Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament

A great day of judgment, before which all the world trembles, will bring to Israel deliverance from the yoke imposed on them.

The Lord will bring them out of the land of their captivity (w\. 4-11). He will bind up and heal the wounds which He inflicted on them because of their sins; will render to those who oppressed and chastised them according to their deeds (vers. 12-17); will again build up His kingdom, and render His people glorious, both in temporal and spiritual respects (vers. 18 22). The wrath of the Lord will be poured forth upon all evil-doers like a tempest, till He has performed the thoughts of His heart at the end of the days (vers. 23, 24). At that time the Lord will become the God of all the families of Israel, and show them favour as His own people (xxxi. 1-G); He will also gather the remnant of Israel out of the land of the north, lead them back into their inheritance, and make them glad and prosperous through His blessing (vers. 7-14); the sorrow of Ephraim will He change to joy, and He will perform a new thing in the land (vers. 15-22). In like manner will He restore Judah, and make want to cease (vers. 23-26). Israel and Judah shall be raised to new life (vers. 27-30), and a new covenant will be made with them, for the Lord will write His law in their heart and forgive their sins (vers. 31-34). Israel shall for ever remain the people of God, and Jerusalem be built anew to the honour of the Lord, and, as a holy city, shall no more be laid waste for ever (vers. 35-40).

This address forms a united whole which divides into two halves. In chap. xxx. 4-22 it is the deliverance of Israel in general that is set forth; while in the passage from chap. xxx. 23 on to the end of chap. xxxi. it is deliverance, more especially in reference to Israel and Judah, that is portrayed. As there is no doubt about its unity, so neither is there any well-founded doubt regarding its genuineness and integrity. Hence the assertion of Hitzig, that, as a whole, it exhibits such a want of connection, such constant alternation of view-point, so many repetitions, and such irregularity in the structure of the verses, that there seems good ground for suspecting interpolation, — such an assertion only shows the inability of the expositor to put himself into the course of thought in the prophetic word, to grasp its contents properly, and to give a fair and unprejudiced estimate of the whole. Hitzig would reject xxxi. 38-40, and Nagelsbach xxx. 20-24, as later additions, but in neither case is this admissible; and Kueper (Jeremias, p. 170 sqq.) and Graf, in his Commentary, have already so well shown with what little reason Movers and Hitzig have supposed they had discovered so many a interpolations," that, in our exposition, we merely intend to take up in detail some of the chief passages.

Chap. xxx. 1-3. Introduction, and statement of the subject. — Ver. 1. "The word which came to Jeremiah from Jahveh, saying: Ver. 2. Thus hath Jahveh the God of Israel said: Write thee all the words that I have spoken unto thee in a book; Ver. 3. For, behold, days come, saith Jahveh, when I shall turn the captivity of my people Israel and Judah, saith Jahveh, and I shall bring them back to the land which I gave to their fathers, and they shall possess it."

Ver. 1 contains the heading not merely of vers. 2 and 3, as Hitzig erroneously maintains, but of the whole prophecy, in chap. xxx. and xxxi. Vers. 2 and 3 form the introduction. Jeremiah is to write the following word of God in a book, because it refers to times still future, — regards the deliverance of Israel and Judah from exile, which will not take place till afterwards. In assigning the reason for the command to write down the word of God that had been received, there is at the same time given the subject of the prophecy which follows. From this it is further evident that the expression " all the words which I have spoken to thee " cannot, like xxxvi. 2, be referred, with J. D. Michaelis, to the whole of the prophecies which Jeremiah had up till that time received; it merely refers to the following prophecy of deliverance. The perfect wrn is thus not a preterite, but only expresses that the address of God to the prophet precedes the writing down of the words he received. As to the expression T&2V 3W^ see on xxix. 14.

Vers. 4-11. The judgment on the nations for the deliverance of Israel. — Ver. 4. " And these are the words which Jahveh spake concerning Israel and Judah: Ver. 5. For thus saith Jahveh: We have heard a cry of terror, fear, and no peace. Ver. 6. Ask now, and see whether a male bears a child? Why do I see every man with his hands on his loins like a woman in childbirth, and every face turned to paleness? Ver. 7. Alas! for that clay is great, with none like it, and it is a time of distress for Jacob, but he will be saved out of it. Ver. 8. And it shall come to pass on that day, saith Jahveh of hosts, that I will break his yoke from upon thy neck, and I will burst thy bonds, and strangers shall no more put servitude on him; Ver. 9. But they shall serve Jahveh their God, and David their king, whom I shall raise up to them. Ver. 10. But fear thou not, O my servant Jacob, saith Jahveh, neither be confounded, O Israel; for, behold, I will save thee from afar, and thy seed from the land of their captivity; and Jacob shall return, and be at rest, and be secure, and there shall be none making him afraid. Ver. 11. For I am with thee, saith Jahveh, to save thee; for I will make an end of all the nations whither I have scattered thee, yet of thee will I not make an end, but I will chastise thee properly and will not let thee go quite unpunished."

With ver. 4 is introduced the description of Israel's restoration announced in ver. 3. This introduction is not absolutely necessary, but neither is it for that reason spurious and to be expunged, as Hitzig seeks to do; it rather corresponds to the breadth of Jeremiah's representation. The *3 in ver. 5 is explicative: " Thus, namely, hath Jahveh spoken." With the lively dramatic power of a poet, the prophet at once transports the hearers or readers of his prophecy, in thought, into the great day to come, which is to bring deliverance to all Israel. As a day of judgment, it brings terror and anguish on all those who live to see it. iTTjn yip} " A voice (sound) of trembling (or terror) we hear," viz. the people, of whom the prophet is one. "ins does not depend on minf, but forms with Di^ pw an independent clause: "There is fear and not peace" (or safety). Ver. 6. What is the cause of this great horror, which makes all men, from convulsive pains, hold their hands on their loins, so as to support their bowels, in which they feel the pangs, and which makes every countenance pale? In ver. 7 the cause of this horror is declared. It is the great day of judgment that is coming. "That (not this) day" points to the future, and thus, even apart from other reasons, excludes the supposition that it is the day of the destruction of Jerusalem that is meant. The words "that day is great" refer to Joel ii. 11, and " there is none like it" is an imitation of Joel ii. 2; in the latter passage the prophet makes use of a judgment which he had seen passed on Judah, — its devastation by locusts, — and for the first time presents, as the main element in his prophecy, the idea of the great day of judgment to come on all nations, and by which the Lord will perfect His kingdom on this earth. This day is for Jacob also, i.e. for all Israel, a time of distress; for the judgment falls not merely on the heathen nations, but also on the godless members of the covenant people, that they may be destroyed from among the congregation of the Lord. The judgment is therefore for Israel as well as for other nations a critical juncture, from which the Israel of God, the community of the faithful, will be delivered. This deliverance is described more in detail in ver. 8 ff. The Lord will break the yoke imposed on Israel, free His people from all bondage to Strang. the heathen, so that they may serve only Him, the Lord, and David, II is king, whom He will raise up. The suffix in &P is referred by several expositors (Hitzig, Nagelsbach) to the king of Babylon, "as having been most clearly before the minds of Jeremiah and his contemporaries;" in support of this view we are pointed to Isa. x. 27, as a passage which may have been before the eyes of Jeremiah. But neither this parallel passage nor TJNJ* (with the suffix of the second person), which immediately follows, sufficiently justifies this view. For, in the second half also of the verse, the second person is interchanged with the third, and ITrTipiD, which is parallel with ^V, requires us to refer the suffix in the latter word to Jacob, so that "his yoke" means "the yoke laid on him," as in 1 Kings xii. 4, Isa. ix. 3. It is also to be borne in mind that, throughout the whole prophecy, neither Babylon nor the king of Babylon is once mentioned; and that the judgment described in these verses cannot possibly be restricted to the downfall of the Babylonian monarchy, but is the judgment that is to fall upon all nations (ver. 11). And although this judgment begins with the fall of the Babylonian supremacy, it will bring deliverance to the people of God, not merely from the yoke of Babylon, but from every yoke which strangers have laid or will lay on them. — Ver. 9. Then Israel will no longer serve strangers, U foreign rulers who heathens, but their God Jahveh, and David the kino- w}10 will be raised up to them, U the Messiah, the righteous sprout that Jahveh will raise up to David; ef. xxiii. 5. The designation of this sprout as « David their king," i.e. the king of the Israelites, points us back to Hos. iii. 5.— Ver. 10 f. Israel the servant of Jahveh, i.e. the true Israel, faithful and devoted to God, need thus fear nothing, since their God will deliver them from the land of their captivity, and stand by them as their deliverer, so that they shall be able to dwell in peace and undisturbed security in their own land. For Jahveh will make a complete end of all the nations among whom Israel has been scattered; Israel, on the other hand, He shall certainly chastise, but DM** (according to what is right, in due measure), that they may be made better by their punishment. As to the expression DBK*fc ID*, see on x. 24; for Plfc) T\wy *6, see on iv. 27 and v. 18 flnk for ^m, v. IS); and 'lastly, on ^ fi6 npj, cf. Ex. xxxiv. 47, Num. xiv. 18, Nah. i. 3.— Vers. lOand 11 are repeated in xlvi. 27, 28, though with some slight changes.1 Vers. 12-17. Because Israel has Leen severely chastised for his sins, the Lord will noiv punish his enemies, and heal Israel. —Ver. 12. " For thus saith Jahveh: It is ill with thy bruise, thy wound is painful. Ver. 13. There is none to judge thy cause; for a sore, healing-plaster there is none for thee. Ver. 14. All thy lovers have forgotten thee, thee they seek not; for I have wounded thee with the wound of an enemy, the chastisement of a cruel one, because of the multitude of thine iniquity, [because] thy sins were numerous. Ver. 15. Why

1 The general strain of these verses is the same as that of the second portion of Isaiah; hence Hitzig, following Movers, views them as an interpolation made by the reviser. But this view is most incorrect, as Graf has already pointed out. The only expression which, besides the repetition made in xlvi. 27, occurs nowhere else in Jeremiah, but frequently in the second Isaiah, is, " my servant Jacob;" cf. Isa. xliv. 1, 2, xlv. 4, xlviii. 20 and xli. 8, xliv. 21, xlix. 3. All the rest is not characteristic of Isaiah. " Thus, ' Fear not, I am with thee,1 is certainly found in Isa. xliii. 5, but also in Gen. xxvi. 24; ' Fear not, neither be afraid,' is found in a like connection in Isa. li. 7, but also in Jer. xxiii. 24, Dent. i. 21, xxxi. 8, Josh, viii. 1; cf. Isa. xliv. 2, Jer. i. 8, 17, Josh. i. 9. y\\>T occurs also in vers. 7, 10, 25, Lam. ii. 3. For ^^'iD, cf. xiv. 8; for prnb, cf. xxiii. 23, xxxi. 3r criest thou over thy bruise, — [because] thy wound is bad? Because of the multitude of thine iniquity, [because] thy sins were numerous, have I done these things to thee. Ver. 16. Therefore all those who devour thee shall be devoured; and all thine oppressors, they shall all go into captivity; and they who spoiled thee shall become a spoil, and those that plundered thee

I will give up for plunder. Ver. 17. For I will put a plaster on thee, and will heal thee of thy wounds, saith Jahveh; for they call thee an outcast, [and say], Zion is she [whom] none seeketh after.''

This strophe is only a fuller expression of the idea set forth in ver. 11, that the Lord certainly chastises Israel, but will not make an end of him. The chastisement has commenced. From the wounds and blows which Israel has received, he lies motionless and helpless, getting neither sympathy nor aid from his lovers. The feminine suffix and the mention of lovers show that the address turns to the daughter of Zion. On the expression TOW ^:v*> U ft is nl w*lh tny bruise," cf. xv. 18. nao nrrn » bad, incurable is the stroke which thou hast re- ceived9" as in x. 19, xiv. 17. P fftf " to execute justice;" cf. v. 28, xxii. lt'». Ilitzig well explains the meaning: "thy claims against thy heathen oppressors." "^H?/, although connected by the accents with what precedes, does not agree well with TJ%1. H > f°r "^? nas not *ne meaning which has been attributed to it, of a " bandage/' but, as derived from the verb TT, " to press a wound," signifies the wound that has been pressed together; see on Hos. v. 13. Neither does the figure of the wound agree with the expression, " there is none to judge li. 50. In the second part of Isaiah, \wy occurs as seldom as T1P10 j^NI; on the other hand, cf. Jer. xlviii. 11, vii. 33. The expressions found in ver. 11 are as rare in the second part of Isaiah as they are frequent in Jeremiah. Thus, ' For I am with thee to save thee' is found in xv. 20, xlii.

II; 'to make a full end' occurs also in iv. 27, v. 10, 18; i I shall certainly not let thee go unpunished,1 which, like Nah. i. 3, seems to have been taken from Ex. xxxiv. 7 or Num. xiv. 18, is not found at all in the second part of Isaiah; pfiH, which is found in ix. 15, xiii. 24, xviii. 17, xxiii. 1 f., appears only in Isa. xli. 16; and while t2E"'E>^ "ID"1 is used in the same meaniDg in x. 24, id1 occurs nowhere in the second part of Isaiah, and DEt^sp is found in Isa. xli. 1, liv. 17, lix. 11, in quite a different connection and meaning.'' (Graf.)

thy cause," so that we might, with Umbreit, render the passage, " No one gives thee thy due, in pressing thy wounds;" while', as Graf says, "niKfi-J dissociated from littA forms a useless synonym with nbyn," and in xlvi. 11, where' the thought is repeated, it is separated from the latter word. Accordingly, with Hitzig and Graf, we connect niarn iStzb into one clause /"for the wound, there is no healing (or medicine)— no plaster." TOTi is what is laid upon the wound, a plaster. "All thy lovers/' i.e. the nations which were once allied with thee (cf. xxii. 20 and 22), do not trouble themselves about thee, because I have smitten thee so heavily on account of the multitude of thy transgressions; cf. v. G, xiii. 22. TO£ still depends on the preposition?y, which continues its force, but as a conjunction. The idea that the Israelites have richly deserved their sufferings is still more plainly presented in ver. 15: " Why criest thou, because thou hast brought this suffering on thee through thy sins?" nJN% also depends on?]>, which continues to exert its power in the sentence as a conjunction. — Ver. 16 f. Therefore {i.e. because Israel, although punished for his sins, is destitute of help) will the Lord take pity on him. He will recompense to his oppressors and spoilers according to their deeds, and will heal his wounds. The enemies of Zion will now meet the fate which they have prepared for Zion. Those who, like rapacious animals, would devour Israel (see on ii. 3), shall be devoured, and all his oppressors shall go into captivity; cf. xxii. 22. The Kethib 3pDMb? is the Aramaic form of the participle from OXf for DptF; the Qeri substitutes the Hebrew form ^D#, after 1. 11, Isa. xvii. 14. nana n?y, to put on a bandage, lay on a plaster. HD-ik signifies, primarily, not a bandage, but, like the

Arabic j£jj\ (according to Fleischer in Delitzsch on Isa. lviii.

8), the new skin which forms over a wound as it heals, and (as is shown by the expression of Isaiah, noVA""^?"!^) proves the healing of the wound. Against the direct transference of the meaning of the word in Arabic to the Hebrew n??N, without taking into consideration the passage in Isaiah just referred to, there is the objection that the word is always used in connection with njv, "to be put on" (cf. viii. 22, 2 Chron. xxiv. 13, Neh. iv. 1), or nJV.n, " to put on" (here and in xxxiii. 6), which is not the proper verb to be used in speaking of the formation of a new skin over a wound after suppuration has ceased. Hence the word in Hebrew seems to have received the derived sense of li a healing-plaster;" this is confirmed by the employment of the word ^JW, u plaster," in ver. 13 and xlvi. 11. — The second *3, ver. 17, is subordinate to the clause which precedes. a Because they called thee one rejected," i.e. because the enemies of Zion spoke of her contemptuously, as a city that has been forsaken of God, the Lord will heal her wounds.

\ era. 18-22. Further explanation of the deliverance promised to Zion. — Ver. 18. "Thus saith Jahveh: Behold, I will turn the captivity of the tents of Jacob, and will take pity on his dwellings; and the city shall be built again upon its own hill, and the palace shall be inhabited after its own fashion. Ver. l\K And there shall come forth from them praise and the voice of those who laugh; and I will multiply them, so that they shall not be few, and I will honour them, so that they shall not be mean. Ver. 20. And his sons shall be as in former times, and his congregation shall be established before me, and I will punish all that oppress him. Ver. 21. And his leader shall spring from himself, and his ruler shall proceed from his midst; and 1 will bring him near, so that he shall approach to me; for who is he that became surety for his life in drawing ir to me? saith Jahveh. Ver. 22. And ye shall become my people, and I will be your God.'*

The dwellings of Israel that have been laid waste, and the cities that have been destroyed, shall be restored and inhabited as formerly, so that songs of praise and tones of joy shall resound from them (ver. 18 f.). "The captivity of the tents of Jacob" means the miserable condition of the dwellings 0f Jacob, i.e. of all Israel; for " to turn the captivity " has everywhere a figurative sense, and signifies the turning of adversity and misery into prosperity and comfort; see on xxix. 14. Hitzig is quite wrong in his rendering: "I bring back the captives of the tents of Jacob, i.e. those who have been carried away out of the tents." That " tents " does not stand for those who dwell in tents, but is a poetic expression for "habitations," is perfectly clear from the parallel " his dwellings." To u take pity on the dwellings" means to "restore the dwellings that have been destroyed" (cf. ix. L8). The anarthrous vy must not be restricted to the capital, but means every city that has been destroyed; here, the capital naturally claims the first consideration. "Upon its hills" is equivalent to saying on its former site, cf. Josh. xi. 13; it does not mean "on the mound made by its ruins," in support of which Niigelsbach erroneously adduces Dent. xiii. 17. |i»lN in like maimer stands, in the most general way, for every palace. \VBf n'ty does not mean "on the proper place," i.e. on an open, elevated spot on the hill (Hitzig), neither does it mean " on its right position" (JEwald): both of these renderings are against the usage of the words: but it signifies " according to its right" (cf. Deut. xvii. 11), i.e. in accordance with what a palace requires, after its own fashion. 2-*\ to be inhabited, as in xvii. 6, etc. " Out of them " i\ fers to the cities and palaces. Thence proceeds, resounds praise or thanksgiving for the divine grace shown them (cf. xxxiii. 11), and the voice, i.e. the tones or sounds, of those who laugh (cf. xv. 17), i.e. of the people living in the cities and palaces, rejoicing over their good fortune. " I will increase them, so that they shall not become fewer," cf. xxix. 6; " I will bring them to honour (cf. Isa. viii. 23), so that they shall not be lightly esteemed." — In ver. 20 f. the singular suffixes refer to Jacob as a nation (ver. 18). " His sons" are the members of the nation; they become as they were previously, in former times, — sicut olim sub Davide et Salomone, floreritissimo rerum statu. " The congregation will be established before me," i.e. under my survey (P-? as in Ps. cii. 29), i.e. they shall no more be shaken or moved from their position. — Ver. 21. The expression " his prince will be out of him " is explained by the parallel clause, " his ruler will proceed from him." The meaning is, that the people will no longer be ruled or subdued by foreign masters, but be ruled by glorious princes, i.e. leaders endowed with princely glory, and these out of the midst of themselves. Herein is contained the truth, that the sovereignty of Israel, as restored, culminates in the kingdom of the Messiah. Yet the words employed are so general that we cannot restrict VTHK and WO to the person of the Messiah. The idea is to be taken in a more general way: As Israel was ruled by princes of the house of David, whom God had chosen, so will it again in the future have its own rulers, whom God will raise out of their midst and exalt gloriously. This is clear from the further statement, " I will cause him to approach, and he shall come near unto me." To affirm that these words do not refer to the ruler, but to the people, is a mistake that could be made only by those expositors who view the " ruler" as being none else than the Messiah. Yet the LXX. and the Chaldee paraphrase understood the words as referring to the people; and in support of this view, it may be asserted that, in the Messianic period, Israel is to become a holy people (iii. 17), and attain its 'I -tiny <>f being a nation of priests (Ex. xix. 6), in reference to which it is called toil? Cy, Pg. cxlviii. 14. But the context evidently requires us to refer the words to the king, with regard to whom one here looks for a further statement. Tin- verb - I is the regular expression employed in reference to the approach on the part of the priests to.Jahveh, cf. Num. xvi. 5; and ffM in Ex. xxiv. 2 denotes the approach of Moses to Jahveh on Mount Sinai. The two V< rbfl thus signify a bringing near and a coming near, which, under the old covenant, was the prerogative of those persons who were consecrated by the Lord to be servants in His sanctuary, but was denied the common people. As to the king> of brae), in regard to this matter, the ordinance proclaimed concerning Joshua held good in reference to them also: u he shall stand before Eleazar, who shall inquire for him in a matter of Urim before Jahveh" (Num. xxvii. 21). Even a David could not approach into the immediate presence of the Lord to ask His will. This prerogative of the priests the Lord will, in the future, vouchsafe also to the princes of Israel, i.*\ He will then put them in such a relation to Himself as no one may now presume to occupy, except at the risk of his life. This is shown by the succeeding sentence, which assigns the reason: u For who is there that stands surety for his heart, i.e. with his heart answers for the consequences of approaching me?" 37 and not ^ is named, as the seat of physical life, in so far as the heart is the place where the soul is alone with itself, and becomes conscious of all it does and suffers as its own (Oehler in Delitzsch's Psychology, p. 296 of Clark's Translation). The meaning is, that nobody will stake his spiritual- moral life on any attempt to draw near to God, because a sinful man is destroyed before the holiness of the Divine Beino-. W hoever approaches into the presence of Jahveh must die; Num. vim 19: Ex. xix. 21, xxxiv. 3, etc.— Ver. 22. Then Israel shall really become the people of the Lord, and the Lord shall be their God; thus the end of their divine calling shall be attained, and the salvation of Israel shall be complete; see on vii. 23.

Vers. 23, 24. The wicked shall be destroyed by the fire of God's anger. — Ver. 23. " Behold, a whirlwind of Jahveh, — wrath goeth forth, — a sweeping whirlwind; it shall hurl down on the head of the wicked. Ver. 24. The heat of Jahveh's anger shall not return till He hath done and till He hath established the purpose of His heart; in the end of the days ye shall consider it."

These two verses have been already met with in chap, xxiii. 19 and 20, with a few variations. Instead of <vinno we have here ">"^n^ an(^ ""tyT"5^ *s nere strengthened by prefixing pn; on the other hand, n:*3, which is added in the preceding passage to intensify Wlliann, is here omitted. The first of these changes is more of a formal than a real kind; for by the substitution of "HiSTO for 'vinnp, the play in the latter word on &VP is merely disturbed, not u destroyed," since "i and b are kindred sounds. Tl^rin has been variously rendered. The meaning of " abiding," which is founded on 1 Kings xvii. 20, is here unsuitable. Equally inappropriate is the meaning of " crowding together," or assembling in troops, which we find in Hos. vii. 14. It is more correct to derive it from Via either in the sense of sweeping away or that of blustering, which are meanings derived from the fundamental one of producing harsh sounds in the throat, and transferred to the rushing sound made by the storm as it carries everything along with it. The second and third changes affect the sense. For, by the addition of P">n to *1X, the idea of a judgment in wrrath is intensified; and by dropping n:s3? less is made of the acuteness of perception. Both of these variations correspond to differences in the context of both passages. In chap, xxiii., where the words are applied to the false prophets, it was important to place emphasis on the statement that these men would, by experience, come to a full knowledge of the reality of that judgment they denied; in this chapter, on the other hand, the idea of judgment in wrath must be expressly set aside. There is thus no good ground for considering these verses a later interpolation into the text, as Movers, Ilitzig, and Niigelsbach think. Ilitzig rejects these verses as spurious on the false ground that the judgment threatened in this chapter refers merely to the fall of the kingdom of Babylon, which Jeremiah could not have been able to know beforehand; Niigelsbach rejects them on the ground of other erroneous assumptions.1 — The only doubtful point regarding these verses is, whether they are to be connected, as Hengstenberg thinks, with what precedes, or with what follows, as Ewald supposes. In the former case, to the promise for the true Israel would be added a threat against those who only seemed to be [srael, — like the declaration in Isaiah, u There is no peace to the wicked:"' this addition would thus ho made, lest those for whom the promise was not intended should unwarrantably apply it to themselves. But, however well-founded the thought is, that every increasing manifestation of grace is invariably accompanied by an increased manifestation of righteousness, and though all the prophets clearly testify that the godless members of the covenant people have no share in the promised salvation, but instead are liable to judgment; yet there has not been such preparation made for the introduction of this thought as that we might be able at once to join these two verses to what precedes. The exclamation " Behold!'' with which the words are introduced, rather form a sign that a new addition is to be made to the prophecy. We therefore view the threat in this verse as a resumption of the threat of judgment made in ver. 5 ff., to

1 First, he holds the groundless opinion that this prophecy origin cited in the time of Josiab, and therefore could not have borrowed verses from the address given in chap, xxiii., which belongs to the time of Jehoiakim; secondly, with as little ground he affirms that these verses do not correspond with the character of the chapter, and seem like a jarring discord in the midst of the announcement of deliverance it contains; finally, he asks whence could come " the wicked" mentioned, in the times described by the prophet, — as if he thought that when the captivity of the people was turned, all godless ones would suddenly disappear. — The doubts as to the genuineness of ver. 22 are based by NageLsbach merely on the fact that the same idea is repeated in xxxi. 1.

which is attached, in xxxi. 1, the further development of the announcement of deliverance; but we refer the threat made in the verse not merely to the heathen as such, but to all " wicked ones/1 in such a way that it at the same time applies to the godless members of the covenant people, and signifies their exclusion from salvation.

ISRAEL. — Ewald has well stated the connection of this chapter with the conclusion of the preceding, as follows: " In order that the old form of blessing, found in the books of Moses, and here given in ver. 22, may be fulfilled, the whirlwind of Jahveh, which must carry away all the unrighteous, will at last discharge itself, as has been already threatened, xxiii. 19; this must take place in order that there may be a fulfilment of that hope to all the tribes of Israel (both kingdoms)." Ver. 1 announces deliverance for all the families of Israel, but afterwards it is promised to both divisions of the people separately,— first, in vers. 2-22, to the ten tribes, who have been exiles the longest; and then, in a more brief statement, vers. 23-2 G, to the kingdom of Judah: to this, again, there is appended, vers. 27-40, a further description of the nature of the deliverance in store for the two houses of Israel.

Vers. 1-6. The deliverance for all Israel, and the readmission of the ten tribes. — Ver. 1. "At that time, saith Jahveh, will I be a God to all the families of Israel, and they shall be my people. Ver. 2. Thus saith Jahveh: A people escaped from the sword found grace in the wilderness. Let me go to give him rest, even Israel. Ver. 3. From afar hath Jahveh appeared unto me, and with everlasting love have I loved thee; therefore have I continued my favour towards thee. Ver. 4. Once more will I build thee up, and thou shalt be built, O virgin of Israel; once more shalt thou adorn [thyself] with thy tabrets, and go forth in the dance of those that make merry. Ver. 5. Once more shalt thou plant vineyards on the hills of Samaria; planters will plant them, and apply them to common use. Ver. 6. For there is a day [when] watchmen will cry on Mount Ephraim: Arise ye, and let us go up to Zion, to Jahveh our God! "

The expression u At that time " refers to xxx. 24, " in the end of the days," which means the Messianic future. The announcement of deliverance itself is continued by resumption of the promise made in xxx. 22; the transposition of the two portions of the promise is to be remarked. Here, " I will be a God to them " stands first, because the restoration and perfection of Israel have their only foundation in the love of God and in the faithfulness with which He keeps His covenant, and it is only through this gracious act that Israel again becomes the people of God. u All the families of Israel" are the families of the whole twelve tribes, — of the two kingdoms of Israel and Judah, separated since the death of Solomon. After this announcement of deliverance for the whole of Israel, the address turns first to Israel of the ten tribes, and continues to treat longest of them, " because, judging from appearances, they seem irrecoverably lost — for ever rejected by the Lord" ( llengstenberg). \ \ is variously explained. Ewald, following Raschi and others, refers the words 'W }H &WB to the leading of Israel out. of Egypt: once on a time, in the Arabian desert, the people that had just barely escaped the sword of the Egyptians nevertheless found grace, when Jahveh, as it were, went to make a quiet dwelling-place for them. The love which He displayed towards them at that time He has since continued, and thus He will now once more bring back His people out of the midst of strangers. This view of the passage is supported by the use of the perfects in vers. 2 and 3, in contrast with the imperfect, u again will I build thee," ver. 4, and the employment of the expression u in the desert;" cf. ii. 2, Hos. xiii. 4, 5. But " the people of those who have escaped the sword " is an expression that cannot be reconciled with it. Raschi, indeed, understands this as referring to the sword of the Egyptians and Amalekites; but the thought that Israel, led out of Egypt through the Arabian desert, was a people that had survived or escaped the sword, is one met with nowhere else in the Old Testament, and is quite inapplicable to the condition of the people of Israel when they were led out of Egypt. Although Pharaoh wished to exterminate the people of Israel through hard servile labour, and through such measures as the order to kill all male children when they were born, yet he did not make an exhibition of his wrath against Israel by the sword, neither did he show his anger thus at the Red Sea, where he sought to bring Israel hark to Egypt by force. There God shielded His pooj.lo from the attack of Pharaoh, as He did in the battle against the Amalekites, so that Lsrael was led through the desert as a whole people, not as a remnant. The designation, " a people ape J from the sword," unconditionally requires us to refer the words to the deliverance of the Israelites from exile; these were only a remnant of what they had formerly been, since the greater portion of them perished, partly at the downfall of the kingdom, and partly in exile, by the sword of the enemy. Hence the perfects in vers. 2 and 3 are prophetic, and used of the divine counsel, which precedes its execution in time. By using the expression " in the desert," Jeremiah makes an allusion to Israel's being led through the Arabian desert. The restoration of Israel to Canaan, from their exile among the nations, is viewed under the figure of their exodus from Egypt into the land promised to their fathers, as in Hos. ii. 16 f.; and the exodus from the place of banishment is, at the same time, represented as having already occurred, so that Israel is again on the march to his native land, and is being safely conducted through the desert by his God. There is as little ground for thinking that there is reference here made to the desert lying between Assvria or Babvlon and Palestine, as there is for Hitzi<i's referring 2in H'np to the sword of the Medes and Persians. — The inf. abs. SjiSn is used instead of the first person of the imperative (cf. 1 Kings xxii. 30), to express a summons addressed by God to Himself: " I will go." [See Gesenius, § 131, 4, b) 7.] The suffix in WT)? points out the object (Israel) by anticipation: " to bring him to rest." Jtt"J in the Hiphil usually means to be at rest, to rest (Deut. xxviii. Qo); here, to give rest, bring to rest. — Ver. 3. The people already see in spirit how the Lord is accomplishing His purpose, ver. 2b. " From afar (the prophet speaks in the name of the people, of which he views himself as one) hath Jahveh appeared unto me." So lon£ as Israel languished in exile, the Lord had withdrawn from him, kept Himself far off. Now the prophet sees Him appearing again. "From afar," i.e. from Zion, where the Lord is viewed as enthroned, the God of His people (Ps. xiv. 7), sitting there to lead them back into their land. But the Lord at once assures the people, who have been waiting for Him, of His everlasting love. Because He loves His people with everlasting love, therefore has He kept them by His grace, so that they were not destroyed. T^7?, to draw, keep, restrain; hence "lpn 7pE? prolongare gratlam, Ps. xxxvi. 11, cix. 12, but construed with P of a person; here, with a double accusative, to restrain any one, to preserve him constantly by grace. — Ver. 4. Israel is now to be built up again, i.e. to be raised to a permanent condition of ever-increasing prosperity; cf. xii. 1G. The additional clause, " and thou shalt be built," confirms this promise. The " virgin of Israel" is the congregation of Israel; cf. xiv. 17. A new and joyful phase in the life of the people is to beiiin: such is the meaninir of the words, " with tabrets shalt thou adorn thyself, and thou shalt go forth in the dance of those who make merry." In this manner were the popular feasts celebrated in Israel; cf. Judg. xi. 34, Ps. lxviii. 26. — Ver. 5. " The mountains of Samaria," i.e. of the kingdom of Ephraim (1 Kings xiii. 22; 2 Kings xvii. 24), shall again be planted with vineyards, and the planters, too, shall enjoy the fruits in peace, — not plant for strangers, so that enemies shall destroy the fruits; cf. Isa. Ixii. 8 f., Ixv. 21 f. The words "planters plant and profane" (i.e. those who plant the vineyards are also to enjoy the fruit of them) are to be explained by the law in Lev. xix. 23 f., according to which the fruits of newly planted fruit trees, and according to Judg. ix. 27, vines also, were not to be eaten during the first three years; those of the fourth year were to be presented as a thank-offering to the Lord; and only those of the fifth year werj to be applied to common use. This application to one's own use is expressed in Deut. xx. 6 by s&)3 properly, to make common. — Ver. 6 is attached to the foregoing by *3, which introduces the reason of what has been stated. The connection is as follows: This prosperous condition of Ephraim is to be a permanent one; for the sin of Jeroboam, the seduction of the ten tribes from the sanctuary of the Lord, shall not continue, but Ephraim shall once more, in the future, betake himself to Zion, to the Lord his God. u There is a day," i.e. there comes a day, a time, when watchmen call. D^yi here denotes the watchmen who were posted oil the mountain?, that they might observe and give notice of the Brst appearance of the crescent of the moon after newmoon, so that the festival of the new-moon and the feasts connected with it might be fixed; cf. Keil's Bill. Archdol. ii. § 74,

Anni. (.> [see also the articles Mond and Neumond in Herzoff's Real-Encykl vols. ix. and x.; New-moon in Smith's Bible Dietionary, vol. ii.]. n?V9 to go up to Jerusalem, which was preeminent among the cities of the land as to spiritual matters.

Vers. 7-14. The restoration of Israel. — Ver. 7. "For thus saith Jahveh: Shout for joy over Jacob, and cry out over the head of the nations! Make known, praise, and say, O Jahveh, save Thy people, the remnant of Israel! Ver. 8. Behold, I will bring them out of the land of the north, and will gather them from the sides of the earth. Among them are the blind and lame, the woman with child and she that hath born, together; a great company shall they return hither. Ver. 9. With weeping shall they come, and with supplications will I lead them: I will bring them to streams of water, by a straight way in which they shall not stumble; for I have become a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my first-born. Ver. 10. Hear the word of Jahveh, ye nations, and declare among the islands far off, and say: He that scattered Israel will gather him, and keep him, as a shepherd his flock. Ver. 11. For Jahveh hath redeemed Israel and ransomed him out of the hand of one stronger than he. Ver. 12. And they shall come and sing with joy on the height of Zion, and ccme like a flood to the goodness of Jahveh, because of corn, and new wine, and fresh oil, and the young of the flock and the herd; and their soul shall be like a well-watered garden, neither shall they pine away any more. Ver. 13. Then shall the virgin rejoice in the dance, and young men and old men together; and I will turn their mourning to joy, and will comfort them, and will cause them to rejoice after their sorrow. Ver. 14. And I will satiate the soul of the priests with fat, and my people shall be satisfied with my goodness, saith Jahveh."

In order to set forth the greatness of the salvation which the Lord will prepare for Israel, so long outcast, Israel is commanded to make loud jubilation, and exhorted to approach the Lord with entreaties for the fulfilment of His purpose of grace. The statement regarding this salvation is introduced by *3, " for," since the description, given in this strophe, of Israel's being led back and re-established, furnishes the actual proof that the nation shall be built up again. The summons to rejoice comes from Jahveh (since, by His gracious dealings, He gives the people material for praise), and is addressed to the members of the nation. These are to rejoice over Jacob, i.e. over the glorious destiny before the people. D*ian CJOn \XXi is translated byllitzig: "shout at the head of the nations," i.e. making a beginning among them all; but this is incorrect and against the context. The thought that many other enslaved nations besides Israel will rejoice over the fall of their oppressors, has not the least foundation in this passage. The summons to the nations, which follows in wr. 10, is simply a command to make known God's purpose regarding the deliverance of Israel. Of course, -*N~-, taken literally ami by itself, may be rendered " at the head" (1 Kings xxi. 1 J; Amoa vi. 7, etc.); but in this place, the expression of which it forms the first word is the object of *■ l!¥, which is construed with ^, "to rejoice over something," Isa. xxiv. -1. " The head of thi' nations" signifies " the first of the nations" (£^:n H'BiO, Amos vi. 1), i.e. the most ilted among the nations. Such is the designation given to Israel, because God has chosen them before all the nations of the earth to be His peculiar people (Deut. vii. 6 J 2 Sam. vii. 23 f.), made them the highest over fa ivty Deut. xxvi. 10) all nations. This high honour of Israel, which seemed to have been taken from him by his being delivered over to the power of heathen nations, is now to appear again, wfl ^E"'n, "make to be heard, sing praise/1 are to be combined into one thought, •• sing praise loudly" (so that people may hear it). The words of praise, " Save Thy people, O Jahveh," form rather the expression of a wish than of a request, just as in many psalms, e.g. Ps. xx. 10, xxviii. 9, especially cxviii. 25 in N3 nywn, with which Jesus was greeted on His entry into Jerusalem, Matt. xxi. 9 (Graf). — To the rejoicing and praise the Lord replies with the promise that He will lead back His people out of the most distant countries of the north, — every one, even the feeble and frail, who ordinarily would not have strength for so long a journey. " Hither," i.e. to Palestine, where Jeremiah wrote the promise; cL iii. 18, xvi. 15.— « With weeping," i.e. with tears of joy, and with contrition of heart over favour so undeserved, they come, and God leads them with weeping, " amidst earnest prayers to the God they have found again, as a lost son returns to the arms of his father*' (Umbreit). Hitzig and Graf would connect EMunna with what precedes, and combine k* 1 will lead them, 1 will bring them;" by this arrangement, it is said, the careful guidance of God, in leaving nothing behind, is properly set forth. But the symmetry of the vers,e is thereby destroyed; and the reason assigned for this construction (which is opposed by the accents), viz. that D^«nn does not mean miseratio, dementia, will not stand the test. As in Isa. lv. 12 it is the being brought HIW3 that is the chief point, so here, it is the bringing D^ynna, amidst weeping, i.e. fervent prayer. At the same time, the Lord will care like a father for their refreshment and nurture; He will lead them to brooks of water, so that they shall not suffer thirst in the desert (Isa. xlviii. 21), and guide them by a straight (i.e. level) road, so that they shall not fall. For He shows Himself again to Israel as a father, one who cares for them like a father (cf. iii. 19, Deut. xxxii. G, Isa. lxiii. 16), and treats Ephraim as His first-born. " The first-born of Jahveh," in Ex. iv. 22, means the people of Israel as compared with the other nations of the earth. This designation is here transferred to Ephraim as the head and representative of the ten tribes; but it is not likely that there is in this any allusion to the preference which Jacob displayed for the sons of Joseph, Gen. xlix. 22 ff. compared with ver. 4 (Yenema, J. D. Michaelis, Nagelsbach), — the advantage they obtained consisting in this, that Ephraim and Manasseh were placed on an equal footing with Jacob's sons as regards inheritance in the land of Canaan; in other words, they were elevated to the dignity of being founders of tribes. There is no trace in this prophecy of any preference given to Ephraim before Judah, or of the ten tribes before the two tribes of the kingdom of Judah. That the deliverance of Ephraim (Israel) from exile is mentioned before that of Judah, and is further more minutely described, is simply due to the fact, already mentioned, that the ten tribes, who had long languished in exile, had the least hope, according to man's estimation, of deliverance. The designation of Ephraim as the first-born of Jahveh simply shows that, in the deliverance of the people, Ephraim is in no respect to be behind Judah, — that they are to receive their full share in the Messianic salvation of the whole people; in other words, that the love which the Lord once displayed towards Israel, when He delivered them out of the power of Pharaoh, is also to be, in the future, displayed towards the ten tribes, who were looked on as lost. The nature of fatherhood and sonship, as set forth in the Old Testament, does not contain the element of the Spirit's testimony to our spirit, but only the idea of paternal care and love, founded on the choosing of Israel out of all the nations to be the peculiar people of God; see on Ex. iv. 22 and Isa. Lxiii. lo', l.xiv. 7. *"}b3 is substantially the same as 1^ [a and Z%V?> ^ & in ver. 20.— Ver. 10 f. The most remote of the heathen, too, are to be told that Jahveh will free His people from their hands, gather them again, and highly favour them, lest they should imagine that the God of Israel has not the power to save His people, and that they may learn to fear Him as the Almighty God, who has given 1 1 is people into their power, not from any inability to defend them, but merely for the purpose of chastising them for their sins. EPS are the islands in, and countries lying along the coast of, the Mediterranean Sea; in the language of prophecy, the word is used as a designation of the distant countries of the west; cf. Ps. lxxii. 10, Isa. xli. 1, 5, xlii. 12, etc. On ver. 10&, cf. xxiii. 3, Ex. xxxiv. 12 ff., Isa. xl. 11. " Stronger than he," as in Ps. xxxv. 10; the expression is here used of the heathen master of the world. — Vers. 12-14. Thus led by the Lord through the wilderness (ver. 9), the redeemed shall come rejoicing" to the sacred height of Zion (see on xvii. 12), and thence go in streams, i.e. scatter themselves over the country like a stream, for the goodness of the Lord, i.e. for the good things which He deals out to them in their native land. "To the goodness of Jahveh" is explained by " because of corn," etc. (/V for /K), cf. Hos. iii. 5. As to the good things of the country, cf. Deut. viii. 8. Their soul will be like a well-watered garden, an emblem of the fulness and freshness of living power; cf. Isa. lviii. 11. — Ver. 13. Then shall young men and old live in unclouded joy, and forget all their former sorrow. " In the dance " refers merely to the virgins: to « young men and old together," only the notion of joy is to be repeated from the context.— Ver 14 Ihe priests and the people will refresh themselves with the fat' >•'■; the fat pieces of the thank-offerings, because numerous Offerings will be presented to the Lord in consequence of the blessing received from Him,

Vers. 15-l>l>. Changing of sorrow into joy, because Ephraim will (urn to the Lord, and the Lord will lead him back.— Ver 15 "Thus saith Jahveh: A voice is heard in Ramah, lamentation! bitter weeping. Rachel is weeping for her children; she refuses to be comforted tor her children, because they are not. Ver. 16 Thus saith Jahveh: Restrain thy voice from weeping, and thine eyes from tears; for there is a reward for thy work, saith Jahveh, and they shall return from the land of the enemy. Ver. 17. And there is hope for thy latter end, saith Jahveh, that children shall return to thy border. Ver. 18. I have certainly heard Ephraim complaining, Thou hast chastised me and I was chastised, like a calf not tamed. Turn me that I may turn, for Thou, O Jahveh, art my God. Ver. 19. For, after I return I repent, and after I have been taught I smite upon [my] thigh; I am ashamed, yea, and confounded, because I bear the reproach of my youth. Ver. 20. Is Ephraim a son dear to me, or a child of delight, that, as often as I speak against him, I do yet certainly remember him! Therefore my bowels move for him; I shall surely pity him, saith Jahveh, Ver. 21. Set thee up way-marks, put up posts for thyself; set thine heart to the highway, the road [by which] thou earnest: return, O virgin of Israel, return to these cities of thine. Ver. 22, How long wilt thou wander about, O backsliding daughter? For Jahveh hath created a new [thing] in the earth: a woman shall encompass a man."

In this strophe the promise is further confirmed by carrying out the thought, that Israel's release from his captivity shall certainly take place, however little prospect there is of it at present. For Israel will come to an acknowledgment of his sins, and the Lord will then once more show him His love. The hopeless condition of Israel is dramatically set forth in ver. 15 f.: RacheJ, the mother of Joseph, and thus the ancestress of Ephraim, the chief tribe of the Israelites who had revolted from the royal house of Davkl, weeps bitterly over the loss of her children, the ten tribes who have been carried away into exile; and the Lord addresses consolation to her, with the promise that they shall return out of the land of the enemy. " A voice is heard" (VDBfy participle, to show duration). The " voice" is more fully treated of in the second part of the verse: loud lamentation and bitter weeping. There is a difficulty connected with no"i3. The LXX. took it to be the name of the city Ramah, now called er-Rdm, in the tribe of Benjamin, five English miles north from Jerusalem, on the borders of the kingdoms of Judah and Israel (1 Kings xv. 17), although this city is elsewhere written with the article (n?"l\1)' n°t onbr 'n *ne ms~ torical notices found in xl. 1, Josh, xviii. 25, Judg. iv. 5, etc., hut also in prophetical addresses, as in Hos. vi. 8, Isa. x. 29. In this passage it cannot he a mere appellative ("on a height"), as in 1 Sam. xxii. 6, K/ek. xvi. 21: nor can we think of Ramah in Xaphtali (Josh. xix. 36, also n?"J?), f°r tms latter city never figures in history like tin1 Ramah of Samuel, not far from Gibeah; see on Josh, xviii. 25 and 1 Sam. i. 1. But why is the lamentation of Rachel heard at Ramah? Most expositors reply, because the tomb of Rachel was in the vicinity of Ramah; in support of this they cite 1 Sam. x. "J. Niigelsbach, who is one of thbse, still maintains this view with the utmost confidence. But this assumption is opposed to Gen. xxxv. 16 and 19, where it is stated that Rachel died and was buried on the way to Bethlehem, and not far from the town (see on Genesis, Z.c), which is about five miles south from Jerusalem, and thus far from Kamah. Nor is any support for this view to be got from 1 Sam. x. 2, except by making the groundless assumption, that Saul, while seeking for the asses of his father, came to Samuel in his native town; whereas, in the account given in that chapter, he is merely said to have sought for Samuel in a certain town, of which nothing more is stated, and to have inquired at him; see on 1 Sam. x. 2. We must therefore reject, as arbitrary and groundless, all attempts to fix the locality of Rachel's sepulchre in the neighbourhood of Ramah (Niigelsbach); in the same way we must treat the assertion of Thenius, Knobel, Graf, etc., that the Ephratah of Gen. xxxv. 16, 19, is the same as the Ephron of 2 Chron. xiii. 19, which was situated near Bethel; so, too, must we deal with the statements, that Ephratah, i.e. Bethlehem, is to be expunged from the text of Gen. xxxv. 9 and 48 as a false gloss, and that the tradition, attested in Matt. ii. 18, as to the situation of Rachel's sepulchre in the vicinity of Bethlehem, is incorrect. Nor does the passage of Jeremiah now before us imply that Rachel's sepulchre was near Ram ah. Rachel does not weep at Ramah over her lost children, either because she had been buried there, or because it was in Ramah of Benjamin that the exiles were assembled, according to Jer. xl. 1 (Hitzig, and also Delitzsch on Gen. xxxv. 20). For it was the Jews who were to be carried away captive that were gathered together at Ramah, whereas it was over Israelites or Ephraimites that had been carried into exile that Rachel weeps. The lamentation of Rachel is heard at Ramah, as the most loftily situated border-town of the two kingdoms, whence the wailing that had arisen sounded far and near, and could be heard in Judah. Nor does she weep because she has learned something in her tomb of the carrying away of the people, but as their common mother, as the beloved spouse of Jacob, who in her married life so earnestly desired children. Just as the people are often included under the notion of the " daughter of Zion," as their ideal representative, so the great ancestress of Ephraim, Benjamin, and Manasseh is here named as the representative of the maternal love shown by Israel in the pain felt when the people are lost. The sing. to^K *3 signifies, " for not one of them is left." — This verse is quoted by Matthew (ii. 18), after relating the story of the murder of the children at Bethlehem, with the introductory formula, rore eTfkr]pw6ri to pr]9ev Bia 'Iepe/jLiov: from this the older theologians (cf. Calovii Bibl. illustr. ad Jer. Lc.) conclude that Jeremiah directly prophesied that massacre of the children committed by Herod. But this inference cannot be allowed; it will not fit in with the context of the prophecy. The expression ZirXripuiOr), used by Matthew, only shows that the prophecy of Jeremiah received a new fulfilment through that act of Herod. Of course, we must not reduce the typical reference of the prophecy to that event at Bethlehem simply to this, that the wailing of the mothers of Bethlehem over their murdered children was as great as the lamentation made when the people were carried into exile.

Typology rather assumes a causal connection between the two events. The destruction of the people of Israel by the Assyrians and Chaldeans is a type of the massacre of the infants at Bethlehem, in so far as the sin which brought the children of Israel into exile laid a foundation for the fact that Herod the Idumean became king over the Jews, and wished to destroy the true King and Saviour of Israel that he mmlit stren£then his own dominion. Cf. Fr. Kleinschmidt, die typolog. Citate der vier Euangclien, 1861, S. 10 ff.; [Fairbairn's Typology, fifth edition, vol. i. pp. 452-3.]

The Lord will put an end to this wailing. " Cease thy weeping,'1 lie cries to the sorrowing ones, u for there is a reward for thy labour" (almost identical with 2 Chron. xv. 7). i^VS is the maternal labour of birth and rearing of children. The reward consists in this, that the children shall return out of the land of the enemy into their own land. Ver. 17 states the same thing in parallel clauses, to confirm the promise. On the expression " hope for thy latter end," cf. xxix. 11. D*J3 without the article, as in Hos. xi. 10, etc.; cf. Ewald, § 277, b. This hope is grounded on the circumstance that Israel will iware, through suffering, that he is punished for his sins, and, repenting of these sins, will beseech his God for favour. The Lord already perceives this repentant spirit and acknowledgment of sin. "IpJNJ does not mean u I had myself chastised," or "I learned chastisement" (Ilitzig), but "I was chastised," like an untamed calf, i.e. one not trained to bear the yoke and to endure labour. On this figure, cf. IIos. x. 11. The recognition of suffering as chastisement by God excites a desire after amelioration and amendment. But since man cannot accomplish these through his own powers, Israel prays, u Lead me back," sc. from my evil way, i.e. turn me. He finds himself constrained to this request, because he feels regret for his apostasy from God. *2& ^QK in this connection can only mean, " after I turned," sc. from Thee, O Lord my God; on this meaning of 3tiP, cf. viii. 4. JTjjn, to be brought to understanding through punishment, i.e. to become wise. To smite the thighs is a token of terror and horror; cf. Ezek. xxi. 17. OnW&H EJ} W2 cf. Isa. xlv. 16. " The shame of my youth" is that which I brought on myself in my youth through the sins I then committed. On this confession generally, cf. the similar one in iii. 21 ff. — Thereafter the Lord replies, ver. 20, with the question, whether Ephraim is so dear a son to Him that, as often as lie has spoken against him, i.e. uttered hard words of condemnation, He still, or again, thinks of him. *fa rr:7-;, « a child of delight," whom one fondles; cf. Isa. v. 7. The clause explanatory of the question, " for as often as," etc., is taken in different ways. n W may signify, " to speak about one," or " to speak against one," or " to pay addresses to one," i.e, to court him: 1 Sam. xxv. 39; Cant. viii. 8. Hitzig applies the last meaning to the expression, and translates, "as often as I have paid my suit to him;" according to this view, the basis of the representation of Jahveh's relation to the people is that of a husband to his wife. But this meaning of the verb does not by any means suit the present context, well established though it is by the passages that have been adduced. Ephraim is here represented as a son, not a virgin to whom Jahveh could pay suit. Hence we must take the expression in the sense of u speaking against" some one. But what Jahveh says against Ephraim is no mere threatening by words, but a reprimand by deeds of judgment. The answer to the question is to be inferred from the context: If the Lord, whenever He is constrained to punish Ephraim, still thinks of him, then Ephraim must be a son dear to Him. But this is not because of his conduct, as if he caused Him joy by obedience and faithful attachment, but in consequence of the unchangeable love of God, who cannot leave His son, however much grief he causes his Father. " Therefore," i.e. because he is a son to whom Jahveh shows the fulness of His paternal love, all His kindly feelings towards him are now excited, and He desires to show compassion on him.

included especially the heart, liver, reins, the noblest organs of the soul. The expression is strongly anthropopathic, and denotes the most heartfelt sympathy. This fellow-feeling manifests itself in the form of pity, and actually as deliverance from misery.

The Lord desires to execute this purpose of His everlasting love. Ver. 21. Israel is required to prepare himself for return, and to go home again into his own cities. " Set thee up way- marks." |**¥, in 2 Kings xxiii. 17 and Ezek. xxxix. 15, " a tombstone," probably a stone pillar, which could also serve as a way-mark. D^jnpR is not from "HO as in ver. 15, but from ICfl, and has the same meaning as m^n Joel iii. 3, Talm.

thy heart," i.e. turn thy mind to the road, the way you have gone (on 'HOT see ii. 20), not, that you may not miss it, but because it leads thee home. u Return to these cities of thine." "These" implies that the summons issues from Palestine. Moreover, the separate clauses of this verse are merely a poetic individualization of the thought that Israel is to think seriously of returning; and, inasmuch as this return to Palestine presupposes return to the Lord, Israel must first turn with the heart to his God. Then, in ver. 22, follows the exhortation not to delay. The moaning of ponnn is educed from Cant, v. 6. where PDTJ signifies to turn one's self round; hence the Ilitlipael means to wander about here and there, uncertain what to do. This exhortation is finally enforced by the statement, M Jahveh creates a new thing on the earth" (cf. Isa. xliii. 19). This novelty is, u a woman will encompass a man." With regard to the meaning of these words, about which there is groat dispute, this much is evident from the context, that they indicate a transformation of things, a new arrangement of the relations of life. This new arrangement of things which Jahveh brings about is mentioned as a motive which should rouse Ephraim (= Israel) to return without delay to the Lord and to his cities. If we keep this in mind, we shall at once set aside as untenable sucli interpretations as that of Luther in his first translation of 1532-38, " those who formerly behaved like women shall be men," which Ewald has revived in his rendering, " a woman changing into a man," or that of Schnurrer, Kosenmuller, Gesenius, Maurer, " the woman shall protect the man," or that of Nagelsbach, " the woman shall turn the man to herself." The above-mentioned general consideration, we repeat, is sufficient to set aside these explanations, quite apart from the fact that none of them can be lexically substantiated; for 331D neither means to " turn one's self, vertere" nor to " protect," nor to " cause to return" (as if

33*0 were used for 3?te>). Dent, xxxii. 10 is adduced to prove the meaning of protection; but the word there means to <r0 about fondling and cherishing. Neither the transmutation of the female into a male, or of a weak woman into a strono- man nor the protection of the man by a woman, nor the notion that the strong succumbs to the weak, forms an effectual motive for the summons to Israel to return; nor can we call any of them a new creative act effected by Jahveh, or a new arrangement of things. But we must utterly reject the meaning of the words given by Castle, le Clerc, and Ilitzig, who apply them to the unnatural circumstance, that a woman makes her suit to a man, even where by the woman is understood the virgin of Israel, and by the man, Jahveh. Luther gave the correct rendering in his editions of 1543 and 1545, "the woman shall encompass the man," — only, " embrace" (Ger. umfangen) might express the sense better than " encompass" (Ger. umgehen). nnpj js nomen sexvs, "femella, a female;" "% a "man," also " proles mascula" not according to the sexual relation (= 13J), but with the idea of strength. Both in the choice of these words and by the omission of the article, the relation is set forth in its widest generality; the attention is thereby steadily directed to its fundamental nature. The woman, the weak and tender being, shall lovingly embrace the man, the strong one. Hen£- stenberg reverses the meaning of the words when he renders them, " the strong one shall again take the weak into his closest intercourse, under his protection, loving care." Many expositors, including Hengstenberg and Hitzig of moderns, have rightly perceived that the general idea has been set forth with special reference to the relation between the woman, Israel, and the man, Jahveh. Starting with this view, which is suggested by the context, the older expositors explained the words of the conception and birth of Christ by a virgin; cf. Corn, a Lapide, Calovii Bill, ill, Cocceius, and Pfeiffer, cluhla vex. p. 758 sqq. Thus, for example, the Berleburger Bibel gives the following explanation: "A woman or virgin — not a married woman — will encompass, i.e. carry and contain in her body, the man w?ho is to be a vanquisher of all and to surpass all in strength." This explanation cannot be set aside by the simple remark, " that here there would be set forth the very feature in the birth of Christ by a virgin which is not peculiar to it as compared with others;" for this u superficial remark" does not in the least touch the real point to be explained. But it may very properly be objected, that 3?iD has not the special meaning of conceiving in a mother's womb. On this ground we can also set down as incorrect the other explanation of the words in the Berleburger Bibel, that the text rather speaks of " the woman who is the Jewish Church, and who, in the spirit of faith, is to bear Christ as the mighty God, Isa. ix. 6, in the likeness of a man, Rev. xii. 1, 2." However, these explanations are nearer the truth than any that have been offered since. The general statement, " a woman shall encompass (the) man," i.e. lovingly embrace him, — this new relation which Jahveh will bring about in place of the old, that the man encompasses the wife, loving, providing for, protecting her, — can only be referred, agreeably to the context, to change of relation between [srael and the Lord. 32iD, " to encompass," is used tropically, not merely of the mode of dealing on the part of the Lord to His people, the faithful, — of the protection, the grace, and the aid which He grants to the pious ones, as in Ps. xxxii. 7, 10, Deuti xxxii. 10, — but also of the dealings of men with divine things. ^0310 nznicx, Ps. xxvi. G, does not mean, u I will go round Thine altar," in a circle or semicircle as it were, but, " I will keep to Thine altar," instead of keeping company with the wicked; or more correctly, u I will surround Thine altar," making it the object of my care, of all my dealings, — I will make mine own the favours shown to the faithful at Thine altar. In the verse now before us, 32iD signifies to encompass with love and care, to surround lovingly and carefully, — the natural and fitting dealing on the part of the stronger to the weak and those who need assistance. And the new thing that God creates consists in this, that the woman, the weaker nature that needs help, will lovingly and solicitously surround the man, the stronger. Herein is expressed a new relation of Israel to the Lord, a reference to a new covenant which the Lord, ver.

31 ff., will conclude with His people, and in which He deals so condescendingly towards them that they can lovingly embrace Him. This is the substance of the Messianic meaning in the words. The conception of the Son of God in the womb of the

Virgin Mary is not expressed in them either directly or indirect ly, oven though we were allowed to take 2^0 in the meaning of " embrace." This new creation of the Lord is intended to be, and can be, for Israel, a powerful motive to their immediate return to their God.

Vers. 23-26. The re-establishment and blessing of Judah.— Ver. 23. "Thus saith Jahveh of hosts, the God of Israel: Once more shall they say this word in the land of Judah and in its cities, when I turn their captivity: < Jahveh bless thee, () habitation of righteousness, O mountain of holiness!' Ver. 2 4. And there shall dwell in it, [in] Judah and all its cities together, husbandmen and [those who] move about with the flock. Ver. 25. For I have satiated the weary soul, and I have filled every languishing soul. Ver. 26. Because of this I awoke and looked, and my sleep was sweet unto me."

The prophecy which treats of Judah alone is condensed, but states much in few words, — not merely the restitutio in statum integrilatis, but also rich blessing thereafter. "May Jahveh bless thee" is a benediction, equivalent to " may you be blessed; " cf. Ps. exxviii. 5, exxxiv. 3. P?* ma does not mean "habitation of salvation " but "habitation of righteousness;" cf. Isa. i. 21, where it is said of Jerusalem that ricrhteousness formerly dwelt in it. This state of matters is again to exist; Jerusalem is again to become a city in which righteousness dwells. "The holy mountain" is Zion, including Moriah, where the Lord had set up His throne. That the designation " the holy mountain" was applied to the whole of Jerusalem cannot be made out from Ps. ii. 6, xlviii. 2 ff., Isa. xi. 9, xxvii. 13, which have been adduced to prove the assertion. The prayer for the blessing implies that Zion will again be the seat of the Divine King of His people. Ver. 24. " There dwell in it (in the land of Judah) Judah and all his towns," i.e. the population of Judah and of all its towns, as " husbandmen and (those who) pasture flocks," i.e. each one pursuing undisturbed his owrn peaceful employment, agriculture and cattlerearing, and (ver. 25) so blessed in these callings that they are kept from every need and want. '"9^1 may either be viewed as the perfect, before which the relative is to be supplied, or an adjectival form imitated from the Aramaic participle, masc. 2X1. — Vcr. 20. Thereupon the prophet awoke from his ecstatic sleep, and said, "My sleep was pleasant" (cf. Prov. iii. 24). Very many expositors, including Rosenmiiller, Umbreit, and Neumann among the modern?, understand the words, " therefore (or, because of this) I awoke," etc., as referring to God, because in what precedes and follows Jahveh speaks, and because God is sometimes, in the Psalms, called on to awake, e.n. Ps. vii. 7, xxxv. 23, xliv. 24, etc. But it has been very properly objected to this, that the words, " my sleep was sweet" (pleasant), are inappropriate as utterances of God, inasmuch as lie does not sleep; nowhere in Scripture is sleep attributed to God, and the summons to awake merely implies the non-interference on the part of God in the affairs of His people. Moreover, 1 to refer the sleeping of God, mentioned in tin- \ I i His dealing towards Israel during the exile, in such a way that His conduct as a powerful judge would be compared to a sweet sleep, — which is inconceivable. little can the verse be supposed to contain words of the

■ pie languishing in exile, as Jerome has taken them. For the people could not possibly compare the time of oppression during the exile to a pleasant sleep. There is thus nothing left for us but to take tin the Targum, Rasclii, Kimchi,

\ enema, Dahler, Hitzig, Hengstenberg, and others have done, as a remark by the prophet regarding his feelings when he received this revelation; and we must accept something like the paraphrase of Tholuck (die Propheten, S. G8j: "Because of Mich glorious promises I awoke to reflect on them, and my static sleep delighted me." This view is not rendered less tenable ly the objection that Jeremiah nowhere says God had revealed Himself to him in a dream, and that, in what precedes, there is not to be found any intimation that what he sets forth appeared to him as a vision. For neither is there any intimation, throughout the whole prophecy, that he received it while in a waking state. The command of God, given xxx. 2 at the first, to write in a book the words which Jahveh spoke to him, implies that the prophecy was not intended, in the first instance, to be publicly read before the people; moreover, it agrees with the assumption that he received the prophecy in a dream. But against the objection that Jeremiah never states, in any other place, in what bodily condition lie was when he received his revelations from God, and that we cannot see why he should make such an intimation here, — we may reply, with Nagelshach, that this prophecy is the only one in the whole book which contains unmixed comfort, and that it is thus easy to explain why he could never forget that moment when, awaking after he had received it, he found he had experienced a sweet sleep, Still less weight is there in the objection of Graf, that one cannot comprehend why this remark stands here, because the description is evidently continued in what follows, while the dream must have ended here, when the prophet awoke. For this is against the assumption that the hand of the Lord immediately touched him again, and put him back into the ecstatic state. One mi^ht rather urge the consideration that the use of the word njE^ " sleep," does not certainly prove that the prophet was in the ecstatic state, from the fact that the LXX. render nsvin, in Gen. ii. 21 and xv. 2, by eWrao-^9. But wherever divine revelations were made in dreams, these of course presuppose sleep; so that the ecstatic state might also be properly called " sleep." Jeremiah adds, "And I looked," to signify that he had been thoroughly awakened, and, in complete self-consciousness, perceived that his sleep had been pleasant.

Vers. 27-30. The renovation of Israel and Judah. — Ver. 27. " Behold, days are coming, saith Jahveh, when I will sow the house of Israel and the house of Judah with seed of men and seed of beasts. Ver. 28. And it shall be that, just as I have watched over them to pluck up and to break down, to pull down and to destroy and to hurt, so shall I watch over them to build and to plant, saith Jahveh. Ver. 29. In those days they shall no more say, ' Fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the teeth of the children become blunt; ' Ver. 30. But each man shall die for his own iniquity: every man who eats the sour grapes, his own teeth shall become blunted."

After announcement has been made, in what preceded, that both portions of the covenant people will be led back into their own land and re-established there, both are now combined, since they are again, at the restoration, to be united under one king, the sprout of David (cf. iii. 15, 18), and to both there is promised great blessing, both temporal and spiritual. The house of Israel and the house of Judah, as separate nations, are represented as a fruitful field, which God will sow with men and cattle, n^3? " cattle," the tame domestic animals, contribute to the prosperity of a nation. That this seed will mightily increase, is evident from the fact that God sows it, and (as is farther stated in ver. 28) will watch over it as it grows. Whereas, hitherto, He has watched for the purpose of destroying and annihilating the people, because of their apostasy, lie will in time to come watch for the purpose of planting and building them up. The prophet has hitherto been engaged in fulfilling, against the faithless people4, the iirst part of the commission given him by the Lord when he was called to his office (i. 10); hereafter, he will be engaged in building up. As certainly as the first has taken place, — and of this the people have had practical experience, — BO certainly shall the other now take place. — Ver. 29. The proverb, which Ezekiel also (xviii. '2 f.) mentions and contends against, cannot mean, "The fathers have begun to eat sour grapes, but not till the teeth of their as have become blunted by them" (Nagelsbach); the change of tense is against this, lor, by the perfect v3S and the imperfect nrnpn the blunting of the children's teeth is set down as a result of the fathers' eating. The proverb means, u Children atone for the misdeeds of their fathers," or " The sins of the fathers are visited on their innocent children." On this point, cf. the explanations given on Ezek. xviii. 2 ff. "Then shall they no more say"' is rightly explained by Ilitzig to mean, "They shall have no more occasion to say." But the meaning of the words is not yet made plain by this; in particular, the question how we must understand ver. 30 is not settled. Graf, referring to xxiii. 7, 8, supplies TON* after EN"^ and thus obtains the meaning, Then will they no more accuse God of unrighteousness, as in that wicked proverb, but they will perceive that every one has to suffer for his own guilt. Hitzig and Na>elsbach have declared against this insertion, — the former with the remark that, in xxiii. 7, 8, because both members of the sentence begin with protestations, the whole is clear, while here it is not so, — the latter resting on the fact that the dropping of the proverb from current use certainly implies a correct knowledge of the righteousness of God, but one which is very elementary and merely negative; while, on the other hand, the whole connection of the passage now before ns shows that it is intended to describe a period when the theocratic life is in a most ilourishing condition. Then expositors take ver. 30 as the utterance of the prophet, and as embodying the notion that the average level of morality shall be so high at this future period, that only some sins will continue to be committed, and these as isolated exceptions to the rule. Taken all in all, [srael will be a holy people, in which the general spirit pervading them will repress the evil in some individuals, that would otherwise manifest itself. But we cannot imagine how these ideas can be supposed to be contained in the words, "Every man shall die for his own sins," etc. Ver. 30 unquestionably contains the opposite of ver. 29. The proverb mentioned in ver. 29 involves the complaint against God, that in punishing sin He deals unjustly. According to this view, ver. 30 must contain the declaration that, in the future, the righteousness of God is to be revealed in the punishment of sins. As we have already remarked on Ezek. xviii. 3 f., the verse in question rather means, that after the re-establishment of Israel, the Lord will make known to His people His grace in so glorious a manner that the favoured ones will fully perceive the righteousness of His judgments. The experience of the unmerited love and compassion of the Lord softens the heart so much, that the favoured one no longer doubts the righteousness of the divine punishment. Such knowledge of true blessedness cannot be called elementary; rather, it implies a deep experience of divine grace and a great advance in the life of faith. Nor does the verse contain a judgment expressed by the prophet in opposition to that of his contemporaries, but it simply declares that the opinion contained in that current proverb shall no longer be accepted then, but the favoured people will recognise in the death of the sinner the punishment due to them for their own sin. Viewed in this manner, these verses prepare the way for the following announcement concerning the nature of the new covenant.

Vers. 31-40. The new covenant. — Ver. 31. Ci Behold, days are coming, saith Jahveh, when I will make with the house of

Israel and with the house of Judah a new covenant; Ver. 32. Not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I laid hold of their hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, which covenant of mine they broke, though I had married them to myself, saith Jahveh; Ver. 33. But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith Jahveh: I will put my law within them, and on their heart will I write it; and I will become to them a God, and they shall be to me a people. Ver. 34. And they shall no more teach every man his neighbour and every man his brother, saying, Know ye Jahveh, for all of them shall know me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, saith Jahveh; for I will pardon their iniquity, and their sins will I remember no more. Ver. 35. Thus with.Jahveh, [who] gives the sun for light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and stars for light by night, who rouses th- sea so that its waves roar, Jahveh of hosts is His name: Ver. 36. If these ordinances move away from before me, saith Jahveh, then also will the seed of Israel cease to be a people before me for owr. Ver. 37. Thus saith.Tali veh: If the heavens above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth below can be searched out, then will I also reject all the seed of Israel because of all that they have done, saith Jahveh. Ver. 38. Behold, days come, saith Jahveh, when the city shall be built for Jahveh, from the tower of Ilananeel unto the gate of the corner, Ver. 39. And the measuring-line shall once more £0 out straight over the hill of Gareb, and turn round towards Goah. Ver. 40. And all the valley of the corpses and of the ashes, and all the fields unto the valley of Kidron, unto the corner of the gate of the horses towards the east, [shall be] holiness to Jahveh; it shall not be plucked up nor pulled down again for ever.''

The re-establishment of Israel reaches its completion in the making of a new covenant, according to which the law of God is written in the hearts of the people; thereby Israel becomes in truth the people of the Lord, and the knowledge of God founded on the experience of the forgiveness of sins is such that there is no further need of any external means like mutual teaching about God (vers. 31-34). This covenant is to endure for ever, like the unchangeable ordinances of nature (vers.

35-37); and in consequence of this, Jerusalem shall be built 18 the holy city of God, which shall never be destroyed again (vers. 38-40).— Ver. 31. n*13 n*]3 does not mean " to make an appointment,'1 but " to conclude a covenant," to establish a relation of mutual duties and obligations. Every covenant which God concludes with men consists, on the side of God, in assurance of His favours and actual bestowal of them; these bind men to the keeping of the commands laid on them. The covenant which the Lord will make with all Israel in the future is called " a new covenant," as compared with that made with the fathers at Sinai, when the people were led out of Egypt; this latter is thus implicitly called the "old covenant." The words, " on the day when I took them by the hand," etc., must not be restricted, on the one side, to the day of the exodus from Egypt, nor, on the other, to the day when the covenant was solemnly made at Sinai; they rather refer to the whole time of the exodus, which did not reach its termination till the entrance into Canaan, though it culminated in the solemn admission of Israel, at Sinai, as the people of Jahveh; see on vii. 22. (On the punctuation of *i??pU, cf. Ewald, § 238, d, Olshaus. Gramm. § 191,/.) "iw'N is not a conjunction, " quod, because," but a relative pronoun, and must be combined with VV*]3TiN, "which my covenant," i.e. which covenant of mine. a They" stands emphatically in contrast with " though I" in the following circumstantial clause, which literally means, " but I have married them to myself," or, " I was their husband." As to w#3, see on iii. 14. Hengstenberg wrongly takes the words as a promise, " but I will marry them to myself;" this view, however, is incompatible with the perfect, and the position of the words as a contrast with " they broke." l The two closely connected expressions indicate why a new covenant was necessary; there is no formal statement, however, of the reason, which is merely given in a subordinate and appended clause. For the proper reason why a new covenant is made is not that the people have

1 In the citation of this passage in Heb. viii. 8 ff., the words are quoted according to the LXX. version, xaya TjfceT^met xvtui>, although this translation is incorrect, because the apostle does not use these words in proving any point. These same words, moreover, have been rendered by the LXX., in iii. 14, tyu kxtcckvohviju vy.uv.

broken the old one, but that, though Jahveh had united Israel to Himself, they have broken the covenant and thereby rendered it necessary to make a new one. God the Lord, in virtue of His unchangeable faithfulness, would not alter the relation He had Himself established in His love, but simply found it anew in a way which obviated the breaking of the covenant by Israel. For it was a defect connected with the covenant made with Israel at Sinai, that it could be broken on their part. This defect is not to exist in the new covenant which God will make in after times. The expression " after those (not these) days" is remarkable; BAH is not the same as ^xn, and yet the days nu-aut can only be the ''coming days;"' accordingly, it is " those days' in ver. 29) that are to be expected. The its origin to the idea contained in the phrase " in the end of the days" (D*?;n nnrwa, cf. xxiii. 20).— Ver. 33. Thecharacter of the new covenant: "I (Jahveh) give (will put) my law within them, and write it upon their heart." D?"^2 is the opposite of D»Ti!&? *n:, which is constantly used of the Sinaitic law, ef. ix. L2, Deut. IV. 8, xi. 32, 1 Kings ix. 6; and the •• writing on the heart"' is opposed to writing on the tables of. Ex. xxxi. 18, ef. xxxii. 15 f.. sxxiv. 8, Deut. iv. 13, ix. 11, \. 1, etc. The difference, therefore, between the old and the new covenants consists in this, that in the old the law was laid before the people that they might accept it and follow it, receiving it into their hearts, a- the copy of what God not merely required of men, but offered and vouchsafed to them for their happiness; while in the new it is put within, implanted into the heart and soul by the Spirit of God, and becomes the animating life-principle, 2 Cor. iii. 3. The law of the Lord thus forms, in the old as well as in the new covenant, the kernel and essence of the relation instituted between the Lord and His people; and the difference between the two consists merely in this, that the will of God as expressed in the law under the old covenant was presented externally to the people, while under the new covenant it is to become an internal principle of life. Now, even in the old covenant, we not only find that Israel is urged to receive the law of the Lord his God into his heart, — to make the law presented to him from without the property of his heart, aa it were,— but even Closes, we also find, promises that God will circumcise the heart of the people, that they may love Clod the Lord with all their heart ami all their soul (Deut. ux. 6). But this circumcision of heart and this love of God with the whole soul, which are repeatedly required in the law (Deut. vi. 5, x. 1-2, 16), are impossibilities, unless the law be received into the heart. It thus appears that the difference between the old and the new covenants must be reduced to this, that what was commanded and applied to the heart in the old is given in the new, and the new is but the completion of the old covenant. This is, indeed, the true relation between them, as is clearly shown by the fact, that the essential element of the new covenant, " I will be their God, and they shall be my people," was set forth as the object of the old; cf. Lev. xxvi. 12 with Ex. xxix. 45. Nevertheless the difference is not merely one of degree, but one of kind. The demands of the law, " Keep the commandments of your God," " Be ye holy as the Lord your God is holy,'1 cannot be fulfilled by sinful man. Even when he strives most earnestly to keep the commands of the law, he cannot satisfy its requirements. The law, with its rigid demands, can only humble the sinner, and make him beseech God to blot out his sin and create in him a clean heart (Ps. li. 11 ff.); it can only awaken him to the perception of sin, but cannot blot it out. It is God who must formve this, and by forgiving it, write Plis will on the heart. The forgiveness of sin, accordingly, is mentioned, ver. 34, at the latter part of the promise, as the basis of the new covenant. But the forgiveness of sins is a work of grace which annuls the demand of the law against men. In the old covenant, the law with its requirements is the impelling force; in the new covenant, the grace shown in the forgiveness of sins is the aiding power by which man attains that common life with God which the law sets before him as the great problem of life. It is in this that the qualitative difference between the old and the new covenants consists. The object which both set before men for attainment is the same, but the means of attaining it are different in each. In the old covenant are found commandment and requirement; in the new7, grace and giving. Certainly, even under the old covenant, God bestowed on the people of Israel grace and the forgiveness of sins, and, by the institution of sacrifice, had opened up a way of access by which men might approach Him and rejoice in His gracious gifts; His Spirit, moreover, produced in the heart of the godly ones the feeling that their sins were forgiven, and that they were favoured of God. But even this institution and this working of the Holy Spirit on and in the heart, was no more than a shadow and prefiguration of what is actually offered and vouchsafed under the new covenant, Heb. x. 1. The sacrifices of the old covenant are but prefigurations of the true atoning-offering of Christ, by which the sins of tlh.' whole world arc atoned for and blotted out.

In ver. 34a arc unfolded the results of God's putting His law in the heart. The knowledge of the Lord will then no longer be communicated by the outward teaching of every man to his fellow, but all, small and great, will be enlightened and taught by the Spirit of God (Isa. liv. 13) to know the Lord; cf. Joel hi. 1 f., Isa. xi. 9. These words do not imply that, under the- new covenant, u the office of the teacher of religion must c (Hitzig); and as little is " disparity in the im- parting of tin- knowledge of God silently excluded" in ver. 33. The meaning -imply is this, that the- knowledge of God will then no longer be dependent on the communication and instruction of man. The knowledge of Jahveh, of which the prophet iks. is not the theoretic knowledge which is imparted and acquired by means of religious instruction; it is rather knowledge of divine grace based upon the inward experience of the heart, which knowledge the Holy Spirit works in the heart by assuring the sinner that he has indeed been adopted as a son of God through the forgiveness of his sins. This knowledge, as being an inward experience of grace, does not exclude religious instruction, but rather tacitly implies that there is intimation given of God's desire to save and of His purpose of grace. The correct understanding of the words results from a ri^ht perception of the contrast involved in them, viz. that under the old covenant the know ledge of the Lord was connected with the mediation of priests and prophets. Just as, at Sinai, the sinful people could not endure that the Lord should address them directly, but retreated, terrified by the awful manifestation of the Lord on the mountain, and said entreatingly to Moses,

Speak thou with us and we will hear, but let not God speak with DS, lest we die" (Ex. xx. 15); so, under the old covenant momv generally, access to the Lord was denied to individuals, and His grace was only obtained by the intervention of human mediator This state of matters has been abolished under the new covenant, inasmuch as the favoured sinner is placed in immediate relation to God by the Holy Spirit. Ileb. iv. L6j Eph. iii. 12.

In order to give good security that the promise of a new covenant would be fulfilled, the Lord, in ver. 35 f., points to the everlasting duration of the arrangements of nature, and declares that, if this order of nature were to cease, then Israel also would cease to be a people before Him; i.e. the continuance of Israel as the people of God shall be like the laws of nature. Thus the eternal duration of the new covenant is implicitly declared. Hengstenberg contests the common view of vers. 35 and 36, according to which the reference is to the firm, unchangeable continuance of God's laws in nature, which everything must obey; and he is of opinion that, in ver. 35, it is merely the omnipotence of God that is spoken of, that this proves He is God and not man, and that there is thus formed a basis for the statement set forth in ver. 35, so full of comfort for the doubting covenant people; that God does not lie, that He can never repent of His covenant and His promises. But the arguments adduced for this, and against the common view, are not decisive. The expression u stirring the sea, so that its waves roar," certainly serves in the original passage, Isa. li. 15, from which Jeremiah has taken it, to bring the divine omnipotence into prominence; but it does not follow from this that here also it is merely the omnipotence of God that is pointed out. Although, in rousing the sea, " no definite rule that we can perceive is observed, no uninterrupted return," yet it is repeated according to the unchangeable ordinance of God, though not every day, like the rising and setting of the heavenly bodies. And in ver. 36, under the expression " these ordinances" are comprehended the rousing of the sea as well as the movements of the moon and stars; further, the departure, i.e. the cessation, of these natural phenomena is mentioned [as impossible], to signify that Israel cannot cease to exist as a people; hence the emphasis laid on the immutability of these ordinances of nature. Considered in itself, the putting of the sun for a light by day, and the appointment of the moon and stars for a light by night, are works of the almighty power of God, just as the sea is roused so that its waves roar; but, that these phenomena never cease, but always recur as long as the present world lasts, is a proof of the immutability of these works of the omnipotence of God, and it is this point alone which here receives consideration. u The ordinances of the moon and of the stars " mean the established arrangements as regards the phases of the moon, and the rising and setting of the different stars. "From being a nation before me" declares not merely the continuance of Israel as a nation, so that they shall not disappear from the earth, just as so many others perish in the coarse of ages, but also their continuance before Jahveh, as His chosen people: cf. xxx. 20. — This positive promise regarding the continuance of Israel is confirmed by a second simile, in i 7, which declares the impossibility of rejection.

The measurement of the heavens and the searching of the fonndatioi of the inmost depths, of the earth, is regarded

:is an impossibility. God will not reject the whole seed of Israel: here b attentively considered. As Hen^stenberg correctly remarks, the hypocrites are deprived of the comfort which they could draw from these promises. Since the posterity of Israel are not all rejected, the rejection of the dead members of the people, Le, unbelievers, is not thereby excluded, but included. That the whole cannot perish "is no bolster for the sin of any single person."' The prophet adds: " because of all that they have done," i.e. because of their sins, their apostasy from God, in order to keep believing ones from despair on account of the greatness of their sins. On this, Calvin makes the appropriate remark: Consulto propheta hie proponit scelera pojndi, ut sciamus superior em fore Dei clementiam, nee conaer iem tot malorum fore ohstaculo, quominus Deus ignoscqt. If we keep before our mind these points in the promise contained in this verse, we shall not, like Graf, find in ver. 37 merely a tame repetition of what has already been said, and be inclined to take the verse as a superfluous marginal gloss.1 1 Hitzig even thinks that, " because the style and the use of langrua£re

^ Vers. 38-40. Then shall Jerusalem be built up as a holy city of God, and be no more destroyed. After D"»* the here, inasmuch as it lias already occurred before, several times, in its full form (vers. 27 and 31); but Jeremiah does not belongs to Him, is consecrated to Him. The extent of the new city is described as being "from the tower of Hananeel to the gate of the corner." The tower of Hananeel, according to

Neh. iii. 1 and Zech iv. 10, was situated on the north-east corner of the city wall: the gate of the corner was at the north-west corner of the city, to the north or north-west of the whole north side. Ver. 39. The measuring-line (nj[J as

■ > does not mean " away towards, or on" (Hitzig); nor is the true reading 1£, " as far as, even to," which is" met with in several codices: the correct rendering is " away over," so that betoken the second Isaiah, and the order of both strophes is reversed in the LXX. (/.<. ver. 37 stands before ver. 35 f.), vers. 35, 36 may have stood in tin- margin at the beginning of the genuine portion in vers. 27-34, and ver. 37, on the other hand, in the margin at ver. 34." But, that the verses, although they present reminiscences of the second Isaiah, do not quite prove that the language is his, has already been made sufficiently evident by Graf, who points out that, in the second Isaiah, rtOH is nowhere used of the roaring of the sea, nor do we meet with rripn and D^pri, niMp V12B*, D^rr^n, nor again -|pn in the Niphal, or px HpiD (but *f"ixn rinsis in Isa. xl. 21); other expressions are not peculiar to the second Isaiah, since they also occur in other writings. — But the transposition of the verses in the LXX., in view of the arbitrary treatment of the text of Jeremiah in that version, cannot be made to prove anything what- are unknown. From the context of the passage only this much is clear, that both of them were situated on the west of the city; for the starting-point of the line spoken of is in the north-west, and the vallev of Ben-hinnom joins in at the end of it, in the south, ver. 40. 3TI means " itching;' for 3?} in Lev. xxi. 20, xxii. 22 means "the itch;" in Arabic also ' the leprosy." From this, many expositors infer that the hill Gareb' was the hill where lepers were obliged to dwell by themselves, outside the city. This supposition is probable; there is no truth, however, in the assumption of Schleussner, Krafft ( Topogr.von Jan*. S. 158), Hitzig, and Hengstenherg, that the hill Bezetha, included within the city bounds by the third wall of kgrippa. is the one meant; for the line described in ver. 39 is not to be sought for on the north side of the city. With Graf we took 'for the hill Gareb on the mount which lies tward from the valley of Ben-hinnom and at the end of the valley of Rephaim, towards the north (Josh. xv. 8, xwn. 16), so that it is likely we must consider it to be identical with ''the to,,,4' the mountain" mentioned in those passages. 1 his mountain is the rocky ridge which hounds the valley of Benhinm,m on tho, 1,-f.tchcs northwards, on the west side

,o near the high road to Jaffa, where it turns off towards the west on the under (t.e. south) side of the Upper Fool (Bxrkei el MamiUa); see on Josh. xv. 8. It is not, as Thenins supposes (Jmualm b, fi re tlu 1 an appendix to his commentary on the Books of Kings), the bare n,ky hill situated on the north and overhanging the Upper Fool; on this view, Goal, could only bo the steep descent from the plateau into the valley ot Kidron, opposite this hill, towards the east. Regarding Goal,, only this much can be said with certainty, that the supposition, made by Vitringa and Hengstenherg, of a connection between the name and Golgotha, is untenable; lexical considerations and facts are all against it. Golgotha was situated in the north-west: Goah must be sought for south-west from Jerusalem. The translation of the Chaldee, "cattle-pond, is a mere inference from TO, " to bellow." But, in spite of the uncertainty experienced in determining the positions of the lull Gareb and Goah, this much is evident from the verse before

08, that the city, which is thus to be built anew, will extend to the west beyond the space occupied by old Jerusalem, and include within it districts or spots which lay outside old {i.e. pre- and post-exile) Jerusalem, and which had been divided off from the city, as unclean places.— In ver. 40, without any change of construction, the southern border is described. u The whole valley of the corpses and of the ashes... shall be holy to Jahveb," i.«. be included within the space occupied by the new city. By " the valley of the corpses and of the ashes'1 expositors generally and rightly understand the valley of Ben-hinnom (Dnja are the carcases of animals that have been killed, and of men who have been slain through some judgment of God and been left unburied). Jeremiah applies this name to the valley, because, in consequence of the pollution by Josiah of the place where the abominations had been offered to Moloch (2 Kings xxiii. 10), it had become a sort of slaughtering-place or tan-yard for the city. According to Lev. vi. 3, \&\ means the ashes of the burnt-offerings consumed on the altar. According to Lev. iv. 12 and vi. 4, these were to be carried from the ash-heap near the altar, out of the city, to a clean place; but they might also be considered as the gross deposit of the sacrifices, and thus as unclean. Hence also it came to pass that all the sweepings of the temple were probably brought to this place where the ashes were, which thus became still more unclean. Instead of rrtontWIj the Qeri requires ni&Tf C, and, in fact, the former word may not be very different from pi"!P rriBnt^ 2 Kings xxiii. 4, whither Josiah caused all the instruments used in idolatrous worship to be brought and burned. But it is improbable that nis"]^ is a mere error in transcription for r.^Tj'. The former word is found nowhere else; not even does the verb B"}^ occur. The latter noun, which is quite well known, could not readily be written by mistake for the former; and even if such an error had been committed, it would not have gained admission into all the MSS., so that even the LXX. should have that reading, and give the word as 'Aaap- 7]fio)0, in Greek characters. We must, then, consider nis"^