What is the context?
The word names Kedar and Hazor’s kingdoms in connection with Nebuchadnezzar. The threatened plunder includes tents, curtains, goods, camels, and flocks.
The people are described as living at ease without gates or bars. Their form of settlement has not put them beyond the reach of a planned invasion.
Scattering from every side and desolate habitation complete the warning. The point is the loss of assumed security, not a criticism that every mobile household is inherently unfaithful.
The text does not identify these kingdoms with every other biblical town called Hazor.
How is this passage commonly understood?
Wesley reads the command through Babylon’s military plans and the vulnerability of people living without fortified gates. His mention of the Hazor known in Joshua should not by itself settle the identity of the kingdoms named here.
What is our position?
We don't have a position on this passage yet. When our study reaches a conclusion the text supports, it will appear here.
Where can I study this further?
No deeper study linked yet.