Tag: bible study

The opening chapter will bounce back and forth between narration and then commentary by the city of Jerusalem herself, who bemoans the state she has fallen into after the Babylonian siege. Obviously, we have to be careful with the language. It’s emotionally heightened, meaning it’s often exaggerating reality but is rightly communicating how that reality feels. Also, cities don’t talk 4 realz so we need to accept the use of personification (giving human thoughts/characteristics to something that isn’t human).

The narrator starts describing the city of Jerusalem (commentary won’t be extensive here, these are just images to digest). These are not happy pictures. A once vibrant city is now empty, like a widow, she is abandoned. The city has fallen greatly and weeps in her loneliness. No one came to her aid during the attack, in fact later we’ll learn that it feels as though the surrounding friends were glad at the downfall of Jerusalem.

We’re told that Judah (southern kingdom, Jerusalem is in Judah) was exiled so they could be forced to do hard labor (hmm, ring any bells, Israel??? God brings you out of slavery, gives you a sweet land, and you’ve landed yourselves right back in the same position for all the reasons our friend Amos laid out.) In this slavery, they find no rest (something that God promises them back in Deuteronomy and that Jesus promises to his Kingdom folk now). Now, again, this language is a bit exaggerated in that not everyone had to do hard labor. And eventually they acclimate to the society and some choose to stay there even when the approval is given to go back to Jerusalem and rebuild the temple.

v.5 gives the first glimpse of acknowledging how this happened – Jerusalem is afflicted for the multitude of her transgressions (it’ll come back in v.8 and continue to become more consistently mentioned as the chapters go on). But we quickly jump off this point and back into the woes and such. We get a couple references to Zion (this is the mount upon which the temples are built). v.6 shows how the royalty have been brought low, unable to find food and having to flee without strength. Jerusalem remembers all the good she had before this happened and now how her enemies mock her now that she has fallen.

In v.9, the “…uncleanness in her skirts” means it’s caught up on her, stuck to her, yet she didn’t expect this trouble (which is foolish, God had been warning them over and over about this outcome. They weren’t listening). Also, we get the first commentary from Jerusalem “O Lord, behold my affliction, for the enemy has triumphed”. She will speak again in v.11, “Look, O Lord, and see for I am despised…” and it will continue to be her talking, not the narrator, through v.16.

You’ll notice that although the narrator had stated that it was the sins of the city (the people, obviously) that caused all of this, when Jerusalem speaks she is much more dodgy on the subject. Her lament in v.11-16 describes these troubles as having been, “…brought upon me, which the Lord inflicted on the day of his fierce anger.” Although true, she seems to dodge the blame here, she paints God as a persistent menace (sending fire, tripping her up, leaving her disoriented, etc.) From her perspective, God loads up all of her sins and binds them to her, leaving her weighed down and burdened, unable to fight against those who came to attack. And those who could defend Jerusalem (her mighty men) were unable to do so. God has put them through the ringer, winepress style. (It is interesting how many of the descriptions of Jerusalem here carry on and are applied to the judgment of Babylon in Revelation.)

One thing not to miss is in v.12 where it talks about the, “…day of his fierce anger”. We should understand this as being a valid reference of “the day of Lord”, a popular phrase among the minor prophets and beyond. It’s not one specific day, however it does refer to a distinct time when God will act and his justice will be carried out. It happened when Assyria took Israel into exile, it happened when Babylon ransacked Judah and exiled them, it happened in Jesus time, and will happen again (and finally, I’d presume) at Christ’s return.

In v.18 we finally get Jerusalem to admit her part in this: “The Lord is in the right, for I have rebelled against his word.” And this is to be a warning to all those who surround her. As the weight of her responsibility sits upon her, she cries out in v.20. And yet those who surround her won’t help, they are glad God has done what He has done. These nations were false friends and were only using Jerusalem (again, much like those who do not mourn Babylon’s downfall in Revelation except that they may be next). Which, interestingly enough, is what Jerusalem asks for here. God has brought justice to Jerusalem, now Jerusalem asks for equal treatment to the evil nations that surround her; for God to deal with them as He has dealt with her.

The lament continues. It’s a new poem and the acrostic starts over again. Similar to the last one we have different perspectives throughout the poem. It starts with the narrator in v.1-10. In v.11, the perspective shifts to a personal one, “My eyes are spent with weeping…”, it seems like a prophet of sorts who weeps for the nation and its disobedience but who doesn’t consider himself part of the nation that disobeyed. He speaks to Jerusalem. Jerusalem responds, not to the prophets words, but back to God, just like the end of the last one, asking God to look upon them and have pity on how harshly He has dealt with them.

I’m not going to necessarily go line by line here, much of it is easy enough to understand. Again, though, it’s best to read through it by saying it out loud.

Lots about how angry God is in this chapter. When it says, “He has cast down heaven to earth the splendor of Israel” we are reminded that this nation was one that was once lifted up, brought high by the Most High God, and now they are brought low, cast from being held up by God and left to their own destruction. The phrase, “…day of his anger” is repeated here from chapter 1 and will continue to show up.

Notice in v.2 we’re told that the strongholds of Judah are broken down, which they were indeed warned about by the prophet Amos. God’s “right hand” has been withdrawn, the power hand that shows up in such circumstances as attacking Pharaoh’s armies and protecting his people, is no longer there to protect them. As a result, their enemies come and the narrator attributes the deaths that occurred during the siege of Jerusalem to God himself, saying “…he has killed all who were delightful in our eyes in the tent of the daughter of Zion…” This is likely in reference to the the many military men who fled with the king when the Babylonians came into town. They were eventually caught and either killed or captured (and the king himself had his eyes gouged out after they killed his kids in front of him and then he was led away). Jeremiah 52 has the deets if you want to read up on it.

Here’s the thing with all of this – I don’t like it. This killing and anger and abandoning of people, I don’t like it. But then I think of two things.

1.) These are indeed a rebellious people. As we read some of the prophets that came before this…why aren’t the people listening? God warned them and warned them and warned them. He called them to repentance over and over again. All that they mourn over losing were things God graciously gave them to begin with. They are not entitled to his mercy here, what they had they never earned anyway. And they took that status of being God’s people and they spit in his face. If the reactions recorded in Lamentations are to be believed, it seems like God’s methods work do they not? I worry that my initial reaction to this means that I don’t think sin is as bad as it really is.

2.) Justice isn’t mine, it’s God’s. Perhaps I can’t look at the world like that because I’m not humanly capable of it. We can handle the mercy stuff because it’s given out freely to anyone willing to turn and follow it into the Kingdom. But the justice, I don’t get to deal it out because I wouldn’t get it right. Too harsh, too soft, too gullible, whatever the issue is I know that I have it. So I can only communicate that God is ultimately just and will handle things appropriately.

In v.6, we’re reminded that not only are the people being punished but the very place where God lived among the people, the Temple (his booth, his meeting place), has also been destroyed. Not only that, but v.9 will say that the prophets of the people are no longer receiving visions of the Lord. He has gone silent. He has abandoned them.
Recognize the image from v.8? That’s right, Amos again. That plumb line used to show how out of joint the walls were shows back up and did the very thing he said he would. Continuing into v.9, that which protects them has been ruined, the law (part of their identity as God’s people) is no more, and the visions are gone. And the elders know it – they mourn for their circumstances they are now in.

v.10 switches to this prophet character. Either this is indeed just a character being used to express a prophet’s perspective or is a real dude who speaks but who is not among the prophets with no vision. In either case, he’s devastated both emotionally and physically. Especially worth noting is his reaction to the least able in society, the infants and the babies, who are being impacted by the sins of the parents. There was indeed a great famine in the city at the time. Children are not only dying here but, jump to v.20, it seems like mothers may be eating their children to stay alive (again, the depth of their depravity).

15-16 speaks of the perspective of her enemies – how they scoff and celebrate and her downfall. Directly following, a reminder that God said this would happen. v.20 Jerusalem now speaks and demands that the Lord see what the destruction He has brought is doing to them. They protest at the impact on the children and how those who (are supposed to) do the work of God are being killed within the place where the Lord dwells. How could He let this happen? The young and the old are dead, the youth have died, and they lay it at God’s feet – He has killed them in the day of his anger (phrase is back in both 21 and 22).

Remember the type of writing this is, it’s a lament, not a straightforward argument (although it contains elements of one). It kind of makes you wish for a Job type response, kind of an “are you done?” moment where God reminds them of who they are, who He is, and how many times he warned them and called them to repentance. But that’s not what’s happening here, we get predominantly the weeping and wailing in the streets.

There is only a single narrator in this one and it seems to be a man who has had this broad judgment of God land upon him (and his descriptions are rough). Yet, there is a turn in v.22, and he reminds himself of the things he knows of God and his character.

At the beginning here, we transition from this justice coming upon the nation of Judah/city of Jerusalem to the perspective of a single fella. It makes the situation much more personal. Where we were able to relegate some of the impacts in chapters 1 and 2 to a broad group who assuredly deserved what they were getting, here we have a man who could just as easily have been one of us, and we get to live out some of this judgment through his perspective.

This man has been in darkness (like the sun has fallen, get it?) and has thought it is certain that God’s hand was against him over and over again. It’s tough to know how much of v.2 and forward is intended to be literal (does he really have broken bones?) or is it a figurative description of what it’s like to be under God’s judgment? The ESV study notes on this are inconsistent, they seem to pick and choose which ones to take literally and which ones not to dependent, it seems, upon whether there is a compelling OT reference for the item in question. I’m not sure it matters either way as either are really possible in the chaotic circumstances of the Babylonian siege.

We do see similar themes carried through to a personal level from what we’ve heard in the first 2. This man is captive (v.7) and God is not listening to his prayers (v.8). And God seems to be hindering his progress at every potential turn (he has made his paths crooked.) The opposite, of course, is what is used to describe John the Baptizer’s work that God set up to prepare people for Jesus. God is a path man one way or the other.

In v.10, that bear/lion combo from Amos shows up (dang, I mean, that’s some consistency on how God speaks right there.) Obviously, “…tore me to pieces” has to be figurative, the man who is speaking is not dead. I’m not sure why the kidneys are in play in v.13 but it’s a very specific and intentional target. It’s also unclear as to whether it is this specific targeting that has made this man a laughingstock (maybe the arrow is still in his kidney, like sticking out of his body all goofy looking) or it’s just a continuation of how God has brought him low. He eats bitterness and drinks wormwood (also bitter, generally associated with some kind of rough times in the Bible, Revelation and Amos included).

Speaking of eating, he also eats gravel. Again, probably not literal, although it could be given the extent of the famine described in Jeremiah and referenced in Lamentations 2. This man has no joy, no hope of happiness, and he says, “My endurance has perished, so has my hope from the Lord.” He calls out that his troubles would be remembered by others as he himself continually remembers them.

But…in spite of all of this…our man remembers the following and has hope. The steadfast love of God never ceases! His mercies never come to an end! They are new every morning, great is your faithfulness, The Lord is my portion,” says my soul, “therefore I will hope in him”! I added the exclamation points (no punctuation would have been in the Hebrew). But what a thing to remember. Think of our modern cultural despondence about much more minor things as what this man is going through at the direct hand of God. And yet, his powerful reminders bring him hope. Man alive, we have got to fight for some perspective in our modern lives. We have blindness, relative cultural blindness, and assuredly the world around us and the Biblical examples in the OT should change that in us.

In v.25 our man extols the virtues of patience, in waiting on God to do what God does. It is not only necessary, it is good! Let him sit alone in silence, let him put his mouth in the dust, let him give his cheek to the one who strikes (familiar, yes?) and let him be filled with insults. What a call to perseverance!

And then the assurance that God will not tarry forever. Yes, he has caused grief here, but he will have compassion and does not willingly afflict or grieve the children of men. (Interesting, what do we call this, then? How does this narrator man see it this way?) In v.34, we are reminded of things God does not approve of – mistreatment of prisoners, the denial of Justice in the presence of God, he’s not down with it.

v.37 is a reminder of God’s sovereignty. To pull this all together, rough times have come upon God’s people and yes, God directed it. Yet, we know God is a God of endless mercy and faithfulness (even when Israel has not been faithful) and he abhors injustice. And so, yes, this is all at his hand. The major question here is, do we trust him? If He can be trusted, then we are assured He is just. If he cannot be trusted, than our laments will fall on deaf ears regardless.

Narrator man decides that God is indeed right and just here, so the reaction is that the community should test and examine their ways and return to the Lord! He cries out that the people would return to God and that, in turn, God would allow their prayers to go through, that ultimately He would return to them (remember the preceding themes of his absence from the Temple).

And this happens. Dig on v.55. In the depths of the pit (when our man is at his lowest), God does indeed hear him. In fact, God responds and says, “Do not fear!” Now we see that God has indeed taken up this man’s cause, redeemed his life (we should probably see all of this as a consequence to the calls of repentance in v.40 onward).

v.64, God will repay the the wrong done to this man by his enemies. Our man seems confident that the curse he is under will move to them and that same anger that landed on him will be directed to them and that God will pursue vengeance on his behalf.

Chapter 4 returns to woe and the rough state of Jerusalem but will end in a fulfillment of their requests. They have asked God up to this point that he see what is happening to them and ultimately make it stop and also that the justice that is coming upon them would also come upon those around them who are guilty of what they have been guilty of. (Of course, as God’s people, it’s been made clear in places like Amos that God holds them to a higher standard as they should have known better so the call to justice for those surrounding them isn’t quite equivalent. However, it’s still appropriate.)

There are points at this chapter where it is unclear who/what the subject is of a given line. For example, it seems likely that v.1 is in reference to people (the last time we saw the phrase “at the head of every street” was in 2:19 and referred to hungry children). So, they could be the “holy stones”. But are they the gold, too? Could this just generally be riches of Jerusalem, the gold and the stones? It’s not clear. However, the next few verses are talking about Jerusalem’s children so that option seems to make the most sense.

And as the following verses will show, the children are in rough shape. Infants are starving, the rich who feasted on delicacies have nothing to eat, those who are used to rich, luxurious clothing (purple) embrace the ashes. v.6 compares that which Jerusalem is going through to Sodom and serves to point out that this judgement upon God’s people is longer and has brought a startling reversal (or what we may consider a revealing of true reality) of the earthly values Jerusalem was using to understand her position vs. how God measures that (unworking princes, finely chiseled bodies, beautiful vs. darkened faces, shriveled skins and dry bones.)

v.9 speaks of how it is more fortunate to have died quickly by the sword (just like quick judgment upon Sodom) vs. the victims of protracted hunger. For such a thing has caused abominable behavior (again the cannibalism of children by their own mothers, who failed to feed them as noted earlier). By the way, that they would do this is revealing of their posturing towards God. This is most certainly a grievous disobedience.

v.13 should cut to the quick of any leader/pastor of God’s people. This judgment was for the sins of the prophets and the iniquities of the priests. They are filthy in the eyes of God and the eyes of the people, in fact they are described in terms of that which makes everyone else unclean (dead people/can’t touch garments, lepers /saying unclean) and end up ostracized from that society. The Lord has scattered them and they shall have no honor. The iniquity of the people falls heavy on these fellas for not being faithful and caring for the people.

Then we are back on the perspective of the outsiders who have entered and ransacked Jerusalem. And they were fierce. But then v.21, Jerusalem will get what they want – that their enemies, Edom (and implied others) will get the same cup that Jerusalem is now drinking from. And in v.22, we find that the punishment is coming to and end. It has been accomplished, and they shall be returned from exile, but it will indeed pass to their enemies, the two things that they have been asking for.

I’ll be honest, this chapter seems oddly placed as we ended the last one with a promise that the punishment has been accomplished and then this one fires back up with a reminder of what has occurred. Either we accept the chapter progression as non-linear (meaning they aren’t intended to “progress” or follow one another in any particular order) or it’s a framing that their restoration, although imminent, will be a bumpy path and not something that happens overnight. The remnants of the judgment will continue to impact them for the years to come, even as God promises ultimate restoration. At this point I’m open to either option.

This chapter opens like many other lines in this series of laments, a call for God to acknowledge what is going on with His people (See! Remember! Hear!). This particular chapter does seem to focus on the long game, though, where the call is to see how their inheritance is gone, the impact to the mothers and fathers, the sins of the fathers – it may not be intentional but some of these afflictions take a more long-term perspective instead of moment-level problems (fellas eating gravel, children starving, etc.).

Even the basics are difficult to come by (they’re paying for water, bread must be bargained for or the ingredients obtained through the path of brigands). They can’t protect their women (this is where it matters which way we think the chapter is framed as. This could be the remnants of people acting like a bunch of hooligans or it could be Babylonians who are around doing this kind of thing.)

Also, the people have lost their identity, their way of life (of sorts). The old men are no longer at the city gate conducting affairs, there is no music, no dancing. These are important aspects of life that no longer exist in their state. When they ask God for restoration, it’s not just for changes to their physical circumstances, it is a request back to the identity God gave them (the covenant provides that) and the freedoms and celebrations that come with that.

The acknowledgment in the tail end of the chapter rings from the early chapters, they have sinned, it is the core of this judgment. But there is a reminder that although they have fallen away, God has not, and he reigns forever. The plea at the end is one of restoration, a final sounding of the persistent call of God to hear the cries of His people. However, no effort is taken in the final lines to express optimism in this area.

How Lamentations Points Us to Jesus

1.) We have a perfect high priest. Much of this judgment is laid at the feet of foolish, weak and corrupt priests. They were supposed to protect the people, keep them on the straight and narrow, facilitate their worship and their reconciliation back to God. They bailed, couldn’t keep it together. Jesus, as our high priest, does all of those things. We will never be subject to an insufficient, fickle, or selfish priest-group again.

2.) The covenant has not changed, but what provides us identity in the covenant has. The rules/laws have always been about identity, who are God’s people, what do they do and how are they connected to God. When they didn’t live up to those they reconciled through sacrifice and were called to turn back and live back in consistency with the identity that they have been given in the covenant. However, in Jesus that sacrifice has been made once and for all. And our identity is within that sacrifice and expression of that is living in consistency with what Jesus says and does. Our failure to live consistent with that identity remains sin, repentance is turning back and living consistent with that identity again. The cost for God allowing that is Christ’s death on the cross (the sacrifice).

3.) Some of these “day of the Lord” promises will be kept long term upon Christ’s return. God makes long-term promises to His people and we are included in that. Ultimately, those who fall on the wrong side of his justice will be reckoned with but the ultimate culmination of that will not be until Jesus returns to once and for all establish His Kingdom with His people.

4.) God’s justice is fierce and real. He’s not messing around. Jesus takes what has happened physically here to God’s people and moves the impact to himself. The fate that rightly awaits us in our sin has been rewritten to declare our innocence because of what Jesus has done. It is good to be reminded that our shallow, passive reaction to our own sin is often miles away from God’s reaction to that same issue.