Lamentations 5:22

Authorized King James Version

PDF

But thou hast utterly rejected us; thou art very wroth against us.

Original Language Analysis

כִּ֚י H3588
כִּ֚י
Strong's: H3588
Word #: 1 of 8
(by implication) very widely used as a relative conjunction or adverb (as below); often largely modified by other particles annexed
אִם H518
אִם
Strong's: H518
Word #: 2 of 8
used very widely as demonstrative, lo!; interrogative, whether?; or conditional, if, although; also oh that!, when; hence, as a negative, not
מָאֹ֣ס But thou hast utterly H3988
מָאֹ֣ס But thou hast utterly
Strong's: H3988
Word #: 3 of 8
to spurn; also (intransitively) to disappear
מְאַסְתָּ֔נוּ H3973
מְאַסְתָּ֔נוּ
Strong's: H3973
Word #: 4 of 8
refuse
קָצַ֥פְתָּ wroth H7107
קָצַ֥פְתָּ wroth
Strong's: H7107
Word #: 5 of 8
to crack off, i.e., (figuratively) burst out in rage
עָלֵ֖ינוּ H5921
עָלֵ֖ינוּ
Strong's: H5921
Word #: 6 of 8
above, over, upon, or against (yet always in this last relation with a downward aspect) in a great variety of applications
עַד H5704
עַד
Strong's: H5704
Word #: 7 of 8
as far (or long, or much) as, whether of space (even unto) or time (during, while, until) or degree (equally with)
מְאֹֽד׃ us thou art very H3966
מְאֹֽד׃ us thou art very
Strong's: H3966
Word #: 8 of 8
properly, vehemence, i.e., (with or without preposition) vehemently; by implication, wholly, speedily, etc. (often with other words as an intensive or

Analysis & Commentary

The book's troubling conclusion: "But thou hast utterly rejected us; thou art very wroth against us" (ki im-ma'os me'astanu katsafta aleinu ad-me'od, כִּי אִם־מָאֹס מְאַסְתָּנוּ קָצַפְתָּ עָלֵינוּ עַד־מְאֹד). The phrase ma'os me'astanu uses emphatic construction: "rejecting, you have rejected us"—complete repudiation. "Very wroth" (katsafta...ad-me'od, קָצַפְתָּ...עַד־מְאֹד) means extreme anger. This seems to contradict verse 19's affirmation of God's eternal throne and earlier hope (3:22-26). Why end on despair? Some traditions read verse 21 as the final verse, repeating it after 22 so the book doesn't end negatively. But the canonical ending serves important purposes:

  1. It's honest—full restoration hasn't yet occurred
  2. It validates ongoing struggle with God's seeming distance
  3. It points beyond itself to the greater restoration only Messiah brings.

The unresolved ending mirrors Israel's state: partial return from exile, but full covenant promises awaited fulfillment in Christ. The book teaches lament as ongoing spiritual discipline, not instantly resolved but held in tension with hope.

Historical Context

Even after the 538 BC return, restoration was partial. The second temple (completed 516 BC) lacked the Ark, Shekinah glory, Urim and Thummim. Haggai 2:3 records: "Who is left among you that saw this house in her first glory? and how do ye see it now? is it not in your eyes in comparison of it as nothing?" Though physically returned, full covenant blessings awaited future fulfillment. Malachi (circa 430 BC), the last Old Testament prophet, addresses continued struggles: corrupt priesthood (Malachi 1:6-14), broken marriages (2:13-16), social injustice (3:5). The Old Testament ends with partial restoration and messianic expectation (Malachi 4:5-6). The 400 silent years between testaments saw no prophets, only anticipation. This explains Lamentations' unresolved ending—it points forward to greater fulfillment. Luke 1:68-79 and 2:29-32 celebrate what Lamentations awaited: Messiah's arrival bringing ultimate redemption. Christ fulfills what Lamentations' incomplete restoration anticipated—reconciliation with God, covenant renewal, indwelling Spirit, resurrection hope.

Questions for Reflection