Study of God's Sorrow in the Old Testament

7/29/2019 Study of God's Sorrow in the Old Testament

1/5

Study of Gods Sorrow (nicham) in the OldTestament

Trevor Peterson

c. 1998

1 God is Sorry about Blessing

Although rarely, persistent disobedience is seen to make God change Hismind. As far back as Genesis, mans great wickedness and continually evilthoughts made the Lord sorry that He had made man, so He decided towipe out all life on earth (6:57). Sauls turning back from following Himmade the Lord sorry that He had crowned Saul king, so He decided togive the kingdom to David (1 Samuel 15). Through Jeremiah, the Lordrevealed a governing principle that seems to have been worked out in thesetwo instances: A nations evil disobedience would make the Lord sorry that

He had spoken of building it up, so He would remove its blessing (18:910). Itis significant that in none of these instances was the nation of Israel directlyin view. This is not to say that God was never sorry for blessing Israel, butHis oath to the Patriarchs makes it a unique situation. In fact, both specificsituations exhibit a common pattern, where Gods sorrow takes place justprior to the formation of a relevant covenant. In Genesis, God followed theflood with a covenant to never again destroy all life on earth (8:2122). In 2Samuel 7, God established a covenant with the house of David (vv. 417),which He explicitly contrasted with the transience of His relationship withSaul (v. 15; cf. 1 Sam 13:13).

2 God is Sorry about Judgment

As far back as Exodus, Mosess reminder of the Lords own reputationbefore the Egyptians and of His oath to the Patriarchs made the Lord sorry

1


2/5

that He had planned to consume the Israelites, so He withheld judgment

(32:914). He later foretold that the possibility of arrogant misperceptionby Israels enemies would make the Lord sorry for His people in the midstof judgment, so He would vindicate and restore them (Deut 32:2642). Thisis seen during the succeeding period, as Israels groanings made the Lordsorry for His people in the midst of their oppression, so He raised up judgesto deliver them (Judg 2:1418). Under David, His own satisfaction made theLord sorry that He had sent a pestilence and a destroying angel upon thepeople of Israel, so He withheld the angel from striking Jerusalem (2 Sam24:1516; 1 Chr 21:1415). Joel prophesied that the wholehearted turning,fasting, weeping, and mourning of the Israelites would make the Lord sorrythat He had a mighty invasion prepared, so He would bless them instead

(2:1114). Amoss pleas on behalf of little Jacob made the Lord sorry thatHe had prepared a locust plague and a consuming fire against Israel, so Hewithheld them in patience (7:16). The repentance of the people and kingof Nineveh made God sorry that He had prophesied the destruction of thecity, so He withdrew His anger and judgment (Jonah 3:410). Interestingly,Jonah recognized that this was consistent with Gods character, which washis expressed reason for fleeing in the first place (4:2). (Perhaps he had reador at least was familiar with the prophecy of Joel 2:13!)

Again, the Lord revealed the governing principle through Jeremiah: Anations turning from evil would make the Lord sorry that He had spoken of

tearing it down, so He would withhold its calamity (18:78). This is seen inthat the turning of the men of Judah from their evil way would have made theLord sorry that He planned to bring calamity upon them, so He would havewithheld it (26:23). Similarly, the mending of their ways and obedienceto His voice would have made the Lord sorry that He had pronouncedmisfortune against them, so He would have withheld it (26:1213). In lightof this, the people recalled that Hezekiahs and Judahs fear of and searchingafter Him had made the Lord sorry that He had pronounced misfortuneagainst them, so He had withheld it (26:1619). Later, the remnants stayingin the land would have made the Lord sorry that He had inflicted calamityupon them, so He would have built them up and planted them (42:10).

Finally, in the midst of exile, the Psalmist recalled that His covenant andlovingkindness had made the Lord sorry that He had allowed nations tooppress His people, so He had shown compassion on them in the presence oftheir captors (Ps 106:4046). The reasons cover a wide range, from Godsown faithfulness to His sworn oath and covenant with the Patriarchs, to His

2


3/5

reputation before other nations, to the intercession of a prophet, to various

levels of repentance on the part of the people under judgment, to the merefact of their suffering and anguish. Of all the categories, this one shows Godsgrace and compassion most fully in His expressed sorrow for judgment uponHis people, and His willingness to bring an end or prevent it altogether.

3 God is not Sorry about Blessing

While God is seen to show remorse in the OT, He does it according to Hisown will, not by the persuasion or coercion of others. Balaks persistencecould not make God sorry that He had blessed Israel, because He is not a

mere human (Num 23:1921). Likewise, Sauls persistence could not makethe Lord sorry that He had decided to give the kingdom to David, becauseHe is not a mere human (1 Sam 15:2729). Finally, the Lord will not besorry that He has made Messiah a ruler and a priest, because He has swornan oath (Ps 110:4). The last of these can easily be explained as a special case,in light of the sworn oath, but the first two generally provide the strongestcase for Gods non-repentance. It is important to note the context in bothcases, however. Interestingly, both situations involve a king, who throughpersistence seeks to change Gods will. What is denied is that God will besorry in this situation; what is affirmed is that His divine nature prevents anyreasonable expectation that He might do so. While this affirmation may state

a general principle that God is never truly sorry, the overwhelming usage ofthis same term with God, even in the same context (in the 1 Samuel passage),tends more toward the idea that His sorrow is different from that of humans.He cannot be persuaded by men of authority, nor is He sorry because of guiltin Himself. His sorrow almost always comes within the context of a specialrelationship to a chosen people, where He has made explicit promises. Whereit extends beyond such relationships, it is grounded in His nature, which isquick to be sorry for harm.

4 God is not Sorry about Judgment

Conversely, when God has chosen to judge His people, there comes a pointwhen He willfully chooses to deny any attempt at staying His hand. TheLord would not be sorry that He was planning to judge Israel, because they

3


4/5

engaged in blatant and persistent idolatry (Isa 57:6). The Lord would not be

sorry that He was planning to destroy the whole land (but not completely),because that was His spoken purpose (Jer 4:2728). The Lord would not besorry that He was planning to judge Judah publicly, because He had spokenHis will, and justice had to be spent upon her deeds (Ezek 24:1314). Finally,the Lord was not sorry that He had purposed to harm Judah, becausethe fathers had provoked Him to wrath (Zech 8:14). From these passages,the stated motivation is evenly divided between external (provocation byidolatry) and internal (His own spoken will and justice). What ties themtogether is that His justice must be satisfied, and there comes a point whendisobedience is so great that He must carry out the threatened punishment.It may also be possible to read into these instances that God knew the people

would not repent, no matter how patient He remained with them. Again,the object of judgment is significant here, in that it is the nation of Israel,which God had foretold in Deuteronomy 30 that He would one day punishfor its rebellion and then later restore.

5 Appendix: Other Relevant Passages

Num 11:434 relates the incident where God sent quail in response to thepeoples complaint for meat. The apparent problem is that God initiallydecided to send so much meat that they would stuff themselves for a month

until they despised it, but as soon as they began eating, sent a plague insteadto kill them immediately. The key seems to come in v. 4, which identifies agreedy rabble among the sons of Israel, who apparently stirred up the wholenation to weep for meat. Vv. 1820 relate what Moses was instructed to sayto the people, not necessarily what God would actually do. The Lord struckthe people with a plague in v. 33, but obviously not everyone was slain byit. V. 34 specifies that they buried the people who had been greedy, so itseems that the plague was only upon the rabble that stirred up the nation.There are therefore at least two ways to take this passage without it showinga change in Gods plan. 1) Either He instructed Moses to tell the people

one thing, while He knew all along that He would instead smite them witha plague, 2) or He actually did give the nation as a whole enough quail tostuff themselves for a month, but sent the plague specifically upon the greedyrabble within the whole group. Since the first carries with it a whole otherset of problems, and since the second is most directly evident from the text,

4


5/5

the latter seems preferable. But either way, there is no need to derive a real

change in Gods overall plan from this passage.In 2 Kings 20 and Isaiah 38, King Hezekiah was struck with a mortalillness and explicitly told that he would die. As Isaiah was leaving, Hezekiahprayed to God, reminding Him of his true and wholehearted walk, and weep-ing before Him. Immediately, God told Isaiah to return and tell Hezekiahthat his prayer had been heard and that he would be healed (2 Kgs 20:5)and his life extended by fifteen years (v. 6). God did this for His own sakeand for that of David, recalling the covenant He had made to always keepHis lovingkindness with Davids descendants (2 Sam 7:1415). As so oftenelsewhere, Gods change of action comes in the context of His covenantalrelationship.

Ps 102:27 contrasts God with creation, saying that He is the same andthat His years will not come to an end. In context, the contrast requires thatGods lack of change refer to the same sort of change that is being attributedto the heavens and the earth. This is a change of form or composition, notprimarily of function or planning.

Mal 3:6 attributes the salvation of the Israelites to Gods changelessness,but it cannot be speaking of immutability with regard to all of His dealings.If that were the case, either it would contradict the times when He choosesto destroy a nation, or it would apply only to situations where He does not.Since the latter is preferable, this statement should be taken in light of His

particular covenant faithfulness to Israel.

5

Study of God's Sorrow in the Old Testament

Documents

Transcript of Study of God's Sorrow in the Old Testament