The book of Lamentations seems to make God the direct author of the punishment and sees the enemy nations only as onlookers who will also experience God’s wrath (Lam 1:21; 3:59-66). It must be noted, however, that the enemies referred to in Lamentations are not only the Babylonians but all of the hostile powers that threatened Judah and gloated over its destruction (1:21). The assurance that God will judge these enemies is not a denial of the message of the book of Jeremiah, for it would be artificial for Jeremiah to suppose that the Babylonians, even though they were an instrument of God’s anger, were exempt from punishment. Such a concept is at variance with Jeremiah 12:14-17.<\/p>\nA number of phrases used in the book of Jeremiah are found in Lamentations as well. The expressions “terrors on every side” (Lam 2:22; cf. Jer 6:25; 20:10) and “wormwood” (Lam 3:15, 19; cf. Jer 9:15; 23:15) are examples of these. This fact lends support to the concept of Jeremaic authorship of the book.<\/p>\nOther reasons cited for the denial of Jeremaic authorship are the absence of the name of Jeremiah in Lamentations and the position of the book in the Writings, not the Prophets, in the Hebrew Bible. The absence of Jeremiah’s name is not a cogent argument against his authorship; there are a significant number of OT books whose authors are not cited. Since the book of Lamentations is a formal dirge, and is thus unlike the book of Jeremiah with its numerous autobiographical references, one would not expect personal allusions by the author.<\/p>\nThe position of Lamentations in the third division of the Hebrew Bible is sometimes appealed to by those who question Jeremaic authorship. Since Jeremiah is in the second division, it is argued that Lamentations was written too late for it to have been authored by Jeremiah. It should be noted, however, that there is a lack of unity in the early lists of the canonical books in the third division. It is difficult to assign a late date to a book of the third division only because of its inclusion in that division. The early church father Jerome indicated that Lamentations was once on the same scroll with Jeremiah.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nIf the book of Lamentations was written by Jeremiah, the time of writing would be shortly after the fall of Jerusalem (586 BC<\/span>). It is extremely difficult to imagine an author living in later times writing such a poignant lament over Jerusalem’s fall. The vivid descriptions of the suffering endured by the inhabitants of Jerusalem support the position that the book was written by an eyewitness to the events.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nAfter many months of siege by the Babylonian armies, Jerusalem fell, and the final deportation of the people of Judah took place. Extrabiblical confirmation of the devastation caused by the Babylonian invasion may be found in the Lachish letters, which record the message from a soldier in the field who indicates that he is watching for the signals of Lachish but cannot see the signals of Azekah (cf. Jer 34:7).<\/p>\nThe time preceding Jerusalem’s fall was one of internal strife and political intrigue. Jeremiah counseled surrender, while the chauvinistic leaders of Jerusalem tried to encourage the Judahites to fight on against the Babylonian onslaught. The role of Jeremiah in those final events was a tenuous one. His life was threatened, and he suffered numerous imprisonments.<\/p>\nThe fall of Jerusalem meant more than ignominious defeat and exile. While these would have been hard to bear, the theological emergency brought about by the event would have been the most difficult thing for believing Jews to comprehend. The fall of the city in which God chose to reveal himself would have signaled the end of God’s promises. The OT clearly set forth a glorious future for Jerusalem. It was to be the center of the messianic kingdom in the end time (Mi 4). The destruction of the city would cause many to question the veracity of God’s Word. The laments in this book are not only for the suffering that accompanied the fall of the city but also for the deep spiritual questions posed by its demise.<\/p>\nStructure<\/p>\nEach poem has a distinct symmetrical pattern. The first (Lam 1) is an elaborate acrostic composed of three-line segments. There are 22 segments, each beginning with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, proceeding in order from the first to the last. The second poem (ch 2) is similar except for a transposition of two Hebrew letters. The third poem (ch 3) is also composed of three-line segments, but each line begins with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, rather than only the first line of each segment as in the first two poems. The same Hebrew letters are transposed. The fourth poem (ch 4) is an acrostic composed of two-line segments. The first line of each segment begins with the appropriate Hebrew letter. The last poem (ch 5) is not an acrostic, but it contains the same number of letters as the Hebrew alphabet.<\/p>\nThe reason for this complex structure is unknown. It has been suggested that it is a device to aid memorization. Another suggestion is that the Hebrews may have seen the alphabet as representing the concept of totality or completeness. This idea derives from the fact that the Hebrew alphabet represented numbers as well as letters. This concept of totality may be reflected in the reference to the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet in Revelation 1:8: “I am the Alpha and the Omega.” It is quite possible that the expression of lamentation in the structure of the Hebrew alphabet could have represented the full range of sorrow felt by the author as he pondered the fall of the city of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPurpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\nA major purpose of the book of Lamentations was to give expression to the deep grief that Jeremiah felt as a result of Jerusalem’s catastrophe. By writing the book, he expressed the grief of all the Jews of his time and gave them a vehicle that would give vent to their sorrow.<\/p>\nThe book does not contain only lamentation, however, for it expresses hope and comfort as well. Thus another of its purposes was to lift the hearts of the people and point them to God, the source of all comfort. One of the greatest expressions of hope in the book is found in 3:22-23: “The unfailing love of the Lord<\/span> never ends! By his mercies we have been kept from complete destruction. Great is his faithfulness; his mercies begin afresh each day” (nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nPerhaps the most important purpose of the book was to explain the theological reason for the catastrophe. The book places the reason for Jerusalem’s fall in clear focus and demonstrates what can be learned about God from this. The reason given for Jerusalem’s demise is the sin of the people (1:8-9, 14; 4:13). The fall of the city is a vivid illustration of God’s justice in not overlooking sin even in those who are his own (1:18). It demonstrates the fact that God may seem like an enemy to his people when they are disobedient (2:5-7). It shows that the catastrophe was not outside the purposes of God (v 17) and vividly describes the results that can come from willful disobedience. But God is envisioned as a God of mercy and faithfulness as well. Even though Jeremiah saw his beloved homeland crumbling about him, there remained one great element of stability: God’s loyalty to his promises. Jeremiah knew that this was not the end, for he trusted in the steadfast love of the Lord and learned to wait quietly for God to act in his time (3:22-27).<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\nThe first chapter is a lamentation over the captivity of the citizens of Jerusalem and the resultant desolation of the city.<\/p>\nThe author alludes to Deuteronomy 28:64-65 at the beginning of the first lamentation (Lam 1:3). In that passage Moses warned the people that their disobedience to God would result in their dispersion among the nations, with no resting place. Lamentations 1:3 says that this warning has been realized.<\/p>\nThe cause of Israel’s misfortune was their sin (1:8a). This is a remarkable example of the results of disobedience to God. The dire results of sin permeate this first lamentation in a series of pictures of deep pathos (vv 11-12, 16-17). In the midst of this suffering Israel confesses that God was in the right (v 18). The righteousness of God involves his acting in integrity. He punishes sin even in his own people.<\/p>\nThe first lamentation ends with a prayer in which the people cry out for God’s judgment on their enemies (1:21-22). Such imprecations are the OT believer’s way of expressing his longing for an end to evil as it was personified in the godless nations.<\/p>\nThe second lamentation also concerns the destruction of Jerusalem but places more emphasis on God’s judgment. The tone is more strident than in the previous lamentation. Throughout the passage words expressing anger appear (2:1-3, 6-7). It is as though the terrible wrath of God evident in the destruction of the city is still vivid in the mind of the writer.<\/p>\nThe author lays the blame for God’s anger squarely on the false prophets (2:14); but he does not exempt the people from guilt, as is clear from other passages (e.g., 1:5, 8). It was the false prophets of the time who failed to warn the people of the results of their sin (2:14). Because of this, destruction came, and the writer can give no comfort to the people (v 13).<\/p>\nThe second lamentation begins with a reference to God’s footstool (2:1), probably referring to the ark of the covenant (1 Chr 28:2). The ark was the focal point of God’s revelation of himself. This verse reflects the theological emergency of the time; the writer laments the fact that God has not remembered his “footstool.” Even the holy ark, which marked God’s presence with his people, has not prevented God from destroying Jerusalem.<\/p>\nThe same thought is expressed in verses 6-7, where the traditional aspects of Israelite worship, as well as the sanctuary, are seen as having been destroyed by God. This important truth demonstrates the viewpoint of the whole book, which sees God as the direct cause of the misfortune.<\/p>\nThe third lamentation is very personal. At its conclusion, sorrow and complaint pass into a prayer of assurance (3:61-66). In the first 18 verses of this chapter, the writer describes how the Lord has afflicted him. He refers to God in the third person, not addressing him as Lord until he speaks the words of verse 18. Only after he has poured out his grief in this fashion can he speak the name of the Lord. This poignant grief suddenly changes to an expression of joy. He can affirm the covenant faithfulness of the Lord, and in the midst of the deepening sorrow, he sees God’s mercies as new every morning (vv 22-24). The chapter closes with a sudden burst of assurance (vv 58-66), in which the writer affirms his belief that God will vindicate him before his enemies. Only after he meditates on the nature of God’s loving-kindness (vv 22-27) can he speak these words. The desperate isolation and separation from God expressed in verses 1-17 give way as he affirms God’s goodness. Assurance comes as he reflects on the nature and goodness of God.<\/p>\nThe fourth lamentation emphasizes the fact that the judgment was well deserved. The author describes the various classes of the population (4:1-16) and indicates how each has been affected by Jerusalem’s downfall. Verses 12-20 affirm that the judgment of God is a direct consequence of sin. This lamentation also becomes a joyous statement of hope (vv 21-22), as the writer affirms that God will punish Israel’s enemies. Israel’s sin will be forgiven, and the guilt of “the daughter of Edom” will be punished. The “daughter of Edom” undoubtedly stands for all the enemy nations. (Edom is used in Isaiah 63:1 in the same fashion.) This salvation of the nation of Judah will not take place until their guilt is atoned for. It occurs when God conquers the godless nations. This conquest of the nations is an event that takes place in the end time, according to numerous OT and NT passages. It represents the manifestation of God’s total sovereignty over his creation.<\/p>\nThe last chapter is a poignant prayer in which the author describes their sufferings and asks God to restore the fortunes of the people. It begins with a request to God, asking him to consider all that has befallen the people (5:1-18). Part of the ignominy of the captive Jews is that “slaves” rule over them (v 8). This is an apparent reference to the Babylonian captors, who themselves were subject to despotic rule for many decades. The author’s perspective changes in verse 19, where he affirms that the Lord reigns forever. While Jerusalem, the earthly dwelling place of the Lord, has come to an end, the Lord’s throne endures forever. Because his throne is everlasting, the author asks, “Why do you continue to forget us? Why have you forsaken us for so long? Restore us, O Lord<\/span>, and bring us back to you again! Give us back the joys we once had! Or have you utterly rejected us? Are you angry with us still?” (5:20-22, nlt<\/span>). The question is based on the belief that because God’s reign is eternal, he cannot utterly forsake his people. He will restore his kingdom.<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations is neglected by many Christians. It deserves to be studied more. Its powerful statement concerning the blessings that may come from tragedy is a relevant message in any age, and it is one of the most powerful illustrations of the results of sin to be found in the OT. Its theology is clear and precise, painting a brilliant picture of God’s faithfulness against the dark background of the collapse of the city of Zion.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jeremiah (Person) #1; Jeremiah, Book of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LAMENTATIONS, Book of Book consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem. Preview • Author • Date • Background • Structure • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author The book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint. The Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different ...","summary_en":"LAMENTATIONS, Book of Book consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem. Preview • Author • Date • Background • Structure • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author The book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint. The Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different ...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":28532,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Oracle","title_en":"Oracle","content_ro":"<h3>ORACLE<\/h3>\nDivine revelation communicated through God’s spokesperson (prophet, priest, or king), usually pronouncing blessing, instruction, or judgment. Contrary to Balak’s request for Balaam to curse Israel, Balaam spoke an oracle of blessing (Nm 24:3-16). God instructed Moses through “living oracles” (Acts 7:38), and entrusted them with the Jewish people (Rom 3:2). The book of Proverbs records two oracles of wisdom: one given by Agur, Jakeh’s son (Prv 30:1), and the other by King Lemuel (31:1). Oracles of judgment were uttered against kings Joram of Israel (2 Kgs 9:25) and Joash of Judah (2 Chr 24:27). The prophets often delivered them against evil nations: Isaiah delivered oracles against Babylon (Is 13:1; 21:1), Damascus (17:1), Egypt (19:1), Jerusalem (22:1), Moab (15:1), Philistia (14:28), and Tyre (23:1). Nahum delivered one against Nineveh (Na 1:1); Habakkuk, one against Judah (Hb 1:1); and Malachi, one against Israel (Mal 1:1). Sometimes false and misleading oracles were given by false prophets (Lam 2:14).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Prophecy.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ORACLE<\/h3>\nDivine revelation communicated through God’s spokesperson (prophet, priest, or king), usually pronouncing blessing, instruction, or judgment. Contrary to Balak’s request for Balaam to curse Israel, Balaam spoke an oracle of blessing (Nm 24:3-16). God instructed Moses through “living oracles” (Acts 7:38), and entrusted them with the Jewish people (Rom 3:2). The book of Proverbs records two oracles of wisdom: one given by Agur, Jakeh’s son (Prv 30:1), and the other by King Lemuel (31:1). Oracles of judgment were uttered against kings Joram of Israel (2 Kgs 9:25) and Joash of Judah (2 Chr 24:27). The prophets often delivered them against evil nations: Isaiah delivered oracles against Babylon (Is 13:1; 21:1), Damascus (17:1), Egypt (19:1), Jerusalem (22:1), Moab (15:1), Philistia (14:28), and Tyre (23:1). Nahum delivered one against Nineveh (Na 1:1); Habakkuk, one against Judah (Hb 1:1); and Malachi, one against Israel (Mal 1:1). Sometimes false and misleading oracles were given by false prophets (Lam 2:14).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Prophecy.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ORACLE Divine revelation communicated through God’s spokesperson (prophet, priest, or king), usually pronouncing blessing, instruction, or judgment. Contrary to Balak’s request for Balaam to curse Israel, Balaam spoke an oracle of blessing (Nm 24:3-16). God instructed Moses through “living oracles” (Acts 7:38), and entrusted them with the Jewish people (Rom 3:2). The book of Proverbs records two oracles of wisdom: one given by Agur, Jakeh’s son (Prv 30:1), and the other by King Lemuel (31:1)....","summary_en":"ORACLE Divine revelation communicated through God’s spokesperson (prophet, priest, or king), usually pronouncing blessing, instruction, or judgment. Contrary to Balak’s request for Balaam to curse Israel, Balaam spoke an oracle of blessing (Nm 24:3-16). God instructed Moses through “living oracles” (Acts 7:38), and entrusted them with the Jewish people (Rom 3:2). The book of Proverbs records two oracles of wisdom: one given by Agur, Jakeh’s son (Prv 30:1), and the other by King Lemuel (31:1)....","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"15":[{"id":4051,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Beauty","title_en":"Beauty","content_ro":"<h3>BEAUTY<\/h3>\nHarmonious combination of qualities pleasant to see. Archaeological materials indicate that the ancient Hebrews were concerned more with usefulness than with beauty. Hebrew pottery, for example, was generally more bulky than Canaanite pottery. Yet such artifacts do not mean that the Hebrews had no aesthetic appreciation.<\/p>\nThe OT speaks of God’s creation as beautiful (Gn 2:9; Jb 26:13; Ps 19:1-6; Sg 6:10). The land of Canaan is a “pleasant land” (Jer 3:19). Jerusalem is called “beautiful” (Is 52:1; Lam 2:15), as is one of its temple gates (Acts 3:2, 10). The Hebrews admired the wild grandeur of the Lebanon mountain range (Ps 104:16; Is 60:13). The Canaanite city of Tirzah (“beauty”), King Baasha’s capital in the northern kingdom (1 Kgs 15:33), was so named for its attractive location.<\/p>\nAlthough the Hebrews did not exalt the human form as did the ancient Greeks, the OT does idealize physical attractiveness. A bride’s beauty is described eloquently by her bridegroom in love lyrics in Song of Songs 4:1-15; 6:4. Such praise of the bride may have been a traditional feature of Israelite weddings. Several women prominent in the OT are described as beautiful (Gn 29:17; 2 Sm 11:2; Est 2:7). But sensual beauty was secondary to industry, resourcefulness, and traditional piety in a woman (Prv 31:10-31). A number of men also were known for their physical attractiveness—for example, David (1 Sm 16:12) and Absalom (2 Sm 14:25). Cosmetics, jewelry, and other accessories were used as female beauty aids in OT times. The prophet Isaiah listed such items (Is 3:18-24), and Ezekiel mentioned cosmetic practices current in his day (Ez 16:10-13). Israelite worship was beautiful, too, with the high priest’s elaborate ceremonial robes designed for glory and beauty (Ex 28:2, 40).<\/p>\nThe concept of beauty is applied also to God in the OT. The Lord’s favor is called his “beauty” (Ps 90:17). Isaiah recorded God’s promise to give his people “beauty for ashes” (Is 61:3). The psalmist expressed a desire to spend time in the temple enjoying the Lord’s beauty, his “incomparable perfections” (Ps 27:4). Isaiah described God as a “diadem of beauty” to the faithful Israelite remnant (Is 28:5), and the Messiah was spoken of as a beautiful king (33:17). Thus in the OT the concept of beauty had a deeper meaning than simply physical attractiveness. It became a theological concept affirming God’s essential glory.<\/p>\nThe NT urges Christ’s followers to live lives that will “adorn” the teaching of the Savior, making it attractive to nonbelievers (Ti 2:10). Those who preach the gospel of Christ are spoken of as beautiful (Rom 10:15). The apostles Paul and Peter warned women against being satisfied with outward beauty (1 Tm 2:9-10), reminding them that beautiful character is the true adornment of godliness (1 Pt 3:3-5). The beauty of the believer’s final home in heaven is reflected in the description of the “new Jerusalem” as a bride and in the symbolism of treasured precious stones of antiquity (see Rv 21–22).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BEAUTY<\/h3>\nHarmonious combination of qualities pleasant to see. Archaeological materials indicate that the ancient Hebrews were concerned more with usefulness than with beauty. Hebrew pottery, for example, was generally more bulky than Canaanite pottery. Yet such artifacts do not mean that the Hebrews had no aesthetic appreciation.<\/p>\nThe OT speaks of God’s creation as beautiful (Gn 2:9; Jb 26:13; Ps 19:1-6; Sg 6:10). The land of Canaan is a “pleasant land” (Jer 3:19). Jerusalem is called “beautiful” (Is 52:1; Lam 2:15), as is one of its temple gates (Acts 3:2, 10). The Hebrews admired the wild grandeur of the Lebanon mountain range (Ps 104:16; Is 60:13). The Canaanite city of Tirzah (“beauty”), King Baasha’s capital in the northern kingdom (1 Kgs 15:33), was so named for its attractive location.<\/p>\nAlthough the Hebrews did not exalt the human form as did the ancient Greeks, the OT does idealize physical attractiveness. A bride’s beauty is described eloquently by her bridegroom in love lyrics in Song of Songs 4:1-15; 6:4. Such praise of the bride may have been a traditional feature of Israelite weddings. Several women prominent in the OT are described as beautiful (Gn 29:17; 2 Sm 11:2; Est 2:7). But sensual beauty was secondary to industry, resourcefulness, and traditional piety in a woman (Prv 31:10-31). A number of men also were known for their physical attractiveness—for example, David (1 Sm 16:12) and Absalom (2 Sm 14:25). Cosmetics, jewelry, and other accessories were used as female beauty aids in OT times. The prophet Isaiah listed such items (Is 3:18-24), and Ezekiel mentioned cosmetic practices current in his day (Ez 16:10-13). Israelite worship was beautiful, too, with the high priest’s elaborate ceremonial robes designed for glory and beauty (Ex 28:2, 40).<\/p>\nThe concept of beauty is applied also to God in the OT. The Lord’s favor is called his “beauty” (Ps 90:17). Isaiah recorded God’s promise to give his people “beauty for ashes” (Is 61:3). The psalmist expressed a desire to spend time in the temple enjoying the Lord’s beauty, his “incomparable perfections” (Ps 27:4). Isaiah described God as a “diadem of beauty” to the faithful Israelite remnant (Is 28:5), and the Messiah was spoken of as a beautiful king (33:17). Thus in the OT the concept of beauty had a deeper meaning than simply physical attractiveness. It became a theological concept affirming God’s essential glory.<\/p>\nThe NT urges Christ’s followers to live lives that will “adorn” the teaching of the Savior, making it attractive to nonbelievers (Ti 2:10). Those who preach the gospel of Christ are spoken of as beautiful (Rom 10:15). The apostles Paul and Peter warned women against being satisfied with outward beauty (1 Tm 2:9-10), reminding them that beautiful character is the true adornment of godliness (1 Pt 3:3-5). The beauty of the believer’s final home in heaven is reflected in the description of the “new Jerusalem” as a bride and in the symbolism of treasured precious stones of antiquity (see Rv 21–22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"BEAUTY Harmonious combination of qualities pleasant to see. Archaeological materials indicate that the ancient Hebrews were concerned more with usefulness than with beauty. Hebrew pottery, for example, was generally more bulky than Canaanite pottery. Yet such artifacts do not mean that the Hebrews had no aesthetic appreciation. The OT speaks of God’s creation as beautiful (Gn 2:9; Jb 26:13; Ps 19:1-6; Sg 6:10). The land of Canaan is a “pleasant land” (Jer 3:19). Jerusalem is called “beautiful...","summary_en":"BEAUTY Harmonious combination of qualities pleasant to see. Archaeological materials indicate that the ancient Hebrews were concerned more with usefulness than with beauty. Hebrew pottery, for example, was generally more bulky than Canaanite pottery. Yet such artifacts do not mean that the Hebrews had no aesthetic appreciation. The OT speaks of God’s creation as beautiful (Gn 2:9; Jb 26:13; Ps 19:1-6; Sg 6:10). The land of Canaan is a “pleasant land” (Jer 3:19). Jerusalem is called “beautiful...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"16":[{"id":52883,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:16","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:16","content_ro":"2:16<\/strong> Their enemies<\/em> were glad that Jerusalem was defeated.<\/p>","content_en":"2:16<\/strong> Their enemies<\/em> were glad that Jerusalem was defeated.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:16 Their enemies were glad that Jerusalem was defeated.","summary_en":"2:16 Their enemies were glad that Jerusalem was defeated.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80509,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:16","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:16","content_ro":"2:16<\/strong> Their enemies<\/em> were glad that Jerusalem was defeated.<\/p>","content_en":"2:16<\/strong> Their enemies<\/em> were glad that Jerusalem was defeated.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:16 Their enemies were glad that Jerusalem was defeated.","summary_en":"2:16 Their enemies were glad that Jerusalem was defeated.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108135,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:16","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:16","content_ro":"2:16<\/strong> Their enemies<\/em> were glad that Jerusalem was defeated.<\/p>","content_en":"2:16<\/strong> Their enemies<\/em> were glad that Jerusalem was defeated.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:16 Their enemies were glad that Jerusalem was defeated.","summary_en":"2:16 Their enemies were glad that Jerusalem was defeated.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135761,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:16","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:16","content_ro":"2:16<\/strong> Their enemies<\/em> were glad that Jerusalem was defeated.<\/p>","content_en":"2:16<\/strong> Their enemies<\/em> were glad that Jerusalem was defeated.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:16 Their enemies were glad that Jerusalem was defeated.","summary_en":"2:16 Their enemies were glad that Jerusalem was defeated.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"17":[{"id":22458,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Lamentations","title_en":"Book of Lamentations","content_ro":"<h3>LAMENTATIONS, Book of<\/h3>\nBook consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Structure<\/p>\n• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint.<\/p>\nThe Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different literary styles of the books of Jeremiah and Lamentations and the alleged conflicting viewpoints in the two books.<\/p>\nThe literary styles of these books are strikingly different. The prophecies of the book of Jeremiah are flowing pronouncements that create an impression of spontaneity and are quite unlike the contrived literary structures of Lamentations. But it is somewhat arbitrary to assert that Jeremiah could not have written the book of Lamentations on the basis of style. The choice of the acrostic form would naturally limit the scope of the writer’s freedom and profoundly affect his style. It is clear from 2 Chronicles 35:25 that Jeremiah composed the same type of material as that found in Lamentations. Since the sermons of the book of Jeremiah were intended for public proclamation, they would naturally have a spontaneity that the book of Lamentations would not possess. Certainly, the sensitive nature reflected in Jeremiah’s prophecies characterized the author of Lamentations as well.<\/p>\nTypical of the alleged differences of viewpoint used to deny Jeremaic authorship is the role of the nations in the destruction of Jerusalem. In his prophecy Jeremiah saw the invading Babylonians as a tool of God’s punishment, and appealed to the Jews to surrender to the invaders (Jer 28:3). The book of Lamentations seems to make God the direct author of the punishment and sees the enemy nations only as onlookers who will also experience God’s wrath (Lam 1:21; 3:59-66). It must be noted, however, that the enemies referred to in Lamentations are not only the Babylonians but all of the hostile powers that threatened Judah and gloated over its destruction (1:21). The assurance that God will judge these enemies is not a denial of the message of the book of Jeremiah, for it would be artificial for Jeremiah to suppose that the Babylonians, even though they were an instrument of God’s anger, were exempt from punishment. Such a concept is at variance with Jeremiah 12:14-17.<\/p>\nA number of phrases used in the book of Jeremiah are found in Lamentations as well. The expressions “terrors on every side” (Lam 2:22; cf. Jer 6:25; 20:10) and “wormwood” (Lam 3:15, 19; cf. Jer 9:15; 23:15) are examples of these. This fact lends support to the concept of Jeremaic authorship of the book.<\/p>\nOther reasons cited for the denial of Jeremaic authorship are the absence of the name of Jeremiah in Lamentations and the position of the book in the Writings, not the Prophets, in the Hebrew Bible. The absence of Jeremiah’s name is not a cogent argument against his authorship; there are a significant number of OT books whose authors are not cited. Since the book of Lamentations is a formal dirge, and is thus unlike the book of Jeremiah with its numerous autobiographical references, one would not expect personal allusions by the author.<\/p>\nThe position of Lamentations in the third division of the Hebrew Bible is sometimes appealed to by those who question Jeremaic authorship. Since Jeremiah is in the second division, it is argued that Lamentations was written too late for it to have been authored by Jeremiah. It should be noted, however, that there is a lack of unity in the early lists of the canonical books in the third division. It is difficult to assign a late date to a book of the third division only because of its inclusion in that division. The early church father Jerome indicated that Lamentations was once on the same scroll with Jeremiah.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nIf the book of Lamentations was written by Jeremiah, the time of writing would be shortly after the fall of Jerusalem (586 BC<\/span>). It is extremely difficult to imagine an author living in later times writing such a poignant lament over Jerusalem’s fall. The vivid descriptions of the suffering endured by the inhabitants of Jerusalem support the position that the book was written by an eyewitness to the events.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nAfter many months of siege by the Babylonian armies, Jerusalem fell, and the final deportation of the people of Judah took place. Extrabiblical confirmation of the devastation caused by the Babylonian invasion may be found in the Lachish letters, which record the message from a soldier in the field who indicates that he is watching for the signals of Lachish but cannot see the signals of Azekah (cf. Jer 34:7).<\/p>\nThe time preceding Jerusalem’s fall was one of internal strife and political intrigue. Jeremiah counseled surrender, while the chauvinistic leaders of Jerusalem tried to encourage the Judahites to fight on against the Babylonian onslaught. The role of Jeremiah in those final events was a tenuous one. His life was threatened, and he suffered numerous imprisonments.<\/p>\nThe fall of Jerusalem meant more than ignominious defeat and exile. While these would have been hard to bear, the theological emergency brought about by the event would have been the most difficult thing for believing Jews to comprehend. The fall of the city in which God chose to reveal himself would have signaled the end of God’s promises. The OT clearly set forth a glorious future for Jerusalem. It was to be the center of the messianic kingdom in the end time (Mi 4). The destruction of the city would cause many to question the veracity of God’s Word. The laments in this book are not only for the suffering that accompanied the fall of the city but also for the deep spiritual questions posed by its demise.<\/p>\nStructure<\/p>\nEach poem has a distinct symmetrical pattern. The first (Lam 1) is an elaborate acrostic composed of three-line segments. There are 22 segments, each beginning with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, proceeding in order from the first to the last. The second poem (ch 2) is similar except for a transposition of two Hebrew letters. The third poem (ch 3) is also composed of three-line segments, but each line begins with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, rather than only the first line of each segment as in the first two poems. The same Hebrew letters are transposed. The fourth poem (ch 4) is an acrostic composed of two-line segments. The first line of each segment begins with the appropriate Hebrew letter. The last poem (ch 5) is not an acrostic, but it contains the same number of letters as the Hebrew alphabet.<\/p>\nThe reason for this complex structure is unknown. It has been suggested that it is a device to aid memorization. Another suggestion is that the Hebrews may have seen the alphabet as representing the concept of totality or completeness. This idea derives from the fact that the Hebrew alphabet represented numbers as well as letters. This concept of totality may be reflected in the reference to the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet in Revelation 1:8: “I am the Alpha and the Omega.” It is quite possible that the expression of lamentation in the structure of the Hebrew alphabet could have represented the full range of sorrow felt by the author as he pondered the fall of the city of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPurpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\nA major purpose of the book of Lamentations was to give expression to the deep grief that Jeremiah felt as a result of Jerusalem’s catastrophe. By writing the book, he expressed the grief of all the Jews of his time and gave them a vehicle that would give vent to their sorrow.<\/p>\nThe book does not contain only lamentation, however, for it expresses hope and comfort as well. Thus another of its purposes was to lift the hearts of the people and point them to God, the source of all comfort. One of the greatest expressions of hope in the book is found in 3:22-23: “The unfailing love of the Lord<\/span> never ends! By his mercies we have been kept from complete destruction. Great is his faithfulness; his mercies begin afresh each day” (nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nPerhaps the most important purpose of the book was to explain the theological reason for the catastrophe. The book places the reason for Jerusalem’s fall in clear focus and demonstrates what can be learned about God from this. The reason given for Jerusalem’s demise is the sin of the people (1:8-9, 14; 4:13). The fall of the city is a vivid illustration of God’s justice in not overlooking sin even in those who are his own (1:18). It demonstrates the fact that God may seem like an enemy to his people when they are disobedient (2:5-7). It shows that the catastrophe was not outside the purposes of God (v 17) and vividly describes the results that can come from willful disobedience. But God is envisioned as a God of mercy and faithfulness as well. Even though Jeremiah saw his beloved homeland crumbling about him, there remained one great element of stability: God’s loyalty to his promises. Jeremiah knew that this was not the end, for he trusted in the steadfast love of the Lord and learned to wait quietly for God to act in his time (3:22-27).<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\nThe first chapter is a lamentation over the captivity of the citizens of Jerusalem and the resultant desolation of the city.<\/p>\nThe author alludes to Deuteronomy 28:64-65 at the beginning of the first lamentation (Lam 1:3). In that passage Moses warned the people that their disobedience to God would result in their dispersion among the nations, with no resting place. Lamentations 1:3 says that this warning has been realized.<\/p>\nThe cause of Israel’s misfortune was their sin (1:8a). This is a remarkable example of the results of disobedience to God. The dire results of sin permeate this first lamentation in a series of pictures of deep pathos (vv 11-12, 16-17). In the midst of this suffering Israel confesses that God was in the right (v 18). The righteousness of God involves his acting in integrity. He punishes sin even in his own people.<\/p>\nThe first lamentation ends with a prayer in which the people cry out for God’s judgment on their enemies (1:21-22). Such imprecations are the OT believer’s way of expressing his longing for an end to evil as it was personified in the godless nations.<\/p>\nThe second lamentation also concerns the destruction of Jerusalem but places more emphasis on God’s judgment. The tone is more strident than in the previous lamentation. Throughout the passage words expressing anger appear (2:1-3, 6-7). It is as though the terrible wrath of God evident in the destruction of the city is still vivid in the mind of the writer.<\/p>\nThe author lays the blame for God’s anger squarely on the false prophets (2:14); but he does not exempt the people from guilt, as is clear from other passages (e.g., 1:5, 8). It was the false prophets of the time who failed to warn the people of the results of their sin (2:14). Because of this, destruction came, and the writer can give no comfort to the people (v 13).<\/p>\nThe second lamentation begins with a reference to God’s footstool (2:1), probably referring to the ark of the covenant (1 Chr 28:2). The ark was the focal point of God’s revelation of himself. This verse reflects the theological emergency of the time; the writer laments the fact that God has not remembered his “footstool.” Even the holy ark, which marked God’s presence with his people, has not prevented God from destroying Jerusalem.<\/p>\nThe same thought is expressed in verses 6-7, where the traditional aspects of Israelite worship, as well as the sanctuary, are seen as having been destroyed by God. This important truth demonstrates the viewpoint of the whole book, which sees God as the direct cause of the misfortune.<\/p>\nThe third lamentation is very personal. At its conclusion, sorrow and complaint pass into a prayer of assurance (3:61-66). In the first 18 verses of this chapter, the writer describes how the Lord has afflicted him. He refers to God in the third person, not addressing him as Lord until he speaks the words of verse 18. Only after he has poured out his grief in this fashion can he speak the name of the Lord. This poignant grief suddenly changes to an expression of joy. He can affirm the covenant faithfulness of the Lord, and in the midst of the deepening sorrow, he sees God’s mercies as new every morning (vv 22-24). The chapter closes with a sudden burst of assurance (vv 58-66), in which the writer affirms his belief that God will vindicate him before his enemies. Only after he meditates on the nature of God’s loving-kindness (vv 22-27) can he speak these words. The desperate isolation and separation from God expressed in verses 1-17 give way as he affirms God’s goodness. Assurance comes as he reflects on the nature and goodness of God.<\/p>\nThe fourth lamentation emphasizes the fact that the judgment was well deserved. The author describes the various classes of the population (4:1-16) and indicates how each has been affected by Jerusalem’s downfall. Verses 12-20 affirm that the judgment of God is a direct consequence of sin. This lamentation also becomes a joyous statement of hope (vv 21-22), as the writer affirms that God will punish Israel’s enemies. Israel’s sin will be forgiven, and the guilt of “the daughter of Edom” will be punished. The “daughter of Edom” undoubtedly stands for all the enemy nations. (Edom is used in Isaiah 63:1 in the same fashion.) This salvation of the nation of Judah will not take place until their guilt is atoned for. It occurs when God conquers the godless nations. This conquest of the nations is an event that takes place in the end time, according to numerous OT and NT passages. It represents the manifestation of God’s total sovereignty over his creation.<\/p>\nThe last chapter is a poignant prayer in which the author describes their sufferings and asks God to restore the fortunes of the people. It begins with a request to God, asking him to consider all that has befallen the people (5:1-18). Part of the ignominy of the captive Jews is that “slaves” rule over them (v 8). This is an apparent reference to the Babylonian captors, who themselves were subject to despotic rule for many decades. The author’s perspective changes in verse 19, where he affirms that the Lord reigns forever. While Jerusalem, the earthly dwelling place of the Lord, has come to an end, the Lord’s throne endures forever. Because his throne is everlasting, the author asks, “Why do you continue to forget us? Why have you forsaken us for so long? Restore us, O Lord<\/span>, and bring us back to you again! Give us back the joys we once had! Or have you utterly rejected us? Are you angry with us still?” (5:20-22, nlt<\/span>). The question is based on the belief that because God’s reign is eternal, he cannot utterly forsake his people. He will restore his kingdom.<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations is neglected by many Christians. It deserves to be studied more. Its powerful statement concerning the blessings that may come from tragedy is a relevant message in any age, and it is one of the most powerful illustrations of the results of sin to be found in the OT. Its theology is clear and precise, painting a brilliant picture of God’s faithfulness against the dark background of the collapse of the city of Zion.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jeremiah (Person) #1; Jeremiah, Book of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LAMENTATIONS, Book of<\/h3>\nBook consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Structure<\/p>\n• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint.<\/p>\nThe Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different literary styles of the books of Jeremiah and Lamentations and the alleged conflicting viewpoints in the two books.<\/p>\nThe literary styles of these books are strikingly different. The prophecies of the book of Jeremiah are flowing pronouncements that create an impression of spontaneity and are quite unlike the contrived literary structures of Lamentations. But it is somewhat arbitrary to assert that Jeremiah could not have written the book of Lamentations on the basis of style. The choice of the acrostic form would naturally limit the scope of the writer’s freedom and profoundly affect his style. It is clear from 2 Chronicles 35:25 that Jeremiah composed the same type of material as that found in Lamentations. Since the sermons of the book of Jeremiah were intended for public proclamation, they would naturally have a spontaneity that the book of Lamentations would not possess. Certainly, the sensitive nature reflected in Jeremiah’s prophecies characterized the author of Lamentations as well.<\/p>\nTypical of the alleged differences of viewpoint used to deny Jeremaic authorship is the role of the nations in the destruction of Jerusalem. In his prophecy Jeremiah saw the invading Babylonians as a tool of God’s punishment, and appealed to the Jews to surrender to the invaders (Jer 28:3). The book of Lamentations seems to make God the direct author of the punishment and sees the enemy nations only as onlookers who will also experience God’s wrath (Lam 1:21; 3:59-66). It must be noted, however, that the enemies referred to in Lamentations are not only the Babylonians but all of the hostile powers that threatened Judah and gloated over its destruction (1:21). The assurance that God will judge these enemies is not a denial of the message of the book of Jeremiah, for it would be artificial for Jeremiah to suppose that the Babylonians, even though they were an instrument of God’s anger, were exempt from punishment. Such a concept is at variance with Jeremiah 12:14-17.<\/p>\nA number of phrases used in the book of Jeremiah are found in Lamentations as well. The expressions “terrors on every side” (Lam 2:22; cf. Jer 6:25; 20:10) and “wormwood” (Lam 3:15, 19; cf. Jer 9:15; 23:15) are examples of these. This fact lends support to the concept of Jeremaic authorship of the book.<\/p>\nOther reasons cited for the denial of Jeremaic authorship are the absence of the name of Jeremiah in Lamentations and the position of the book in the Writings, not the Prophets, in the Hebrew Bible. The absence of Jeremiah’s name is not a cogent argument against his authorship; there are a significant number of OT books whose authors are not cited. Since the book of Lamentations is a formal dirge, and is thus unlike the book of Jeremiah with its numerous autobiographical references, one would not expect personal allusions by the author.<\/p>\nThe position of Lamentations in the third division of the Hebrew Bible is sometimes appealed to by those who question Jeremaic authorship. Since Jeremiah is in the second division, it is argued that Lamentations was written too late for it to have been authored by Jeremiah. It should be noted, however, that there is a lack of unity in the early lists of the canonical books in the third division. It is difficult to assign a late date to a book of the third division only because of its inclusion in that division. The early church father Jerome indicated that Lamentations was once on the same scroll with Jeremiah.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nIf the book of Lamentations was written by Jeremiah, the time of writing would be shortly after the fall of Jerusalem (586 BC<\/span>). It is extremely difficult to imagine an author living in later times writing such a poignant lament over Jerusalem’s fall. The vivid descriptions of the suffering endured by the inhabitants of Jerusalem support the position that the book was written by an eyewitness to the events.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nAfter many months of siege by the Babylonian armies, Jerusalem fell, and the final deportation of the people of Judah took place. Extrabiblical confirmation of the devastation caused by the Babylonian invasion may be found in the Lachish letters, which record the message from a soldier in the field who indicates that he is watching for the signals of Lachish but cannot see the signals of Azekah (cf. Jer 34:7).<\/p>\nThe time preceding Jerusalem’s fall was one of internal strife and political intrigue. Jeremiah counseled surrender, while the chauvinistic leaders of Jerusalem tried to encourage the Judahites to fight on against the Babylonian onslaught. The role of Jeremiah in those final events was a tenuous one. His life was threatened, and he suffered numerous imprisonments.<\/p>\nThe fall of Jerusalem meant more than ignominious defeat and exile. While these would have been hard to bear, the theological emergency brought about by the event would have been the most difficult thing for believing Jews to comprehend. The fall of the city in which God chose to reveal himself would have signaled the end of God’s promises. The OT clearly set forth a glorious future for Jerusalem. It was to be the center of the messianic kingdom in the end time (Mi 4). The destruction of the city would cause many to question the veracity of God’s Word. The laments in this book are not only for the suffering that accompanied the fall of the city but also for the deep spiritual questions posed by its demise.<\/p>\nStructure<\/p>\nEach poem has a distinct symmetrical pattern. The first (Lam 1) is an elaborate acrostic composed of three-line segments. There are 22 segments, each beginning with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, proceeding in order from the first to the last. The second poem (ch 2) is similar except for a transposition of two Hebrew letters. The third poem (ch 3) is also composed of three-line segments, but each line begins with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, rather than only the first line of each segment as in the first two poems. The same Hebrew letters are transposed. The fourth poem (ch 4) is an acrostic composed of two-line segments. The first line of each segment begins with the appropriate Hebrew letter. The last poem (ch 5) is not an acrostic, but it contains the same number of letters as the Hebrew alphabet.<\/p>\nThe reason for this complex structure is unknown. It has been suggested that it is a device to aid memorization. Another suggestion is that the Hebrews may have seen the alphabet as representing the concept of totality or completeness. This idea derives from the fact that the Hebrew alphabet represented numbers as well as letters. This concept of totality may be reflected in the reference to the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet in Revelation 1:8: “I am the Alpha and the Omega.” It is quite possible that the expression of lamentation in the structure of the Hebrew alphabet could have represented the full range of sorrow felt by the author as he pondered the fall of the city of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPurpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\nA major purpose of the book of Lamentations was to give expression to the deep grief that Jeremiah felt as a result of Jerusalem’s catastrophe. By writing the book, he expressed the grief of all the Jews of his time and gave them a vehicle that would give vent to their sorrow.<\/p>\nThe book does not contain only lamentation, however, for it expresses hope and comfort as well. Thus another of its purposes was to lift the hearts of the people and point them to God, the source of all comfort. One of the greatest expressions of hope in the book is found in 3:22-23: “The unfailing love of the Lord<\/span> never ends! By his mercies we have been kept from complete destruction. Great is his faithfulness; his mercies begin afresh each day” (nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nPerhaps the most important purpose of the book was to explain the theological reason for the catastrophe. The book places the reason for Jerusalem’s fall in clear focus and demonstrates what can be learned about God from this. The reason given for Jerusalem’s demise is the sin of the people (1:8-9, 14; 4:13). The fall of the city is a vivid illustration of God’s justice in not overlooking sin even in those who are his own (1:18). It demonstrates the fact that God may seem like an enemy to his people when they are disobedient (2:5-7). It shows that the catastrophe was not outside the purposes of God (v 17) and vividly describes the results that can come from willful disobedience. But God is envisioned as a God of mercy and faithfulness as well. Even though Jeremiah saw his beloved homeland crumbling about him, there remained one great element of stability: God’s loyalty to his promises. Jeremiah knew that this was not the end, for he trusted in the steadfast love of the Lord and learned to wait quietly for God to act in his time (3:22-27).<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\nThe first chapter is a lamentation over the captivity of the citizens of Jerusalem and the resultant desolation of the city.<\/p>\nThe author alludes to Deuteronomy 28:64-65 at the beginning of the first lamentation (Lam 1:3). In that passage Moses warned the people that their disobedience to God would result in their dispersion among the nations, with no resting place. Lamentations 1:3 says that this warning has been realized.<\/p>\nThe cause of Israel’s misfortune was their sin (1:8a). This is a remarkable example of the results of disobedience to God. The dire results of sin permeate this first lamentation in a series of pictures of deep pathos (vv 11-12, 16-17). In the midst of this suffering Israel confesses that God was in the right (v 18). The righteousness of God involves his acting in integrity. He punishes sin even in his own people.<\/p>\nThe first lamentation ends with a prayer in which the people cry out for God’s judgment on their enemies (1:21-22). Such imprecations are the OT believer’s way of expressing his longing for an end to evil as it was personified in the godless nations.<\/p>\nThe second lamentation also concerns the destruction of Jerusalem but places more emphasis on God’s judgment. The tone is more strident than in the previous lamentation. Throughout the passage words expressing anger appear (2:1-3, 6-7). It is as though the terrible wrath of God evident in the destruction of the city is still vivid in the mind of the writer.<\/p>\nThe author lays the blame for God’s anger squarely on the false prophets (2:14); but he does not exempt the people from guilt, as is clear from other passages (e.g., 1:5, 8). It was the false prophets of the time who failed to warn the people of the results of their sin (2:14). Because of this, destruction came, and the writer can give no comfort to the people (v 13).<\/p>\nThe second lamentation begins with a reference to God’s footstool (2:1), probably referring to the ark of the covenant (1 Chr 28:2). The ark was the focal point of God’s revelation of himself. This verse reflects the theological emergency of the time; the writer laments the fact that God has not remembered his “footstool.” Even the holy ark, which marked God’s presence with his people, has not prevented God from destroying Jerusalem.<\/p>\nThe same thought is expressed in verses 6-7, where the traditional aspects of Israelite worship, as well as the sanctuary, are seen as having been destroyed by God. This important truth demonstrates the viewpoint of the whole book, which sees God as the direct cause of the misfortune.<\/p>\nThe third lamentation is very personal. At its conclusion, sorrow and complaint pass into a prayer of assurance (3:61-66). In the first 18 verses of this chapter, the writer describes how the Lord has afflicted him. He refers to God in the third person, not addressing him as Lord until he speaks the words of verse 18. Only after he has poured out his grief in this fashion can he speak the name of the Lord. This poignant grief suddenly changes to an expression of joy. He can affirm the covenant faithfulness of the Lord, and in the midst of the deepening sorrow, he sees God’s mercies as new every morning (vv 22-24). The chapter closes with a sudden burst of assurance (vv 58-66), in which the writer affirms his belief that God will vindicate him before his enemies. Only after he meditates on the nature of God’s loving-kindness (vv 22-27) can he speak these words. The desperate isolation and separation from God expressed in verses 1-17 give way as he affirms God’s goodness. Assurance comes as he reflects on the nature and goodness of God.<\/p>\nThe fourth lamentation emphasizes the fact that the judgment was well deserved. The author describes the various classes of the population (4:1-16) and indicates how each has been affected by Jerusalem’s downfall. Verses 12-20 affirm that the judgment of God is a direct consequence of sin. This lamentation also becomes a joyous statement of hope (vv 21-22), as the writer affirms that God will punish Israel’s enemies. Israel’s sin will be forgiven, and the guilt of “the daughter of Edom” will be punished. The “daughter of Edom” undoubtedly stands for all the enemy nations. (Edom is used in Isaiah 63:1 in the same fashion.) This salvation of the nation of Judah will not take place until their guilt is atoned for. It occurs when God conquers the godless nations. This conquest of the nations is an event that takes place in the end time, according to numerous OT and NT passages. It represents the manifestation of God’s total sovereignty over his creation.<\/p>\nThe last chapter is a poignant prayer in which the author describes their sufferings and asks God to restore the fortunes of the people. It begins with a request to God, asking him to consider all that has befallen the people (5:1-18). Part of the ignominy of the captive Jews is that “slaves” rule over them (v 8). This is an apparent reference to the Babylonian captors, who themselves were subject to despotic rule for many decades. The author’s perspective changes in verse 19, where he affirms that the Lord reigns forever. While Jerusalem, the earthly dwelling place of the Lord, has come to an end, the Lord’s throne endures forever. Because his throne is everlasting, the author asks, “Why do you continue to forget us? Why have you forsaken us for so long? Restore us, O Lord<\/span>, and bring us back to you again! Give us back the joys we once had! Or have you utterly rejected us? Are you angry with us still?” (5:20-22, nlt<\/span>). The question is based on the belief that because God’s reign is eternal, he cannot utterly forsake his people. He will restore his kingdom.<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations is neglected by many Christians. It deserves to be studied more. Its powerful statement concerning the blessings that may come from tragedy is a relevant message in any age, and it is one of the most powerful illustrations of the results of sin to be found in the OT. Its theology is clear and precise, painting a brilliant picture of God’s faithfulness against the dark background of the collapse of the city of Zion.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jeremiah (Person) #1; Jeremiah, Book of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LAMENTATIONS, Book of Book consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem. Preview • Author • Date • Background • Structure • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author The book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint. The Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different ...","summary_en":"LAMENTATIONS, Book of Book consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem. Preview • Author • Date • Background • Structure • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author The book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint. The Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different ...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52884,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:17","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:17","content_ro":"2:17<\/strong> promises . . . made long ago:<\/em> God’s promises of blessing were always contingent upon Israel’s obedience to the law (Deut 8). He had promised to destroy them if they disobeyed it (Lev 26).<\/p>","content_en":"2:17<\/strong> promises . . . made long ago:<\/em> God’s promises of blessing were always contingent upon Israel’s obedience to the law (Deut 8). He had promised to destroy them if they disobeyed it (Lev 26).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:17 promises . . . made long ago: God’s promises of blessing were always contingent upon Israel’s obedience to the law (Deut 8). He had promised to destroy them if they disobeyed it (Lev 26).","summary_en":"2:17 promises . . . made long ago: God’s promises of blessing were always contingent upon Israel’s obedience to the law (Deut 8). He had promised to destroy them if they disobeyed it (Lev 26).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80510,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:17","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:17","content_ro":"2:17<\/strong> promises . . . made long ago:<\/em> God’s promises of blessing were always contingent upon Israel’s obedience to the law (Deut 8). He had promised to destroy them if they disobeyed it (Lev 26).<\/p>","content_en":"2:17<\/strong> promises . . . made long ago:<\/em> God’s promises of blessing were always contingent upon Israel’s obedience to the law (Deut 8). He had promised to destroy them if they disobeyed it (Lev 26).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:17 promises . . . made long ago: God’s promises of blessing were always contingent upon Israel’s obedience to the law (Deut 8). He had promised to destroy them if they disobeyed it (Lev 26).","summary_en":"2:17 promises . . . made long ago: God’s promises of blessing were always contingent upon Israel’s obedience to the law (Deut 8). He had promised to destroy them if they disobeyed it (Lev 26).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108136,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:17","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:17","content_ro":"2:17<\/strong> promises . . . made long ago:<\/em> God’s promises of blessing were always contingent upon Israel’s obedience to the law (Deut 8). He had promised to destroy them if they disobeyed it (Lev 26).<\/p>","content_en":"2:17<\/strong> promises . . . made long ago:<\/em> God’s promises of blessing were always contingent upon Israel’s obedience to the law (Deut 8). He had promised to destroy them if they disobeyed it (Lev 26).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:17 promises . . . made long ago: God’s promises of blessing were always contingent upon Israel’s obedience to the law (Deut 8). He had promised to destroy them if they disobeyed it (Lev 26).","summary_en":"2:17 promises . . . made long ago: God’s promises of blessing were always contingent upon Israel’s obedience to the law (Deut 8). He had promised to destroy them if they disobeyed it (Lev 26).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135762,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:17","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:17","content_ro":"2:17<\/strong> promises . . . made long ago:<\/em> God’s promises of blessing were always contingent upon Israel’s obedience to the law (Deut 8). He had promised to destroy them if they disobeyed it (Lev 26).<\/p>","content_en":"2:17<\/strong> promises . . . made long ago:<\/em> God’s promises of blessing were always contingent upon Israel’s obedience to the law (Deut 8). He had promised to destroy them if they disobeyed it (Lev 26).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:17 promises . . . made long ago: God’s promises of blessing were always contingent upon Israel’s obedience to the law (Deut 8). He had promised to destroy them if they disobeyed it (Lev 26).","summary_en":"2:17 promises . . . made long ago: God’s promises of blessing were always contingent upon Israel’s obedience to the law (Deut 8). He had promised to destroy them if they disobeyed it (Lev 26).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"18":[{"id":52885,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:18","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:18","content_ro":"2:18-19<\/strong> Repentance and prayer<\/em> are the proper responses when facing the devastation of God’s judgment.<\/p>","content_en":"2:18-19<\/strong> Repentance and prayer<\/em> are the proper responses when facing the devastation of God’s judgment.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:18-19 Repentance and prayer are the proper responses when facing the devastation of God’s judgment.","summary_en":"2:18-19 Repentance and prayer are the proper responses when facing the devastation of God’s judgment.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80511,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:18","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:18","content_ro":"2:18-19<\/strong> Repentance and prayer<\/em> are the proper responses when facing the devastation of God’s judgment.<\/p>","content_en":"2:18-19<\/strong> Repentance and prayer<\/em> are the proper responses when facing the devastation of God’s judgment.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:18-19 Repentance and prayer are the proper responses when facing the devastation of God’s judgment.","summary_en":"2:18-19 Repentance and prayer are the proper responses when facing the devastation of God’s judgment.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108137,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:18","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:18","content_ro":"2:18-19<\/strong> Repentance and prayer<\/em> are the proper responses when facing the devastation of God’s judgment.<\/p>","content_en":"2:18-19<\/strong> Repentance and prayer<\/em> are the proper responses when facing the devastation of God’s judgment.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:18-19 Repentance and prayer are the proper responses when facing the devastation of God’s judgment.","summary_en":"2:18-19 Repentance and prayer are the proper responses when facing the devastation of God’s judgment.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135763,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:18","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:18","content_ro":"2:18-19<\/strong> Repentance and prayer<\/em> are the proper responses when facing the devastation of God’s judgment.<\/p>","content_en":"2:18-19<\/strong> Repentance and prayer<\/em> are the proper responses when facing the devastation of God’s judgment.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:18-19 Repentance and prayer are the proper responses when facing the devastation of God’s judgment.","summary_en":"2:18-19 Repentance and prayer are the proper responses when facing the devastation of God’s judgment.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"19":[{"id":38194,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Watch","title_en":"Watch","content_ro":"<h3>WATCH<\/h3>\nTime unit for the division of the night in both the OT and NT. During the OT period, the night was divided into three military watches. The beginning or evening watch ran from sunset to roughly 10:00 pm<\/span> (Lam 2:19); the middle or night watch was from 10:00 pm<\/span> to 2:00 am<\/span> (Jgs 7:19); and the morning watch was from approximately 2:00 am<\/span> until sunrise (Ex 14:24; 1 Sm 11:11). During the Roman period, the number of watches was increased from three to four. These were either described by number (first, second, etc.) or as evening, midnight, cock-crowing, and morning (Mt 14:25; Mk 6:48). The respective watches ended at roughly 9:00 pm<\/span>, midnight, 3:00 am<\/span>, and 6:00 am<\/span>. See<\/em> Night.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WATCH<\/h3>\nTime unit for the division of the night in both the OT and NT. During the OT period, the night was divided into three military watches. The beginning or evening watch ran from sunset to roughly 10:00 pm<\/span> (Lam 2:19); the middle or night watch was from 10:00 pm<\/span> to 2:00 am<\/span> (Jgs 7:19); and the morning watch was from approximately 2:00 am<\/span> until sunrise (Ex 14:24; 1 Sm 11:11). During the Roman period, the number of watches was increased from three to four. These were either described by number (first, second, etc.) or as evening, midnight, cock-crowing, and morning (Mt 14:25; Mk 6:48). The respective watches ended at roughly 9:00 pm<\/span>, midnight, 3:00 am<\/span>, and 6:00 am<\/span>. See<\/em> Night.<\/p>","summary_ro":"WATCH Time unit for the division of the night in both the OT and NT. During the OT period, the night was divided into three military watches. The beginning or evening watch ran from sunset to roughly 10:00 pm (Lam 2:19); the middle or night watch was from 10:00 pm to 2:00 am (Jgs 7:19); and the morning watch was from approximately 2:00 am until sunrise (Ex 14:24; 1 Sm 11:11). During the Roman period, the number of watches was increased from three to four. These were either described by number...","summary_en":"WATCH Time unit for the division of the night in both the OT and NT. During the OT period, the night was divided into three military watches. The beginning or evening watch ran from sunset to roughly 10:00 pm (Lam 2:19); the middle or night watch was from 10:00 pm to 2:00 am (Jgs 7:19); and the morning watch was from approximately 2:00 am until sunrise (Ex 14:24; 1 Sm 11:11). During the Roman period, the number of watches was increased from three to four. These were either described by number...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"20":[{"id":31355,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Priests and Levites","title_en":"Priests and Levites","content_ro":"<h3>PRIESTS AND LEVITES<\/h3>\nServants of God in the OT. There were three basic classes of religious personnel in ancient Israel: prophets, wise men, and priests and Levites. The classical prophets fulfilled a vocation but were not professionals; they were not paid for their task and functioned only in response to the particular call of God. The wise men were involved in government and education; some of their duties were secular, though they were also involved in moral education. The priests and Levites fulfilled a variety of essentially religious duties and were equivalent approximately to the clergy in modern times. They were professional men and were supported for their full-time religious work.<\/p>\nThe role of the priesthood may be seen most clearly in the context of Israelite religion as a whole. At the heart of religion was a relationship with God; to be an Israelite or a Jew was to know and maintain a continuous relationship with the living God. This relationship found its outward expression in a variety of contexts: the covenant, the temple, worship, and every facet of daily life. Thus religion, understood as a relationship, had two perspectives: the relationship with God and that with fellow human beings. It had both a personal and a communal dimension to it. The priests were the guardians and servants of this life of relationship, which was at the heart of OT religion; all their functions can best be understood within the context of a relationship between God and Israel. The prophets, too, were servants of the covenant relationship. While the priests functioned as the normal servants of religion, the prophets’ role was more that of calling a delinquent people back to the relationship with God in times of crisis.<\/p>\nIn the OT, there are frequent references to both priests and Levites; in a number of biblical texts, however, the distinction is not clear (see, e.g., Dt 18:1-8). From the scholarly point of view, the precise relationship between priests and Levites is a continuing problem that has not yet been fully resolved. In general terms, only the sons of Aaron were to assume the role of priests; all other Levites would have religious functions, though technically they would not be priests. While this distinction is clear in most biblical texts, in others there is lack of certainty and clarity. It is clear, however, that priests<\/em> (Levites descended from Aaron) and Levites<\/em> (other than the descendants of Aaron) all had professional religious duties to perform. The precise nature of those duties varied from time to time in the course of Israel’s history.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• The Origins of the Priesthood<\/p>\n• The High Priest<\/p>\n• The Priests<\/p>\n• The Levites<\/p>\n• The History of the Institution<\/p>\n• The Priesthood in New Testament Times<\/p>\nThe Origins of the Priesthood<\/p>\nThe priesthood in Israel began during the time of Moses and Aaron. The exodus from Egypt was not only the liberation of a group of Hebrew slaves but also the birth of the nation of Israel. The nation that was born in the exodus was given its constitution in the covenant of Sinai. The law of this covenant established the foundations and origins of Israelite priesthood. It provides insight into the three basic categories to be considered: the high priest, the priests, and the Levites.<\/p>\nThe High Priest<\/p>\nAny large and complex organization requires a head or leader, and this was true also of the Hebrew priesthood (though in its early days it was a small organization). The covenant was established through Moses, the prophet, through whom God gave the offer and substance of the covenant relationship; religious life within the covenant was to be the primary responsibility of Aaron, who was the first and chief priest.<\/p>\nIn the earliest days of Israel’s priesthood, it is probable that the high priest’s office was relatively informal; he was chief or leader among his fellow priests. The office was significant, nevertheless, and involved a special ritual of investiture, special clothing, and certain special responsibilities. While the high priest’s duties were similar in principle to those of other priests, he had certain exclusive responsibilities. To some extent, his duties were administrative, pertaining to all the priests of whom he had charge. But his position was more weighty than that of an administrator; just as all priests were the servants and guardians of the covenant relationship, so the high priest was chief servant and chief guardian. In his hands rested spiritual responsibility for the entire people of God, and therein lay the true honor and gravity of his position.<\/p>\n\nThis spiritual seniority of the high priest is seen most clearly in certain tasks he undertook within Israel’s life of worship. The clearest example may be seen in the annual observation of the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur). On that day alone, the high priest entered the Holy of Holies and, standing before the “mercy seat,” he sought God’s forgiveness and mercy for the whole nation of Israel (Lv 16:1-19). It is in that ceremony that Israel’s covenant faith is seen most clearly. Israel’s religion was one of relationship with a holy God, and human evil disrupted that relationship. While all worship and sacrifices throughout the year were concerned with the continuation of the relationship, the Day of Atonement was the most solemn day of the year, in which the attention of all the people focused upon the meaning of their existence. Life held meaning only if the relationship with God could be maintained; the high priest had the great honor and heavy burden of seeking God’s mercy for all Israel.<\/p>\nThe special clothing worn by the high priest was symbolic of the nature and importance of his office; although all the symbolism cannot be determined, some of it is made clear in the biblical text. There are three particular themes in the symbolism. The first is beauty. The sense of beauty emerges from the quality and design of all the items of clothing, together with the use of color and precious stones. But beauty is dominant in the breastplate; the Hebrew word translated approximately as “breastplate” has as its basic sense “beauty” or “excellence.” The clothing symbolizes beauty, while beauty describes the office; the two other themes associated with the symbolism bring out the excellence of the office.<\/p>\nThe second theme is the role of the priest as representative of Israel before God. This essential dimension of the office of the high priest is explicitly identified in the names of the tribes of Israel in the two onyx stones in the ephod, and in the 12 precious stones attached to the breastplate. The high priest entered God’s presence to seek deliverance from God’s judgment (the breastplate is identified with judgment; Ex 28:15) for his people and in order to keep the people constantly in God’s remembrance (v 12), as symbolized by the two onyx stones. The third theme is the role of high priest as the representative of God to Israel. This dimension of the office is seen in the Urim and Thummim, kept in the breastpiece, by means of which God made known his will to Israel. The high priest, Aaron, fully robed, was a splendid figure, and the splendor of his garments indicated the magnificence of the office with which he had been entrusted.<\/p>\nThe high priesthood was to be passed on within the family (for the high priest was expected to be a married man), although in later history the practice was not always adhered to. On Aaron’s death, the office passed to Eleazar, one of his four sons.<\/p>\nThe Priests<\/p>\nPriests took office not as the result of a particular vocation but by virtue of priestly descent. Thus the first priests were the four sons of Aaron: Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar. These four were ordained at the same time that Aaron was ordained high priest (Ex 28:1). Like him, they had special clothing, which was basically similar, though it lacked the distinctive garments of the high priest (the special ephod, the breastpiece, and the crown). The priesthood would be passed down through their sons.<\/p>\nThe sanctity of the priestly office was such that it was preserved from degeneration through specific laws. A man must be a descendant of Aaron to be a priest, but he was also required to meet a variety of other qualifications. He would not marry a divorcée or a former prostitute (Lv 21:7). If he was afflicted by certain kinds of disease or congenital defects, he was barred from priestly office (e.g., blindness, lameness, mutilation, being a hunchback or dwarf; vv 16-23). The principle involved was similar to that applying to animals used in sacrifice—only those free from defect or blemish were suitable for divine service.<\/p>\nIn the earliest days of the priesthood there is some information provided in the biblical text concerning the specific duties of the priests. Eleazar had overall responsibility for the tabernacle and its offerings (Nm 4:16); assisted Moses in a number of duties, such as numbering the people and dividing the land (26:1-2; 32:2); and later served as an adviser to Joshua. Ithamar was responsible for the construction of the tabernacle (Ex 38:21) and supervised the families of the Gershonites and Merarites (Nm 4:28-33). Nadab and Abihu, however, died soon after their ordination as a result of a sinful act in their priestly duties (Lv 10:1-7), which may have been related in part to drunkenness (vv 8-9).<\/p>\nPriestly duties, in general, fell into three areas (Dt 33:8-10). First, priests were responsible, in conjunction with the high priest, for declaring God’s will to the people. Second, they had responsibilities in religious education; they were to teach to Israel God’s ordinances and law (v 10). Third, they were to be the servants of the tabernacle, participating in Israel’s sacrifices and worship. There were a number of other duties that may have fallen to them, which they would have shared with the Levites in general.<\/p>\nThe priests, along with all other Levites, did not own any land, as did the other Israelite tribes. Their task was to be entirely in the direct service to God. The absence of land, however, meant that they could not support and feed themselves as could other men and women. Consequently, the law specified that they could be supported for their services by the people as a whole. They were to receive, from worshipers, portions of animals that were brought to the tabernacle, as well as corn, wine, oil, and wool.<\/p>\nThe Levites<\/p>\nThis term includes the priests, in a broad sense, for the sons of Aaron belonged to the tribe of Levi. For practical purposes, however, the Levites were those of the tribe other than the priests. The Levites also functioned in the service of the tabernacle, though they had a subordinate position. They, too, were professional men and were paid in money and in kind for their services. Though they did not inherit tribal territory of their own, there were a number of cities set aside for their use (Nm 35:1-8), and pasturelands were designated outside those cities for their livestock.<\/p>\nThe Levites were divided into three principal families, the descendants of Kohath, Gershon, and Merari (Nm 4). Each of these families had particular responsibilities with respect to the care and transport of the tabernacle. The sons of Kohath carried the tabernacle furniture (after it had been covered by the priests), the sons of Gershon cared for the coverings and screens, and the sons of Merari carried and erected the tabernacle’s frame. The priests, by contrast, were responsible for the transportation of the ark of the covenant. The role of each Levite, as servant of the tabernacle, was restricted; he undertook his professional duties between the ages of 25 and 50 (8:24-26).<\/p>\nAlthough many of the duties of the Levites were of a mundane nature, they also had a very significant religious role. The law required that all the firstborn, including firstborn sons, be given to God, recalling the slaying of the firstborn at the exodus from Egypt. The Levites’ role in religion was that of being accepted by God in the place of the firstborn sons of Israel (Nm 3:11-13); their cattle, too, were accepted in place of the Israelites’ firstborn cattle. In the census taken in the time of Moses, the firstborn Israelites exceeded the number of the Levites, and a five-shekel redemption fee had to be paid into the priestly coffers for each person in excess (vv 40-51). The representative and substitutionary nature of the Levites can be seen in Israelite religion. Like the priests, they played a part in the larger activity of mediation between God and Israel.<\/p>\nThe law of Deuteronomy specifies a number of duties that may have fallen upon both priests and Levites (though the texts are ambiguous). These duties included participation in the activity of the law courts as judges, perhaps with special reference to religious crimes (Dt 17:8-9), taking care of the Book of the Law (v 18), controlling the lives and health of lepers (24:8), and participating directly in the conduct of covenant renewal ceremonies (27:9).<\/p>\nThe History of the Institution<\/p>\nIn theory, the covenant law of Moses determined the nature and course of the offices of priests and Levites for the future history of Israel. In practice, however, changing historical circumstances and changes in the shape of Israel’s religion and culture altered the shape of the priesthood and the role of the Levites from time to time. And even more significantly, the persons who held the offices shaped them and their effectiveness through their faithfulness or unfaithfulness.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood before the Monarchy<\/h5>\nIn the time of Joshua, the priests continued to undertake their important task of carrying the ark of the covenant. The Levites assisted in the division and allocation of the newly acquired land among the Israelite tribes. In Joshua 21, there is a detailed list of the allocation of cities to both priests and Levites, in fulfillment of the earlier legislation. In the days of the settlement, beyond the Conquest, there is some evidence that the Levites took over the priestly duty of transporting the ark (1 Sm 6:15; 2 Sm 15:24).<\/p>\nThe writer of the book of Judges has recorded two stories that illuminate the lives of particular Levites. The first, the story of Micah (Jgs 17–18), describes the establishment of a local shrine in which Micah’s son was appointed as a priest (though he was not of Levite or Aaronic descent). Later, Micah hired an itinerant Levite to function as a priest in his shrine, though subsequently that Levite was persuaded to serve the tribe of Dan as a priest. It is difficult to fit the details of this story into the theoretical model of priests and Levites, though the story may illustrate the confused state of Israel’s religion at the time. What is particularly significant is that the role of the Levite-priest was primarily oracular (18:5-6). The second story in Judges is the rather horrifying account of a Levite and his concubine (ch 19). The story illustrates the moral decline and lack of law and order in Israel at the time, but it sheds little light on the role of the Levites.<\/p>\nMore information is provided about the priesthood during the 11th century BC<\/span>, immediately before the establishment of the monarchy. The tabernacle (by now probably a semipermanent structure) and the ark of the covenant were located in Shiloh. The priest in charge of the sanctuary in Shiloh was Eli, who may have been a descendant of Aaron’s son Ithamar. His two sons, Hophni and Phinehas, also served as priests, indicating that the principle of family descent was still operative with respect to the priesthood. But although Eli was a faithful priest, his two sons abused the office.<\/p>\nThe precise role of Samuel in this period is unclear. He was primarily a judge and a prophet, but it is difficult to determine whether he was also a priest. In the historical narrative, he is not called a priest, though Psalm 99:6 might be interpreted to indicate his priestly office. There are a number of passages, however, that indicate he acted like a priest. For example, he offered sacrifices (1 Sm 7:9-10); as a young man he served in the sanctuary of Shiloh and wore an ephod (ch 2). Furthermore, one of the biblical genealogies implies priestly descent (1 Chr 6:23-30). Nevertheless, he is not normally identified as a priest and the introduction to his story refers to him as an Ephraimite, by descent from his father (1 Sm 1:1), not a Levite. If the priest is perceived as a permanent servant of the sanctuary, as was Eli, then it is clear that Samuel was not a priest. But the priestly role of Samuel may perhaps be related to the fact that his mother “lent” him to God (v 28) while he was still a boy.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood during the Time of David and Solomon<\/h5>\nSeveral radical changes took place during the reign of David and Solomon. These were a result, primarily, of the establishment of a permanent temple in Jerusalem and the installation of the ark of the covenant there. During the time of Saul, the first king of Israel, the social structure was essentially the same as it had been in the time of the judges. Saul, as king, was a military leader, but his relationship to religion and the priesthood was not clearly determined.<\/p>\nDavid changed the situation in many important respects. After his capture of the city of Jerusalem, he made that place the political and religious capital of his nation. The religious centrality of Jerusalem was assured by moving the ark of the covenant there, together with the tabernacle. Jerusalem now became the permanent location of the ark, and therefore the permanent center of religion; at the same time, the various regional shrines, which had developed in the premonarchical period, were gradually eliminated.<\/p>\nThese changes had numerous implications for the priesthood and the Levites. During David’s reign, there were two principal priests, Abiathar and Zadok. Abiathar, a former priest of Nob, had joined David before his rise to power; he appears to have been a descendant of Eli, and through him of Ithamar, one of Aaron’s sons. Zadok’s background is less clear, though his lineage appears to go back to Aaron’s other son, Eleazar. These two priests are always named together in the texts describing David’s reign, and Zadok is always mentioned before Abiathar. Although neither is explicitly identified as high priest in the ancient texts, there is some evidence to suggest that Abiathar functioned as high priest (1 Kgs 2:35); in NT times, he is identified as such (Mk 2:26). Zadok, during David’s reign, may have been particularly responsible for the care of the ark of the covenant (2 Sm 15:24-25). These two priests had a significant position in David’s royal establishment; they may also have shared overall responsibility for the priests, whose lives were now centered on the Jerusalem temple.<\/p>\nMuch of David’s time was focused upon the preparations for building a permanent temple for God. In the preparation for the temple, and in its completion during the reign of King Solomon, the new activities of the Levites may be seen. (The construction of a permanent temple automatically removed their former responsibilities related to the care and transportation of the tabernacle.) Large numbers of Levites were employed as laborers in the actual building of the temple. Others found new tasks in the worship of God in the tabernacle during David’s reign and in the temple upon its completion. To the Levites, and especially to Heman, Asaph, and Ethan, was given primary responsibility for the music of worship; this involved not only singing but also the playing of a variety of instruments in the temple’s orchestra or band. The Levites had also a variety of other tasks; they worked as gatekeepers at the sanctuary, assisted the priests in the preparation of sacrifices, kept the sanctuary clean, and functioned as general administrative and legal officers (1 Chr 23:1-32). Other Levites functioned as bankers, with primary responsibility for the temple treasuries (26:20-28).<\/p>\nFollowing David’s death, there was a dispute over the royal succession, from which Solomon emerged as the new king. During his reign, the temple was brought to its completion and the regular worship of the nation was conducted there. In the matter of succession, however, Abiathar had supported a losing candidate, and when Solomon was made king, he lost his important office in the royal court. During Solomon’s reign, the control of the priesthood passed into the hands of Zadok.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood during the Divided Monarchy<\/h5>\nThe great empire, which had been built by David and maintained by Solomon, collapsed after Solomon’s death. From the ruins, two new and relatively insignificant states emerged. The southern kingdom, Judah, retained Jerusalem as its capital and the temple as its center of worship. The northern kingdom, Israel, located its first capital at Shechem, from where it was later moved to Tirzah.<\/p>\nIn the southern state of Judah, the priests and Levites continued to function normally within the Jerusalem temple. The office of high priest continued to be passed on by descent within the family of Zadok, who had held office in Solomon’s reign. The continuity of office in this family was to be retained down into the time of the second temple, when the Zadokite succession was interrupted about 171 BC<\/span>. Nevertheless, for all the continuity of religion in Jerusalem, all was not well with religion in Judah, neither during the reign of its first king, Rehoboam, nor during the reigns of his successors. During Rehoboam’s reign, there was a decline in religion and also in the priesthood, when popular forms of religion were introduced as a result of foreign influence (1 Kgs 14:22-24). The history of the southern kingdom was marked by periods of religious decline followed by reform, often as a result of the activities of the prophets. The role of the priesthood was all too rarely one of spiritual leadership, and the priests themselves were often the subject of criticism by the prophets (e.g., Jer 2:8, 26).<\/p>\nThe northern kingdom, whose first king was Jeroboam I, inevitably had to introduce some radical changes in religion. Jeroboam could not recognize the temple of Jerusalem, partly because it lay outside his state and partly because it was intimately associated with the royal line of David. Jeroboam established two principal shrines in his kingdom, both of which were to retain importance during the relatively short life of the northern kingdom (200 years). The first was at Bethel, in the southern part of his kingdom near the border of Judah (it was only about 12 miles, or 19.3 kilometers, north of Jerusalem). The second shrine, or sanctuary, was at Dan, in the far northern part of his kingdom.<\/p>\nBoth these sanctuaries had ancient associations with the Hebrew traditions. Bethel is referred to as early as the time of Abram (Gn 12:8), and the sanctuary at Dan is known from the history of the judges (Jgs 18). There may indeed have been priests and Levites still residing in these two places, descendants of the former servants of the sanctuaries. But Jeroboam established a non-Levitical priesthood to serve in these sanctuaries and in various smaller shrines or “high places,” thereby cutting off the religious tradition of the northern state even more radically from that of Judah. The royal sanctuary at Bethel, so close to the Jerusalem temple, may have been set up in deliberate competition with the Judean sanctuary.<\/p>\nThe history of the priesthood in the northern kingdom is no more impressive than that of Judah. Many of the prophets, including Amos, Hosea, and Jeremiah, condemned the northern sanctuaries and their priests. Hosea was forceful in his condemnation: “As marauders lie in ambush for a man, so do bands of priests; they murder on the road to Shechem, committing shameful crimes” (Hos 6:9, niv<\/span>). Those to whom the spiritual lives of the chosen people had been entrusted only rarely lived up to their responsibilities.<\/p>\n<h5>Priests and Levites during and after the Exile<\/h5>\nThe northern kingdom came to its end in 722 BC<\/span>, defeated by the armies of Assyria, but religious life continued in Judah for a while longer. Eventually, the end of the southern state came about 586 BC<\/span>; the defeat of the state by the Babylonians was accompanied by the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple (Lam 2:20). The Babylonian commander took Seraiah, the high priest, and Zephaniah, his assistant, to Riblah, where, along with other officials, they were executed (2 Kgs 25:18-21). Then a policy of exile was established by the Babylonians; the most important and influential people of Judah were deported to Babylon, while the less significant were allowed to remain, for they were unlikely to cause trouble. Of those exiled from Judah, many may have been priests (Jer 29:1), for they were men of influence. By way of contrast, it seems likely that a much smaller number of Levites was exiled, reflecting perhaps their inferior social position.<\/p>\nIn the city of Jerusalem there was little normal religious life during the years of the exile; the altar had been destroyed and was not restored until after the exile. No doubt some kind of activity continued, but it was an impoverished form of religion. Most of the priests were in exile in Babylon, but they could not function, for there was no temple or sanctuary. Ezekiel implies that God himself was the only “sanctuary” for the exiles (Ez 11:16). Not until the return from exile and the restoration of Jerusalem and its temple could the normal functions of priests and Levites resume.<\/p>\nWhen the Babylonian Empire was defeated, the new Persian conquerors instituted a policy whereby the Hebrew exiles could return to their homeland. Of those returning, 4,289 are designated as priests and members of priestly families, while only 341 were Levites (Ezr 2:36-42); the imbalance probably reflects the imbalance in the number of those exiled initially. Under Joshua (Jeshua), the priest, and Zerubbabel, work began on the restoration. The priests played a significant role in the first year of the return, in the restoration of the altar in Jerusalem, so that sacrifice and worship to God could resume. Once the altar had been restored, the work began on the temple itself in the second year of the return. In this work, both the priests and the Levites were involved, and the laying of new foundations for the temple began. When the foundation had been laid, both priests, in their vestments, and Levites, in their role as singers and musicians, participated in the ceremony of dedication (3:8-13). Again, when the temple had been rebuilt, both priests and Levites participated in the ceremony of dedication (6:16-18). The restoration, however, was concerned with more than buildings; it also involved a moral and religious component. Though priests and Levites helped in this task, they were also affected by it. Many, for example, had married foreign wives (9:1), and thus had to conform to Ezra’s reform laws.<\/p>\nTo some extent, the priests and Levites resumed their normal duties in the worship of the postexilic period. The priests were engaged in the conduct of the temple worship. The Levites assisted, as temple servants (Neh 11:3), as treasurers and collectors of tithes (10:37-39), and as instructors or teachers of the law of God (8:7-9). Nevertheless, the history of the priesthood after the exile is not free of blemish. Condemnation of the abuses of the priestly office was delivered by the prophet Malachi (Mal 1:6–2:9). Malachi catalogues a list of priestly evils reminiscent of the evil priests who lived during the time of the monarchy.<\/p>\nThe office of high priest continued after the exile among the descendants of Zadok, being held first by Joshua (Hg 1:1). The different political circumstances, however, changed the nature of the high priestly office. Whereas in the days of the monarchy the high priest was subservient to the king, there was no king, in the proper sense, after the exile. From a political perspective, the Jews were members of a province or colony; for practical purposes, they were a community based upon a common religion. The high priest was no longer subject to the secular authority of a Jewish king, but his religious authority was considerable, and in some ways his functions were similar to those of a king in preexilic times.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood in the Maccabean Period<\/h5>\nDuring the second century BC<\/span>, some changes took place in the priesthood, particularly with respect to the office of high priest, which marked the end of the OT era and set the background for the NT period. Judea, in the second century, was ruled by the Seleucid kings, who had inherited a portion of the massive Greek Empire established by Alexander the Great. The Judean province was controlled internally under the high priesthood, whose authority was received from the Seleucid kings.<\/p>\nFor the first three decades of the second century BC<\/span>, the high priesthood remained with the Zadokite line of descent. The high priests were members of the (Zadokite) Oniad family: first, Onias III (198–174 BC<\/span>); then Jason, brother of Onias III (174–171 BC<\/span>). It was in the period of Jason that there began a series of events that would terminate the Zadokite tradition.<\/p>\nOnias III had opposed the Hellenization policy of Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), which threatened to undermine the Jewish faith. Antiochus replaced Onias by Jason, who in effect purchased the high priesthood from the Seleucid king. In purchasing the priestly office, Jason had set a dangerous precedent; although he was of Zadokite descent, his act implied that the office could be bought and that descent was not vital. The opponents of Jason, the Tobiads, were able to remove him from office and have their own candidate, Menelaus (who was not a Zadokite), appointed in his place. This act resulted in a civil war between those supporting Jason and those supporting Menelaus, and the war in turn culminated in ruthless repressive measures by Antiochus Epiphanes; there were massacres in Jerusalem, and the temple was desecrated (167 BC<\/span>). The desecration of the temple led to the Maccabean revolt, as a result of which the Jews regained their independence for a short time. Menelaus retained the office of high priest until 161 BC<\/span> and was succeeded by Alcimus (161–159 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nThere then followed a period during which there was no high priest for seven years. The political climate, however, was such that it became unlikely that the Zadokite line would ever regain the high priesthood, which had been established in the time of King Solomon. The Maccabean Jonathan gained control of Jerusalem, and in 152 BC<\/span>, with the approval of the Seleucid king, he was formally invested with the high priest’s robes of office. He was succeeded as high priest and ruler by his brother Simon in 143 BC<\/span>, who also held the office with the approval of the Seleucids (Demetrius II). But in the third year of his reign (140 BC<\/span>), the high priesthood of Simon received public approval in a great religious assembly, and the family of Simon became “high priest forever” (1 Macc 14:41-47). That event marked the real termination of the Zadokite tradition and the foundation of the Hasmonean line.<\/p>\nThe establishment of the high priestly office outside the Zadokite line did not go without challenge. It is probable that a sect within Judaism, now known as the Essenes, was born in reaction to the high priesthood of Simon. The Essenes (better known for the Dead Sea Scrolls) appear to have been founded by a Zadokite priest who rejected the authenticity and authority of Simon. Thus, in a limited sense, the Zadokite priests continued to survive.<\/p>\nThe Priesthood in New Testament Times<\/p>\nIn the early NT period, both priests and Levites continued to function within the Jewish religion. Zechariah, father of John the Baptist, was a priest belonging to the division of Abijah (Lk 1:5), and his wife was also of priestly descent. When Zechariah was visited by an angel, he was engaged at the time in priestly duties in the Jerusalem temple—various divisions of priests took responsibility for the temple services for a period of time and then returned to their homes (v 23), as another division took over. The distinction between priests and Levites is also maintained in the NT (Jn 1:19) and appears in Jesus’ parable concerning the Good Samaritan (Lk 10:31-32). Both priests and Levites were among the earliest converts to Christianity; Barnabas was a Levite from Cyprus (Acts 4:36), and several priests responded to the proclamation of the gospel (6:7).<\/p>\nThe office of high priest is frequently referred to in the NT. Several high priests are named, the plurality of current and former holders of the office reflecting the nature of the position as an essentially political appointment (as distinct from its oldest definition, that of an office passing from father to son on the death of the father). The two most significant high priests in the NT are those who held office during the lifetime of Jesus. Annas was high priest about AD<\/span> 6 to 15, but even after he ceased to hold the office formally, he continued to exert considerable influence through his son-in-law, the high priest Caiaphas (c. AD<\/span> 18–36). Both were significant figures in the trial of Jesus. At a later date, Ananias, son of Nedebaeus, was high priest (c. AD<\/span> 47–58) and president of the Sanhedrin during the time in which Paul was brought to trial.<\/p>\nThe priesthood held considerable authority in NT times. Most internal and religious matters in the Roman province of Judea were within the authority of the Sanhedrin, which functioned as a kind of provincial government, though its powers were limited in certain matters by Rome. Its membership included the ruling and former high priests and a large number of Sadducees, many of whom belonged to influential priestly families. This priestly influence in the Sanhedrin was indicative of the important role of the temple in Jewish life during the first century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nIn AD<\/span> 70, following the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem, a radical change came about in the significance of the priesthood in Judaism. The end of the temple removed in effect the purpose for the existence of the priesthood. Although the priesthood continued after a fashion until the Bar-Kochba rebellion in AD<\/span> 135, its days were numbered after AD<\/span> 70. Since the end of the first century AD<\/span>, Judaism has developed without priests, and its course down to the present century has been charted by the rabbis, the spiritual descendants of the Pharisees.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Priesthood.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PRIESTS AND LEVITES<\/h3>\nServants of God in the OT. There were three basic classes of religious personnel in ancient Israel: prophets, wise men, and priests and Levites. The classical prophets fulfilled a vocation but were not professionals; they were not paid for their task and functioned only in response to the particular call of God. The wise men were involved in government and education; some of their duties were secular, though they were also involved in moral education. The priests and Levites fulfilled a variety of essentially religious duties and were equivalent approximately to the clergy in modern times. They were professional men and were supported for their full-time religious work.<\/p>\nThe role of the priesthood may be seen most clearly in the context of Israelite religion as a whole. At the heart of religion was a relationship with God; to be an Israelite or a Jew was to know and maintain a continuous relationship with the living God. This relationship found its outward expression in a variety of contexts: the covenant, the temple, worship, and every facet of daily life. Thus religion, understood as a relationship, had two perspectives: the relationship with God and that with fellow human beings. It had both a personal and a communal dimension to it. The priests were the guardians and servants of this life of relationship, which was at the heart of OT religion; all their functions can best be understood within the context of a relationship between God and Israel. The prophets, too, were servants of the covenant relationship. While the priests functioned as the normal servants of religion, the prophets’ role was more that of calling a delinquent people back to the relationship with God in times of crisis.<\/p>\nIn the OT, there are frequent references to both priests and Levites; in a number of biblical texts, however, the distinction is not clear (see, e.g., Dt 18:1-8). From the scholarly point of view, the precise relationship between priests and Levites is a continuing problem that has not yet been fully resolved. In general terms, only the sons of Aaron were to assume the role of priests; all other Levites would have religious functions, though technically they would not be priests. While this distinction is clear in most biblical texts, in others there is lack of certainty and clarity. It is clear, however, that priests<\/em> (Levites descended from Aaron) and Levites<\/em> (other than the descendants of Aaron) all had professional religious duties to perform. The precise nature of those duties varied from time to time in the course of Israel’s history.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• The Origins of the Priesthood<\/p>\n• The High Priest<\/p>\n• The Priests<\/p>\n• The Levites<\/p>\n• The History of the Institution<\/p>\n• The Priesthood in New Testament Times<\/p>\nThe Origins of the Priesthood<\/p>\nThe priesthood in Israel began during the time of Moses and Aaron. The exodus from Egypt was not only the liberation of a group of Hebrew slaves but also the birth of the nation of Israel. The nation that was born in the exodus was given its constitution in the covenant of Sinai. The law of this covenant established the foundations and origins of Israelite priesthood. It provides insight into the three basic categories to be considered: the high priest, the priests, and the Levites.<\/p>\nThe High Priest<\/p>\nAny large and complex organization requires a head or leader, and this was true also of the Hebrew priesthood (though in its early days it was a small organization). The covenant was established through Moses, the prophet, through whom God gave the offer and substance of the covenant relationship; religious life within the covenant was to be the primary responsibility of Aaron, who was the first and chief priest.<\/p>\nIn the earliest days of Israel’s priesthood, it is probable that the high priest’s office was relatively informal; he was chief or leader among his fellow priests. The office was significant, nevertheless, and involved a special ritual of investiture, special clothing, and certain special responsibilities. While the high priest’s duties were similar in principle to those of other priests, he had certain exclusive responsibilities. To some extent, his duties were administrative, pertaining to all the priests of whom he had charge. But his position was more weighty than that of an administrator; just as all priests were the servants and guardians of the covenant relationship, so the high priest was chief servant and chief guardian. In his hands rested spiritual responsibility for the entire people of God, and therein lay the true honor and gravity of his position.<\/p>\n\nThis spiritual seniority of the high priest is seen most clearly in certain tasks he undertook within Israel’s life of worship. The clearest example may be seen in the annual observation of the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur). On that day alone, the high priest entered the Holy of Holies and, standing before the “mercy seat,” he sought God’s forgiveness and mercy for the whole nation of Israel (Lv 16:1-19). It is in that ceremony that Israel’s covenant faith is seen most clearly. Israel’s religion was one of relationship with a holy God, and human evil disrupted that relationship. While all worship and sacrifices throughout the year were concerned with the continuation of the relationship, the Day of Atonement was the most solemn day of the year, in which the attention of all the people focused upon the meaning of their existence. Life held meaning only if the relationship with God could be maintained; the high priest had the great honor and heavy burden of seeking God’s mercy for all Israel.<\/p>\nThe special clothing worn by the high priest was symbolic of the nature and importance of his office; although all the symbolism cannot be determined, some of it is made clear in the biblical text. There are three particular themes in the symbolism. The first is beauty. The sense of beauty emerges from the quality and design of all the items of clothing, together with the use of color and precious stones. But beauty is dominant in the breastplate; the Hebrew word translated approximately as “breastplate” has as its basic sense “beauty” or “excellence.” The clothing symbolizes beauty, while beauty describes the office; the two other themes associated with the symbolism bring out the excellence of the office.<\/p>\nThe second theme is the role of the priest as representative of Israel before God. This essential dimension of the office of the high priest is explicitly identified in the names of the tribes of Israel in the two onyx stones in the ephod, and in the 12 precious stones attached to the breastplate. The high priest entered God’s presence to seek deliverance from God’s judgment (the breastplate is identified with judgment; Ex 28:15) for his people and in order to keep the people constantly in God’s remembrance (v 12), as symbolized by the two onyx stones. The third theme is the role of high priest as the representative of God to Israel. This dimension of the office is seen in the Urim and Thummim, kept in the breastpiece, by means of which God made known his will to Israel. The high priest, Aaron, fully robed, was a splendid figure, and the splendor of his garments indicated the magnificence of the office with which he had been entrusted.<\/p>\nThe high priesthood was to be passed on within the family (for the high priest was expected to be a married man), although in later history the practice was not always adhered to. On Aaron’s death, the office passed to Eleazar, one of his four sons.<\/p>\nThe Priests<\/p>\nPriests took office not as the result of a particular vocation but by virtue of priestly descent. Thus the first priests were the four sons of Aaron: Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar. These four were ordained at the same time that Aaron was ordained high priest (Ex 28:1). Like him, they had special clothing, which was basically similar, though it lacked the distinctive garments of the high priest (the special ephod, the breastpiece, and the crown). The priesthood would be passed down through their sons.<\/p>\nThe sanctity of the priestly office was such that it was preserved from degeneration through specific laws. A man must be a descendant of Aaron to be a priest, but he was also required to meet a variety of other qualifications. He would not marry a divorcée or a former prostitute (Lv 21:7). If he was afflicted by certain kinds of disease or congenital defects, he was barred from priestly office (e.g., blindness, lameness, mutilation, being a hunchback or dwarf; vv 16-23). The principle involved was similar to that applying to animals used in sacrifice—only those free from defect or blemish were suitable for divine service.<\/p>\nIn the earliest days of the priesthood there is some information provided in the biblical text concerning the specific duties of the priests. Eleazar had overall responsibility for the tabernacle and its offerings (Nm 4:16); assisted Moses in a number of duties, such as numbering the people and dividing the land (26:1-2; 32:2); and later served as an adviser to Joshua. Ithamar was responsible for the construction of the tabernacle (Ex 38:21) and supervised the families of the Gershonites and Merarites (Nm 4:28-33). Nadab and Abihu, however, died soon after their ordination as a result of a sinful act in their priestly duties (Lv 10:1-7), which may have been related in part to drunkenness (vv 8-9).<\/p>\nPriestly duties, in general, fell into three areas (Dt 33:8-10). First, priests were responsible, in conjunction with the high priest, for declaring God’s will to the people. Second, they had responsibilities in religious education; they were to teach to Israel God’s ordinances and law (v 10). Third, they were to be the servants of the tabernacle, participating in Israel’s sacrifices and worship. There were a number of other duties that may have fallen to them, which they would have shared with the Levites in general.<\/p>\nThe priests, along with all other Levites, did not own any land, as did the other Israelite tribes. Their task was to be entirely in the direct service to God. The absence of land, however, meant that they could not support and feed themselves as could other men and women. Consequently, the law specified that they could be supported for their services by the people as a whole. They were to receive, from worshipers, portions of animals that were brought to the tabernacle, as well as corn, wine, oil, and wool.<\/p>\nThe Levites<\/p>\nThis term includes the priests, in a broad sense, for the sons of Aaron belonged to the tribe of Levi. For practical purposes, however, the Levites were those of the tribe other than the priests. The Levites also functioned in the service of the tabernacle, though they had a subordinate position. They, too, were professional men and were paid in money and in kind for their services. Though they did not inherit tribal territory of their own, there were a number of cities set aside for their use (Nm 35:1-8), and pasturelands were designated outside those cities for their livestock.<\/p>\nThe Levites were divided into three principal families, the descendants of Kohath, Gershon, and Merari (Nm 4). Each of these families had particular responsibilities with respect to the care and transport of the tabernacle. The sons of Kohath carried the tabernacle furniture (after it had been covered by the priests), the sons of Gershon cared for the coverings and screens, and the sons of Merari carried and erected the tabernacle’s frame. The priests, by contrast, were responsible for the transportation of the ark of the covenant. The role of each Levite, as servant of the tabernacle, was restricted; he undertook his professional duties between the ages of 25 and 50 (8:24-26).<\/p>\nAlthough many of the duties of the Levites were of a mundane nature, they also had a very significant religious role. The law required that all the firstborn, including firstborn sons, be given to God, recalling the slaying of the firstborn at the exodus from Egypt. The Levites’ role in religion was that of being accepted by God in the place of the firstborn sons of Israel (Nm 3:11-13); their cattle, too, were accepted in place of the Israelites’ firstborn cattle. In the census taken in the time of Moses, the firstborn Israelites exceeded the number of the Levites, and a five-shekel redemption fee had to be paid into the priestly coffers for each person in excess (vv 40-51). The representative and substitutionary nature of the Levites can be seen in Israelite religion. Like the priests, they played a part in the larger activity of mediation between God and Israel.<\/p>\nThe law of Deuteronomy specifies a number of duties that may have fallen upon both priests and Levites (though the texts are ambiguous). These duties included participation in the activity of the law courts as judges, perhaps with special reference to religious crimes (Dt 17:8-9), taking care of the Book of the Law (v 18), controlling the lives and health of lepers (24:8), and participating directly in the conduct of covenant renewal ceremonies (27:9).<\/p>\nThe History of the Institution<\/p>\nIn theory, the covenant law of Moses determined the nature and course of the offices of priests and Levites for the future history of Israel. In practice, however, changing historical circumstances and changes in the shape of Israel’s religion and culture altered the shape of the priesthood and the role of the Levites from time to time. And even more significantly, the persons who held the offices shaped them and their effectiveness through their faithfulness or unfaithfulness.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood before the Monarchy<\/h5>\nIn the time of Joshua, the priests continued to undertake their important task of carrying the ark of the covenant. The Levites assisted in the division and allocation of the newly acquired land among the Israelite tribes. In Joshua 21, there is a detailed list of the allocation of cities to both priests and Levites, in fulfillment of the earlier legislation. In the days of the settlement, beyond the Conquest, there is some evidence that the Levites took over the priestly duty of transporting the ark (1 Sm 6:15; 2 Sm 15:24).<\/p>\nThe writer of the book of Judges has recorded two stories that illuminate the lives of particular Levites. The first, the story of Micah (Jgs 17–18), describes the establishment of a local shrine in which Micah’s son was appointed as a priest (though he was not of Levite or Aaronic descent). Later, Micah hired an itinerant Levite to function as a priest in his shrine, though subsequently that Levite was persuaded to serve the tribe of Dan as a priest. It is difficult to fit the details of this story into the theoretical model of priests and Levites, though the story may illustrate the confused state of Israel’s religion at the time. What is particularly significant is that the role of the Levite-priest was primarily oracular (18:5-6). The second story in Judges is the rather horrifying account of a Levite and his concubine (ch 19). The story illustrates the moral decline and lack of law and order in Israel at the time, but it sheds little light on the role of the Levites.<\/p>\nMore information is provided about the priesthood during the 11th century BC<\/span>, immediately before the establishment of the monarchy. The tabernacle (by now probably a semipermanent structure) and the ark of the covenant were located in Shiloh. The priest in charge of the sanctuary in Shiloh was Eli, who may have been a descendant of Aaron’s son Ithamar. His two sons, Hophni and Phinehas, also served as priests, indicating that the principle of family descent was still operative with respect to the priesthood. But although Eli was a faithful priest, his two sons abused the office.<\/p>\nThe precise role of Samuel in this period is unclear. He was primarily a judge and a prophet, but it is difficult to determine whether he was also a priest. In the historical narrative, he is not called a priest, though Psalm 99:6 might be interpreted to indicate his priestly office. There are a number of passages, however, that indicate he acted like a priest. For example, he offered sacrifices (1 Sm 7:9-10); as a young man he served in the sanctuary of Shiloh and wore an ephod (ch 2). Furthermore, one of the biblical genealogies implies priestly descent (1 Chr 6:23-30). Nevertheless, he is not normally identified as a priest and the introduction to his story refers to him as an Ephraimite, by descent from his father (1 Sm 1:1), not a Levite. If the priest is perceived as a permanent servant of the sanctuary, as was Eli, then it is clear that Samuel was not a priest. But the priestly role of Samuel may perhaps be related to the fact that his mother “lent” him to God (v 28) while he was still a boy.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood during the Time of David and Solomon<\/h5>\nSeveral radical changes took place during the reign of David and Solomon. These were a result, primarily, of the establishment of a permanent temple in Jerusalem and the installation of the ark of the covenant there. During the time of Saul, the first king of Israel, the social structure was essentially the same as it had been in the time of the judges. Saul, as king, was a military leader, but his relationship to religion and the priesthood was not clearly determined.<\/p>\nDavid changed the situation in many important respects. After his capture of the city of Jerusalem, he made that place the political and religious capital of his nation. The religious centrality of Jerusalem was assured by moving the ark of the covenant there, together with the tabernacle. Jerusalem now became the permanent location of the ark, and therefore the permanent center of religion; at the same time, the various regional shrines, which had developed in the premonarchical period, were gradually eliminated.<\/p>\nThese changes had numerous implications for the priesthood and the Levites. During David’s reign, there were two principal priests, Abiathar and Zadok. Abiathar, a former priest of Nob, had joined David before his rise to power; he appears to have been a descendant of Eli, and through him of Ithamar, one of Aaron’s sons. Zadok’s background is less clear, though his lineage appears to go back to Aaron’s other son, Eleazar. These two priests are always named together in the texts describing David’s reign, and Zadok is always mentioned before Abiathar. Although neither is explicitly identified as high priest in the ancient texts, there is some evidence to suggest that Abiathar functioned as high priest (1 Kgs 2:35); in NT times, he is identified as such (Mk 2:26). Zadok, during David’s reign, may have been particularly responsible for the care of the ark of the covenant (2 Sm 15:24-25). These two priests had a significant position in David’s royal establishment; they may also have shared overall responsibility for the priests, whose lives were now centered on the Jerusalem temple.<\/p>\nMuch of David’s time was focused upon the preparations for building a permanent temple for God. In the preparation for the temple, and in its completion during the reign of King Solomon, the new activities of the Levites may be seen. (The construction of a permanent temple automatically removed their former responsibilities related to the care and transportation of the tabernacle.) Large numbers of Levites were employed as laborers in the actual building of the temple. Others found new tasks in the worship of God in the tabernacle during David’s reign and in the temple upon its completion. To the Levites, and especially to Heman, Asaph, and Ethan, was given primary responsibility for the music of worship; this involved not only singing but also the playing of a variety of instruments in the temple’s orchestra or band. The Levites had also a variety of other tasks; they worked as gatekeepers at the sanctuary, assisted the priests in the preparation of sacrifices, kept the sanctuary clean, and functioned as general administrative and legal officers (1 Chr 23:1-32). Other Levites functioned as bankers, with primary responsibility for the temple treasuries (26:20-28).<\/p>\nFollowing David’s death, there was a dispute over the royal succession, from which Solomon emerged as the new king. During his reign, the temple was brought to its completion and the regular worship of the nation was conducted there. In the matter of succession, however, Abiathar had supported a losing candidate, and when Solomon was made king, he lost his important office in the royal court. During Solomon’s reign, the control of the priesthood passed into the hands of Zadok.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood during the Divided Monarchy<\/h5>\nThe great empire, which had been built by David and maintained by Solomon, collapsed after Solomon’s death. From the ruins, two new and relatively insignificant states emerged. The southern kingdom, Judah, retained Jerusalem as its capital and the temple as its center of worship. The northern kingdom, Israel, located its first capital at Shechem, from where it was later moved to Tirzah.<\/p>\nIn the southern state of Judah, the priests and Levites continued to function normally within the Jerusalem temple. The office of high priest continued to be passed on by descent within the family of Zadok, who had held office in Solomon’s reign. The continuity of office in this family was to be retained down into the time of the second temple, when the Zadokite succession was interrupted about 171 BC<\/span>. Nevertheless, for all the continuity of religion in Jerusalem, all was not well with religion in Judah, neither during the reign of its first king, Rehoboam, nor during the reigns of his successors. During Rehoboam’s reign, there was a decline in religion and also in the priesthood, when popular forms of religion were introduced as a result of foreign influence (1 Kgs 14:22-24). The history of the southern kingdom was marked by periods of religious decline followed by reform, often as a result of the activities of the prophets. The role of the priesthood was all too rarely one of spiritual leadership, and the priests themselves were often the subject of criticism by the prophets (e.g., Jer 2:8, 26).<\/p>\nThe northern kingdom, whose first king was Jeroboam I, inevitably had to introduce some radical changes in religion. Jeroboam could not recognize the temple of Jerusalem, partly because it lay outside his state and partly because it was intimately associated with the royal line of David. Jeroboam established two principal shrines in his kingdom, both of which were to retain importance during the relatively short life of the northern kingdom (200 years). The first was at Bethel, in the southern part of his kingdom near the border of Judah (it was only about 12 miles, or 19.3 kilometers, north of Jerusalem). The second shrine, or sanctuary, was at Dan, in the far northern part of his kingdom.<\/p>\nBoth these sanctuaries had ancient associations with the Hebrew traditions. Bethel is referred to as early as the time of Abram (Gn 12:8), and the sanctuary at Dan is known from the history of the judges (Jgs 18). There may indeed have been priests and Levites still residing in these two places, descendants of the former servants of the sanctuaries. But Jeroboam established a non-Levitical priesthood to serve in these sanctuaries and in various smaller shrines or “high places,” thereby cutting off the religious tradition of the northern state even more radically from that of Judah. The royal sanctuary at Bethel, so close to the Jerusalem temple, may have been set up in deliberate competition with the Judean sanctuary.<\/p>\nThe history of the priesthood in the northern kingdom is no more impressive than that of Judah. Many of the prophets, including Amos, Hosea, and Jeremiah, condemned the northern sanctuaries and their priests. Hosea was forceful in his condemnation: “As marauders lie in ambush for a man, so do bands of priests; they murder on the road to Shechem, committing shameful crimes” (Hos 6:9, niv<\/span>). Those to whom the spiritual lives of the chosen people had been entrusted only rarely lived up to their responsibilities.<\/p>\n<h5>Priests and Levites during and after the Exile<\/h5>\nThe northern kingdom came to its end in 722 BC<\/span>, defeated by the armies of Assyria, but religious life continued in Judah for a while longer. Eventually, the end of the southern state came about 586 BC<\/span>; the defeat of the state by the Babylonians was accompanied by the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple (Lam 2:20). The Babylonian commander took Seraiah, the high priest, and Zephaniah, his assistant, to Riblah, where, along with other officials, they were executed (2 Kgs 25:18-21). Then a policy of exile was established by the Babylonians; the most important and influential people of Judah were deported to Babylon, while the less significant were allowed to remain, for they were unlikely to cause trouble. Of those exiled from Judah, many may have been priests (Jer 29:1), for they were men of influence. By way of contrast, it seems likely that a much smaller number of Levites was exiled, reflecting perhaps their inferior social position.<\/p>\nIn the city of Jerusalem there was little normal religious life during the years of the exile; the altar had been destroyed and was not restored until after the exile. No doubt some kind of activity continued, but it was an impoverished form of religion. Most of the priests were in exile in Babylon, but they could not function, for there was no temple or sanctuary. Ezekiel implies that God himself was the only “sanctuary” for the exiles (Ez 11:16). Not until the return from exile and the restoration of Jerusalem and its temple could the normal functions of priests and Levites resume.<\/p>\nWhen the Babylonian Empire was defeated, the new Persian conquerors instituted a policy whereby the Hebrew exiles could return to their homeland. Of those returning, 4,289 are designated as priests and members of priestly families, while only 341 were Levites (Ezr 2:36-42); the imbalance probably reflects the imbalance in the number of those exiled initially. Under Joshua (Jeshua), the priest, and Zerubbabel, work began on the restoration. The priests played a significant role in the first year of the return, in the restoration of the altar in Jerusalem, so that sacrifice and worship to God could resume. Once the altar had been restored, the work began on the temple itself in the second year of the return. In this work, both the priests and the Levites were involved, and the laying of new foundations for the temple began. When the foundation had been laid, both priests, in their vestments, and Levites, in their role as singers and musicians, participated in the ceremony of dedication (3:8-13). Again, when the temple had been rebuilt, both priests and Levites participated in the ceremony of dedication (6:16-18). The restoration, however, was concerned with more than buildings; it also involved a moral and religious component. Though priests and Levites helped in this task, they were also affected by it. Many, for example, had married foreign wives (9:1), and thus had to conform to Ezra’s reform laws.<\/p>\nTo some extent, the priests and Levites resumed their normal duties in the worship of the postexilic period. The priests were engaged in the conduct of the temple worship. The Levites assisted, as temple servants (Neh 11:3), as treasurers and collectors of tithes (10:37-39), and as instructors or teachers of the law of God (8:7-9). Nevertheless, the history of the priesthood after the exile is not free of blemish. Condemnation of the abuses of the priestly office was delivered by the prophet Malachi (Mal 1:6–2:9). Malachi catalogues a list of priestly evils reminiscent of the evil priests who lived during the time of the monarchy.<\/p>\nThe office of high priest continued after the exile among the descendants of Zadok, being held first by Joshua (Hg 1:1). The different political circumstances, however, changed the nature of the high priestly office. Whereas in the days of the monarchy the high priest was subservient to the king, there was no king, in the proper sense, after the exile. From a political perspective, the Jews were members of a province or colony; for practical purposes, they were a community based upon a common religion. The high priest was no longer subject to the secular authority of a Jewish king, but his religious authority was considerable, and in some ways his functions were similar to those of a king in preexilic times.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood in the Maccabean Period<\/h5>\nDuring the second century BC<\/span>, some changes took place in the priesthood, particularly with respect to the office of high priest, which marked the end of the OT era and set the background for the NT period. Judea, in the second century, was ruled by the Seleucid kings, who had inherited a portion of the massive Greek Empire established by Alexander the Great. The Judean province was controlled internally under the high priesthood, whose authority was received from the Seleucid kings.<\/p>\nFor the first three decades of the second century BC<\/span>, the high priesthood remained with the Zadokite line of descent. The high priests were members of the (Zadokite) Oniad family: first, Onias III (198–174 BC<\/span>); then Jason, brother of Onias III (174–171 BC<\/span>). It was in the period of Jason that there began a series of events that would terminate the Zadokite tradition.<\/p>\nOnias III had opposed the Hellenization policy of Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), which threatened to undermine the Jewish faith. Antiochus replaced Onias by Jason, who in effect purchased the high priesthood from the Seleucid king. In purchasing the priestly office, Jason had set a dangerous precedent; although he was of Zadokite descent, his act implied that the office could be bought and that descent was not vital. The opponents of Jason, the Tobiads, were able to remove him from office and have their own candidate, Menelaus (who was not a Zadokite), appointed in his place. This act resulted in a civil war between those supporting Jason and those supporting Menelaus, and the war in turn culminated in ruthless repressive measures by Antiochus Epiphanes; there were massacres in Jerusalem, and the temple was desecrated (167 BC<\/span>). The desecration of the temple led to the Maccabean revolt, as a result of which the Jews regained their independence for a short time. Menelaus retained the office of high priest until 161 BC<\/span> and was succeeded by Alcimus (161–159 BC<\/span>).<\/p>\nThere then followed a period during which there was no high priest for seven years. The political climate, however, was such that it became unlikely that the Zadokite line would ever regain the high priesthood, which had been established in the time of King Solomon. The Maccabean Jonathan gained control of Jerusalem, and in 152 BC<\/span>, with the approval of the Seleucid king, he was formally invested with the high priest’s robes of office. He was succeeded as high priest and ruler by his brother Simon in 143 BC<\/span>, who also held the office with the approval of the Seleucids (Demetrius II). But in the third year of his reign (140 BC<\/span>), the high priesthood of Simon received public approval in a great religious assembly, and the family of Simon became “high priest forever” (1 Macc 14:41-47). That event marked the real termination of the Zadokite tradition and the foundation of the Hasmonean line.<\/p>\nThe establishment of the high priestly office outside the Zadokite line did not go without challenge. It is probable that a sect within Judaism, now known as the Essenes, was born in reaction to the high priesthood of Simon. The Essenes (better known for the Dead Sea Scrolls) appear to have been founded by a Zadokite priest who rejected the authenticity and authority of Simon. Thus, in a limited sense, the Zadokite priests continued to survive.<\/p>\nThe Priesthood in New Testament Times<\/p>\nIn the early NT period, both priests and Levites continued to function within the Jewish religion. Zechariah, father of John the Baptist, was a priest belonging to the division of Abijah (Lk 1:5), and his wife was also of priestly descent. When Zechariah was visited by an angel, he was engaged at the time in priestly duties in the Jerusalem temple—various divisions of priests took responsibility for the temple services for a period of time and then returned to their homes (v 23), as another division took over. The distinction between priests and Levites is also maintained in the NT (Jn 1:19) and appears in Jesus’ parable concerning the Good Samaritan (Lk 10:31-32). Both priests and Levites were among the earliest converts to Christianity; Barnabas was a Levite from Cyprus (Acts 4:36), and several priests responded to the proclamation of the gospel (6:7).<\/p>\nThe office of high priest is frequently referred to in the NT. Several high priests are named, the plurality of current and former holders of the office reflecting the nature of the position as an essentially political appointment (as distinct from its oldest definition, that of an office passing from father to son on the death of the father). The two most significant high priests in the NT are those who held office during the lifetime of Jesus. Annas was high priest about AD<\/span> 6 to 15, but even after he ceased to hold the office formally, he continued to exert considerable influence through his son-in-law, the high priest Caiaphas (c. AD<\/span> 18–36). Both were significant figures in the trial of Jesus. At a later date, Ananias, son of Nedebaeus, was high priest (c. AD<\/span> 47–58) and president of the Sanhedrin during the time in which Paul was brought to trial.<\/p>\nThe priesthood held considerable authority in NT times. Most internal and religious matters in the Roman province of Judea were within the authority of the Sanhedrin, which functioned as a kind of provincial government, though its powers were limited in certain matters by Rome. Its membership included the ruling and former high priests and a large number of Sadducees, many of whom belonged to influential priestly families. This priestly influence in the Sanhedrin was indicative of the important role of the temple in Jewish life during the first century AD<\/span>.<\/p>\nIn AD<\/span> 70, following the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem, a radical change came about in the significance of the priesthood in Judaism. The end of the temple removed in effect the purpose for the existence of the priesthood. Although the priesthood continued after a fashion until the Bar-Kochba rebellion in AD<\/span> 135, its days were numbered after AD<\/span> 70. Since the end of the first century AD<\/span>, Judaism has developed without priests, and its course down to the present century has been charted by the rabbis, the spiritual descendants of the Pharisees.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Priesthood.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PRIESTS AND LEVITES Servants of God in the OT. There were three basic classes of religious personnel in ancient Israel: prophets, wise men, and priests and Levites. The classical prophets fulfilled a vocation but were not professionals; they were not paid for their task and functioned only in response to the particular call of God. The wise men were involved in government and education; some of their duties were secular, though they were also involved in moral education. The priests and Levit...","summary_en":"PRIESTS AND LEVITES Servants of God in the OT. There were three basic classes of religious personnel in ancient Israel: prophets, wise men, and priests and Levites. The classical prophets fulfilled a vocation but were not professionals; they were not paid for their task and functioned only in response to the particular call of God. The wise men were involved in government and education; some of their duties were secular, though they were also involved in moral education. The priests and Levit...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52886,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:20","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:20","content_ro":"2:20<\/strong> Jeremiah had predicted that the same cannibalism that occurred during a siege of Samaria (2 Kgs 6:28-29) would happen in Jerusalem (Jer 19:9; see also Lam 4:10; Ezek 5:10; cp. Deut 28:53-57).<\/p>","content_en":"2:20<\/strong> Jeremiah had predicted that the same cannibalism that occurred during a siege of Samaria (2 Kgs 6:28-29) would happen in Jerusalem (Jer 19:9; see also Lam 4:10; Ezek 5:10; cp. Deut 28:53-57).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:20 Jeremiah had predicted that the same cannibalism that occurred during a siege of Samaria (2 Kgs 6:28-29) would happen in Jerusalem (Jer 19:9; see also Lam 4:10; Ezek 5:10; cp. Deut 28:53-57).","summary_en":"2:20 Jeremiah had predicted that the same cannibalism that occurred during a siege of Samaria (2 Kgs 6:28-29) would happen in Jerusalem (Jer 19:9; see also Lam 4:10; Ezek 5:10; cp. Deut 28:53-57).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80512,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:20","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:20","content_ro":"2:20<\/strong> Jeremiah had predicted that the same cannibalism that occurred during a siege of Samaria (2 Kgs 6:28-29) would happen in Jerusalem (Jer 19:9; see also Lam 4:10; Ezek 5:10; cp. Deut 28:53-57).<\/p>","content_en":"2:20<\/strong> Jeremiah had predicted that the same cannibalism that occurred during a siege of Samaria (2 Kgs 6:28-29) would happen in Jerusalem (Jer 19:9; see also Lam 4:10; Ezek 5:10; cp. Deut 28:53-57).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:20 Jeremiah had predicted that the same cannibalism that occurred during a siege of Samaria (2 Kgs 6:28-29) would happen in Jerusalem (Jer 19:9; see also Lam 4:10; Ezek 5:10; cp. Deut 28:53-57).","summary_en":"2:20 Jeremiah had predicted that the same cannibalism that occurred during a siege of Samaria (2 Kgs 6:28-29) would happen in Jerusalem (Jer 19:9; see also Lam 4:10; Ezek 5:10; cp. Deut 28:53-57).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108138,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:20","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:20","content_ro":"2:20<\/strong> Jeremiah had predicted that the same cannibalism that occurred during a siege of Samaria (2 Kgs 6:28-29) would happen in Jerusalem (Jer 19:9; see also Lam 4:10; Ezek 5:10; cp. Deut 28:53-57).<\/p>","content_en":"2:20<\/strong> Jeremiah had predicted that the same cannibalism that occurred during a siege of Samaria (2 Kgs 6:28-29) would happen in Jerusalem (Jer 19:9; see also Lam 4:10; Ezek 5:10; cp. Deut 28:53-57).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:20 Jeremiah had predicted that the same cannibalism that occurred during a siege of Samaria (2 Kgs 6:28-29) would happen in Jerusalem (Jer 19:9; see also Lam 4:10; Ezek 5:10; cp. Deut 28:53-57).","summary_en":"2:20 Jeremiah had predicted that the same cannibalism that occurred during a siege of Samaria (2 Kgs 6:28-29) would happen in Jerusalem (Jer 19:9; see also Lam 4:10; Ezek 5:10; cp. Deut 28:53-57).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135764,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:20","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:20","content_ro":"2:20<\/strong> Jeremiah had predicted that the same cannibalism that occurred during a siege of Samaria (2 Kgs 6:28-29) would happen in Jerusalem (Jer 19:9; see also Lam 4:10; Ezek 5:10; cp. Deut 28:53-57).<\/p>","content_en":"2:20<\/strong> Jeremiah had predicted that the same cannibalism that occurred during a siege of Samaria (2 Kgs 6:28-29) would happen in Jerusalem (Jer 19:9; see also Lam 4:10; Ezek 5:10; cp. Deut 28:53-57).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:20 Jeremiah had predicted that the same cannibalism that occurred during a siege of Samaria (2 Kgs 6:28-29) would happen in Jerusalem (Jer 19:9; see also Lam 4:10; Ezek 5:10; cp. Deut 28:53-57).","summary_en":"2:20 Jeremiah had predicted that the same cannibalism that occurred during a siege of Samaria (2 Kgs 6:28-29) would happen in Jerusalem (Jer 19:9; see also Lam 4:10; Ezek 5:10; cp. Deut 28:53-57).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60138,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Famine","title_en":"Famine","content_ro":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\nFamine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\nFamine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\nFamine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\nJesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\nFamine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\nFamine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\nFamine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\nJesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","summary_en":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87764,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Famine","title_en":"Famine","content_ro":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\nFamine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\nFamine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\nFamine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\nJesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\nFamine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\nFamine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\nFamine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\nJesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","summary_en":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115390,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Famine","title_en":"Famine","content_ro":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\nFamine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\nFamine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\nFamine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\nJesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\nFamine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\nFamine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\nFamine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\nJesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","summary_en":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143016,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Famine","title_en":"Famine","content_ro":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\nFamine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\nFamine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\nFamine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\nJesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\nFamine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\nFamine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\nFamine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\nJesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\nPassages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\nGen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","summary_en":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"22":[{"id":8843,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Day of the Lord","title_en":"Day of the Lord","content_ro":"<h3>DAY OF THE LORD<\/h3>\nExpression used by OT prophets (as early as the eighth-century BC<\/span> prophet Amos) to signify a time in which God actively intervenes in history, primarily for judgment. Thus “the day of the Lord” is also called “the day of the Lord<\/span>’s anger” (Zep 2:2).<\/p>\nSometimes “the day of the Lord” is used in the OT to speak of a past judgment (Lam 2:22). More often, an impending future judgment is in view (Jl 2:1-11). Ultimately, though, the term refers to climactic future judgment of the world (Jl 3:14-21; Mal 4:5). Often, prophecy of a near-future event and an end-time prophecy are merged—the immediate judgment being a preview of the final Day of the Lord. The prophecy of Isaiah against Babylon is an example (Is 13:5-10). Jesus combined events described there with other prophecies to explain his second coming (Mk 13:24-37). Another example is Joel’s prophecy of the Day of the Lord (Jl 1:15–2:11). Though the prophet initially spoke of God’s judgment on Israel by a locust plague, that judgment prompted further pronouncements about a final Day of the Lord far beyond Joel’s time (2:14-17, 31). That Day of the Lord extended even beyond the outpouring of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost predicted by Joel’s prophecy (Jl 2:28-32; Acts 2:16-21; Rv 6:12-13). The NT uses the term exclusively to mean the end time.<\/p>\nThe final Day of the Lord is characterized in the Bible as a day of gloom, darkness, and judgment. Associated with God’s judgment is language depicting changes in nature, especially a darkening of the sun, moon, and stars (Is 13:10; Jl 2:31; 3:15; Mt 24:29; Rv 6:12). Nations will be judged for their rebellion against God’s anointed people and king (Jl 3:19; cf. Ps 2). Israel is counseled not to be eager for that day, because it will also include judgment on the chosen nation (Am 5:18-20). But the prophets promise that a believing “remnant” will be saved by looking to the Messiah they once rejected (Jl 2:32; Zec 12:10). Following the judgment, the future Day of the Lord will be a time of prosperity, restoration, and blessing for Israel (Jl 3:18-21).<\/p>\nThe more explicit NT expressions—“the day of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Cor 1:8), “the day of the Lord Jesus” (1 Cor 5:5; 2 Cor 1:14), and “the day of Christ” (Phil 1:10; 2:16)—are more personal and more positive. They point to final events related to Christian believers, who will not experience the wrath of God (1 Thes 5:9). When the Day of the Lord comes, the earth will be renewed and purified through a judgment of fire (2 Pt 3:10-13). In the book of Revelation the final purging seems to come after the Millennium—that is, the 1,000-year reign of Christ (Rv 21:1).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Eschatology; Last Days; Last Judgment.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DAY OF THE LORD<\/h3>\nExpression used by OT prophets (as early as the eighth-century BC<\/span> prophet Amos) to signify a time in which God actively intervenes in history, primarily for judgment. Thus “the day of the Lord” is also called “the day of the Lord<\/span>’s anger” (Zep 2:2).<\/p>\nSometimes “the day of the Lord” is used in the OT to speak of a past judgment (Lam 2:22). More often, an impending future judgment is in view (Jl 2:1-11). Ultimately, though, the term refers to climactic future judgment of the world (Jl 3:14-21; Mal 4:5). Often, prophecy of a near-future event and an end-time prophecy are merged—the immediate judgment being a preview of the final Day of the Lord. The prophecy of Isaiah against Babylon is an example (Is 13:5-10). Jesus combined events described there with other prophecies to explain his second coming (Mk 13:24-37). Another example is Joel’s prophecy of the Day of the Lord (Jl 1:15–2:11). Though the prophet initially spoke of God’s judgment on Israel by a locust plague, that judgment prompted further pronouncements about a final Day of the Lord far beyond Joel’s time (2:14-17, 31). That Day of the Lord extended even beyond the outpouring of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost predicted by Joel’s prophecy (Jl 2:28-32; Acts 2:16-21; Rv 6:12-13). The NT uses the term exclusively to mean the end time.<\/p>\nThe final Day of the Lord is characterized in the Bible as a day of gloom, darkness, and judgment. Associated with God’s judgment is language depicting changes in nature, especially a darkening of the sun, moon, and stars (Is 13:10; Jl 2:31; 3:15; Mt 24:29; Rv 6:12). Nations will be judged for their rebellion against God’s anointed people and king (Jl 3:19; cf. Ps 2). Israel is counseled not to be eager for that day, because it will also include judgment on the chosen nation (Am 5:18-20). But the prophets promise that a believing “remnant” will be saved by looking to the Messiah they once rejected (Jl 2:32; Zec 12:10). Following the judgment, the future Day of the Lord will be a time of prosperity, restoration, and blessing for Israel (Jl 3:18-21).<\/p>\nThe more explicit NT expressions—“the day of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Cor 1:8), “the day of the Lord Jesus” (1 Cor 5:5; 2 Cor 1:14), and “the day of Christ” (Phil 1:10; 2:16)—are more personal and more positive. They point to final events related to Christian believers, who will not experience the wrath of God (1 Thes 5:9). When the Day of the Lord comes, the earth will be renewed and purified through a judgment of fire (2 Pt 3:10-13). In the book of Revelation the final purging seems to come after the Millennium—that is, the 1,000-year reign of Christ (Rv 21:1).<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Eschatology; Last Days; Last Judgment.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DAY OF THE LORD Expression used by OT prophets (as early as the eighth-century BC prophet Amos) to signify a time in which God actively intervenes in history, primarily for judgment. Thus “the day of the Lord” is also called “the day of the Lord’s anger” (Zep 2:2). Sometimes “the day of the Lord” is used in the OT to speak of a past judgment (Lam 2:22). More often, an impending future judgment is in view (Jl 2:1-11). Ultimately, though, the term refers to climactic future judgment of the worl...","summary_en":"DAY OF THE LORD Expression used by OT prophets (as early as the eighth-century BC prophet Amos) to signify a time in which God actively intervenes in history, primarily for judgment. Thus “the day of the Lord” is also called “the day of the Lord’s anger” (Zep 2:2). Sometimes “the day of the Lord” is used in the OT to speak of a past judgment (Lam 2:22). More often, an impending future judgment is in view (Jl 2:1-11). Ultimately, though, the term refers to climactic future judgment of the worl...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":22439,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Lamentations","title_en":"Book of Lamentations","content_ro":"<h3>LAMENTATIONS, Book of<\/h3>\nBook consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Structure<\/p>\n• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint.<\/p>\nThe Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different literary styles of the books of Jeremiah and Lamentations and the alleged conflicting viewpoints in the two books.<\/p>\nThe literary styles of these books are strikingly different. The prophecies of the book of Jeremiah are flowing pronouncements that create an impression of spontaneity and are quite unlike the contrived literary structures of Lamentations. But it is somewhat arbitrary to assert that Jeremiah could not have written the book of Lamentations on the basis of style. The choice of the acrostic form would naturally limit the scope of the writer’s freedom and profoundly affect his style. It is clear from 2 Chronicles 35:25 that Jeremiah composed the same type of material as that found in Lamentations. Since the sermons of the book of Jeremiah were intended for public proclamation, they would naturally have a spontaneity that the book of Lamentations would not possess. Certainly, the sensitive nature reflected in Jeremiah’s prophecies characterized the author of Lamentations as well.<\/p>\nTypical of the alleged differences of viewpoint used to deny Jeremaic authorship is the role of the nations in the destruction of Jerusalem. In his prophecy Jeremiah saw the invading Babylonians as a tool of God’s punishment, and appealed to the Jews to surrender to the invaders (Jer 28:3). The book of Lamentations seems to make God the direct author of the punishment and sees the enemy nations only as onlookers who will also experience God’s wrath (Lam 1:21; 3:59-66). It must be noted, however, that the enemies referred to in Lamentations are not only the Babylonians but all of the hostile powers that threatened Judah and gloated over its destruction (1:21). The assurance that God will judge these enemies is not a denial of the message of the book of Jeremiah, for it would be artificial for Jeremiah to suppose that the Babylonians, even though they were an instrument of God’s anger, were exempt from punishment. Such a concept is at variance with Jeremiah 12:14-17.<\/p>\nA number of phrases used in the book of Jeremiah are found in Lamentations as well. The expressions “terrors on every side” (Lam 2:22; cf. Jer 6:25; 20:10) and “wormwood” (Lam 3:15, 19; cf. Jer 9:15; 23:15) are examples of these. This fact lends support to the concept of Jeremaic authorship of the book.<\/p>\nOther reasons cited for the denial of Jeremaic authorship are the absence of the name of Jeremiah in Lamentations and the position of the book in the Writings, not the Prophets, in the Hebrew Bible. The absence of Jeremiah’s name is not a cogent argument against his authorship; there are a significant number of OT books whose authors are not cited. Since the book of Lamentations is a formal dirge, and is thus unlike the book of Jeremiah with its numerous autobiographical references, one would not expect personal allusions by the author.<\/p>\nThe position of Lamentations in the third division of the Hebrew Bible is sometimes appealed to by those who question Jeremaic authorship. Since Jeremiah is in the second division, it is argued that Lamentations was written too late for it to have been authored by Jeremiah. It should be noted, however, that there is a lack of unity in the early lists of the canonical books in the third division. It is difficult to assign a late date to a book of the third division only because of its inclusion in that division. The early church father Jerome indicated that Lamentations was once on the same scroll with Jeremiah.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nIf the book of Lamentations was written by Jeremiah, the time of writing would be shortly after the fall of Jerusalem (586 BC<\/span>). It is extremely difficult to imagine an author living in later times writing such a poignant lament over Jerusalem’s fall. The vivid descriptions of the suffering endured by the inhabitants of Jerusalem support the position that the book was written by an eyewitness to the events.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nAfter many months of siege by the Babylonian armies, Jerusalem fell, and the final deportation of the people of Judah took place. Extrabiblical confirmation of the devastation caused by the Babylonian invasion may be found in the Lachish letters, which record the message from a soldier in the field who indicates that he is watching for the signals of Lachish but cannot see the signals of Azekah (cf. Jer 34:7).<\/p>\nThe time preceding Jerusalem’s fall was one of internal strife and political intrigue. Jeremiah counseled surrender, while the chauvinistic leaders of Jerusalem tried to encourage the Judahites to fight on against the Babylonian onslaught. The role of Jeremiah in those final events was a tenuous one. His life was threatened, and he suffered numerous imprisonments.<\/p>\nThe fall of Jerusalem meant more than ignominious defeat and exile. While these would have been hard to bear, the theological emergency brought about by the event would have been the most difficult thing for believing Jews to comprehend. The fall of the city in which God chose to reveal himself would have signaled the end of God’s promises. The OT clearly set forth a glorious future for Jerusalem. It was to be the center of the messianic kingdom in the end time (Mi 4). The destruction of the city would cause many to question the veracity of God’s Word. The laments in this book are not only for the suffering that accompanied the fall of the city but also for the deep spiritual questions posed by its demise.<\/p>\nStructure<\/p>\nEach poem has a distinct symmetrical pattern. The first (Lam 1) is an elaborate acrostic composed of three-line segments. There are 22 segments, each beginning with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, proceeding in order from the first to the last. The second poem (ch 2) is similar except for a transposition of two Hebrew letters. The third poem (ch 3) is also composed of three-line segments, but each line begins with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, rather than only the first line of each segment as in the first two poems. The same Hebrew letters are transposed. The fourth poem (ch 4) is an acrostic composed of two-line segments. The first line of each segment begins with the appropriate Hebrew letter. The last poem (ch 5) is not an acrostic, but it contains the same number of letters as the Hebrew alphabet.<\/p>\nThe reason for this complex structure is unknown. It has been suggested that it is a device to aid memorization. Another suggestion is that the Hebrews may have seen the alphabet as representing the concept of totality or completeness. This idea derives from the fact that the Hebrew alphabet represented numbers as well as letters. This concept of totality may be reflected in the reference to the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet in Revelation 1:8: “I am the Alpha and the Omega.” It is quite possible that the expression of lamentation in the structure of the Hebrew alphabet could have represented the full range of sorrow felt by the author as he pondered the fall of the city of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPurpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\nA major purpose of the book of Lamentations was to give expression to the deep grief that Jeremiah felt as a result of Jerusalem’s catastrophe. By writing the book, he expressed the grief of all the Jews of his time and gave them a vehicle that would give vent to their sorrow.<\/p>\nThe book does not contain only lamentation, however, for it expresses hope and comfort as well. Thus another of its purposes was to lift the hearts of the people and point them to God, the source of all comfort. One of the greatest expressions of hope in the book is found in 3:22-23: “The unfailing love of the Lord<\/span> never ends! By his mercies we have been kept from complete destruction. Great is his faithfulness; his mercies begin afresh each day” (nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nPerhaps the most important purpose of the book was to explain the theological reason for the catastrophe. The book places the reason for Jerusalem’s fall in clear focus and demonstrates what can be learned about God from this. The reason given for Jerusalem’s demise is the sin of the people (1:8-9, 14; 4:13). The fall of the city is a vivid illustration of God’s justice in not overlooking sin even in those who are his own (1:18). It demonstrates the fact that God may seem like an enemy to his people when they are disobedient (2:5-7). It shows that the catastrophe was not outside the purposes of God (v 17) and vividly describes the results that can come from willful disobedience. But God is envisioned as a God of mercy and faithfulness as well. Even though Jeremiah saw his beloved homeland crumbling about him, there remained one great element of stability: God’s loyalty to his promises. Jeremiah knew that this was not the end, for he trusted in the steadfast love of the Lord and learned to wait quietly for God to act in his time (3:22-27).<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\nThe first chapter is a lamentation over the captivity of the citizens of Jerusalem and the resultant desolation of the city.<\/p>\nThe author alludes to Deuteronomy 28:64-65 at the beginning of the first lamentation (Lam 1:3). In that passage Moses warned the people that their disobedience to God would result in their dispersion among the nations, with no resting place. Lamentations 1:3 says that this warning has been realized.<\/p>\nThe cause of Israel’s misfortune was their sin (1:8a). This is a remarkable example of the results of disobedience to God. The dire results of sin permeate this first lamentation in a series of pictures of deep pathos (vv 11-12, 16-17). In the midst of this suffering Israel confesses that God was in the right (v 18). The righteousness of God involves his acting in integrity. He punishes sin even in his own people.<\/p>\nThe first lamentation ends with a prayer in which the people cry out for God’s judgment on their enemies (1:21-22). Such imprecations are the OT believer’s way of expressing his longing for an end to evil as it was personified in the godless nations.<\/p>\nThe second lamentation also concerns the destruction of Jerusalem but places more emphasis on God’s judgment. The tone is more strident than in the previous lamentation. Throughout the passage words expressing anger appear (2:1-3, 6-7). It is as though the terrible wrath of God evident in the destruction of the city is still vivid in the mind of the writer.<\/p>\nThe author lays the blame for God’s anger squarely on the false prophets (2:14); but he does not exempt the people from guilt, as is clear from other passages (e.g., 1:5, 8). It was the false prophets of the time who failed to warn the people of the results of their sin (2:14). Because of this, destruction came, and the writer can give no comfort to the people (v 13).<\/p>\nThe second lamentation begins with a reference to God’s footstool (2:1), probably referring to the ark of the covenant (1 Chr 28:2). The ark was the focal point of God’s revelation of himself. This verse reflects the theological emergency of the time; the writer laments the fact that God has not remembered his “footstool.” Even the holy ark, which marked God’s presence with his people, has not prevented God from destroying Jerusalem.<\/p>\nThe same thought is expressed in verses 6-7, where the traditional aspects of Israelite worship, as well as the sanctuary, are seen as having been destroyed by God. This important truth demonstrates the viewpoint of the whole book, which sees God as the direct cause of the misfortune.<\/p>\nThe third lamentation is very personal. At its conclusion, sorrow and complaint pass into a prayer of assurance (3:61-66). In the first 18 verses of this chapter, the writer describes how the Lord has afflicted him. He refers to God in the third person, not addressing him as Lord until he speaks the words of verse 18. Only after he has poured out his grief in this fashion can he speak the name of the Lord. This poignant grief suddenly changes to an expression of joy. He can affirm the covenant faithfulness of the Lord, and in the midst of the deepening sorrow, he sees God’s mercies as new every morning (vv 22-24). The chapter closes with a sudden burst of assurance (vv 58-66), in which the writer affirms his belief that God will vindicate him before his enemies. Only after he meditates on the nature of God’s loving-kindness (vv 22-27) can he speak these words. The desperate isolation and separation from God expressed in verses 1-17 give way as he affirms God’s goodness. Assurance comes as he reflects on the nature and goodness of God.<\/p>\nThe fourth lamentation emphasizes the fact that the judgment was well deserved. The author describes the various classes of the population (4:1-16) and indicates how each has been affected by Jerusalem’s downfall. Verses 12-20 affirm that the judgment of God is a direct consequence of sin. This lamentation also becomes a joyous statement of hope (vv 21-22), as the writer affirms that God will punish Israel’s enemies. Israel’s sin will be forgiven, and the guilt of “the daughter of Edom” will be punished. The “daughter of Edom” undoubtedly stands for all the enemy nations. (Edom is used in Isaiah 63:1 in the same fashion.) This salvation of the nation of Judah will not take place until their guilt is atoned for. It occurs when God conquers the godless nations. This conquest of the nations is an event that takes place in the end time, according to numerous OT and NT passages. It represents the manifestation of God’s total sovereignty over his creation.<\/p>\nThe last chapter is a poignant prayer in which the author describes their sufferings and asks God to restore the fortunes of the people. It begins with a request to God, asking him to consider all that has befallen the people (5:1-18). Part of the ignominy of the captive Jews is that “slaves” rule over them (v 8). This is an apparent reference to the Babylonian captors, who themselves were subject to despotic rule for many decades. The author’s perspective changes in verse 19, where he affirms that the Lord reigns forever. While Jerusalem, the earthly dwelling place of the Lord, has come to an end, the Lord’s throne endures forever. Because his throne is everlasting, the author asks, “Why do you continue to forget us? Why have you forsaken us for so long? Restore us, O Lord<\/span>, and bring us back to you again! Give us back the joys we once had! Or have you utterly rejected us? Are you angry with us still?” (5:20-22, nlt<\/span>). The question is based on the belief that because God’s reign is eternal, he cannot utterly forsake his people. He will restore his kingdom.<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations is neglected by many Christians. It deserves to be studied more. Its powerful statement concerning the blessings that may come from tragedy is a relevant message in any age, and it is one of the most powerful illustrations of the results of sin to be found in the OT. Its theology is clear and precise, painting a brilliant picture of God’s faithfulness against the dark background of the collapse of the city of Zion.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jeremiah (Person) #1; Jeremiah, Book of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LAMENTATIONS, Book of<\/h3>\nBook consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPreview<\/p>\n• Author<\/p>\n• Date<\/p>\n• Background<\/p>\n• Structure<\/p>\n• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n• Content<\/p>\nAuthor<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint.<\/p>\nThe Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different literary styles of the books of Jeremiah and Lamentations and the alleged conflicting viewpoints in the two books.<\/p>\nThe literary styles of these books are strikingly different. The prophecies of the book of Jeremiah are flowing pronouncements that create an impression of spontaneity and are quite unlike the contrived literary structures of Lamentations. But it is somewhat arbitrary to assert that Jeremiah could not have written the book of Lamentations on the basis of style. The choice of the acrostic form would naturally limit the scope of the writer’s freedom and profoundly affect his style. It is clear from 2 Chronicles 35:25 that Jeremiah composed the same type of material as that found in Lamentations. Since the sermons of the book of Jeremiah were intended for public proclamation, they would naturally have a spontaneity that the book of Lamentations would not possess. Certainly, the sensitive nature reflected in Jeremiah’s prophecies characterized the author of Lamentations as well.<\/p>\nTypical of the alleged differences of viewpoint used to deny Jeremaic authorship is the role of the nations in the destruction of Jerusalem. In his prophecy Jeremiah saw the invading Babylonians as a tool of God’s punishment, and appealed to the Jews to surrender to the invaders (Jer 28:3). The book of Lamentations seems to make God the direct author of the punishment and sees the enemy nations only as onlookers who will also experience God’s wrath (Lam 1:21; 3:59-66). It must be noted, however, that the enemies referred to in Lamentations are not only the Babylonians but all of the hostile powers that threatened Judah and gloated over its destruction (1:21). The assurance that God will judge these enemies is not a denial of the message of the book of Jeremiah, for it would be artificial for Jeremiah to suppose that the Babylonians, even though they were an instrument of God’s anger, were exempt from punishment. Such a concept is at variance with Jeremiah 12:14-17.<\/p>\nA number of phrases used in the book of Jeremiah are found in Lamentations as well. The expressions “terrors on every side” (Lam 2:22; cf. Jer 6:25; 20:10) and “wormwood” (Lam 3:15, 19; cf. Jer 9:15; 23:15) are examples of these. This fact lends support to the concept of Jeremaic authorship of the book.<\/p>\nOther reasons cited for the denial of Jeremaic authorship are the absence of the name of Jeremiah in Lamentations and the position of the book in the Writings, not the Prophets, in the Hebrew Bible. The absence of Jeremiah’s name is not a cogent argument against his authorship; there are a significant number of OT books whose authors are not cited. Since the book of Lamentations is a formal dirge, and is thus unlike the book of Jeremiah with its numerous autobiographical references, one would not expect personal allusions by the author.<\/p>\nThe position of Lamentations in the third division of the Hebrew Bible is sometimes appealed to by those who question Jeremaic authorship. Since Jeremiah is in the second division, it is argued that Lamentations was written too late for it to have been authored by Jeremiah. It should be noted, however, that there is a lack of unity in the early lists of the canonical books in the third division. It is difficult to assign a late date to a book of the third division only because of its inclusion in that division. The early church father Jerome indicated that Lamentations was once on the same scroll with Jeremiah.<\/p>\nDate<\/p>\nIf the book of Lamentations was written by Jeremiah, the time of writing would be shortly after the fall of Jerusalem (586 BC<\/span>). It is extremely difficult to imagine an author living in later times writing such a poignant lament over Jerusalem’s fall. The vivid descriptions of the suffering endured by the inhabitants of Jerusalem support the position that the book was written by an eyewitness to the events.<\/p>\nBackground<\/p>\nAfter many months of siege by the Babylonian armies, Jerusalem fell, and the final deportation of the people of Judah took place. Extrabiblical confirmation of the devastation caused by the Babylonian invasion may be found in the Lachish letters, which record the message from a soldier in the field who indicates that he is watching for the signals of Lachish but cannot see the signals of Azekah (cf. Jer 34:7).<\/p>\nThe time preceding Jerusalem’s fall was one of internal strife and political intrigue. Jeremiah counseled surrender, while the chauvinistic leaders of Jerusalem tried to encourage the Judahites to fight on against the Babylonian onslaught. The role of Jeremiah in those final events was a tenuous one. His life was threatened, and he suffered numerous imprisonments.<\/p>\nThe fall of Jerusalem meant more than ignominious defeat and exile. While these would have been hard to bear, the theological emergency brought about by the event would have been the most difficult thing for believing Jews to comprehend. The fall of the city in which God chose to reveal himself would have signaled the end of God’s promises. The OT clearly set forth a glorious future for Jerusalem. It was to be the center of the messianic kingdom in the end time (Mi 4). The destruction of the city would cause many to question the veracity of God’s Word. The laments in this book are not only for the suffering that accompanied the fall of the city but also for the deep spiritual questions posed by its demise.<\/p>\nStructure<\/p>\nEach poem has a distinct symmetrical pattern. The first (Lam 1) is an elaborate acrostic composed of three-line segments. There are 22 segments, each beginning with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, proceeding in order from the first to the last. The second poem (ch 2) is similar except for a transposition of two Hebrew letters. The third poem (ch 3) is also composed of three-line segments, but each line begins with a different letter of the Hebrew alphabet, rather than only the first line of each segment as in the first two poems. The same Hebrew letters are transposed. The fourth poem (ch 4) is an acrostic composed of two-line segments. The first line of each segment begins with the appropriate Hebrew letter. The last poem (ch 5) is not an acrostic, but it contains the same number of letters as the Hebrew alphabet.<\/p>\nThe reason for this complex structure is unknown. It has been suggested that it is a device to aid memorization. Another suggestion is that the Hebrews may have seen the alphabet as representing the concept of totality or completeness. This idea derives from the fact that the Hebrew alphabet represented numbers as well as letters. This concept of totality may be reflected in the reference to the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet in Revelation 1:8: “I am the Alpha and the Omega.” It is quite possible that the expression of lamentation in the structure of the Hebrew alphabet could have represented the full range of sorrow felt by the author as he pondered the fall of the city of Jerusalem.<\/p>\nPurpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\nA major purpose of the book of Lamentations was to give expression to the deep grief that Jeremiah felt as a result of Jerusalem’s catastrophe. By writing the book, he expressed the grief of all the Jews of his time and gave them a vehicle that would give vent to their sorrow.<\/p>\nThe book does not contain only lamentation, however, for it expresses hope and comfort as well. Thus another of its purposes was to lift the hearts of the people and point them to God, the source of all comfort. One of the greatest expressions of hope in the book is found in 3:22-23: “The unfailing love of the Lord<\/span> never ends! By his mercies we have been kept from complete destruction. Great is his faithfulness; his mercies begin afresh each day” (nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\nPerhaps the most important purpose of the book was to explain the theological reason for the catastrophe. The book places the reason for Jerusalem’s fall in clear focus and demonstrates what can be learned about God from this. The reason given for Jerusalem’s demise is the sin of the people (1:8-9, 14; 4:13). The fall of the city is a vivid illustration of God’s justice in not overlooking sin even in those who are his own (1:18). It demonstrates the fact that God may seem like an enemy to his people when they are disobedient (2:5-7). It shows that the catastrophe was not outside the purposes of God (v 17) and vividly describes the results that can come from willful disobedience. But God is envisioned as a God of mercy and faithfulness as well. Even though Jeremiah saw his beloved homeland crumbling about him, there remained one great element of stability: God’s loyalty to his promises. Jeremiah knew that this was not the end, for he trusted in the steadfast love of the Lord and learned to wait quietly for God to act in his time (3:22-27).<\/p>\nContent<\/p>\nThe first chapter is a lamentation over the captivity of the citizens of Jerusalem and the resultant desolation of the city.<\/p>\nThe author alludes to Deuteronomy 28:64-65 at the beginning of the first lamentation (Lam 1:3). In that passage Moses warned the people that their disobedience to God would result in their dispersion among the nations, with no resting place. Lamentations 1:3 says that this warning has been realized.<\/p>\nThe cause of Israel’s misfortune was their sin (1:8a). This is a remarkable example of the results of disobedience to God. The dire results of sin permeate this first lamentation in a series of pictures of deep pathos (vv 11-12, 16-17). In the midst of this suffering Israel confesses that God was in the right (v 18). The righteousness of God involves his acting in integrity. He punishes sin even in his own people.<\/p>\nThe first lamentation ends with a prayer in which the people cry out for God’s judgment on their enemies (1:21-22). Such imprecations are the OT believer’s way of expressing his longing for an end to evil as it was personified in the godless nations.<\/p>\nThe second lamentation also concerns the destruction of Jerusalem but places more emphasis on God’s judgment. The tone is more strident than in the previous lamentation. Throughout the passage words expressing anger appear (2:1-3, 6-7). It is as though the terrible wrath of God evident in the destruction of the city is still vivid in the mind of the writer.<\/p>\nThe author lays the blame for God’s anger squarely on the false prophets (2:14); but he does not exempt the people from guilt, as is clear from other passages (e.g., 1:5, 8). It was the false prophets of the time who failed to warn the people of the results of their sin (2:14). Because of this, destruction came, and the writer can give no comfort to the people (v 13).<\/p>\nThe second lamentation begins with a reference to God’s footstool (2:1), probably referring to the ark of the covenant (1 Chr 28:2). The ark was the focal point of God’s revelation of himself. This verse reflects the theological emergency of the time; the writer laments the fact that God has not remembered his “footstool.” Even the holy ark, which marked God’s presence with his people, has not prevented God from destroying Jerusalem.<\/p>\nThe same thought is expressed in verses 6-7, where the traditional aspects of Israelite worship, as well as the sanctuary, are seen as having been destroyed by God. This important truth demonstrates the viewpoint of the whole book, which sees God as the direct cause of the misfortune.<\/p>\nThe third lamentation is very personal. At its conclusion, sorrow and complaint pass into a prayer of assurance (3:61-66). In the first 18 verses of this chapter, the writer describes how the Lord has afflicted him. He refers to God in the third person, not addressing him as Lord until he speaks the words of verse 18. Only after he has poured out his grief in this fashion can he speak the name of the Lord. This poignant grief suddenly changes to an expression of joy. He can affirm the covenant faithfulness of the Lord, and in the midst of the deepening sorrow, he sees God’s mercies as new every morning (vv 22-24). The chapter closes with a sudden burst of assurance (vv 58-66), in which the writer affirms his belief that God will vindicate him before his enemies. Only after he meditates on the nature of God’s loving-kindness (vv 22-27) can he speak these words. The desperate isolation and separation from God expressed in verses 1-17 give way as he affirms God’s goodness. Assurance comes as he reflects on the nature and goodness of God.<\/p>\nThe fourth lamentation emphasizes the fact that the judgment was well deserved. The author describes the various classes of the population (4:1-16) and indicates how each has been affected by Jerusalem’s downfall. Verses 12-20 affirm that the judgment of God is a direct consequence of sin. This lamentation also becomes a joyous statement of hope (vv 21-22), as the writer affirms that God will punish Israel’s enemies. Israel’s sin will be forgiven, and the guilt of “the daughter of Edom” will be punished. The “daughter of Edom” undoubtedly stands for all the enemy nations. (Edom is used in Isaiah 63:1 in the same fashion.) This salvation of the nation of Judah will not take place until their guilt is atoned for. It occurs when God conquers the godless nations. This conquest of the nations is an event that takes place in the end time, according to numerous OT and NT passages. It represents the manifestation of God’s total sovereignty over his creation.<\/p>\nThe last chapter is a poignant prayer in which the author describes their sufferings and asks God to restore the fortunes of the people. It begins with a request to God, asking him to consider all that has befallen the people (5:1-18). Part of the ignominy of the captive Jews is that “slaves” rule over them (v 8). This is an apparent reference to the Babylonian captors, who themselves were subject to despotic rule for many decades. The author’s perspective changes in verse 19, where he affirms that the Lord reigns forever. While Jerusalem, the earthly dwelling place of the Lord, has come to an end, the Lord’s throne endures forever. Because his throne is everlasting, the author asks, “Why do you continue to forget us? Why have you forsaken us for so long? Restore us, O Lord<\/span>, and bring us back to you again! Give us back the joys we once had! Or have you utterly rejected us? Are you angry with us still?” (5:20-22, nlt<\/span>). The question is based on the belief that because God’s reign is eternal, he cannot utterly forsake his people. He will restore his kingdom.<\/p>\nThe book of Lamentations is neglected by many Christians. It deserves to be studied more. Its powerful statement concerning the blessings that may come from tragedy is a relevant message in any age, and it is one of the most powerful illustrations of the results of sin to be found in the OT. Its theology is clear and precise, painting a brilliant picture of God’s faithfulness against the dark background of the collapse of the city of Zion.<\/p>\nSee also<\/em> Jeremiah (Person) #1; Jeremiah, Book of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LAMENTATIONS, Book of Book consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem. Preview • Author • Date • Background • Structure • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author The book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint. The Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different ...","summary_en":"LAMENTATIONS, Book of Book consisting of five poems that constitute a formal dirge lamenting the fall of Jerusalem. Preview • Author • Date • Background • Structure • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author The book of Lamentations has been traditionally ascribed to the prophet Jeremiah. This ascription is supported by the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint. The Jeremaic authorship of the book has been questioned by many scholars, however. The chief reasons for this are the different ...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":52887,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:22","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:22","content_ro":"2:22<\/strong> calling them to a day of feasting:<\/em> The poet compares Jerusalem’s destruction to an invitation to a banquet at which war, famine, wild animals, and sickness would feast on the wicked in Jerusalem (Deut 28:15-68; cp. Rev 19:17-21).<\/p>","content_en":"2:22<\/strong> calling them to a day of feasting:<\/em> The poet compares Jerusalem’s destruction to an invitation to a banquet at which war, famine, wild animals, and sickness would feast on the wicked in Jerusalem (Deut 28:15-68; cp. Rev 19:17-21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:22 calling them to a day of feasting: The poet compares Jerusalem’s destruction to an invitation to a banquet at which war, famine, wild animals, and sickness would feast on the wicked in Jerusalem (Deut 28:15-68; cp. Rev 19:17-21).","summary_en":"2:22 calling them to a day of feasting: The poet compares Jerusalem’s destruction to an invitation to a banquet at which war, famine, wild animals, and sickness would feast on the wicked in Jerusalem (Deut 28:15-68; cp. Rev 19:17-21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":80513,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:22","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:22","content_ro":"2:22<\/strong> calling them to a day of feasting:<\/em> The poet compares Jerusalem’s destruction to an invitation to a banquet at which war, famine, wild animals, and sickness would feast on the wicked in Jerusalem (Deut 28:15-68; cp. Rev 19:17-21).<\/p>","content_en":"2:22<\/strong> calling them to a day of feasting:<\/em> The poet compares Jerusalem’s destruction to an invitation to a banquet at which war, famine, wild animals, and sickness would feast on the wicked in Jerusalem (Deut 28:15-68; cp. Rev 19:17-21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:22 calling them to a day of feasting: The poet compares Jerusalem’s destruction to an invitation to a banquet at which war, famine, wild animals, and sickness would feast on the wicked in Jerusalem (Deut 28:15-68; cp. Rev 19:17-21).","summary_en":"2:22 calling them to a day of feasting: The poet compares Jerusalem’s destruction to an invitation to a banquet at which war, famine, wild animals, and sickness would feast on the wicked in Jerusalem (Deut 28:15-68; cp. Rev 19:17-21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":108139,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:22","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:22","content_ro":"2:22<\/strong> calling them to a day of feasting:<\/em> The poet compares Jerusalem’s destruction to an invitation to a banquet at which war, famine, wild animals, and sickness would feast on the wicked in Jerusalem (Deut 28:15-68; cp. Rev 19:17-21).<\/p>","content_en":"2:22<\/strong> calling them to a day of feasting:<\/em> The poet compares Jerusalem’s destruction to an invitation to a banquet at which war, famine, wild animals, and sickness would feast on the wicked in Jerusalem (Deut 28:15-68; cp. Rev 19:17-21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:22 calling them to a day of feasting: The poet compares Jerusalem’s destruction to an invitation to a banquet at which war, famine, wild animals, and sickness would feast on the wicked in Jerusalem (Deut 28:15-68; cp. Rev 19:17-21).","summary_en":"2:22 calling them to a day of feasting: The poet compares Jerusalem’s destruction to an invitation to a banquet at which war, famine, wild animals, and sickness would feast on the wicked in Jerusalem (Deut 28:15-68; cp. Rev 19:17-21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":135765,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Plângerile 2:22","title_en":"Study Note: Plângerile 2:22","content_ro":"2:22<\/strong> calling them to a day of feasting:<\/em> The poet compares Jerusalem’s destruction to an invitation to a banquet at which war, famine, wild animals, and sickness would feast on the wicked in Jerusalem (Deut 28:15-68; cp. Rev 19:17-21).<\/p>","content_en":"2:22<\/strong> calling them to a day of feasting:<\/em> The poet compares Jerusalem’s destruction to an invitation to a banquet at which war, famine, wild animals, and sickness would feast on the wicked in Jerusalem (Deut 28:15-68; cp. Rev 19:17-21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:22 calling them to a day of feasting: The poet compares Jerusalem’s destruction to an invitation to a banquet at which war, famine, wild animals, and sickness would feast on the wicked in Jerusalem (Deut 28:15-68; cp. Rev 19:17-21).","summary_en":"2:22 calling them to a day of feasting: The poet compares Jerusalem’s destruction to an invitation to a banquet at which war, famine, wild animals, and sickness would feast on the wicked in Jerusalem (Deut 28:15-68; cp. Rev 19:17-21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}]},"labels":{"article":"Articol","map":"Hartă","chart":"Diagramă","textbox":"Notă explicativă","picture":"Imagine","profile":"Profil","study_note":"Notă de studiu","theme_note":"Temă biblică"},"icons":{"article":"📖","map":"🗺️","chart":"📊","textbox":"💡","picture":"🖼️","profile":"👤","study_note":"📝","theme_note":"🎯"},"typeColors":{"article":"#d4af37","map":"#2d7d46","chart":"#3b82f6","textbox":"#8b5cf6","picture":"#ec4899","profile":"#f59e0b","study_note":"#06b6d4","theme_note":"#ef4444"}}

Plângerile lui Ieremia 2

Citește Biblia

Plângerile lui Ieremia 2

Niciun rezultat

Redare audio

Bine ai venit! 👋