To illustrate more fully the threatening against Judah and all peoples, ver. (.) ff., the judgment the Lord is about to execute on all the world is set forth under the similitude of a flagon filled with wrath, which the prophet is to hand to all the kings and peoples, one after another, and which he does give them to drink. The symbolical action imposed upon the prophet and, ace. to ver. 17, performed by him, serves to give emphasis to the threatening, and is therefore introduced by *?; of which Graf erroneously affirms that it conveys a meaning only when vers. 116-14 are omitted. Giving the peoples to drink of the cup of wrath is a figure not uncommon with the prophets for divine chastisements to be inflicted; cf. xlix. 12, li. 7, Isa. li. 17, 22, Ezek. xxiii. 31 ff., Hab. ii. 15, Ps. lx. 5, lxxv. 9, etc. The cup of wine which is wrath (fury). ^Dnn is an explanatory apposition to " wine." The wine with which the cup is filled is the wrath of God. riNin belongs to Di3, which is fern., cf. Ezek. xxiii. 32, 34, Lam. iv. 21, whereas irrix belongs to the wine which is wrath. In ver. 16, where the purpose with which the cup of wrath is to be presented is given, figure is exchanged for fact: they shall reel and become mad because of the sword which the Lord sends amidst them. To reel, sway to and fro, like drunken men. &nnn, demean oneself insanely, be mad. The sword as a weapon of war stands often for war, and the thought is: war with its horrors will stupefy the peoples, so that they perish helpless and powerless. — Ver. 17. This duty imposed by the Lord Jeremiah performs; he takes' the cnp and makes all peoples drink it. Here the question has been suggested, how Jeremiah performed this commission: whether he made journeys to the various kings and peoples, or, as J. D. Mich, thought, gave the cup to ambassadors, who were perhaps then in Jerusalem. This question is the result of an imperfect understanding of the case. The prophet does not receive from God a flagon filled with wine which he is to give, as a symbol of divine wrath, to the kings and peoples; he receives a cup filled with the wrath of God, which is to intoxicate those that drink of it. As the wrath of God is no essence that may be drunk by the bodily act, so manifestly the cup is no material cup, and the drinking of it no act of the outer, physical reality. The whole action is accordingly only emblematical of a real work of God wrought on kin<rs and peoples, and is performed by Jeremiah when he announces what he is commanded. And the announcement he accomplished not by travelling to each of the nations named, but by declaring to the king and his princes in Jerusalem the divine decree of judgment.
The enumeration begins with Judah, vcr. 18, on which first judgment is to come. Along with it are named Jerusalem, the capital, and the other cities, and then the kings and princes; whereas in what follows, for the most part only the kings, or, alternating with them, the peoples, are mentioned, to show that kings and peoples alike must fall before the coming judgment. The plural " kings of Judah" is used as in xix. 3. The consequence of the judgment: to make them a desolation, etc., runs as in vers. 9, 11, xix. 8, xxiv. 9. HJH Di'D has here the force: as is now about to happen. — Ver. 19 ff. The enumeration of the heathen nations begins with Egypt and goes northwards, the peoples dwelling to the east and west of Judah being ranged alongside one another. First we have in ver. 20 the races of Arabia and Philistia that bordered on Egypt to the east and west: then in ver. 21 the Edomites, Moabites, and Ammonites to the east, and, ver. 22, the Phoenicians with their colonies to the west. Next we have the Arabian tribes of the desert extending eastwards from Palestine to the Euphrates (vers. 23, 24); then the Elamites and Medes in the distant east (ver. 25), the near and distant kings of the north, and all kingdoms upon earth; Inst of all the king of Babylon (ver 26). arjprrfej LXX.: irdvra? toO? <ti;/z/z/a:tou9, and Jerome: cunctusqite qui non est a 1 egyptius, sed in ejus regionibus commoratur. The word means originally a mixed multitude of different races that attach themselves to one people and dwell as strangers amongst them; cf. Ex. xii. 38 and Neh. xiii. 3. Here it is races that in part dwelt on the borders of Egypt and were in subjection to that people. It is rendered accordingly "vassals" by Ew.; an interpretation that suits the present verse very well, but will not do in ver. 24. It is certainly too narrow a view, to confine the reference of the word to the mercenaries or Ionian and Carian troops by whose help Necho's father Psammetichus acquired sole supremacy (Graf), although this be the reference of the same word in Ezek. xxx. 5. The land of Uz is, ace. to the present passage and to Lam. iv. 21, where the daughter of Edom dwells in the land of Uz, to be sought for in the neighbourhood of Idumaea and the Egyptian border. To delete the words "and all the kings of the land of Uz " as a gloss, with Hitz. and Gr., because they are not in the LXX., is an exercise of critical violence. The LXX. omitted them for the same reason as that on which Hitz. still lays stress — namely, that they manifestly do not belong to this place, but to ver. 23. And this argument is based on the idea that the land of Uz ('Avcltis) lies much farther to the north in Arabia Deserta, in the Hauran or the region of Damascus, or that it is a collective name for the whole northern region of Arabia Deserta that stretches from Idumasa as far as Syria; see Del. on Job i. 1, and Wetzstein in Del.'s Job, S. 536 f. This is an assumption for which valid proofs are not before us. The late oriental legends as to Job's native country do not suffice for this. The kings of the land of the Philistines are the kings of the four towns next in order mentioned, with their territories, cf. Josh. xiii. 3, 1 Sam. vi. 4. The fifth of the towns of the lords of the Philistines, Gath, is omitted here as it was before this, in Amos i. 7 f. and Zeph. ii. 4, and later in Zech. ix. 5, not because Gath had already fallen into premature decay; for in Amos' time Gath was still a very important city. It is rather, apparently, because Gath had ceased to be the capital of a separate kingdom or principality. There is remaining now only a remnant of Ashclod; for after a twenty-nine years' siege, this town was taken by Psammetichus and destroyed (Herod, ii. 157), so that thus the whole territory greatly lost its importance. Ver. 21. On Edom, Moab, and the Ammonites, cf. chap. xlix. 7-22, xlviii. 1, xlix. 1-6. Ver. 22. The plural: "kings of Tyre and Sidon," is to be understood as in ver. 18. With them are mentioned " the kings of the Island" or "of the coast" land, that is, beyond the (Mediterranean) Sea. *RH is not KvTrpos (Cyprus), but means, generally, the Phoenician colonies in and upon the Mediterranean. Of the Arabian tribes mentioned in ver. 23, the Dedanites are those descended from the Cnshit' D ml living near Edom, with whom, however, the Ahrahamic Dedanites had probably mingled; a famous commercial people, Lsa. xxi. 1"), Ezek. x.wii. 15,20, xxxviii. 13, Job vi. 19. Tema is not Temd beyond the Hainan (Wetzst. /. S. 21 and 93 Ef.j cf. on the other hand, the same in Del.'s J< '. S. 526), but Temd situated on the pilgrims' route from Damascus to Mecca, between Tebuk and Wadi el J\ Del. on lsa. xxi. 14; here, accordingly, the Arabian
"lid son of Nahor. As to u hair-corners polled/' see on IX. 25. — The two appellations -">' and "the mixed races that dwell in the wilderness'1 comprehend the whole of the Arabian races, not merely those that are left after deducting the already (ver.
I mentioned nomad tribes. The latter also dwelt in the wilderness, and the word JTJJJ is a general name, not for the whole of Arabia, but for the nomadic Arabs, see on Ezek. xxvii. 21, whose tribal chieftains, here called kings, are in Ezek. called 2\s%;j':. In ver. 25 come three very remote peoples of the east and north-east: Zimri, Elamites, and Medes. The name Zimri is found only here, and lias been connected by the Syr. and most comm. with Z unrein, Gen. xxv. 2, a son of Abraham and Keturah. Accordingly *)D? would stand for ':"'-:, and might be identified with Za{3pd/jL, Ptol. vi. 7, § 5, a people which occupied a territory between the Arabs and Persians— which would seem to suit our passage. The reference is certainly not to the He/jL^plrac in Ethiopia, in the region of the later priestly city Meroe (Strabo, 786). On Elam1 see on xlix. 31 ff. — Finally, to make the list complete, ver. 26 mentions the kings of the north, those near and those far, and all the kingdoms of the earth, fltofeon with the article in stat. constr. against the rule. Hence Hitz. and Graf infer that pan may not be genuine, it being at the same time superfluous and not given in the LX X. This may be possible, but it is not certain; for in Isa. xxiii. 17 we find the same pleonastic mode of expression, and there are precedents for the article with the nomen regens. "The one to (or with) the other" means: according as the kingdoms of the north stand in relation to one another, far or near. — After the mention of all the kings and peoples on whom the king of Babylon is to execute judgment, it is said that he himself must at last drink the cup of wrath. SjW is, according to li. 41, a name for Babylon, as Jerome states, presumably on the authority of his Jewish teacher, who followed the tradition. The name is formed ace. to the Canon Atbashj in virtue of which the letters of the alphabet were put one for the other in the inverse order (n for K, w for 3, etc.); thus V would correspond to 3 and 3 to *?. Cf. Buxtorf, Lex. talm. s.v. C'linx and de abbreviatnris liebr. p. 41. A like example is found in li. 1, where 0*^3 is represented by ^? 37. The assertion of Gesen. that this w7ay of playing with words was not then in use, is groundless, as is also Hitz.'s, when he says it appeared first during the exile, and is consequently none of Jeremiah's work. It is also erroneous when many comm. remark, that Jeremiah made use of the mysterious name from the fear of weakening the impression of terror which the name of Babylon ought to make on their minds. These assumptions are refuted by ver. 12, where there is threatening of the punishment of spoliation made against the king of Babylon and the land of the Chaldeans; and by li. 41, where alongside of Sheshach we find in parallelism Babylon. The Atbash is, both originally and in the present case, no mere playing with words, but a transposition of the letters so as to gain a significant meaning, as may plainly be seen in the transposition to S£P ^., li. 1. This is the case with Sheshach also, which would be a contraction of W3B> (see Ew. § 158, c), from TJ3K*, to sink (of the water, Gen. viii. 1), to crouch (of the bird-catcher, Jer. v. 26). The sig. is therefore a sinking down, so that the threatening, li. 64: Babel shall sink and not rise again, constitutes a commentary on the name; cf. Hgstb. Christ, ill. p. 377. The name does not sig. humiliation, in support of which Graf lias recourse partly to P1RB?, partly to the Arabic usage. For other arbitrary interpretations, see in Ges. thes. p. I486.1
From ver. 27 onwards the commission from God (ver. 15 f.) is still more completely communicated to Jeremiah, so that the record of its fulfilment (vers. 17-26), together with the enumeration of the various peoples, is to be regarded as an explanatory parenthesis. These might the less unsuitably be inserted after ver. 16, inasmuch as what there is further of the divine command in vers. 27—29 is, if we examine its substance, little else than an enforcement of the command. The prophet ifl not merely to declare to them what is the meaning of this drinking of wrath (Ilitz.), but is to tell them that they are to drink the cup of wrath to the bottom, so that they shall fall for drunkenness and not be able to stand again (ver. 27); and that they must drink, because when once Jahveh has begun judgment on His own people, He is determined not to spare any other people. Vp from n^p=aip serves to strengthen the VUK?; in the second hemistich the figurative statement passes into the real, as at ver. 16. In ver. 28 VWTl in'f is a peremptory command: ye shall = must drink. Ver. 29 gives the reason: since God spares not His own people, then the heathen people need not count on immunity. u And ye think to go unpunished " is a question of surprise. Judgment is to be extended over all the inhabitants of the earth.
As to the fulfilment of this prophecy, see details in the exposition of the oracles against the nations, chap, xlvi.-li. Hence it
1 As has been done with the whole or with parts of vers. 12-14, so too the last clause of ver. 26 is pronounced by Ew., Hitz., and Graf to be spurious, a gloss that had ultimately found its way into the text. This is affirmed because the clause is wanting in the LXX., and because the prophet could not fitly threaten Babylon along with the other nations (Hitz.); or because "the specification of a single kingdom seems very much out of place, after the enumeration of the countries that are to drink the cup of wrath has been concluded by the preceding comprehensive intimation, 'all the kingdoms of the earth'" (Gr.). Both reasons are valueless. By "shall drink after them " Babylon is sufficiently distinguished from the other kings and countries mentioned, and the reason is given why Babylon is not put on the same footing with them, but is to be made to drink after them.
appears that most of the nations here mentioned were subject to Nebuchadnezzar. Only of Elam is no express mention there made; and as to Media, Jeremiah has given no special prophecy. As to both these peoples, it is very questionable whether Nebuchadnezzar ever subdued them. For more on this, see on xlix. 34-39. Although it is said in ver. 9 of the present chapter and in chap, xxvii. 5 ff. that God has given all peoples, all the lands of the earth, into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar, yet it does not follow thence that Nebuchadnezzar really conquered all. The meaning of the prophetic announcement is simply that the king of Babylon will obtain dominion over the world for the coming period, and that when his time is run, he too must fall beneath the judgment. The judgment executed by Nebuchadnezzar on the nations is the beginning of that upon the whole earth, before which, in course of time, all inhabitants of the earth fall, even those whom Nebuchadnezzar's sword has not reached. In the beginning of the Chaldean judgment the prophet sees the beginning of judgment upon the whole earth.
Vers. 30-38. u But do thou prophesy to them all these words, and say unto them: Jahveh will roar from on high, and from His holy habitation let His voice resound; He will roar against His pasture, raise a shout like treaders of grapes against all the inhabitants of the earth. Ver. 31. Noise reacheth to the end of the earth, for controversy hath Jahveh with the nations; contend will He with all flesh; the wicked He gives to the sword, is the saying of Jahveh. Ver. 32. Thus saith Jahveh of hosts: Behold, evil goeth forth from nation to nation, and (a) great storm shall raise itself from the utmost coasts of the earth. Ver. 33. And the slain of Jahveh shall lie on that day from one end of the earth unto the other, shall not be lamented, neither gathered nor buried; for dung shall they be upon the ground. Ver. 34. Howl, ye shepherds, and cry! and sprinkle you (with ashes), ye lordliest of the flock! For your days are filled for the slaughter; and I scatter you so that ye shall fall like a precious vessel. Ver. 35. Lost is flight to the shepherds, and escape to the lordliest of the flock. Ver. 36. Hark! Crying of the shepherds and howling of the lordliest of the flock; for Jahveh laveth waste their pasture. Ver. 37. Desolated are the pastures of peace because of the heat of Jahveh's anger. Ver. 38. He hath forsaken like a young lion his covert; for their land is become a desert, because of the oppressing sword, and because of the heat of His amrer."
In this passage the emblem of the cup of the Lord's anger (vers. 25-29) is explained by a description of the dreadful judgment God is to inflict on all the inhabitants of the earth. This is not the judgment on the world at large as distinguished from that proclaimed in vers. 15-29 against the kingdom of God and the kingdoms of the world, as Nag. supposes. It is the nature of this same judgment that is here discussed, no regard being here paid to the successive steps of its fulfilment. Vers. 30 and 31 are only a further expansion of the second half of ver. 29. " All these words'' refers to what follows. The clause "Jahveh will mar" to ulet His voice resound" is a reminiscence from Joel iv. 1G and Amos i. 2; but instead of " out of ZlOD and out of.Jerusalem M in those passages, we have here "from on high.' /.<'. heaven, and out of His holy habitation (in heaven), because the judgment is not to fall on the heathen only, but on the theocracy in a special manner, and on the earthly sanctuary, the temple itself, so that it can come only from heaven or the upper sanctuary. Jahveh will roar like a lion against His pasture (the pasture or meadow where His flock feeds, ef. x. -■>): a name for the holy land, including Jerusalem and the temple; not: the world subject to Him (E\\\). 'U1 Tj^j He will answer J. 'ike treaders of grapes; i.e. raise a shout as they do. Answer; inasmuch as the shout or war-cry of Jahveh is the answer to the words and deeds of the wicked. Grammatically TVn is accu.*. and object to the verb: He<htd he gives as answer. The word is from Tin crash, and signifies the loud cry with which those that tread grapes keep time to the alternate raising and thrusting of the feet. Ew. is accordingly correct, though far from happy, in rendering the word u tramping-song;" see on Iaa. xvi. 9 f. As to the figure of the treader of grapes, cf. Isa. Ixiii. 3. — Ver. 31. flWP is the din of war. the noise of great armies, cf. Isa. xvii. 12 f., etc. For the Lord conducts a controversy, a cause at law, with the nations, with all flesh, i.e. with all mankind; cf. ii. 9, 35. — tW^«] is for the sake of emphasis put first and resumed again in the suffix to DJW. « Give to the Bword" as in xv. 9. — Yer. 32 f. As a fierce storm (cf. xxiii. 19) rises from the ends of the earth on the horizon, so will evil burst forth and seize on one nation after another. Those slain by Jahveh will then lie, unmourned and unburied, from one end of the earth to the other; cf. viii. 2 xvi. 4. With "slain of Jahveh," cf. Isa. lxvi. 16. Jahveh slays thorn by the sword in war. — Yer. 34. No rank is spared. This is intimated in the summons to howl and lament addressed to the shepherds, i.e, the kings and rulers on earth (cf. x. 21, xxii. 22, etc.), and to the lordly or glorious of the flock, i.e. to the illustrious, powerful, and wealthy. With " sprinkle you," cf. vi. 26. Your days are full or filled for the slaughter, i.e. the days of your life are full, so that ye shall be slain; cf. Lam. iv. 18. D3*nitfarn is obscure and hard to explain. It is so read by the Masora, while many codd. and editt. have D^ntosrtt. According to this latter form, Jerome, Rashi, Ivimchi, lately Maur. and Umbr., hold the word for a substantive: your dispersions. But whether we connect this with what precedes or what follows, we fail to obtain a fitting sense from it. Your days are full and your dispersions, for: the time is come when ye shall be slain and dispersed, cannot be maintained, because " dispersions " is not in keeping with " are full." Again: as regards your dispersions, ye shall fall, would give a good meaning, only if " your dispersions " meant: the flock dispersed by the fault of the shepherds; and with this the second pers. u ye shall fall " does not agree. The sig. of fatness given by Ew. to the word is wholly arbitrary. Hitz., Gr., and Nag. take the word to be a Tiphil (like mnn, xii. 5, xxii. 15), and read Drrnivs2fi? I scatter you. This gives a suitable sense; and there is no valid reason for attaching to the word, as Hitz. and Gr. do, the force of TV? or PSJ, smite in pieces. The thought, that one part of the flock shall be slain, the other scattered, seems quite apt; so also is that which follows, that they that are scattered shall fail and break like precious, i.e. fine, ornamental vases. Hence there was no occasion for Ew.'s conjectural emendation, "HJ?, like precious lambs. Nor does the LXX. rendering: toenrep ol ttpiol ol ifcXe/cTOL, give it any support; for W]3 does not mean rams, but lambs. The similar comparison of Jechoniah to a worthless vessel (xxii. 28) tells in favour of the reading in the text (Graf). — In ver. 35 the threatening is made more woeful by the thought, that the shepherds shall find no refuge, and that no escape will be open to the sheep. — Ver. 36 f. The prophet is already hearing in spirit the lamentation to which in ver. 34 he has called them, because Jahveh has laid waste the pastures of the shepherds and their flocks, and destroyed the peaceful meadows by the heat of His anger. — In ver. 38, finally, the discourse is rounded off by a repetition and expansion of the thought with which the description of the judgment was begun in ver. 30. As a young lion forsakes his covert to seek for prey, s<>.Jahveh has gone forth out of Ilis heavenly habitation to hold judgment on the people; for their (the shepherds*) land becomes a desert. The peril, are prophetic. *2 has grounding force. The desolation of the land gives proof that the Lord lias arisen to do judgment. njtal pin seems strange, since the adjective HJiVl never occurs independently, but only in connection with inn (xlvi. 10, 1. It;, and with Tty Zeph. iii. 1). pin, again. ularly joined witli s *]*<, and only three times ides with a sullix referring to Jahveh (Ex. xv. 7; Ps. ii. 5; Ezek. vii. 14). In this we find justification for the conjecture of Hit/.. Ew., dr., etc., that we should read with the LXX. and Chald. n:vr\ yvn. The article with the adj. after the subst. without one, here and in xlvi. 10, 1. 10, is to be explained by the looseness of connection between the participle and its noun; cf. Ew. § 335, a.
Chap. xxvi. Accusation and Acquittal of Jeremiah in the matter of las prophesying Thrcatenings. TJce Prophet Urijah p>ut to death.
This chapter is separated from the discourses that precede and follow by a heading of its own, and dates from the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim; whereas the following chap, xxvii.-xxix. fall into the earlier years of Zedekiah's reign. In point of matter, however, the present chapter is closely connected with these latter, though the connection between them is certainly not that held to exist by Ew. His view is, that chap, xxvii.-xxix. furnish " three historical supplements regarding true and false prophethood," in each of which we are told in the first place how the prophet himself acted, the account being concluded with notices of prophets who either prophesied what was directly false, or who vindicated the truth with but insufficient stedfastness. As against this, Graf justly observes, "that this is in keeping neither with the real contents of chap, xxvii-xxix. nor with chap, xxvi.; for Micah was far from being a false prophet, and Urijah was as little wanting in courage as was Jeremiah, who hid himself from Jehoiakim, xxxvi. 19, 26."— Chap, xxvii.-xxix. are related in the closest possible manner to chap. xxv.; for all that is said by Jeremiah in these chapters has manifestly for its aim to vindicate the truth of his announcement, that Judah's captivity in Chaldea would last seventy years, as against the false prophets, who foretold a speedy return of the exiles into their fatherland. To this the contents of chap. xxvi. form a sort of prelude, inasmuch as here we are informed of the attitude assumed by the leaders of the people, by the priests and prophets, and by King Jehoiakim towards the prophet's announcement of judgment about to fall on Judah. Thus we are put in a position to judge of the opposition on the part of the people and its leaders, with which his prophecy of the seventy years' bondage of Judah was likely to meet. For this reason chap, xxvi., with its historical notices, is inserted after xxv. and before xxvii.-xxix.
Vers. 1-19. Accusation and acquittal of Jeremiah. — Vers. 1-7. His prophecy that temple and city would be destroyed gave occasion to the accusation of the prophet. — Ver. 1. " In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim, the son of Josiah king of Judah, came this word from Jahveh, saying: Ver. 2. Thus said Jahveh: Stand in the court of the house of Jahveh, and speak to all the cities of Judah which come to worship in Jahveh's house, all the wrords that I have commanded thee to speak to them; take not a word therefrom. Ver. 3. Perchance they will hearken and turn each from his evil way, that I may repent me of the evil which I purpose to do unto them for the evil of their doings. Ver. 4. And say unto them: Thus saith Jahveh: If ye hearken not to me, to walk in my law which I have set before yon, Ver. 5. To hearken to the words of my servants the prophets whom I sent unto you, from early morning on sending, but ye have not hearkened, Ver. 6. Then I make this house like Shiloh, and this city a curse to all the peoples of the earth. Ver. 7. And the priests and the prophets and all the people heard Jeremiah speaking these words in the house of Jahveh."
In the discourse of chap, vii., where he was combating the people's false reliance upon the temple, Jeremiah had already threatened that the temple should share the fate of Shiloh, unless the people turned from its evil ways. Now, since that discourse was also delivered in the temple, and since \ era. 2-6 of the present chapter manifestly communicate only the substance of what the prophet said, several comm. have held these discourses to be identical, and have taken it for granted that the discourse here referred to, bclonLrinir to the be<nnnin£ of Jehoiakiin's reign, was given in full in chap, vii., while the history of it has been given in the present chapter by way of supplement (cf. the introductory remarks to chap. vii.). Bnt considering that it is a peculiarity of Jeremiah frequently to repeat certain of the main thoughts of his message, the saying of God, that lie will do to the temple as He has done to Shiloh, is not sufficient to warrant this assumption. Jeremiah frequently held discourses in the temple, and more than once foretold the destruction of Jerusalem; so that it need not be surprising if on more than one occasion he threatened the temple with the fate of Shiloh. Between the two discourses there is further this distinction: AYhereas in chap. vii. the prophet speaks chiefly of the spoliation or destruction of the temple and the expulsion of the people into exile, here in brief incisive words he intimates the destruction of the city of Jerusalem as well; and the present chapter throughout gives the impression that by this, so to speak, peremptory declaration, the prophet sought to move the people finally to decide for Jahveh its God, and that he thus so exasperated the priests and prophets present, that they seized him and pronounced him worthy of death. — According to the heading, this took place in the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim. The like specification in the heading of chap, xxvii. does not warrant us to refer the date to the fourth year of this king. "The beginning" intimates simply that the discourse belongs to the earlier period of Jehoiakiin's reign, without minuter information as to year and day. "To Jeremiah" Beems to have been dropped out after " came this word," ver. 1. The court of the house of God is not necessarily the inner or priests1 court of the temple; it may have been the outer one where the people assembled; cf. xix. 14. All the " cities of Judah" for their inhabitants, as in xi. 12. The addition: u take not a word therefrom," cf. Deut. iv. 2, xiii. 1, indicates the peremptory character of the discourse. In full, without softening the threat by the omission of anything the Lord commanded him, i.e. he is to proclaim the word of the Lord in its full unconditional severity, to move the people, if possible, to repentance, ace. to ver. 3. With ver. 36, cf. xviii. 8, etc. — In vers. 4-6 we have the contents of the discourse. If they hearken not to the words of the prophet, as has hitherto been the case, the Lord will make the temple as Shiloh, and this city, i.e. Jerusalem, a curse, i.e. an object of curses (cf. xxiv. 9), for all peoples. On this cf. vii. 12 ff. But ye have not hearkened. The Chet. nnwn Hitz. holds to be an error of transcription; Ew. § 173, «7, and Olsh. Gramm. § 101, c, and 133, a paragogically lengthened form; Bottcher, Lelirb. § $65. hi. and 897, 3, a toneless appended suffix, strengthening the demonstrative force: this (city) here.
Vers. 8-19. The behaviour of the priests, prophets, and princes of the people towards Jeremiah on account of this discourse. — Ver. 7 ff. When the priests and prophets and all the people present in the temple had heard this discourse, they laid hold of Jeremiah, saying, Ver. 8 f. " Thou must die. Wherefore prophesiest thou in the name of Jahveh, saying, Like Shiloh shall this house become, and this city shall be desolate, without inhabitant? And all the people gathered to Jeremiah in the house of Jahveh." This last remark is not so to be understood, when compared with vers. 7 and 8, as that all the people who, according to ver. 7, had been hearing the discourse, and, according to ver. 8, had with the priests and prophets laid hold on Jeremiah, gathered themselves to him now. It means, that after one part of the people present had, along with the priests and prophets, laid hold on him, the whole people gathered around him. « All the people," ver. 9, is accordingly to be distinguished from " all the people," ver. 8; and the word >3} all, must not be pressed, in both cases meaning simply a great many When it is thus taken, there is no reason for following Hitz., and deleting "all the people" in ver. 8 as a gloss. Jeremiah's special opponents were the priests and prophets after their own hearts. But to them there adhered many from among the people; and these it is that are meant by " all the people" ver. 8. But since these partisans of the priests and pseudo-prophets had no independent power of their own to pass judgment, and since, after Jeremiah was laid hold of, all the • of the people then in the temple gathered around him, it happens that in ver. 11 the priests and prophets are opposed to "all the people," ami are mentioned as being alone the accusers of Jeremiah.— When the princes of Judah heard what had occurred, they repaired from the king's house (the palace) to the temple, and seated themselves m the entry of the 1H.V, Jahveh, sr. to investigate and decide the case.
The new gate was, according to xxxvi. 10, by the upper, i.e. inner court, and is doubtless the same that Jotham caused to built (2 Kings xv. 35); but whether it was identical with the upper gate of Benjamin, n. 2, cannot be decided, lie princes of Judah, since they came up into the temple from the palace, are the judicial officers who were at that time about the palace The judges were chosen from among the heads of the >.ople; cf. my BibL Archdol. ii. § Hu.-Ver. 10. Before these princes, about whom all the people gathered, Jeremiah is accused by the pri -id proph.: This man is worthy of death;
literally: a sentence of death (cf. Deut. xix. 6), condemnation to death, is due to this man; " for he hath prophesied against this city, as ye have heard with your ears." With these last words they appeal to the people standing round who had heard the prophecy, for the princes had not reached the temple till after Jeremiah had been apprehended. Ver. 12. To this Jeremiah answered in his own defence before the princes and all the people: "Jahveh hath sent me to prophesy against (?* for bv) this house and against this city all the words which ye have heard. Ver. 13. And now make your ways good and your doings, and hearken to the voice of Jahveh your God, and Jahveh will repent Him of the evil that He hath spoken against you. Ver. 14. But I, behold, I am in your hand; do with me as seemeth to you good and right. Ver. 15. Only ye must know, that if ye put me to death, ye bring innocent blood upon you, and upon this city, and upon her inhabitants; for of a truth Jahveh hath Bent me to you to speak in your ears all these words." — As to "make your ways good," cf. vii. 3. This defence made an impression on the princes and on all the people. From the intimation that by reform it was possible to avert the threatened calamity, and from the appeal to the fact that in truth Jahveh had sent him and commanded him so to speak, they see that he is a true prophet, whose violent death would bring blood-guiltiness upon the city and its inhabitants. They therefore declare to the accusers, ver. 16: 11 This man is not worthy of death, for in the name of Jahveh our God hath he spoken unto us." — Vers. 17-19. To justify and confirm this sentence, certain of the elders of the land rise and point to the like sentence passed on the prophet Micah of Moresheth-Gath, who had foretold the destruction of the city and temple under Kino; Hezekiah, but had not been put to death by the king; Hezekiah, on the contrary, turning to prayer to the Lord, and thus succeeding in averting the catastrophe. The " men of the elders of the land" are different from " all the princes," and are not to be taken, as by Graf, for representatives of the people in the capacity of assessors at judicial decisions, who had to give their voice as to guilt or innocence; nor are they necessarily to be regarded as local authorities of the land. They come before us here solely in their character as elders of the people, who possessed a high authority in the eyes of the people. The saying of the Morasthite Micah which they cite in ver. 18 is found in Mic. iii. 12, verbally agreeing with ver. 18; see the exposition of that passage. The stress of what they say lies in the conclusion drawn by them from Micah' s prophecy, taken in connection with Hezekiah's attitude towards the Lord, ver. 19: " Did Hezekiah king of Judah and all Judah put him to death? Did he not fear Jahveh and entreat Jahveh, and did not Jahveh repent Him of the evil which He had spoken concerning them % and we would commit a great evil against our souls?" Neither in the book of Micah, nor in the accounts of the books of Kings, nor in the chronicle of Hezekiah's reinn are we told that, in consequence of that prophecy of Micali, Hezekiah entreated the Lord and so averted judgment from Jerusalem. There we find only that during the siege of Jerusalem by the Assyrians, Hezekiah besought the help of the Lord and protection from that mighty enemy. The elders have combined this fact with Micah's prophecy, and thence drawn the conclusion that the godly king succeeded by his prayer in averting the mischief. Cf. the remarks on this passage at Mic. iv. 10. '* '^"DS n^ lit. stroke the face of Jahvehj i.e. entreat Him, cf. Ex. xxxii. 11. a And we would commit," are thinking of doing, are on the point of doing a great evil against our souls; inasmuch as by putting the prophet to death they would bring blood-guiltiness upon themselves and hasten the judgment of God. — The acquittal of Jeremiah is not directly related; but it may be gathered from the decision of the princes: This man is not worthy of death.
Vers. 20 21. The prophet Urijah put to death. — While the history we have just been considering gives testimony to the hostility of the priests and false prophets towards the true prophets of the Lord, the story of the prophet Urijah shows the hostility of King Jehoiakim against the proclaimers of divine truth. For this purpose, and not merely to show in how great peril Jeremiah then stood (Gr., Nag.), this history is introduced into our book. It is not stated that the occurrence took place at the beginning of Jehoiakim's reign, nor can we infer so much from its being placed directly after the events of that time. The time is not specified, because it was irrelevant for the case in hand. Ver. 20. A man, Urijah the son of -inaiali — both unknown — from Kirjath-Jearim, now called Kuriyet el r£nab, about three hours to the north-west of Jerusalem, on the frontiers of the tribe of Benjamin (see on Josh, ix. 17), prophesied in the name of Jahveh against Jerusalem and Judah very much in the same terms as Jeremiah had done. When King Jehoiakim and his great men heard this discourse, he sought after the prophet to kill him. Urijah, when he heard of it, fled to Egypt; but the king sent men after him, Elnathan the son of Achbor with some followers, and had him brought back thence, caused him to be put to death, and his body to be thrown into the graves of the common people. Ilitz. takes objection to " all his mighty men," ver. 21 because it is not found in the LXX., and is nowhere else used by Jeremiah. But these facts do not prove that the words are not genuine; the latter of the two, indeed, tells rather in favour of their genuineness, since a glossator would not readily have interpolated an expression foreign to the rest of the book. The " mighty men" are the distinguished soldiers who were about the king, the military commanders, as the " princes" are the supreme civil authorities. Elnathan the son of Achbor, according to xxxvi. 12, 25, one of Jehoiakim's princes, was a son of the Achbor who is mentioned in 2 Kin^s xxii. 12-14 as amongst the princes of Josiah. Whether this Elnathan was the same as the Elnathan whose daughter Nehushta was Jehoiachin's mother (2 Kings xxiv. 8), and who was therefore the king's father-in-law, must remain an undecided point, since the name Elnathan is of not unfrequent occurrence; of Levites, Ezra viii. 16. Dyn \J3 (see on xvii. 19) means the common people here, as in 2 Kings xxii. 6. The place of burial for the common people was in the valley of the Kidron; see on 2 Kings xxii. G. — Ver. 24. The narrative closes with a remark as to how, amid such hostility against the prophets of God on the part of king and people, Jeremiah escaped death. This was because the hand of Ahikam the son of Shaphan was with him. This person is named in 2 Kings xxii. 12, 14, as one of the great men sent by King Josiah to the prophetess Hulda to inquire of her concerning the book of the law recently discovered. According to Jer. xxxix. 14, xl. 5, etc., he was the father of the future Chaldean governor Gedaliah.
These three chapters are closely connected with one another. They all belong to the earlier period of Zedekiah's reign, and contain words of Jeremiah by means of which he confirms and vindicates against the opposition of false prophets his announcement of the seventy years' duration of the Chaldean supremacy over Judah and the nations, and warns king and people patiently to bear the yoke laid on them by Nebuchadnezzar. The three chapters have besides an external connection. For chap, xxviii. is attached to the event of xxvii. by its introductory formula: And it came to pass in that year, at the beginning, etc., as xxix. is to xxviii. by ^M. To this, it is true, the heading handed down in the Masoretic text is in contradiction. The date: In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim. the son of Josiah king of Judah, came this word to Jeremiah (xxvii. 1), is irreconcilable with the date: And it came to pass in tliit year, in the beirinninir of the reign of Zedekiah kin^ of Judah, in the fourth year, in the fifth month. The name u Jehoiakim the son of Josiah" in xxvii. 1 is erroneous. It is without doubt the blunder of a copyist who had in his mind the heading of the 26th chapter, and should have been '• Zedekiah; ' for the contents of chap, xxvii. carry us into Zedekiah's time, as plainly appears from vers. 3, 12, and 20. Hence the Syr. translation and one of Kennicott's codd. have substituted the latter name.1
1 Following tin1 example <>f ancient ootnm., Baevernick in his Tntrod. (ii. 2) baa endeavoured to defend the date: "In the beginning of the oiakim the bod of Josiah.'' To this, end he ventures the hypois, that in chap, xxvii. there are placed beside one another three discoui eeing in their subject-matter: "one addressed to Jehoiakim
1 1). a -> cond to Zedekiah (yen. 12-15), a third to the priests and •le;" and that the \vord>: " by the hand of the ambassador that came to Zedekiah the king of Judah,11 are appended to show how Zedekiah ought to have obeyed the older prophecy of Jehoiakim's time, and how he Bhould have home himself towards the nations with which lie was in alli.i But this (1 solve the ditficnlty. The prophecy, vers. HI, is addressed t<> the kings of Edom, Moab, Ammon, Tyre, and SidoD; but since the envoys of these kings did not come to Jerusalem till Zedekiah's time, we are bound, if the prophecy dates from the beginning of Jehoiakinfs reign, to assume that this prophecy was communicated to Jeremiah and published by him eleven years before the event, upon occasion of which it was to be conveyed to the kings concerned. An assumption that would require unusually cogent reasons to render it credible. Vers. 45-21 contain nothing whatever that points to Jehoiakinfs time, or give countenance to the hypothesis that the three sections of this chapter contain three discourses of different dates, which have been put together on account merely of the similarity of their contents.
Beyond this one error of transcription, these three chapters contain nothing that could throw any doubt on the integrity of the text. There are no traces of a later supplementary revision by another hand, such as Mov., Hitz., and de AV. profess to have discovered. The occurrence of Jeremiah's name in the contracted form!TDV, as also of other names com-
- to the nations adjoining Jndah (vers. 2-11), to Kino- Zedekiah (vers. 12 15), and to the priests and all the people (vers. 16-22), that God has laid on them the yoke of the kino- of Babylon, and that they ought to humble themselves under His almighty hand. — Ver. 1. According to the (corrected) heading, the prophecy was given in the beginning of the rei^n of Zedekiah. If we compare chap, xxviii. we find the same date: " in that year, at the beginning of the reign of Zedekiah," more fully defined as the fourth year of his reign. Graf has made objection, that in the case of a reign of eleven years, one could not well speak of the fourth year as the beginning of the reign. But the idea of beginning is relative (cf. Gen. x. 10), and does not necessarily coincide with that <>f the first year. The reio*n of Zedekiah is divided into two halves: the first period, or begin- potraded with Jahu in the form Jah, docs not prove later retouching; for, as Graf has shown, we find alongside of it the fuller form also (xxviii. 12, xxix. 27-30), and have frequently both longer and shorter forms in the same verse (so in xxvii. 1, xxviii. 12, xxix. 2(J— 31). And so long as other means for distinguishing are wanting, it will not do to discriminate the manner of expression in the original text from that of the reviser by means of these forms alone. Again, as we have shown at p. 312, note, there is a good practical reason for Jeremiah's being called " the prophet" (x"32n);
so that this too is not the reviser's wbrk. Finally, we cannot argue later addition from the fact that the name of the king of Babylon is written Nebuchadnezzar in xxvii. 6, 8, 20, xxviii. 3, 11, 14, xxix. 1, 3; for the same form appears again in xxxiv. 1 and xxxix. 5, and with it we have also Nebuchadrezzar in xxix. 21 and xxxix. 1. Elsewhere, it is true, we find only the one form Nebuchadnezzar, and this is the unvarying spelling in the books of Kings, Chron., Ezra, Dan., and in Esth. ii. G; whereas Ezekiel uniformly writes Nebuchadrezzar (xxvi. 7, xxix. 18, 19, and xxx. 10), and this form Jeremiah uses twenty-seven times (xxi. 2, 7, xxii. 25, xxiv. 1, xxv. 1.!». xxix. 21, xxxii. 1. 28, xxxv. 11, xxxvii. 1, xxxix. 1, 11, xliii. 10, xliv. 30, xlvi. 2, 13, 26, xlix. 28, 30, 1. 17, li. 34, hi. 4, 12, 28, 295 30— not merely in the discourses, but in the headings and historical parts as well). But though the case is so, we are not entitled to conclude that Nebuchadnezzar was a way of pronouncing the name that came into use at a later time; the conclusion rather is, as we have remarked at p. 327, and on Dan. i. 1, that the writing with n represents the Jewish-Aramajan pronunciation, whereas the form Nebuchadrezzar, according to the testimony of such inscriptions as have been preserved, expresses more fairly the ning, when he was elevated by Nebuchadnezzar, and remained subject to him, and the after or last period, when he had rebelled against his liege lord.
Vers. 2-11. The yoke of the king of Babylon upon the kings of Edom, Moab, Amnion, Tyre, and SiJon. — Ver. 2. u Thus said Jahveh to me: Make thee bonds and yokes, and put them upon thy neck, Ver. 3. And send them to the king of Edom, the king of Moab, the king of the sons of Amnion, the king of Tyre, and the king of Sidon, by the hand of the messengers that are come to Jerusalem to Zedekiah king of Judah. Ver. 4. And command them to say unto their masters, Thus hath Jahveh of hosts, the (iod of Israel, said: Thus shall ye say unto your master-: Ver. 5. I have made the earth, the man and the beast that are upon the ground, by my great power and by my outstretched hand, and give it to whom it seemeth meet unto me. V. 6. And now have 1 given all these lands into the hand of N buchadnezzar king of Babylon, my servant; and the beasts of the held also have I given him to serve him. Ver. 7. And all nations shall serve him, and his son, and his son's son, until the time of his land come, and many nations and great kings \e then of him. Ver. 8. And the people and the kingdom that will not serve him, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon,
Assyrian pronunciation. The Jewish way of pronouncing would naturally not arise till after the kin ibylon had appeared in Palestine, from which time the J< wa would have this name often on their lips. Hence it is in the book of Jeremiah alone that wo find both forms of the name (that with /• 27 times, that with n 10 times). How it has come about that the latter form is osed just three times in each of chap, xxvii. and xxviii. cannot with certainty be made out. But note, (1) that the form with » occurs twice in xwiii. (vers..'! and 11) in the speech of the false prophet Hananiah, and then, ver. 1-1. m Jeremiah's answer to that speech; (2) that the prophecy of chap, xxvii. was addressed partly to the envoys of the kings of Edom, Moab, Amnion, and Phoenicia, while it is partly a warning to the people against the lying speeches of the false prophets, and that it is just in these portions, vers. 6, 8, and 20, that the name so written occurs. If we consider this, we cannot avoid the conjecture, that by changing the r foi w, the Jewish people had accommodated to their own mode of utterance the strange-sounding name Nabucudurusur, and that Jeremiah made use of the popular pronunciation in these two discourses, whereas elsewhere in all his discourses he uses Nebuchadrezzar alone; for the remaining cases in which we rind Nebuchadnezzar in this book are contained iu historical notices.
and that will not put its neck into the yoke of the king of Babylon, with sword, with famine, and with pestilence I will visit that people, until I have made an end of them by his hand. Ver. 9. And ye, hearken not to your prophets, and your soothsayers, and to your dreams, to your enchanters and your sorcerers, which speak unto you, saying: Ye shall not serve the king of Babylon. Ver. 10. For they prophesy a lie unto you, that I should remove you far from your land, and that I should drive you out and ye should perish. Ver. 11. But the people that will bring its neck under the yoke of the king of Babylon and will serve him, that will I let remain in its land, saith Jahveh, to till it and to dwell therein."
The yoke Jeremiah is to make and lay on his neck is a plain emblem of the Babylonian yoke the nations are to bear. The words " bonds and yokes" denote together one yoke, nittb are the two wooden beams or poles of the yoke, which were fastened together by means of the nftpiD, bonds, ropes, so that the yoke might be laid on the beast's neck; cf. Lev. xxvi. 13. That Jeremiah really put such a yoke on his neck and wore it, we see from xxviii. 10, 12, where a false prophet breaks it for him. He is to send the yoke to the kings of Edom, Moab, etc., by means of envoys of those kings, who were come to Jerusalem to Zedekiah. And since Jeremiah laid a yoke on his own neck and so carried out the commanded symbolical action in objective reality, there is no reason to doubt that he made yokes for the five kings named and gave them to their respective envoys. Chr. B. Mich., Hitz., Graf, hold this to be improbable, and suppose that Jeremiah only made a yoke for himself and put it on his neck; but by appearing abroad with it, he set before the eyes of the ambassadors the yoke that was to be laid on their kings, and, in a certain sense, emblematically gave it to them. But even though this might have sufficed to accomplish the aim of the prophecy, it is difficult to reconcile it with the wording of the text; hence Hitz. seeks arbitrarily to change DFIIW into nniw. And it is a worthless argument that Jeremiah cannot possibly have believed that the envoys would carry the yokes with them and deliver them to their masters. Why should not he have believed they would do so? And if they did not, it was their concern. The plur. " bands and yokes" may indeed mean a single voke, but it may also mean many: and the verbs DiVU and Dflfw, both with plural suffixes, indicate clearly that he was to make not merely one yoke for himself, but yokes for himself and the kings. In chap, xxviii. 10 and 12, where one yoke is spoken of, the singular ncrton is used; while, ver. 13, " yokes of wood hast thou broken," does not prove that this plural has the same force as the singular.
We are not told for what purpose ambassadors from the kings named had come to Jerusalem; but we can discover what it was from the message Jeremiah gives them for their lords. From tin- it appears, without a doubt, that they were come to take counsel as to a coalition with the view of throwing off the Chaldean supremacy. By God's command Jeremiah opposes this design with the announcement, that the God of Israel, the Creator of the world and of all creatures, has given all these lands (those of the kings named in ver. 3) into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar; that men. and even beasts, should serve him,.. that he might exercise unbounded dominion over these lands and all that belonged to them, cf. xxviii. 14. u My servant," as in xxv. 9. All nations arc to serve him, his son and his grandson. These words simply express the long duration of the kinix of Babylon's power over them, without warranting us in concluding that he was succeeded on the throne by his son and his grandson, cf. Dent. vi. '2. iv. 25. For, as we know, Nebuchadnezzar was succeeded by his son Evil-Merodach; then came his brother-in-law Neriglissar, who murdered Evil-Merodach, who was followed by his son Laborosoarchod, a child, murdered after a nine months1 reign by conspirators. Of these latter, Naboned ascended the throne of Babylon; and it was under his reign that the time for his land came that it should be made subject bv many nations and great kings, cf. xxv. 14. WH E3 serves to strengthen the suffix on fan*; and the suffix, like 13, refers to Nebuchadnezzar.1 What is said in vers. ('» and 7 is made sterner by the threatening of ver. 8, that the Lord will punish with
1 Ver. 7 is wanting in the LXX.. and therefore Mow and Hitz. pronounce it spurious. But, as Graf remarked, tlnv have no sufficient reason for this, since, reference being had to ver. 16 and to xxviii. I), 11, this verse is very much in place here. It is not a vaticinium ex eventu, as Hitz. asserts, but was rather omitted by the LXX., simply because its contents, sword, famine, and pestilence the poople and kingdom that will n>>t serve Nebuchadnezzar. "W« n«1 introduces a second relative clause, the HM being here quite in place, since " the people and the kingdom" are accusatives made to precede absolutely, and resumed again by the 'n *ian ty which belongs directly to the verb " visit." With nsrpg cf. xxiv. 10 and^Dnx ♦rifeny, corresponding in meaning, in ix. 15.— Ver. 9 f. Therefore they must not hearken to their prophets, soothsayers, and sorcerers, that prophesy the contrary. The mention of dreams between the prophets and soothsayers on the one hand, and the enchanters and sorcerers on the other, strikes us as singular. It is, however, to be explained from the fact, that prophets and soothsayers often feigned dreams and dream-revelations (cf. xxiii. 25); and other persons, too, might have dreams, and could give them out as significant. Cf. xxix. 8, where dreams are expressly distinguished from the discourse of the prophets and soothsayers. Whether the reckoning of five kinds of heathen prophecy has anything to do with the naming of five kings (Hitz.), appears to us to be questionable; but it is certain that Jeremiah does not design to specify five different, i.e. distinct and separate, kinds of heathen divination. For there was in reality no such distinction. Heathen prophecy was closely allied with sorcery and soothsaying; cf. Deut. xviii. 9 f., and Oehler on the Relation of Old Testament Propliecy to Heathen Divination (Tub. 1861). The enumeration of the multifarious means and methods for forecasting the future is designed to show the multitude of delusive schemes for supplying the lack of true and real divine inspiration. BW?, equivalent to D^EGbft, the same which in Deut. xviii. 10 is used along with ip.iyp. The explanation of the last-mentioned word is disputed. Some take it from jJV, cloud = cloud-maker or stormraiser; others from PV, eye = fascinator, the idea being that of bewitching with the evil eye; see on Lev. xix. 26. The use of the word alone with *]BbD1 &>m», Deut. xviii. 10, favours the latter rendering, whereas no passage in which the word is used taken literally, were not in keeping with the historical facts. The LXX. omit also the clause from "that will not serve" to "king of Babylon and," which is accordingly, and for other subjective reasons of taste, pronounced spurious by Hitz.; but Graf justly opposes this.
in the Old Testament supports the sig. storm-raiser. " That I should remove you," as is shown by the continuation of the infinitive by 'nrnni. The false prophets delude the people, inducing them to rise in rebellion against Nebuchadnezzar, contrary to God's will, and thus simply bringing about their expulsion from their land, i.e. removal into banishment. iV^p shows, as frequently, that the inevitable consequence of these persons1 proceedings is designed by them. — Ver. 11. The people, on the other hand, that bends under the yoke of the king of Babylon shall remain in its own land. For the great Asiatic conquerors contented themselves, in the first place, with thoroughly subjecting the vanquished nations and imposing a tribute; only in the case of stubborn resistance or of insurrection on the part of the conquered did they proceed to destroy the kingdoms and deport their populations. This X deki ih and the ambassadors that had come to him might have learnt from Nebuchadnezzar's course of action after the capture of Jerusalem under Jehoiachin, as compared with that in Jehoiakim's time, had they not been utterly infatuated by the lying spirit of the false prophets, whose prophecies accommodated themselves to the wishes of the natural heart.
V. 12-15. To King Zedekiah Jeremiah addressed words of like import, saving: M Bring your necks into the yoke of the king of Babylon, and serve him and his people, and ye shall live. Ver. 13. Why will ye die, thou and thy people, by sword, famine, and pestilence, as Jahveh hath spoken concerning the people that will not serve the king of Babylon? Ver. 14. And hearken not unto the words of the prophets that speak unto you: Ye shall not serve the king of Babylon; for they prophecy a lie unto you. Ver. 15. For I have not sent them, itli Jahveh, and they prophesy in my name falsely, that I might drive you out and ye might perish, ye and the prophets that prophesy unto you." — The discourse addressed to the king in the plural, " bring your necks," etc., is explained by the fact that, as ver. 13 shows, in and along with the king his people are addressed. The imperative W[ intimates the consequence of the preceding command. Ver. 13 gives the application of the threat in ver. 8 to King Zedekiah and his people; and ver. 14 f. gives the warning corresponding to
Vers. 16-22. The priests and all the people are warned to give no belief to the false prophesyings of a speedy restoration the vessels carried off to Babylon. — Ver. 16. "Thus hath Jahveh said: Hearken not to the sayings of your prophets that prophesy unto you: Behold, the vessels of Jahveh's house shall now shortly be brought again from Babylon; for they prophesy a lie unto you. Ver. 17. Hearken not unto them; serve the king of Babylon and live; wherefore should this city become a desert? Ver. L8. But if they be prophets, and if 'the word of Jahveh be with them, let them now make intercession to Jahveh of hosts, that the vessels which are left in the house of Jahveh, and in the king's house, and in Jerusalem, go not to Babylon. Ver. 19. For thus saith Jahveh of hosts concerning the pillars and the [brazen] sea and the frames, and concerning the other vessels that are left in this city, Ver. 20. Which Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon took not away when he carried away captive Jechoniah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah from Jerusalem to Babylon, with all the nobles of Judah and Jerusalem. Ver. 21. For thus saith Jahveh of hosts, the God of Israel, concerning the vessels that are left in the house of Jahveh," and in the house of the king of Judah, and in Jerusalem: Ver. 22. To Babylon shall they be brought, and there shall they remain until the day that I visit them, saith Jahveh, and carry them up, and bring them back to this place."
Here Jeremiah gives King Zedekiah warning that the prophecies of a speedy end to Chaldean bondage are lies, and that confidence in such lies will hurry on the ruin of the state. He at the same time disabuses the priests of the hope raised by the false prophets, that the vessels of the temple and of the palace that had been carried off at the time Jechoniah was taken to Babylon will very soon be restored; and assures them that such statements can only procure the destruction of the city, since their tendency is to seduce king and people to rebellion, and rebellion against the king of Babylon means the destruction of Jerusalem, — a prophecy that was but too soon fulfilled. The vessels of the temple, ver. 16, are the golden vessels Solomon caused to be made (1 Kings vii. 48 f.), which Nebuchadnezzar had carried to Babylon, 2 Kings xxiv. 13. np32p? from towards Babylon, i.e. from Babylon, whither they had been taken; cf. Ew. § 21G, b. u Now shortly," lit. hastily or speedily, i.e. ere long, cf. xxviii. 3, where the prophet Hananiah foretells the restoration of them within two years, in opposition to Jeremiah's affirmation that the exile will last seventy years.1 To show more clearly the irreconcilableness of his own position with that of the false prophets, Jeremiah further tells what true prophets, who have the word of Jahveh, would do. They would Intake themselves in intercession to the Lord, seeking to avert yet further calamity or punishment, as all the prophets sent by God. including Jeremiah himself, did, cf. vii. K). They should endeavour by intercession to prevent the vessels that are still left in Jerusalem from being taken away. The extraordinary expression W3 **???? has probably come from the omission of Jod from the verb, which should be read ttfaj. As it stands, it can only be imperative, which is certainly not suitable, w?? is usually construed with the infinitive, but occasionally also with the temp, fin,; with the imperf., which is what the sense here demands, in Ex. XX. 20; with the perf., Jer. xxiii. 14. — Of the temple furniture still remaining, he mentions in ver. 10 as most valuable the two □ pillars, Jachin and Boaz9 1 Kings vii.
15 tf., the brazen sea, 1 Kings vii. 23 ff., and nWDBH, the artistic wasson frames for the basins in which to wash the sacrificial h, 1 Kings vii. 27 ff.; and he declares they too shall be carried to Babylon, as happened at the destruction of Jerusalem, 2 Kings xxv. 13 ff. (info? for infona.)1
1 These word? are not given in LXX., awl 80 Mov. and Hitz. pronounce them spurious. Haev., on the other hand, and with greater justice, says (Introd. ii. '2), that the LXX. omitted the words, because, according to an Alexandrian legend, the temple furniture was really very soon restored, even in Zedekiah's time, cf. Baruch i. b ff.; so that the false prophets were in the right. The passage cited from Baruch does not indeed give a very rigorous proof of this. It alleges that the silver vessels which Zedekiah had caused to be made after Jechoniah's exile had been brought back by Baruch. But considering the innumerable arbitrary interferences of the LXX. with the text of Jeremiah, the omission of the words in question cannot justify the slightest critical suspicion of their genuineness.
2 The statement in vers. 19-22 is wide and diffuse; it is therefore con-
Chap, xxviii. Against the false prophet Hananiah. — Wrs. 1-1. This man's prophecy. At the same time, namely in the fourth year of Zedekiah (cf. rem. on xxvii. 1. The CheL IW3 is supported by xlvi. 2 and li. 59; the Keri nj$3 is an unnecessary alteration), in the fifth month, spake Hananiah the son of A:iw, — a prophet not otherwise known, belonging to Gibeon, a city of the priests (.Tosh. xxi. 17; now Jib, a large village two hours north-west of Jerusalem; see on Josh. ix. 3), possibly therefore himself a priest, — in the house of the Lord, in the presence of the priests and people assembled there, saying: Ver. 2. " Thus hath Jahveh of hosts, the God of Israel, said: I break the yoke of the king of Babylon. Ver. 3. Within two years I bring again into this place the vessels of the house of Jahveh, which Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon took away from this place and carried them to Babylon. Ver. 4. And Jechoniah, the son of Jehoiakim the king of Judah, and all the captives of Judah that went into Babylon, bring I again to this place, saith Jahveh; for I will break the yoke of the king of Babylon." — The false prophet endeavours to stamp on densed in the LXX., but at the same time mutilated. From the fact Mov., with llitz. agreeing thereto, concludes that the Hebr. text has been expanded by means of glosses. Graf has already shown in reply to this, that the hand of a later glossator interpolating materials from lii. 17, 2 Kings xxv. 13 and xxiv. 1 is not betrayed in the extended account of the furniture remaining, and of the occasion on which it was left behind. He goes on to show that it is rather the editorial hand of Baruch than the hand of the glossator that is to be presumed from the fact that, in consequence of the narrative part of ver. 20, ver. 19 is repeated in ver. 21; and from the further fact that it is impossible here to discriminate the interpolated from the original matter. Graf has also so conclusively proved the worthlessness of the distinguishing marks of the glossator adduced by Mov. and Hitz., that we adopt in full his argument. Such marks are (we are told), (1) the scriptio plena of m:i3E here, as contrasted with lii. 17, 2 Kings xxv. 13, 2 Chron. iv. 14, and of W2)y, as against xxiv. 1, xxviii. 4, xxix. 2; and yet the interpolations in vers. 19 and 20 are said to have been taken directly from lii. 17 and xxiv. 1. (2) The expression D^h, which is alleged not to have come into use till the exile. But the fact of its standing here and in xxxix. 6 is enough to show it to have been earlier in use; cf. also 1 Kings xxi. 8, 11; and since it is not used in xxiv. 1 and xxix. 2, it is certain that it has not been got from there. (3) The "slip-shod" D^Wl, ver. 21, for D^C'lT3% ver. 18, which is, however, occasioned simply by the precediDg accusative his prediction the impress of a true, God-inspired prophecy, by copying the title of God, so often used by Jeremiah, " Jahveh of hosts, the God of Israel," and by giving the utmost definiteness to his promise: " within two years" (in contrast to Jeremiah's seventy years). " Two years" is made as definite as possible by the addition of D**?': two years in days, i.e. in two full years. See on Gen. xli. 1, 2 Sam. xiii. 23.
Vers. 5-11. Jeremiah's reply. — First Jeremiah admits that the fulfilment of this prediction would be desirable (ver. G), but then reminds his opponent that all the prophets of the Lord up till this time have prophesied of war and calamity (vers. 7 and 8). So that if a prophet, in opposition to these witnesses of God, predicts nothing bnt peace and safety, then nothing short of the fulfilment of his prediction can make good his claim to 1 a true prophet (ver. (.'j. — Jeremiah's answer is to this effect: Ver. 6. "Amen (.'..-. yea), may.Jahveh s<> do! may Jahveh perform thy words which thou hast prophesied, to bring again the i sels of Jahveh's house and all the captives from Babylon into this place. Ver. 7. Only hear now this word that I speak in thine ears, and in the ears of all the people. Ver. 8. The prophets that were before me and before thee from of old, they prophesied concerning many lands and great kingdoms, of war, and of trouble, and of pestilence. Ver. 9. The prophet that iphesieth of peace, when the word of the prophet cometh to pa^s, shall be known as the prophet that Jahveh hath truly sent." — As to P-N\ \ see on xi. 5. The scope of this assent is straightway defined in u may Jahveh so do." But in order that the hearers may not misunderstand his assent, Jeremiah proceeds to show that hitherto only threatening predictions have carried with them the presumption of their being true prophecies, inasmuch as it is these alone that have been in harmony with the predictions of all previous prophets. ^?ri (ver. 8) is explained by the fact that " the prophets" with the accompanying relative clause is made to precede absolute-wise. In the same absolute manner the clause " the prophet... peace" is disposed so that after the verb JTW the word N^?3n is repeated. For njnp many MSS. have 3]n?; manifestly an adaptation to passages like xiv. 12, xxi. 9, xxiv. 10, xxvii. 8, 13, xxix. 17 f., where sword, famine, and pestilence are mentioned to- gether as three modes of visitation by God; whereas only the genera] word ^pt seems in place here, when mentioned alongside of u war." For this very reason Hitz. rejects 3$n as being the least difficult reading, while Ew. takes it under his protection on account of the parallel passages, not considering that the train of thought is different here. — The truth expressed in ver. 9 is based on the Mosaic law concerning prophecy, Dent, xviii. 21 f., where the fulfilment of the prediction is given as the test of true, God-inspired prophecy. — Ver. 10 f. Had Hananiah been sent by the Lord, he might have been satisfied with Jeremiah's opinion, and have contentedly awaited the issue. But instead of this, he seeks by means of violence to secure credence for his prophesying. He takes the yoke from off the neck of the prophet, and breaks it in pieces, as he repeats before the people his former prediction: " Thus hath Jahveh said: Even so will I break the yoke of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon from the neck of all nations within two years." — Thereupon Jeremiah went his way without answering a word, calmly entrusting to the Lord the vindication of the truth of His own word.
Vers. 12-17. The Lord's testimony against IJananiaTi. — Apparently not long after Jeremiah had departed, he received from the Lord the commission to go to Hananiah and to say to him: Ver. 13. "Thus saith Jahveh: Yokes of wood hast thou broken, but hast made in place of them yokes of iron. Ver. 14. For thus saith Jahveh of hosts, the God of Israel: A yoke of iron I lay upon the neck of all these nations, that they may serve Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, and they shall serve him; and the beasts of the field also have I given him." — When the prophet says: Yokes of wood hast thou broken, etc., we are not to understand him as speaking of the breaking of the wooden yoke Jeremiah had been wearing; he gives the deeper meaning of that occurrence. By breaking Jeremiah's wooden yoke, Hananiah has only signified that the yoke Nebuchadnezzar lays on the nations will not be so easily broken as a wooden one, but is of iron, i.e. not to be broken. The plural " yokes" is to be explained by the emblematical import of the words, and is not here to be identified, as it sometimes may be, with the singular, ver. 10. Ver. 14 shows in what sense
Hananiah put an iron yoke in the place of the wooden one: Jahveh will lay iron yokes on all nations, that they may serve the king of Babel. Hananiairs breaking the wooden yoke does not alter the divine decree, but is made to contribute to its fuller revelation. With the last clause of ver. 14, cf. xxvii. 6. — Hereupon Jeremiah forewarns the false prophets what is to be God's punishment on them for their false and audacious declarations. Ver. 15. "Hear DOW, Hananiah: Jahveh hath not sent thee, and thou hast made this people to believe a lie. Y. r. ltl. Therefore thus saith Jahveh: Behold, I cast thee from off the face of the earth; this year shalt thou die, for thou hast spoken rebellion against Jahveh." " The year " = this year, as in Isa. xxxvii. 30. The words " for thou hast spoken," etc.,;ill Deut. xiii. 6. They involve an application to Ilananiah's e of the command there given to put such a prophet to death, and show how it can with justice be said that the Lord will east him from off the face of the earth. The verb in?! ia chosen for the sake of the play on "1"^ k>. God has not ^:t him as prophet to His people, but will send him away from off the earth ■ use him to die. — In ver. 17 it is recorded that this saying was soon fulfilled. Hananiah died in the enth month of that year, i.e. two months after his controversy with Jeremiah (ef. ver. 1).
chap. xxix. a letter from jeremiah to the captives in Babylon, together with thbeatenings against their
FALSE PROPHET8. — As in Jerusalem, so too in Babylon the predictions of the false prophets fostered a lively hope that the domination of Nebuchadnezzar would not last long, and that the return of the exiles to their fatherland would soon come about. The spirit of discontent thus excited must have exercised an injurious influence on the fortunes of the captives, and could not fail to frustrate the aim which the chastisement inflicted by God was designed to work out, namely, the moral advancement of the people. Therefore Jeremiah makes use of an opportunity furnished by an embassy sent by King Zedekiah to Babel, to address a letter to the exiles, exhorting them to yield with submission to the lot God had assigned to them. He counsels them to prepare, by establishing their households there, for a long Bojoura in Babel, and to seek the welfare of that te necessary condition of their own. They must not Let themselves be deceived by the false prophets' idle promises oi a speedy return, since God will not bring them back and fulfil His glorious promises till after seventy years have passed (vers. 4-14). Then he tells them that sore judgments are yet m store for King Zedekiah and such as have been left in the land (vers. 15-20); and declares that some of their false prophets shall perish miserably (vers. 21-32).
\ ers. 1-;;. Heading and Introduction.— -The following circular is connected, in point of outward form, with the preceding discourses against the false prophets in Jerusalem by mealis of the words: « And these are the words of the letter," etc. The words of the letter, i.e. the main contents of the letter, since it was not transcribed, but given in substance. " Which the prophet Jeremiah sent from Jerusalem unto the residue of the elders of the captives, and to the priests and prophets, and to the whole people, which Nebuchadnezzar had carried away from Jerusalem to Babylon." " The residue of the elders," Hitz. and Graf understand of those elders who were not at the same time priests or prophets. On this Nag. pronounces: " It is impossible that they can be right, for then 'the residue of the elders of the captivity' must have stood after the priests and prophets." And though we hear of elders of the priests, there is no trace in the O. T. of elders of the prophets. Besides, the elders, whenever they are mentioned along with the priests, are universally the elders of the people. Thus must we understand the expression here also. "The residue of the elders" can only be the remaining, i.e. still surviving, elders of the exiles, as W is used also in xxxix. 9 for those still in life. But there is no foundation for the assumption by means of which Gr. seeks to support his interpretation, namely, that the place of elders that died was immediately filled by new appointments, so that the council of the elders must always have been regarded as a whole, and could not come to be a residue or remnant. Jeremiah could not possibly have assumed the existence of such an organized governing authority, since in this very letter he exhorts them to set about the establishment of regular system in their affairs. The date given in ver. 2:
" after that Jechoniah the king, and the sovereign lady, and the courtiers, the princes of Judah and Jerusalem, the workmen and smiths, were gone away from Jerusalem," points to the beginning of Zedekiah's reign, to the first or second year of it. With this the advice given to the captives in the letter harmonizes well, namely, the counsel to build houses, plant gardens, etc.; since this makes it clear that they had not been long there. The despatch of this letter is usually referred to the°fourth year of Zedekiah'a reign, because in xxviii. 1 this year is specified. But the connection in point of matter between the present chapter and chap, xxviii. does not necessarily imply their contemporaneousm-. although that is perfectly possible; and the fact that, according to li. 59, Zedekiah himself undertook a jonrney to Babylon in the fonrth year of his ign, does not exclude the possibility of an embassy thither in the same year. The going away from Jerusalem is the emigration to Babylon; cf. xxiv. 1, 2 Kings xxiv. 15. "??*?, the queen-mother, see on xiii. 18. By* are the officials of the court; not necessarily eunuehs. Both words are joined to the kin-, because these stood in closest relations to him. Then follows without copula the second class of emigrants, the princes of Judah and Jerusalem, U the heads of the tribes, septs, and families of the nation. The artisans form the third class. This disposes of the objections raised by Mov. and Ilitz. against the genuineness of the words " princes of Judah and Jerusalem," Their objections being based on the false assumption that these words were an exposition of "courtiers." Cf. against this, 2 Kings xxiv. 15, where along with the DWD the heads of tribes and families are comprehended under the head of Pv? 7*. Ver.;\. « By the hand " of Elasah is dependent on " sent," ver. 1. The men by whom Jeremiah sent the letter to Babylon are not further known. Shaphan is perhaps the same who is mentioned in xxvi. 24. We have no information as to the aim of the
Vers. 4-14. At ver. 4 the contents of the letter begin. Jeremiah warns the people to prepare for a lengthened sojourn in Babylonia, and exhorts them to settle down there. Ver. 5. « Build houses and dwell (therein), and plant gardens and eat the fruit of them. Ver. 6. Take wives and beget sons and daughters, and take for your sons wives and give your daughters to husbands, that they may bear sons and daughters; and increase there and not diminish. Ver. 7. And seek the safety of the city whither I have carried you captive, and pray for it to J all veil, and in its safety shall be safety to you." The imperatives a increase and not diminish" give the consequence of what has been said just before. " The city whither I have carried you captive" is not precisely Babylon, but every place whither separate companies of the exiles have been transported. And pray for the city whither you are come, because in this you further your own welfare, instead of looking for advantage to yourselves from the fall of the Chaldean empire, from the calamity of your heathen fellow-citizens. — With this is suitably joined immediately the warning against putting trust in the delusive hopes held out by the false prophets. " For thus saith Jahveh of hosts, the God of Israel: Let not your prophets, that are in the midst of you, and your soothsayers, deceive you, and hearken not to your dreams which ye cause to be dreamed; for falsely they prophesy to you in my name; I have not sent them, saith Jahveh." D^no is somewhat singular, since we have no other example of the Hiph. of D?n in its sig. dream (in Isa. xxxviii. 16 the Hiph. of the same root means to preserve in good health); but the Hiph. may here express the people's spontaneity in the matter of dreams: which ye cause to be dreamed for you (Hitz.). Thus there would be no need to alter the reading into DTOh; a precedent for the defective spelling being found in B^T^D, 2 Chron. xxviii. 23. What the false prophets gave out is not expressly intimated, but may be gathered from the context ver. 10, namely, that the yoke of Babylon would soon be broken and captivity come to an end. — This warning is justified in vers. 10-14, where God's decree is set forth. The deliverance will not come about till after seventy years; but then the Lord will fulfil to His people His promise of grace. Ver. 10. " For thus saith Jahveh: When as seventy years are fulfilled for Babylon, I will visit you, and perform to you my good word, to bring you back to this place. Ver. 11. For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, saith Jahveh, thoughts of peace and not for evil, to give you (a) destiny and hope. Ver. 12. And ye will call upon me, and go and pray unto me, and I will hear you. Ver. 13. And ye will seek me, and find me, if ye search for me with all your heart. Ver. 14. And I will let myself be found of you, saith Jahveh, and will turn your captivity, and gather you out of all the peoples and from all the places whither I have driven you, saith Jahveh, and will bring you again to the place whence I have carried you away.*' — rus^p *D?, according to the measure of the fulfilment of seventy years for Babel. These words point back to chap. xxv. 11 f., and we must reckon from the date of that prediction. *1j5B c. accus. sig. to visit in a good sense, to look favourably on one and take his part. "My good word" is expounded by the following infinitive clause. Ver. 11. "I know my thoughts" is not to be taken, as by Jerome, J. D. Mich., etc., as in contrast with the false prophets ■ I know, but they do not. This antithesis is not in keeping with what follows. The meaning is rather: Although I appoint so long a term for the fulfilment of tlnj plan of redemption, yet fear not that I have utterly rejected you; 1 know will what my design is in your ard. My thoughts toward you are thoughts of good, not of evil. Although DOW 1 inflict lengthened sufferings on you, yet this chastisement but serves to bring about your welfare in the future (Chr. 15. Mich., Graf, etc.).— To give you nnnx, lit. last, i.e. issue or future, and hope. For this sig. cf. Job viii. 7, Prov. v. 4, etc. This future destiny and hope can, however, only be realized if by the sorrows of exile you permit yourselves to be brought to a knowledge of your sins, and return penitent to me. Then ye will call on me and pray, and I will hear you. "And ye will go," ver. 12, is not the apodosis to k- ye will call," since there is no further explanation of it, and since the simple ^ can neither mean to go away satisfied nor to have success. " Go" must be taken with what follows: go to the place of prayer (E\v., Umbr., Gi\, Nag.). In ver. 13 TIN is to be repeated after " find." Vers. 12 and 13 are a renewal of the promise, Deut. iv. 29, 30; and ver. 14 is a brief summary of the promise, Deut. xxx. 3-5, whence is taken the graphic expression fiCUprnH 3NP; see on that passage. — Thereafter in
Vers. 15-20. Jeremiah informs the captives of the judgment that is to fall on such as are still left in the land. Ver. 15. " If ye say: Jahveh hath raised us up prophets in Babylon Vcr.
16. Xea, tlms saith Jahveh of the king that sitteth upon the throne of David, and of all the people that dwelleth in this city, your brethren that are not gone forth with you into captivity, Ver. 17. Thus saith Jahveh of hosts: Behold, I send amongst them the sword, famine, and pestilence, and make them like horrible figs, that cannot be eaten for badness, Ver. 18. And hunt after them with the sword, the famine, and the pestilence, and give them to be abused to all the kingdoms of the earth, to be a curse, and an astonishment, and a hissing, and a reproach among all the peoples whither I have driven them; Ver. 19. Inasmuch as they have not hearkened to my words, saith Jahveh, wherewith I sent to them my servants the prophets, from early morning on sending them, and ye have not hearkened, saith Jahveh. Ver. 20. But ye, hear the word of Jahveh, all ye captives whom I have sent from Jerusalem to Babylon." — The design with which Jeremiah tells the captives of this judgment may be gathered from the terms of ver. 15, with which this prophecy is introduced: God hath raised up to us prophets in Babel (n???, lit. as far as Babel, i.e. extending His agency so far beyond the bounds of Judah). Hence it is clear that the announcement of judgment to come on those left in the land is in direct opposition to the predictions of the prophets that had appeared in Babylon. These prophesied a swift end to Chaldean domination and an immediate return of the exiles to their fatherland. So long as one of David's posterity sat on his throne in Jerusalem, and so long as the kingdom of Judah was maintained, the partial captivity of the people and removal of the plundered treasures of the temple would appear as a calamity which might soon be repaired. The false prophets in Babylon laid, therefore, great stress on the continued existence of the kingdom, with its capital and the temple, in their efforts to obtain belief amongst the exiles. As Nag. justly remarks, it was to take this ground from beneath their feet that Jeremiah predicted expulsion and destruction against the people of Jerusalem. The prophecy does indeed bear upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, u but not in the first reference; its immediate purpose was to overthrow the foundations on which the false prophets of the exile stood" (Nag.). Taken thus, these verses form an integral part of the message sent by Jeremiah to the exiles, which was of no small weight for quieting the excitement, nourished by the false prophets, which reigned amongst them. One is struck by the want of connection between vers. 15 and 16. The beginning of ver. 16, u Yea, thus saith," comes directly after the end of ver. 15 without any joining link. Nag. holds the *3 to be the pleonastic *3 which often introduces a saying. But its position before the " thus saith" makes this impossible. Here it serves to strengthen the asseveration: yea, thus fitly introducing what Jahveh says to the contrary; and vers. 15 and 16 are, tersely and immediately, set over against one another. '•If ye Bay" means: as regards your saying that Jahveh hath raised you up prophets in Babylon, the answer is: Thus hath Jahveh said. This is the connection of ver. 16 with ver. 15.1 M Your brethren that," etc., is co-ordinate with "all the people." The words: Ml make them like horrible 6g8," make allusion to the vision in chap. xxiv. '1 ff., but do not imply that this vision are disposed of all the objections that have been brought by Houb., Lad. Ven., etc., against the genuineness of tin i at least, list the true position for them. The fact <>f their being wanting in the I.W.. on which Ilitz. mainly grounds his charge of spuriousness, proves nothing mure than that these translators were unable to understand the train of thought in the verses, especially seeing that the substance of them has several times been expressed by Jeremiah, particularly vers. 17 and 18; xxiv. 9, l". cf. xv. 1. xix. 8; with ver. 10 cf. vii. L3,25f. Against the attempts to alter the text. Grafs remarks are admirable: "It is much easier to explain how the passage was omitted as out of place by the LXX. than to show how it could haw 1 teen introduced as an interpolation. It is too long for a mere marginal gloss that had at a later time found its way into the text; and why it should have been placed here, would remain all the more incomprehensible if it were so wholly unconnected with the body of the text. We cannot admit that it is merely an erroneous displacement of \vr. 15, which originally stood before ver. ~1\; since it is less likely that ver. 10 could have come directly after ver. 14. In respect of form, vers. 16-20 is connected with and forms a continuation of what precedes. Ver. 20 implies the presence of ver. 16 as an antithesis, and at the same time completes again the connection that had been interrupted with ver. 15, and leads on to ver. 21 if. Connection in thought seems to be wanting only because ver. 16 does not express the connecting idea, and because the contrast is so abrupt." — The other arguments adduced by Hitz. to throw suspicion on the passage, we can afford to pass over as wholly without force.
waa known to the exiles, for they are quite intelligible to him who knows nothing of chap, xxiw (Niig.). The adject. "W is found only here, from T#, shudder; horrible, that on tasting sent my servant lommissioned them. This verb construed not hearkened," the 2d pers. instead of the 3d, is hardly to be explained by the fact that the prophet here cites in full an often quoted saying (Hitz., Niig., etc.). The reason is that the prophet'is thinking of the exiles also as having been equal to their brethren remaining in Judah in the matter of not hearkening
Vers. 21-23. After having set forth the divine determination, the prophet's letter addresses itself specially against the false prophets and tells them their punishment from God. Ver. 21. " Thus saith Jahveh, the God of hosts, of Ahab the son of Kolaiah, and of Zedekiah the son of Maaseiah, who prophesy to you in my name falsely: Behold, I give them into the hand of Nebuchadrezzar the king of Babylon, that he may smite them before your eyes. Ver. 22. And of them shall be taken up a curse by all the exiles of Judah that are in Babylon, saying: Jahveh make thee like Zedekiah and like Ahab, whom the king of Babylon roasted in the fire, Ver. 23. Because they have done folly in Israel, and have committed adultery with their neighbours' wives, and have spoken in my name lying words which I have not commanded them. But I know it and am witness, saith Jahveh." — Beyond what is here told, we know nothing of these two pseudo-prophets. The name 2Ni>S is written in ver. 20 without X; thus the Kametz comes to be under the n, and in consequence of this the Pathach is changed into a Seghol. " Smite," i.e. slay. The manner of their death is called, probably with allusion to the name Kolaiah, ^?Pt, roast, burn in a heated furnace; a mode of execution usual in Babylon, ace. to Dan. iii. 6. This punishment is to fall on them because of two kinds of sin: 1. Because they have done folly in Israel, namely, committed adultery with their neighbours' wives; 2. Because they have prophesied falsely in the name of Jahveh. Except in Josh. vii. 15, the phrase: commit folly in Israel, is always used of the grosser sins of uncleanness; see on Gen. xxxiv. 7. So here also. — The Chet. JTPin is expounded in the Keri by JTP'Dj according to which there has been a transposition of the letters i and s, as in ii. 25, viii. 6, etc. Still the article here is extraordinary, since TJ has none. Therefore J. I). Mich., Ew., Ilitz., Graf suppose we should read VT •"~l, the X having been dropped from WM in scriptio continue^ as it often is, especially after \ in R*3?J and other words, cf. xix. 15, xxxix. 16, 1 Kings xxi. 29, etc. KV1 is then the copula between subject and predicate, as in Isa. xliii. 25: cf. Ew. § 297, b.
— Jeremiah's letter to the exiles (vers. L-23) had excited great indignation among the false prophets in Babylon, who predicted f restoration. One of them, named Shemaiall, wrote accordingly letters to Jerusalem addressed to the people, and especially to the priest ZephaniaJi, who held the highest place in the management of the temple, insisting that he should immediately take steps to punish Jeremiah and check his labotu. 24-28). When Zephaniah read this letter to
Jeremiah, the latter received from God the commission to tell the pseudo-prophet of the punishment awaiting him, that he and his race should perish and not survive Israel's liberation (vers. 29—32). — This threatening accordingly dates from a somewhat later time than the letter, vers. 1-23, since it was its arrival and influence upon the exiles that led Shemaiah to write to Jerusalem that letter, to which the threatening of the present verse is the reply. But on account of their historical connec-' tion, the letter of Jeremiah and that of Shemaiah were, at the publication of Jeremiah's prophecies, placed the one after the other. — From the introductory clause of ver. 24: "And to Shemaiah the Nehelamite thou shalt speak thus," we might conclude, with Graf, that what Jeremiah had to say was not addressed by letter to Shemaiah himself; and hold it to have sufficed that he should read it, like all the exiles, in the letter which doubtless found its wTay to Babylon. But this is incompatible with the command of God, ver. 31: Send to all the captives, saying, etc. For it was only by writing that Jeremiah could send to the exiles the sentence from God on Shemaiah that follows in ver. 31. The introductory clause is therefore interposed by the author of the book to form a link of connection between the two utterances regarding the pseudo-prophets at Babylon. We cannot make sure whether "the Nehelamito" refers the man to a family or to a place of which we know nothing else. Yer. 25. Next the introduction to the divine sentence comes (from "Because thou" on) a statement of the occasion that called for it, which extends to ver. 28. Then in vers. 29 31 we are told that Zephaniah read to Jeremiah the letter he had received from Shemaiah in Babylon, and that Jeremiah was then commissioned by God to intimate to Shemaiah the punishment to be sent on him by God for his false and seducing prophecies. Then, again, attached to the preliminary statement by "therefore," the introductory phrase "Thus saith Jahveh" is repeated, and what the Lord said follows.— Ver. 25. " Because thou hast sent in thy name (without divine commission) letters to all the people in Jerusalem, and to Zephaniah the son of Maaseiah the priest, and to all the priests, saying:' D^BD may be a single letter, cf. 2 Kings x. i, 2; but since these were sent to the people, the priest Zephaniah, and all the people, the word doubtless means here letters in the plural. As to Zephaniah ben Maaseiah, see at xxi. 1. — In vers. 26-28 follows the main substance of the letter: "Jahveh hath set thee to be priest in the stead of the priest Jehoiada, that there should be officers in the house of Jahveh for every man that is mad and prophesieth, that thou shouldest put him in the stocks and in neck-irons. Ver. 2J. And, now, why hast thou not restrained Jeremiah of Anathoth, that prophesieth to you? Ver. 28. For therefore hath he sent to us to Babylon (a letter) to the effect: It will last long; build houses and dwell (therein), and plant gardens and eat the fruit of them." Zephaniah occupied, ace. to ver. 26, the post of a chief officer of the temple, was a chief warden, as Pashur had been before him, xxi. 1, who had charge of the police regulations of the temple. In the stead of the priest Jehoiada. These words Grot., Hitz., and Gr. refer to the high priest Jehoiada under King Joash, 2 Kings xi. 18, who set up officers (fifrjja) over the temple. But this view cannot be reconciled with the words of the text: " Jahveh hath set thee to be priest in Jehoiada's stead, that there should be officers;" since from these unambiguous words, Zephaniah filled the same post as Jehoiada had done, and was his successor in office. The other well-known Jehoiada was high priest, who appointed officers; Zephaniah, on the other hand was only u the second priest," and as such had charge of the temple arrangements and of public order there. Nor is there any hint here or elsewhere that Zephaniah was the immediate successor of Pasliur in this office, nor any indication to make it unlikely that Jehoiada held the post after Pashur and that Zedekiah succeeded him. The plural " officers " is general: that at all times there should he officers. il For every man that is mad and prophesieth." V3"'2, the deranged or mad person, is here closely associated with N3:n», him that bears himself as prophet. The former word is used in the evil sense of the apparently deranged behaviour of the man on whom the Spirit of God has laid hold, 2 Kings ix. 11, Hos. ix. 7. The idea is not: for (or against) every prophet, but: for every madman that plays the prophet. The temple, i.e. the outer court of the temple, was the usual place for prophets to take their stand. Shemaiah accordingly means that it was the duty of the chief warden of the temple to repress attempts to speak in the temple on the part of pretended prophets, by putting such persons in stocks and irons. As to rDBTO, see on xx. 2. p^* is air. \ey. It certainly does not mean prison after p:v, in Samaritan =
Since both words are used together here, and since the meaning is apparently that Jeremiah should be put into both instruments at once, Hitz. conjectures that both together were needed to make the stocks complete, but that each had its own proper name, because it was possible to fix in the neck, leaving hands and feet free, or conversely, as in xx. 2. — TO, rebuke, check by threats, restrain, cf. Ruth ii. 16, Mai. iii. 11, etc. "For therefore," sc. just because thou hast not restrained him from prophesying he has sent to Babylon. fW with ^CN7 following, send to say, means: to send a message or letter as follows. R*H POIK nbaA Hitz. renders: for he thought: it (Babylon) is far away; Jeremiah's meaning being, that in Jerusalem they would know nothing about his letter he was sending to Babylon. But such a hidden purpose is utterly foreign to the character of the prophet He had publicly predicted in Jerusalem the W Beventy years1 duration of the exile; and it was not likely to occur to him to wish to make a secret of the letter of like import which he scut to Babylon. Besides, Hitz.'s interpretation is forced. Since there is no Ib^ before trro ua the Tbkij before nan* can only be introductory to the contents of the letter. For ^K used of duration in time, cf. 2 Sam. iii. 1, Job xi. 9. « Loog-lasting it is," sc. your sojourn in Babvlom These words give the burden of his prophecy, that on which he founded his counsel: build houses, etc.— Ver. 29. Zephaniah read aloud to Jeremiah the letter he had received from Babylon. With what design, we are not told; probably simply to inform him of the proceedings of the pseudo-prophets in Babylon. If we may judge by xxi. 1 and xxxvii. 3, Zephaniah seems to have been friendly to Jeremiah.— Ver. 30 ff. In consequence of this, Jeremiah received from the Lord the commission to predict to Shemaiah his punishment at the hand of God, and to send the prediction to all that are in Babylon in banishment. With ver. 31b, cf. xxviii. 15. The punishment is this: Shemaiah shall have no posterity among his people, i.e. of his children none shall be left amongst the people, nor shall he see, i.e. experience, have any share in the blessings which the Lord will yet bestow upon His people. The extinction of his race and his own exclusion from the privilege of seeing the day of Israel's redemption are the punishment that is to fall on him for his rebellion against the commandment of the Lord. With *3 1 rnD cf. xxviii. 16.
IN view of the impending fall of the kingdom of Judah, Jeremiah seeks to present the godly with a strong anchor of hope in the realization of God's gracious promises, which were to be fulfilled after the appointed season of punishment had passed. For this purpose, after predicting the ills of exile times, the prophet gives a comprehensive statement concerning the deliverance which the Lord will vouchsafe to His people in the future, and gathers together the repeated briefer promises regarding the restoration and glorious condition of Israel and Judah, so as to give a full description of the deliverance intended for all the covenant people under the sceptre of the future David. This detailed announcement of the deliverance consists of a pretty long prophetic address (which Hengstenberg very properly designates "the triumphal hymn of Israel's salvation," chap, xxx. and xxxi.), and two pieces confirmatory of this address, viz.: (1) one recording -a symbolical act performed by the prophet at God's command, — the sale of a piece of hereditary property in land during the last siege of Jerusalem, shortly before the breaking up of the kingdom, which commenced with the taking of the city, — together with a message from God explaining this act, chap, xxxii.; and (2) another passage giving, in prophetic language, a renewed promise that Jerusalem and Judah would be restored with the blissful arrangements connected with the Davidic monarchy and the Levitical priesthood, chap, xxxiii. According to the headings given in xxxii. 1 and xxxiii. 1, these two latter pieces belong to the tenth year of Zedekiah's reign; the address contained in chap. xxx. and xxxi., on the other hand, belongs to a somewhat earlier period, and was not uttered publicly before the people, but simply composed in writing, and meant to be preserved for future use. As regards the exact time of its composition, the views of modern expositors are very dissimilar. While Ilengstenberg, with many others, places it in the same period with the allied chapters xxxii. and xxxiii., viz. in the time when Jerusalem was being besieged, immediately before the capture and destruction of the city, Nagelsbach reckons this address among the oldest portions of the whole book, and assigns its composition to the times of King Josiah, to which iii. 11-2.") belongs. But the arguments adduced in support of this view are quite insufficient to establish it. It does not by any means follow from the substantial agreement of the address with that in chap, iii., so far as it exists, that they re both composed at the same time; and if (as Nagelsbach think-) the fact that there is no mention made of the Chaldeans u:, re taken as a criterion of composition before the fourth year of Jehoiakim, then, too, would the address in chap, xxxiii. be put down as having been composed before that year, but in glaring contradiction to the inscription given xxxiii. 1. And as little reason is there for inferring, with Hengstenberg, from \.\x. 5-7, that the final catastrophe of.Jeremiah's time is represented as still imminent; for these verses do not refer at all to the destruction of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans. That learned writer is, however, quite correct in his remark, that the prophet takes his stand-point within the period of the catastrophe, as if it had already begun, but that this time is an ideal present, so that we must not allow ourselves to be deceived as to the time of composition by the circumstance that, generally, Judah no less than Israel appears to be already in a state of exile, far from the land of the Lord. The time of composition cannot be made out with perfect certainty. Yet there is nothing against the assumption that it is the tenth year of Zedekiah.