Jeremiah 49:26

This might have immediately occurred to every one, "How can it be that Damascus is to perish?" Then the Prophet anticipates this, and shews, that though this was contrary to the judgment commonly formed, yet, as the Lord had so decreed, the destruction of that city was certain. We now then perceive the design of the Prophet. It afterwards follows, -- So the versions, (except the Sept.) and also the Targ., the y iod being regarded as paragogic. So Grotius. — Ed. The Syr. rendered it "spared;" the Vulg. has left out the negative not. There are two difficulties, the verb zv is not used in the sense of sparing, though Gataker labours to shew this; then the connexion: the next verse begins with a "therefore." Take the verb here in its usual sense, and then "therefore" will have its force. He asks, Why was not this city, under the circumstances previously mentioned, forsaken or abandoned, notwithstanding its being a celebrated and a joyous city? But as it was not forsaken, "therefore," he says, "her young men shall fall in her streets," etc. Venema's view is different; his version is, — Why not? forsaken has been the city of praise, The city of my joy. That is, Why should not Damascus be compelled to flee, since Jerusalem had been forsaken, the city of praise and of his joy. "Therefore," in this sense, refers to the slaughter of those who would not flee. — Ed. Jeremiah 49:26 26.

Therefore her young men shall fall in her streets,.... Or "verily" (o) so Jarchi interprets it as an oath; Jehovah swearing that so it should be; that her young men, her choice ones such who were the flower of the city, and on whom its future prosperity depended; these should fall by the sword of the Chaldeans in the streets of the city, when having entered, and taken it: and all the men of war shall be cut off in that day, saith the Lord of hosts; soldiers and officers, men of strength and valour in whom the inhabitants of Damascus trusted for their defence; these should be cut oil by the sword of the enemy at the time of the siege, and taking of it. (o) "certe", Gataker.

An exclamation of sorrow wrung from the prophet at the thought of the people of Damascus remaining to be slaughtered. The words my joy express the prophet's own sympathy. The praise of Damascus for beauty has been universal from the days of Naaman 2 Kings 5:12 , to those of recent travelers.

The Hebrew particles are not always well rendered in our translation, and our learned English Annotator hath rightly observed this place as one instance, for Nbl cannot be here an iliative, but is much better translated surely , as a note of assertion. God threateneth the Syrians with a certain ruin and desolation.

רפתה דמּשׁק, "Damascus has become slack," i.e., discouraged; she turns to flee, and cannot escape, being seized with trembling and anxiety. החזיקה is not the third pers. fem., prehendit terrorem, but stands for החזיקהּ, with Mappik omitted, because the tone is retracted in consequence of the Athnach; cf. Jeremiah 6:24 ; Jeremiah 8:21 , etc. "Terror has seized Damascus." In the last clause וחבלים is subsumed along with צרה; hence the verb is put in the singular. - Jeremiah 49:25 . The question, "How is not," etc., has been differently explained. Eichhorn, Gesenius, Ewald, and Umbreit take the words according to the German usage, in the sense, "How is the city forsaken?" or laid waste. But this Germanism is foreign to the Hebrew; and it is not obviated by C. B. Michaelis taking "how" in the sense of quam inopinato et quam horribiliter non deserta est, so that the words would mean nullus est modus desertionis aut gradus quem Damascus non sit experta, because איך לא does not express the kind and manner, or the degree of an action. In the only other passage where איך לא occurs ( 2 Samuel 1:14 ) the negative has its full meaning. Others (Calvin, Schnurrer, J. D. Michaelis, Rosenmller, Maurer) take עזב in the sense of leaving free, untouched: "How has she not been left untouched?" i.e., been spared. But this meaning of the verb is nowhere found.

There is no other course left than, with Ngelsbach, to take the verb as referring to the desertion of the city through the flight of the inhabitants, as in Jeremiah 4:29 , etc., and to take the words thus: "How is (i.e., how has it happened that) the famous city (is) not forsaken?" According to this view, it is not the desolation of the city that is bewailed, but the fact that the inhabitants have not saved their lives by flight. The way is prepared for this thought by Jeremiah 49:24 , where it is said that the inhabitants of Damascus wish to flee, but are seized with convulsive terror; in Jeremiah 49:25 also there is a more specific reason given for it, where it is stated that the youths (the young warriors) and all the men of war shall fall in the streets of the city, and be slain by foes. The suffix in "my delight" refers to the prophet, and expresses his sympathy for the fall of the glorious city (see on Jeremiah 48:31 ); because not only does its population perish, but the city itself also ( Jeremiah 49:27 ) is to be burned to ashes.

Jeremiah 49:26 The Hebrew particles are not always well rendered in our translation, and our learned English Annotator hath rightly observed this place as one instance, for Nbl cannot be here an iliative, but is much better translated surely, as a note of assertion. God threateneth the Syrians with a certain ruin and desolation. Jeremiah 49:27 I will bring a judgment that shall burn in Damascus like a consuming fire, and it shall reach to the royal seat of Benhadad; either that which was the royal seat of Ben-hadad, 2Ki_8:7, or else Ben-hadad (signifying the son of Hadad, which was their idol) was the common name of all the kings of Syria, as Pharaoh was to the kings of Egypt, Amo_1:4 ## Jeremiah 49:28 Kedar, Gen_25:13, was one of the sons of Ishmael, whose posterity inhabited part of Arabia Petrea. See Isa, Isa_21:13 ,17 . We read of it Psa_120:5 Son_1:5 Eze_27:21. We read of ## Hazor Jos_11:1 Jos_11:10, it was the head city to several kingdoms in Joshua’s time; Jabin was king of it in the times of Deborah, Jud_4:2. The prophet foretells that Nebuchadrezzar should also conquer these kingdoms; and saith he heard the Lord call to Nebuchadrezzar to go up against them.