Movatterモバイル変換

Deuteronomy 28:25,37,64
The LORD shall cause thee to be smitten before thine enemies: thou shalt go out one way against them, and flee seven ways before them: and shalt be removed into all the kingdoms of the earth…

Leviticus 26:33,38
And I will scatter you among the heathen, and will draw out a sword after you: and your land shall be desolate, and your cities waste…

Isaiah 63:16
Doubtless thouart our father, though Abraham be ignorant of us, and Israel acknowledge us not: thou, O LORD,art our father, our redeemer; thy nameis from everlasting.

that I would cut them to pieces
The imagery of being "cut to pieces" signifies total destruction. This is a metaphor for severe judgment, often used in the Old Testament to describe the fate of nations that oppose God (1 Samuel 15:33). It underscores the gravity of Israel's sin and the potential for divine retribution.

and blot out their memory from mankind
To "blot out their memory" suggests complete eradication, leaving no trace of existence. This echoes the fate of the Amalekites (Exodus 17:14) and other nations judged by God. It serves as a warning of the ultimate consequence of persistent rebellion against God. The concept of memory in ancient cultures was tied to legacy and honor, making this a severe punishment.

from mankind
This phrase emphasizes the totality of the judgment, extending beyond Israel to the perception of all humanity. It reflects the universal scope of God's authority and the seriousness of Israel's role as a witness to the nations (Isaiah 43:10). The potential for such judgment underscores the importance of Israel's obedience in fulfilling their covenantal role.

The line opens with the Lord reflecting on what He was fully entitled to do in light of Israel’s stubborn rebellion (seeDeuteronomy 32:15–18). His “I would have said” is not indecision but a deliberate disclosure of divine intention, much likeExodus 32:10 where He tells Moses, “Now leave Me alone, so that My anger may burn against them and consume them.” The Lord is perfectly just and has every right to carry out the threatened judgment (Leviticus 26:27–28).

• This statement reminds us that God’s plans are never thwarted; yet He often reveals what could have happened to underscore both His holiness and His mercy (Numbers 14:11-12;Psalm 106:23).

• The phrase also sets up verse 27, where He explains why total annihilation is withheld—for the sake of His own reputation among the nations.

Here the Lord speaks of decisive, violent judgment. “Cut them to pieces” evokes the covenant curses spelled out earlier: “The LORD will strike you with wasting disease… with the sword” (Deuteronomy 28:22, 25).

• Similar language appears in1 Samuel 2:31-33 when God foretells the downfall of Eli’s house, and inIsaiah 10:15-16 where He promises to “consume” the proud Assyrian.

• The idea is physical destruction plus national dismemberment—scattering tribes, breaking their power (compareDeuteronomy 32:36).

• Such severity proves God’s intolerance of idolatry and His faithfulness to His own covenant terms (Hebrews 10:26-31 echoes this principle for the New Covenant believer).

The ultimate penalty would be total erasure, as happened to Sodom (Jude 7) or Amalek (Exodus 17:14). To “blot out” is to remove from history’s record; no descendants, no legacy, no remembrance (Psalm 9:5-6).

• Yet God did not let this happen to Israel. Verse 27 explains He restrained judgment so that “their adversaries would misconstrue.” His name and His promises to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob could not be mocked (Isaiah 48:9-11;Romans 9:29).

• This restraint foreshadows the gospel: though judgment was deserved, God chose mercy for the sake of His glory, ultimately satisfied in Christ (Romans 3:25-26).

Deuteronomy 32:26 reveals the severity of divine justice and the tenderness of divine restraint. God could have spoken the final word of destruction—cutting Israel to pieces and wiping their memory from the earth—yet He held back to protect His name and fulfill His covenant. The verse stands as a sober warning against presuming on grace, while assuring believers that the same God who judges righteously also preserves His people for His glory.

1.Were it not that I feared the provocation of the enemy,i.e. that I should be provoked to wrath by the enemy ascribing the destruction of Israel to their own prowess.

2.Were it not that I feared a wrath upon the enemy, with much the same meaning.

3.Were it not that I feared the fury of the enemy,i.e. against Israel - feared lest the enemy should be encouraged to rise up against Israel and ascribe their destruction to their own valor. Of these that most generally approved is the first. (On this reason for sparing Israel, seeDeuteronomy 9:28;Exodus 32:12;Numbers 14:13, etc.;Isaiah 10:5, etc.;Ezekiel 20:13, 14.) Should behave themselves strangely; rather,should mistake orfalsely pretend. The verb is the Piel ofנָכַר, to look upon, to mark, and conveys the idea of looking on askance or prejudicially, hence being ignorant of, mistaking, feigning, or falsely pretending. Our hand is high; rather,was high,i.e. was mighty in power.Vers 28-33. - The cause of Israel's rejection was that they were a people utterly destitute of counsel and without understanding. Had they been wise, they would have looked to the end, and acted in a way conducive to their own welfare, instead of rushing upon ruin.

Parallel Commentaries ...