C4 WERRIBEE SDARM FORUM
Thank You For Logging In

The Bread of Adversity, and The Water of Affliction

Post new topic   Reply to topic

View previous topic View next topic Go down

The Bread of Adversity, and The Water of Affliction

Post by Mathétés on Sun Sep 03, 2017 8:50 am

Is. 30:20 "And though the Lord give you the bread of adversity, and the water of affliction, yet shall not thy teachers be removed into a corner any more, but thine eyes shall see thy teachers."


How many times the Lord allows us to taste sufferings and trials; however, even through those things He manifests His great love for us.
avatar
Mathétés
Admin

Posts : 278
Join date : 2017-08-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Bread of Adversity, and The Water of Affliction

Post by Alkaios on Sun Sep 17, 2017 12:05 pm

Thus do they fall out with God and the bearers of His word. "Therefore thus saith the Holy One of Israel, Because ye dislike this word, and put your trust in force and shufflings, and rely upon this; therefore will this iniquity be to you like a falling breach, bent forwards in a high-towering wall, which falls to ruin suddenly, very suddenly. And He smites it to pieces, as a potter's vessel falls to pieces, when they smash it without sparing, and of which, when it lies smashed to pieces there, you cannot find a sherd to fetch fire with from the hearth, or to take water with out of a cistern." The "word" towards which they cherished me'ōs (read mo'oskhem), was the word of Jehovah through His prophet, which was directed against their untheocratic policy of reckoning upon Egypt. Nâlōz, bent out or twisted, is the term used to denote this very policy, which was ever resorting to bypaths and secret ways; whilst ‛ōsheq denotes the squeezing out of the money required to carry on the war of freedom, and to purchase the help of Egypt (compare 2 Kings 15:20). The guilt of Judah is compared to the broken and overhanging part of a high wall (nibh‛eh, bent forwards; compare (בּעבּע, a term applied to a diseased swelling). Just as such a broken piece brings down the whole of the injured wall along with it, so would the sinful conduct of Judah immediately ruin the whole of its existing constitution. Israel, which would not recognise itself as the image of Jehovah, even when there was yet time (Isaiah 29:16), would be like a vessel smashed into the smallest fragments. It is the captivity which is here figuratively threatened by the prophet; for the smashing had regard to Israel as a state. The subject to וּשׁברהּ in Isaiah 30:14 is Jehovah, who would make use of the hostile power of man to destroy the wall, and break up the kingdom of Judah into such a diaspora of broken sherds. The reading is not ושׁהברהּ (lxx, Targum), but וּשׁברהּ, et franget eam. Kâthōth is an infinitive statement of the mode; the participle kâthūth, which is adopted by the Targum, Kimchi, Norzi, and others, is less suitable. It was necessary to proceed with יחמל לא (without his sparing), simply because the infinitive absolute cannot be connected with לא (Ewald, 350, a). לחשּׂוף (to be written thus with dagesh both here and Haggai 2:16) passes from the primary meaning nudare to that of scooping up, as ערה does to that of pouring out.
avatar
Alkaios

Posts : 369
Join date : 2017-07-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You can reply to topics in this forum