Jeremiah 49:25

Jer 49:25 How is the city of praise not left, the city of my joy!

Ver. 25. How is the city of praise not left?] Why is so praiseworthy and renowned a city so demolished? See Jer 49:23. Cause enough there was, because it was a valley of vanity, {Amo 1:3-5} and Comus, Venus, and Bacchus there made their dividend, and shared their devotes.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

49:25 Damascus had a long history of power and glory at the hub of major trade routes. Its people enjoyed prosperity and joy, but they would lose these pleasures when they were forsaken by the Lord.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

He speaketh this in the person of the king and of them of the country, who shall wonder to see Damascus the chief city destroyed.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

city of praise--The prophet, in the person of a citizen of Damascus deploring its calamity, calls it "the city of praise," that is, celebrated with praises everywhere for its beauty (Jer 33:9; Jer 51:41). "How is it possible that such a city has not been left whole--has not been spared by the foe?" Compare left, Luk 17:35-36. So Israel "left" standing some of the Canaanite cities (Jos 11:13).

of my joy--that is, in which I delighted.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 25. How is the city of praise not left] Damascus is so ruined that she can no more be called a praiseworthy or happy city.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Some think “my” to be redundant, and therefore render it “the city of joy;” but they seem to be induced by no good reason; for they think it absurd that it should be called a city of joy to the Prophet, since he ought not to have regarded Damascus with any love or kindness. But the prophets, we know, do not always speak according to their own feelings, but assume the persons of others. We might then fitly read the words as they are, the city of my joy! Besides, Jeremiah very cuttingly exults over Damascus, when he thus expresses his wonder at its destruction: “How can this be,” he says, “that the city of praise, that is, a celebrated city, and the city of my joy, that is, a spectacle so noble as to cause joy to all, — how can it be that this city should not be left, that is, should not be spared?” For by “left” he does not mean forsaken by its inhabitants, or reduced to solitude; for by “left” he means untouched or safe.

But we must ever bear in mind what we have often stated, that the prophets, when they thus speak in astonishment, do not adopt an elevated style as rhetoricians do, to show their eloquence, but have always a regard to what is profitable. It was necessary powerfully to impress the minds of men, when the Prophet spoke of the ruin of so great a city. Then this astonishment includes what they call an anticipation; for it obviated a doubt which might have prevented credit from being given to this prophecy. 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, —

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(25) How is the city of praise not left . . . !—The exclamation, half scornful, half ironical, points to the fact that the inhabitants of Damascus had tried in vain to flee (Jer_49:24). The city so fair and glorious, with its rivers Abana and Pharphar (2Ki_5:12), had not been “left,” would not be empty when it was taken. The people would perish with it. Her young warriors and her veterans should be cut off within the walls.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

25. not forsaken] The negative quite reverses the sense we should expect. Accordingly Du. and Co., emending the MT., render respectively, “Woe to her!” and “Woe to me!” continuing, “For the city of praise is forsaken.”

the city of my joy] We should probably, with several Versions, omit the pronoun, and so put the words in the mouth of the prophet, and not of an inhabitant of the doomed city.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

How is the city of praise not left,.... The city of Damascus, famous for its antiquity, its wealth and riches, strength and power; and with the Heathens for its devotion and superstition. So Julian (i) the emperor calls it,

"the truly city of Jupiter; the eye of the whole east; Damascus the holy and the greatest;''

but more especially for its delightful and pleasant situation. Benjamin Tudelensis (k) says it was, in his time,

"a very great and beautiful city, surrounded with a wall; and the country about it was full of gardens and orchards, fifteen miles' walk on every side of it; and no city in the whole world appeared with such plenty of fruit as that did.''

Monsieur Thevenot (l) relates, that

"the city of Damascus is in the middle of a spacious plain, surrounded with hills, but all distant from the town, almost out of sight; those on the north side are the nearest, on which side it hath a great many gardens, full of trees, and most fruit trees; these gardens take up the ground from the hill of the forty martyrs, even to the town; so that at a distance it seems to be a forest.''

Mr. Maundrell (m) tells us, that the Turks relate this story of their prophet Mahomet, that,

"coming near Damascus, he took his station at a high precipice, in order to view it; and considering the ravishing beauty and delightfulness of it, he would not tempt his frailty by entering into it; but instantly departed with this reflection on it, that there was but one paradise designed for men, and for his part he was resolved not take his in this world;''

and, adds the same traveller,

"you have indeed from the precipice the most perfect prospect of Damascus; and certainly no place in the world can promise the beholder at a distance greater voluptuousness. It is situate in an even plain of so great extent, that you can but just discern the mountains that compass it on the farther side. In its length it extends near two miles, and is encompassed with gardens, extending no less, according to common estimation, than thirty miles round; which makes it look like a noble city in a vast wood.''

Strabo (n) says of this city, that it is worthy of praise, and almost the most famous city of all near Persia. The sense of it either is, how is it that so famous a city was not spared by the enemy, that they did not leave it untouched, but destroyed and demolished it? or how is it that it was not fortified by the inhabitants of it; that a parapet was not built about the wall all around, to strengthen it, and keep out the enemy? This sense, as well as the former, is mentioned both by Jarchi and Kimchi, who direct to Nah 3:8, for the confirmation of this sense of the word:

the city of my joy! these are either the words of the prophet, who had a great regard to the city of Damascus as ancient, well built, and opulent city, and lamented its destruction; or rather of the king of it, as Jarchi; or of the inhabitants of it, who said this to one another as they fled; so Kimchi: but there is no necessity of rendering it "my joy", only "joy"; for the "jod" affixed may not be considered as a pronoun, but as a paragogic, or a Syriac termination, which is common; though some interpret this of the city of Jerusalem, and as spoken by the Lord, or by the prophet in his name, upbraiding the Syrians for their hatred to it, and disturbance they gave it; and which is now mentioned as one cause and reason of their ruin; see Amo 1:3.

(i) Opera, par. 2. Ep. 24. p. 145. (k) Itinerarium, p. 54, 55. (l) Travels, par. 2. B. 1. p. I9. (m) Journey from Aleppo to Jerusalem, p. 121, 122. Ed. 7. (n) Geograph. l. 16. p. 520.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

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 2Ki 5:12, to those of recent travelers.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

They. Hebrew, Septuagint, and Chaldean add, "not." Why have they not spared this beautiful city? or, why have not its citizens given it up, to prevent its entire demolition?

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

It is called

the city of praise, because it was a city so much praised, a city of great renown, which the prophet seeing like to be destroyed, lamenteth either in the person of the king of Syria, or of the Syrian inhabitants, wondering that the conquerors should not spare so famous and renowned a city, in which so many did rejoice.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Hew is the city of praise not left, etc.! A difficult passage. The construction, indeed, is plain. "How is not," etc. I can only mean "How is it that the city of praise is not," etc.? (comp. 2Sa_1:14) The difficulty lies in the word rendered "left." The ordinary meaning of the verb, when applied to cities, is certainly "to leave without inhabitants;" e.g. Jer_4:29 Isa_7:16 Isa_32:14. This, however, does not suit the context, which shows that "the daughter of Damascus" personified is the speaker, so that ver. 25 ought rather to mean, "How is it that the city of praise is not, "is not forsaken?" Either, then, we must suppose that "not" has been inserted by mistake a too arbitrary step, seeing that there is no negative in the context to account for the insertion (the case is different, therefore, from Job_21:30 Job_27:15, where such an insertion is at any rate justifiable); or else we must give uzzebhah the sense of "let go free". (Exo_23:5 Deu_32:36 Job_10:1) It is the obstinate incredulity of love which refuses to admit the possibility of the destruction of the loved object. The city of praise. The city which is my "praise," or boast. Few cities, in fact, have had so long and brilliant an existence as Damascus.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Of my joy - A city of great renown. The king of Syria is here supposed to speak.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

“How was...not fortified” It was not filled with earth around its wall to strengthen the wall. Cf. “And they fortified (ויעזבוּ) Jerusalem up to the wall” (Neh. 3:8). It can also be interpreted: Why was it not forsaken by this evil, that the evil should not come upon it?

the city of my joy So shall her king mourn over her.

Rashi on the Tanakh — English translations: “The Judaica Press complete Tanach with Rashi, translated by A. J. Rosenberg” (CC BY 4.0); “Pentateuch with Rashi's commentary by M. Rosenbaum and A.M. Silbermann, 1929-1934” (public domain); “The Metsudah Tanach series, Lakewood, N.J” (CC BY 4.0); and “The Book of Joshua, Metsudah Publications, 1997” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.