*Jj, or ***, "to cut off, cut to pieces," in the sense of "ravines, hollows" (*-i), or loca abscissa, places cut off or shut out from the holy city. " Unto the brook of Kidron," into which the valley of Ben-hinnom opens towards the east, u unto the corner of the horse-gate towards the east." The horse-irate stood on the site of the modern a Dunir-irate" (Bab el Moghdriebh), in the wall which ran along from the south-east end of Zion to the western border of Ophel (see on Neh. iii. 28), so that, in this verse before us, it is the south and south-eastern boundaries of the city that are given; and only the length of the eastern side, which enclosed the temple area, on to the north-eastern corner, has been left without mention, because the valley of the Kidron here formed a strong boundary.
The extent of the new city, as here given, does not much surpass that of old Jerusalem. Only in the west and south are tracts to be included within the city, and such tracts, too, as had formerly been excluded from the old city, as unclean places. Jeremiah accordingly announces, not merely that there will be a considerable increase in the size of Jerusalem, but that the whole city shall be holy to the Lord, the unclean places in its vicinity shall disappear, and be transformed into hallowed places of the new city. As being sacred to the Lord, the city shall no more be destroyed.
From this description of Jerusalem which is to be built anew, so that the whole city, including the unclean places now outside of it, shall be holy, or a sanctuary of the Lord, it is very evident that this prophecy does not refer to the rebuilding of Jerusalem after the exile, but, under the figure of Jerusalem, as the centre of the kingdom of God under the Old Testament, announces the erection of a more spiritual kingdom of God in the Messianic age. The earthly Jerusalem was a holy city only in so far as the sanctuary of the Lord, the temple, had been built in it. Jeremiah makes no mention of the rebuilding of the temple, although he had prophesied the destruction, not only of the city, but also of the temple. But he represents the new city as being, in its whole extent, the sanctuary of the Lord, which the temple only had been, in ancient Jerusalem. Cf., as a substantial parallel, Zecb. xiv. 10, 11. —The erection of Jerusalem into a city, within whose walls there shall be nothing unholy, implies the vanquishment of sin, from which all impurity proceeds; it is also the ripe fruit of the forgiveness of sins, in which the new covenant, which the Lord will make with His people in the days to come, consists and culminates. This prophecy, then, reaches on to the time when the kingdom of God shall have been perfected: it contains, under an old Testament dress, the outlines of the image of the heavenly Jerusalem, which the seer perceives at Patmos in its full glory. This image of the new Jerusalem thus forms a very suitable conclusion to this prophecy regarding the restoration of Israel, which, although it begins with the deliverance of the covenant people from their exile, is yet thoroughly Messianic. Though clothed in an Old Testament dress, it does not implicitly declare that Israel shall be brought back to their native land during the period extending from the time of Cyrus to that of Christ; but, taking this interval as its stand-point, it combines in one view both the deliverance from the exile and the redemption by the Messiah, and not merely announces the formation of the new covenant in its beginnings, when the Christian Church was founded, but at the same time points to the completion of the kingdom of God under the new covenant, in order to show the whole extent of the salvation which the Lord will prepare for His people who return to Him. If these last verses have not made the impression on Graf's mind, that they could well have formed the original conclusion to the prophecy which precedes, the reason lies simply in the theological inability of their expositor to get to the bottom of the sacred writings.
Chap, xxxii. The Purchase of a Field as a Symbol of the Restoration of Judah after the Exile,
This chapter, after an introduction (vers. 1-5) which accurately sets forth the time and circumstances of the following event, contains, first of all (vers. 6-15), the account of the purchase of a hereditary field at Anathoth, which Jeremiah, at the divine command, executes in full legal form, together with a statement of the meaning of this purchase; then (vers.
16-25) a prayer of the prophet for an explanation as to how the purchase of the field could be reconciled with the delivering up of the people and the city of Jerusalem to the Chaldeans; together with (vers. 26-35) the Lord's reply, that He shall certainly give up Jerusalem to the Chaldeans, because Israel and Judah, by their sins and their idolatries, have roused His wrath; but (vers. 36-41) that He shall also gather again His people out of all the hinds whither they have been scattered, and make an everlasting covenant with them, so that they shall dwell safely and happily in the laud in true fear of God.
Vers. 1-5. The time and the circumstances of the following message from God. — The message came to Jeremiah in the tenth year <>f Zedekiah, i.e. in the eighteenth year of Nebuchadrezzar (cf. xxv. 1 ami lii. L2), when the army of the king of Babylon was besieging Jerusalem, and Jeremiah was kept in confinement in the fore-court of the royal palace. These historical data a: rted (vers. 2-5) in the form of circum- anal clauses: 'W 7*0 TNl, k' for at that time the army of the king of Babylon was besieging Jerusalem." The siege had:un in the ninth year of Zedekiah (xxxix. 1, lii. 4), and was afterwards raised for a short time, in consequence of the approach cf an auxiliary corps of Egyptians; but, as soon as these had been defeated, it was resumed (xxxvii. 5, 11). Jeremiah was then kept confined in the court of the prison of the royal palace (cf. Neh. iii. 25), "where Zedekiah, king of Judah, had imprisoned him, saying: Why dost thou prophesy, ' Thus saith the Lord, Behold, I will give this city into the hand of the king of Babylon, so that he shall take it; Ver. 4. And Zedekiah, the king of Judah, shall not escape out of the hand of the Chaldeans, but shall assuredly be delivered into the hand of the king of Babylon, and his mouth shall speak with his mouth, and his eyes shall behold his eyes; Ver. 5. And he shall lead Zedekiah to Babylon, and there shall he be until I visit him, saith the Lord. Though ye fight with the Chaldeans, ye shall not succeed? ' " — We have already found an utterance of like import in chap, xxi., but that is not here referred to; for it was fulfilled at the bemnninsr of the sie^e of Jerusalem, and did not bring on Jeremiah the consequences mentioned here. From chap, xwvii. we learn that Jeremiah, during the siege of Jerusalem, on till the time when it was raised through the ap] of the Egyptian army, had not been imprisoned, but ly in and out among the people (xxxvii. 4 ff.). Not tlli:"'A of the siege, when he wanted to go out of the city into the land of Ben jamin, was he seized and thrown into a dungeon, on the pretence that he intended to r to the Chaldeans. There he remained many days, till King Ze lekiah ordered him to be brought, and questioned him privately as to the is the conflict; when Jeremiah replied,
" Thou shalt be delivered into the hand of the king of Babylon." On this occasion Jeremiah complained to the king of his imprisonment, and requested that he might not be sent back into the dun-eon, where he must soon perish; the king then ordered him (xxxvii. 11-24) to betaken into the court of the prisonhouse <—_•- nvn, xxxvii. 21), where he remained in confinement till the city was taken (xxxviii. 13, 28, xxxix. 14). The statement in our verses as to the cause of this imprisonment does not contradict, but agrees with the notice in chap, xxxvii., as soon as we perceive that this account contains merely a brief passing notice of the matter. The same holds true of the utterance of the prophet in vers. 3-5. Jeremiah, even at the beginning of the siege (xxi. off.), had sent a message of similar import to the king, and repeated the same afterwards: xxxiv. 3-5, xxxvii. 17, xxxviii. 17-23. The words of our verses are taken from these repeated utterances; ver. 4 agrees almost verbatim with xxxiv. 3; and the words, " there shall he remain inx HpaTgj till I regard him with favour," are based upon the clearer utterance as to the end of Zedekiah, xxxiv. 4, 5. — The circumstances under which Jeremiah received the following commission from the Lord are thus exactly stated, in order to show how little prospect the present of the kingdom of Judah offered for the future, which was portrayed by the purchase of the field. Not only must the kingdom of Judah inevitably succumb to the power of the' Chaldeans, and its population go into exile, but even Jeremiah is imprisoned, in so hopeless a condition, that he is no longer sure of his life for a single day. Vers. 6-15. The purchase of the field.— In ver. 6, the introduction, which has been interrupted by long parentheses, is resumed with the words, "And Jeremiah said," etc. The word of the Lord follows, ver. 7. The Lord said to him: u Behold, Hanameel, the son of Shallum, thine uncle, cometh to thee, saying, 6 Buy thee my field at Anathoth, for thou hast the redemption-right to purchase it.' ' According to a mode of construction common elsewhere, T?^ might be taken as in apposition to /WMH: " Hanameel, son of Shallum, thine uncle." But vers. 8, 9, in which Jeremiah calls Hanameel ^TH^ son of my uncle, show that T?^ is in apposition to u$&: u son of Shallum, [who is] thine uncle." The right of redemption consisted in this, that if any one was forced through circumstances to sell his landed property, the nearest blood-relation had the right, or rather was obliged, to preserve the possession for the family, either through pre-emption, or redemption from the Btranger who had bought it (Lev. \xv. 25). For the land which God had given to the tribes and families of Israel for a hereditary po;i could not be sold, so as to pass into the hands of strangers; and for this reason, in the year of jubilee, what had been sold since the previous jubilee reverted, without payment of any kind, to the original possessor or his heirs. (Cf. 1 *, and Keif's Bibl ArckdoL ii. § 141, j). 208 ff.) — A AY hat had been announced to the prophet by God took place. Hanameel came to him, and offered him his field for sale. From this Jeremiah perceived that the proposed sale was the word of the Lord, i.e. that the matter was appointed by the Lord. Ver. 9. Jeremiah accordingly bought the field, and weighed out to Hanameel " seven shekels and ten the silver" (r|2":n is definite, as being the amount of money a-ked as price of purchase). But the form of expression is remarkable: " seven shekels and ten" instead of u seventeen " (*|D3n ^r rnfegl '"TOU'). The Chaldee consequently has " seven manehs and ten shekels of silver;" and J. D. Michaelis supposes that the seven shekels which are first named, and are separated from the ten, were shekels of gold: u seven shekels of gold, and seven shekels of silver." But both assumptions are gratuitous, and perhaps only inferences, not merely from the unusual separation of the numerals, but likewise from the fact that seventeen silver shekels (less than two pounds sterling) was too small a price for an arable field. The supposition of Hitzig has more in its favour, that the mode of expression " seven shekels and ten (shekels) of silver" was a law form. Some have sought to explain the smallness of the price on the ground that the seller was compelled to part with his property through poverty, and that the land had become depreciated in consequence of the war. Both may be true; but, as Nagelsbach has already remarked, neither explains the smallness of the price. For instances have very properly been adduced from Roman history (Livy, xxvi. 11, and Florus, ii. 6) which show that occupation of a country by an enemy did not lessen the value of ground-property. It is rather to be taken into consideration, that in the first place we do not know the real value of arable land among the Hebrews; and secondly, the sale of portions of land was, correctly speaking, only the sale of the harvests up till the year of jubilee, for then the property returned to the former possessor or his heirs. In the case of a sale, then, the nearer the jubilee-year, the smaller must be the price of purchase in the alienation of the land. — Ver. 10 ff. The purchase was concluded in full legal form. " I wrote it (the necessary terms) in the letter (the usual letter of purchase), and sealed it, and took witnesses, and weighed out the money on the balance" (it was then and still is the custom in the East to weigh money). Erin means here, not to append a seal instead of subscribing the name, or for attestation (cf. 1 Kings xxi. 8, Neh. x. 2), but to seal up, make sure by sealing (Isa. xxix. 11, etc.). For, from vers. 11, 12, we perceive that two copies of the bill of purchase were prepared, one sealed up, and the other open; so that, in case the open one were lost, or were accidentally or designedly injured or defaced, a perfect original might still exist in the sealed-up copy. Then " Jeremiah took the bill of purchase, the sealed one," — the specification and the conditions, — " and the open one." The words njysn D^nrn are in apposition with 'W "iDCrrtN. The Vulgate renders stipulationes et rata; Jerome, stipulatione rata, which he explains by stipulationibus et sponsionibus corroborata. nJVP> usually " a command, order," is probably employed here in the general sense of " specification," namely, the object and the price of purchase; D^n, " statutes," the conditions and stipulations of sale. The apposition has the meaning, " containing the agree- merit and the conditions." Both copies of this bill, the prophet, — before the eyes of Hanameel, his cousin (*ft, either in the general sense of a near relation, since the relationship has been stated exactly enough already, or "|3 has been inadvertently omitted), and before the eyes of, i.e. in the presence of " the witnesses, who wrote in the letter of purchase," i.e. had subscribed it as witnesses in attestation of the matter, and in the eyes of all the Jews w ho were sitting in the court of the prison, and in whose presence the transaction had been concluded, — delivered up to his attendant Baruch, son of Nerijah, the son of Mahsejah, with the words, ver. 14: " Thus saith Jahveh of hosts, the God of Israel: Take these letters, this sealed-up letter of purchase and this open letter, and put them into an earthen vessel, that they may remain a long time [there]. Ver. 15. For thus saith Jahveh of hosts, the God of Israel: Houses, and fields, and vineyards shall still be bought in this land." — The second utterance of the Lord (ver. 15) declares the reason why the Utters were to be preserved in an earthen vessel, in order to protect them from damn, decay, and destruction, namely, because cue could make ase <>f them afterwards, when sale of property would still be taking place. There is also implied the intimation, that the present desolation of the land and the transportation of its inhabitants will only last during their time; and then the population of Judah will return, and enter again on the possession of their land. The purchase of the field on the part of Jeremiah had this meaning; and for the sake of this meaning it was announced to him by God, and completed before witnesses, in the presence of the Jews who happened to be in the court of the prison.
V rs, 16 25. The prcn/er of Jeremiah. —Although Jeremiah has declared, in the words of the Lord, ver. 14 f., the meaning of the purchase of the field to the witnesses who were present at the transaction, yet the intimation that houses, fields, and vineyards would once more be bought, seemed so improbable, in view of the impending capture and destruction of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans, that he betakes himself to the Lord in prayer, asking for further disclosures regarding the future of the people and the land, less for his own sake than for that of the people, who could with difficulty rise to such confidence of faith. The prayer runs thus, ver. 17: "Ah, Lord Jaliveh! behold, Thou hast made the heaven and the earth by Thy great power and Thine outstretched arm; to Thee nothing is impossible. Ver. 18. Thou showest mercy unto thousands, and repayest the iniquity of fathers into the bosom of their children after them, Thou great and mighty God, whose name is Jahveh of hosts. Ver. 19. Great in counsel and mighty in deed, whose eyes are open to all the ways of the children of men, to give unto every one according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his wbrks: Ver. '20. Thou who didst signs and wonders in the land of Ecrypt until this day, both id Israel and among [other] men, and madest for Thyself a name, as it is this day; Ver. 21. And didst lead Thy people Israel out of the land of Egypt with signs and wonders, and with strong hand and outstretched arm, and with great terror, Ver. 22. And didst give them this land, which Thou hast sworn to their fathers to give them, a land flowinowith milk and honey; Ver. 23. And they came and took possession of it, but they hearkened not to Thy voice and walked not in Thy law: all that Thou commandedst them to do they did not, therefore didst Thou cause all this evil to come against them. Ver. 24. Behold, the besiegers' mounds are come to the city, to take it, and the city will be given into the hands of the Chaldeans, who fight against it, because of the swTord, hunger, and pestilence; and what Thou didst speak is come to pass, and, behold, Thou seest it. Ver. 25. Yet Thou hast said to me, O Lord Jahveh, l Buy thee the field for money, and take witnesses,' while the city is being delivered into the hands of the Chaldeans."
This prayer contains a laudation of the omnipotence of the Lord and the justice of His dealing among all men (vers. 17-19), and especially in the guidance of the people Israel (vers. 20-23), with the view of connecting with it the question, how the divine command to buy the field is to be reconciled with the decreed deliverance of the city into the power of the Chaldeans (vers. 24, 25). Ver. 17. God prochiims His omnipotence in the creation of the heaven and the earth, cf. xxvii. 5. From this it is plain that nothing is too wonderful for God, i.e. is impossible for Him, Gen. xviii. 14. As Creator and Euler of. the wrorld, God exercises grace and justice. The words of ver. 18 are a reminiscence and free imitation of the passages Ex. xx. 5 ff. and xxxiv. 7, where the Lord so depicts His dealings in the guidance of men. To " recompense iniquity into the bosom" (see Isa. Ixv. 6, cf. Ps. lxxix. 12), i.e. to pour into the bosom of the garment the reward for iniquity, so that it may be carried away and borne; cf. Ruth iii. 15, Prov. xvii. 23. u The great and mighty God," as in Deut. x. 17. On " Jaliveh of hosts is His name," cf. x. 1G, xxxi. 35. toP is to be explained thus: " O Thou great God, whose name is Jahveh of hosts." — Ver. 10. God shows His greatness and might in the wisdom with which lie regards the doings of men, and in the power with which lie executes His decrees, so as to recomj to every one according to his deeds. On 19a cf.
Isa. xxviii. 29, Ps. lxvi. 5. u To give to every one," etc., is repeated, word for word, from xvii. 10. — Vers. 20-22. The Lord has farther Bhown this omnipotence and righteousness in His guidance of Israel, in His leading them out of Egypt with wonden and signs; cf. Deut. vi. 22, xxxiv. 11. " Until this day" cannot mean that the wonders continue in Egypt until this day, — still lc<s, that their glorious remembrance continues till this day (Calvin, Rnseninuller, etc.). Just as little can we connect the words with what follows, u until this day, in Egypt and among men," as Jerome supposed; although the idea et in Israel et in eunctis mortalibua quoHdie tua signa complentur is in itself quite right. Logically considered, " until this day" belongs to the verb* 'tn riC'J1^ and the construction is pregnant, as in xi. 7: u Thou hast done wonders in Egypt, and hast still been doing than until this day in Israel and among other men." u Men," in contrast to M Israel," are mankind outside of Israel, — other men, the heathen; on the expression, cf. Judg. xviii. 7, Isa. xliii. 4, Ps. Ixxiii. 5. u As at this day:" cf. xi. 5, xxv. 18. Through signs and wonders the Lord wrought, leading Israel out of Egypt, and into the land of Canaan, which had been promised to their fathers. Ver. 21 is almost exactly the same as Deut. xxvi. 8, cf. iv. 34. 7H3 K"no refers to the terror spread among the neighbouring nations, Ex. xv. 14 ff., by the wonders, especially the slaying of the first-born among the Egyptians, Ex. xii. 30 f., and the miracle at the Red Sea. On " a land flowing with milk and honey," cf. Ex. iii. 8. — Ver. 23.
These wonders of grace which the Lord wrought for His people, Israel requited with base unthankfulness. When they had got into possession of the land, they did not listen to the voice of their God, and did the reverse of what He had commanded. (The Kethib WTfta might be read as a plural. But since fnin in the plural is always written elsewhere rnin (cf. Gen. xxvi. 5, Ex. xvi. 28, xviii. 20, Lev. xxvi. 46, etc.), and the omission of the ' in plural suffixes is unusual (cf. xxxviii. 22), the word rather seems to have been incorrectly written for arnfria (cf. xxvi. 4, xliv. 10, 23), i.e. the 1 seems to have been misplaced. Therefore the Lord brought on them this great calamity, the Chaldean invasion (N}i?n for nipn); cf. xiii. 22, Deut. xxxi. 29. With this thought, the prophet makes transition to the questions addressed to the Lord, into which the prayer glides. In ver. 24, the great calamity is more fully described. The ramparts of the besieging enemy have come to the city (sis with ace), to take it, and the city is given (n???> prophetic perfect) into the hands of the Chaldeans. a Because of the sword;" i.e. the sword, famine, and pestilence (cf. xiv. 16, xxv. 16, etc.) bring them into the power of the enemy. " What Thou spakest," i.e. didst threaten through the prophets, " is come to pass; and, behold, Thou seest it (viz. what has happened), and yet (J^nM adversative) Thou sayest to me, ' Buy the field,' " etc. The last clause, 'J Tprn, is a " circumstantial" one, and is not a part of God's address, but is added by Jeremiah in order to give greater prominence to the contrast between the actual state of matters and the divine command regarding the purchase. The prayer concludes with this, which is for men an inexplicable riddle, not (as Nagelsbach thinks) for the purpose of leaving to the reader the solution of the problem, after all aids have been offered him, — for Jeremiah would not need to direct his question to God for that purpose, — but in order to ask from God an explanation regarding the future. This explanation immediately follows in the word of the Lord, which, from ver. 26 onwards, is addressed to the prophet.
Vers. 26-44. Th$ answer of the Lord. — Behold, I am Jahveh, the God of all flesh; is there anything impossible to me? Ver. 28. Therefore, thus saith Jahveh: Behold, I give this city into the hand of the Chaldeans, and into the hand of Nebuchadrezzar, the king of Babylon, that he may take it. Ver. 29. The Chaldeans that fight against this city shall come, and shall set fire to this city, and burn it and the houses on whose roofs you have burned incense to Baal and poured out libations to other gods, to provoke me. Ver. 30. For the children of Israel and the children of Judah have done only what is evil in mine eyes from their youth; for the children of Israel have only provoked me with the work of their hands, saith Jahveh. Ver. 31. For this city has been to me [a burden] upon mine anger and upon my wrath from the day that it was built till this day, that I might remove it from before my face; Ver. 32. if all the wickedness of the children of Israel and the children of Judah, which they have done, to provoke me, — they, their kings, their princes, their priests, and their proph the men of Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem. Ver. 33. They turned to me the back and not the face; and though they were constantly being taught, they would not hear so as to receive instruction. Ver. 31. And they placed their abominations in the house which is called by my name, in order to defile it; Ver. 35. And built high places to Baal in the valley of Ben-hinnom, to devote their sons and their daughters to Moloch, — which I did not command them, nor did it come into my mind that they would do such abomination, — that they might lead Judah to sin. Ver. 3G. And now, therefore, thus saith Jahveh, the God of Israel, concerning this city, of which ye say, ' It shall be delivered into the hand of the king of Babylon, through the sword, famine, and pestilence:' Ver. 37. Behold, I shall gather them out of all lands whither I have driven them in my wrath, and in mine anger, and in great rage, and shall bring them back to this place, and make them dwell safely. Ver. 38. And they shall be my people, and I will be their God. Ver. 39. And I will give them one heart and one way, to fear me always, for good to them and to their children after them. Ver. 40. And I will make with them an everlasting covenant, that I shall not turn aside from doing them good; and I will put my fear in their heart, that they may not depart from me. Ver. 41. And I shall rejoice over them, to do them good, and shall plant them in this land, in truth, with my whole heart and my whole soul. Ver. 42. For thus saith Jahveh: < Just as I have brought all this great evil on this people, so shall I bring on them all the good of which I speak regarding them.' Ver. 43^ And fields shall ight in this land, of which ye say, It is a desolation, without man or beast, and it is given into the hand laldeans. Ver. 44. They shall buy fields for money, and write it in the letter, and seal it up, and take witnesses, in the land of Benjamin, and in the places round Jerusalem, and in the cities of Judah, and in the cities of the hill-country, and in the cities of the plain, and in the cities of the south; for I shall turn again their captivity, saith Jahveh."
The Lord replies to the three points touched on in the prayer of the prophet. First, in ver. 27, He emphatically confirms the acknowledgment that to Him, as Creator of heaven and earth, nothing is impossible (ver. 17), and at the same time points out Himself as the God of all flesh, i.e. the God on whom depend the life and death of all men. This description of God is copied from Num. xvi. 22, xxvii. 16, where Jahveh is called " the God of the spirits of all flesh." " All flesh" is the name given to humanity, as being frail and perishing.— Then God reaffirms that Jerusalem will be given into the hand of Nebuchadrezzar, and be burned by the Chaldeans (ver. 28 ff.), because Israel and Judah have always roused His wrath by their idolatry and rebellion against His commands (vers. 30-35). The substance of these verses has been often given before. On ^TOrn cf. xxi. 10, xxxvii. 8; on 'W n»j? IPS cf. xix. 13 with vii. 9, 18. The mention of the children of Israel in connection with the children of Judah is not to be understood as if the destruction of Jerusalem was partly owing to the former; but it is here made, to signify that Judah can expect no better fate than the Israelites, whose kingdom has been destroyed long before, and who have for a long time now been driven into exile. SIK VTt BW, "they were only doing," i.e. doing nothing else than what is displeasing to the Lord. In ver. 306 " the children of Israel" is a designation of the whole covenant people. The whole sentence has reference to Deut. xxxi. 29. "The work of their hands" is not the idols, but signifies the whole conduct and actions of the people. Ver. 31. The difficult construction *? iTTWJ... *B&rbj> is most easily explained from the employment of?V rpn with reference to the superincumbency of a duty or burden lying on one. u This city became to me a burden on my wrath," an object which lay upon my wrath, called it forth. No other explanation can be vindicated. The passages lii. 3 and 2 Kings xxiv. 3, 20, are of a different character, and the meaning juxta, secundum for?V, after vi. 14 (Hitzig), is quite unsuitable. The words, u from the day when it was built," are not to be referred to the earliest founding of Jerusalem, but to that time when the Israelites first built it; and even in reference to this, they are not to be pressed, but to be viewed as a rhetorically strong expression for, lt from its earliest times." Even so early as David's time, opposition against Jahveh showed itself in the conspiracy of Absalom; and towards the end of Solomon's reign, idolatry had been introduced into Jerusalem, 1 Kings xi. 5 ff. After the words "to remove it from before my face," there follows once more, in ver. 32, the reason of the rejection; cf. vii. 12, xi. 17, and for (numeration of the several classes of the population, ii. 26, xvii. 25. The sins are once more specified, vers. 33-35; in ver. 33, as a stiff-necked departure from God, and in ver. 34 f. the mention of the greatest abomination of idolatry, the setting up of idols in the temple, and of the worship of Moloch. With 33a cf. ii. 27. The inf. abs. *fth\ stands with special emphasis instead of the finite tense: though they were taught from early morn, yet they were inattentive still. On this point cf. ii. 13, 25, xxv. 3, 4. On 1WD nnp? cf. xvii. 23, vii. 28. Vers. 34, 35 are almost identical with vii. 30, 31. W ™fyp. does not belong to the relative clause 'W t6 1l;S (Niigelsbach), but is parallel to 'W Vlffh, continuing the main clause: u that they should commit these abominations, and thereby cause Judah to sin," i.e. bring them into sin and guilt. WW with N dropped; see xix. 15. — After setting forth the sin for which Judah had drawn on herself the judgment through the Chaldeans, the Lord proclaims, ver. 36 fF., the deliverance of the people from exile, and their restoration; thus He answers the question which had been put to Him, ver. 25. "IW, "but now," marks what follows as the antithesis to what precedes. "Therefore, thus saith Jahveh," in ver. 36, corresponds to the same words in ver. 28. Because nothing is impossible to the Lord, He shall, as God of Israel, gather again those who have been scattered through every land, and bring them back into their own country. "To this city,"— namely, of which ye speak. The suffix of D^B refers to TJjWl, whose inhabitants are meant. Jerusalem, as the capital, represents the whole kingdom. "The dispersed" are thus, in general, the inhabitants of Judah. Hence, too, from the nature of the ea^e, "this place" is the kingdom of Judah. On this point cf. Kzek. xxxvi. 11, 33, Hos. xi. 11.— Vers. 38, 39 are to be understood like xxxi. 33. They must in very deed become the people of the Lord, for God gives them one heart and one way [of life], to fear Him always, i.e. through His Spirit He renews and sanctities them (xxxi. 33, xxiv. 7; Ezek. xi. 19). " One heart and one way," that they may all with one mind and in one way fear me, no longer wander through many wicked ways (xxvi. 3; Isa. liii. 6). nxT is an infinitive, as often in Deut., e.g. iv. 10, from which the whole sentence has been derived, and vi. 24, to which the expression Dn? 3iD? points. The everlasting covenant which the Lord wishes to conclude with them, i.e. the covenant-relationship which He desires to grant them, is, in fact, the new covenant, xxxi. 33 ff. Here, however, only the eternal duration of it is made prominent, in order to comfort the pious in the midst of their present sufferings. Consequently, only the idea of the Djiy is mainly set forth: " that I shall not turn away from them, to do them good, — no more withdraw from them my gracious benefits; " but the uninterrupted bestowal of these implies also faithfulness to the Lord on the part of the people. The Lord desires to establish His redeemed people in this condition by putting His fear in their heart, namely, through His Spirit; see xxxi. 33, 34. VlW?!, "And I shall rejoice over them, by doing them good," as was formerly the case (Deut. xxviii. 63), and is again to be, in time to come. flEX3, in truth, properly, "in faithfulness." This expression is strengthened by the addition, " with my whole heart and my whole soul." — So much for the promise of restoration and renewal of the covenant people. This promise is confirmed, vers. 42-44, by the assurance that the accomplishment of deliverance shall follow as certainly as the decree of the calamity has done; the change is similar to that in xxxi. 38. Finally, vers. 43, 44, there is the application made of this to the purchase of the field which the prophet had been commanded to fulfil; and the signification of this purchase is thus far determined, that after the restoration of Judah to their own land, fields shall once more be bought in full le^al form: with this, the discourse returns to its starting-point, and finishes. The article is used generically in *tf&n; hence, on the repetition of the thought, ver. 44, the plural TftW is employed instead. The enumeration of the several regions of the kingdom, as in xvii. 20, is a rhetorical individualization for strengthening the thought. The land of Benjamin is here made prominent in relation to the field purchased by Jeremiah at Anathoth in the land of Benjamin. The final sentence 'til 2'*J\S *3 also serves for further proof. The lliphil in this expression does not mean the same as the usual — N. •• I turn the captivity," i-e. I change the adversity into prosperity. 3H7H exi litutio in statum incolumi- tatis sen integritaiis more plainly than 3VJ', — not merely the change of misfortune or misery; but it properly means, to lead back i the captivity, to remove the condition of adversity by restoration of previous prosperity. The expression analogous to DOip or nfcnn rua, to build or raise ruins, Isa. xliv. 20, lviii. 12, lxi. 4, and ^•,;,:,J• Dtrip, to raise up desolate places, Isa. lxi. 4, which does not mean to restore ruins or desolate places, but to build them up into inhabitable places (cf. Isa. lxi. 4)j to remove ruins or desolations by the building and restoration of cities.
Chap, xxxiii. Renewal Promise of the Restoration and Glorious Condition of the People of God.
Ver. 1. While Jeremiah was still in confinement in the court of the prison belonging to the palace (see xxxii. 2), the word of the Lord came to him the second time. This word of God is attached 1 to the promise of chap, xxxii. It followed, too, not long, perhaps, after the other, which it further serves to confirm. — After the command to call on Him, that lie might make known to him great and hidden things (vers. 2, 3), the Lord announces that, although Jerusalem shall be destroyed by the Chaldeans, He shall yet restore it, bring back the captives of Judah and Israel, purify the city from its iniquities, and make it the glory and praise of all the people of the earth (vers.
1 9), so that in it and in the whole land joy will again prevail (vers. 10 13). Then the Lord promises the restoration of the kingdom through the righteous sprout of David,— of the priesthood, too, and sacrificial worship (vers. 14-18); He promises also tl. rlasting duration of these two ordinances of grace
(vers. 1(J 22), because His covenant with the seed of Jacob and David shall be as enduring as the natural ordinance of day and night, and the laws of heaven and earth (vers. 23-26).— The promises thus fall into two parts. First, there is proclaimed the restoration of the people and kingdom to a new and glorious state of prosperity (vers. 4-13); then the re-establishment of the monarchy and the priesthood to a new and permanent condition (vers. 14-26). In the first part, the promise given in chap, xxxii. 36-44 is further carried out; in the second, the future form of the kingdom is more plainly depicted.
Vers. 2, 3. Introduction.— Ver. 2. "Thus saith Jahveh who makes it, Jahveh who forms it in order to establish it, Jahveh is His name: Ver. 3. Call on me and I will answer thee, and tell thee great and hidden tilings which thou knowest not." The reference of the suffixes in tiWV, nrris, and ^J^n is evident from the contents of the propositions: the Lord does what He says, and forms what He wants to make, in order to accomplish it, i.e. He completes what He has spoken and determined on. ">y, to frame, namely, in the mind, as if to think out, just as in xviii. 11: the expression is parallel with »!3tfnD 3CTI; in this sense also we find Isa. xlvi. 11. prt? to establish, realize what has been determined on, prepare, is also found in Isa. ix. 6, xl. 20, but more frequently in Jeremiah (x. 12, li. 12, 15), and pretty often in the Old Testament generally. On the phrase u Jahveh is His name," cf. xxxi. 35. The idea contained in ver. 2 reminds us of similar expressions of Isaiah, as in xxii. 11, xxxvii. 26, xlvi. 11, etc.; but this similarity offers no foundation for the doubts of Movers and Hitzig regarding the genuineness of this verse. The same holds as regards ver. 3. The first proposition occurs frequently in the Psalms, e.g. iv. 4, xxviii. 1, xxx. 9, also in Jer. vii. 27, xi. 14; but fcOiJ with bis is unusual in Isaiah. The words OnVT. *6 ni"IX3 are certainly an imitation of DflJIT tfbl ihSi, Isa. xlviii. 6; but they are modified, in the manner peculiar to Jeremiah, by the change of nnw into hnV3.
The combination rinvin rtfTB is elsewhere used only of the strong cities of the Canaanites, Deut. i. 28, ix. 1, Josh. xiv. 12, cf. Num. xiii. 28; here nvitfa is transferred to things which lie beyond the limits of human power to discover, and become known to men only through divine revelation. There is no good reason for Ewald's change of nnsa in accordance with Isa. xlviii. 6. — On the contents of these verses Ilengstenberg remarks: " It may seem strange that, though in the opening part the prophet is promised a revelation of greater, unknown things, for which he is to call on God, yet the succeeding announcement contains scarcely anything remarkable or peculiar." Graf also adds the remark of Ilitzig, that the command to pray, Iressed to Jeremiah, cannot have the effect of keeping us from the conclusion that the verges are an addition by a later hand. Nagelsbach replies that the mode of expression presents nothing specially unlike Jeremiah, and that what is most calculated to give the impression of being unlike Jeremiah's, namely, this introduction in itself, and especially the peculiar turn of ver. 3, a Call unto me," etc., is occasioned by the prayer of the prophet, xxxii. KJ-25. To this prayer the prophet had received an answer, xxxii. 36-44; but he is here admonished to approach the Lord more frequently with such a request, The God who has the power to execute as well as make decrees is quite prepared to give him an insight into His great thoughts regarding the future; and of this a proof is at once given. Thus, vers. 1-3 must be viewed as the connecting link between chap, xxxii. xxxiii. Yet these remarks are not sufficient to silence the objections set forth against the genuineness of vers. 2, 3; for the specializing title of our chapter, in ver. 1, is opposed to the close connection which Nagelsbach maintains between chap, xxxii. xxxiii. The fact that, in chap, xxxii., Jeremiah addresses the Lord in prayer for further revelation regarding the purchase of the field, as commanded, and that he receives the information he desired regarding it, gives no occasion for warning to the prophet, to betake himself more frequently to God for disclosures regarding His purposes of salvation. And Nagelsbach has quite evaded the objection that Jeremiah does not obey the injunction. Moreover, the succeeding revelation made in vers. 4-26 is not of the nature of a
"proof," for it does not contain a single great leadino- feature in God's purposes as regards the future.— Ilengstenberg also points out the difficulty, " that the Scripture everywhere refuses to recognise a dead knowledge as true knowledge, and that the hope of restoration has an obstacle in the natural man who strives to obscure and to extinguish it; that, consequently, the promise of restoration is always new, and the word of God always great and grand; " but what he adduces for the solution of the difficulty contained in the command, " Call on me, and I will show thee great and unknown things," is insufficient for his purpose. The objection which expositors have taken to these verses has arisen from an improper application of them; the words vK iOp have been understood as referring to the request that God should give some revelation regarding the future, or His purposes of deliverance, and njy as referring to the communication of His purposes for increasing our knowledge of them. But " to call on God " rather signifies to pray to God, i.e. to beseech Him for protection, or help, or deliverance in time of need, cf. Ps. iii. 5, xxviii. 1, xxx. 9, lv. 17, etc.; and to "answer" is the reply of God made when He actually vouchsafes the aid sought for; cf. e.g. Ps. lv. 17, " I call on God, and Jahveh answers me (saves me); " Ps. iv. 2, 4, xviii. 7, xxvii. 7, etc. Consequently, also, " to make known " (1>"i) is no mere communication of knowledge regarding great and unknown things, no mere letting them be known, but a making known by deeds. The words nbty and F.rriN *\VS\ ascribed to the Lord, suggest and require that the words should be thus understood. With the incorrect reference of these words to knowing and making known there is connected the further error, that the command, " Call unto me," is directed to the person of the prophet, and gives an admonition for his behaviour towards God, for which the text affords no foundation whatever; for it does not run: "Thus saith Jahveh to me" (7^), and the insertion of this vK is unwarranted, and inconsistent with the use of *3 which introduces the announcement. Hitzig, Graf, and others have passed by this *3 without remark; and what Nagelsbach says about it is connected with his view, already refuted, as to the essential unity of chap, xxxii. xxxiii. Lastly, Ewald has enclosed ver. 3 within parentheses, and considers that the introductory formula of ver. 2 is resumed in ver. 4: "Yea, thus saith Jahveh." This is a conclusion hastily formed bv one who is in difficulty, for ver. o has not the nature of a parenthesis. If we allow the arbitrary addition "to me" after the words, "Thus saith the Lord," ver. '2, and if we take the words in their simplest sense, — the invocation of the Lord as a call to God for help in need, — then vers. 2, 3 do not contain a mere prelude to the revelation which follows, but an exhortation to the people to betake themselves to the Lord their God in their calamity, when He will make known to them things unattainable bv human discernment; for (*3, ver. 4) He announces, in reference to the ruined houses of the city, that He will repair their injuries.
Vers. 4-13. Repair of the injuries and renewal of the prosperity of Jerusalem and Judah. — Ver. 1. "For thus saith Jahveh, the God of Israel, concerning the houses of this city, and concerning the houses of the kings of Judah, which are broken down bee I the 1 re1 mounds and because of the sword, Ver. 5. While they come to fight with the Chald< ans, and to fill them with the corpses of men, whom I have slain in my wrath and in my fury, and for all whose wickedness I have hidden my face from this city: Ver, '». Behold, I will apply a bandage to it and a remedy, and will heal them, and will reveal to them abundance of peace and truth. Ver. 7. And I will turn again the captivity of Judah and the captivity of Israel, and will build them up as at the first. Ver. 8. And I will purify them from all their iniquity by which they have sinned against me, and will pardon all their iniquities, by which thev have sinned and have transgressed against me. Ver. 9. And it (the city) shall become to me a name of joy, a praise, and an honour among all the people of the earth that shall hear all the good which I do them, and shall tremble and quake because of all the good and because of all the prosperity that I show to it. Ver. 10. Thus saith Jahveh: A^ain shall there be heard in this place, — of which ye say, ' It is desolate, without man and without beast,' — in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem, which are laid waste, without men, and without inhabitants, and without beasts, Ver. 11. The voice of gladness and the voice of joy, the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride, the voice of those who say, < Praise Jahveh of hosts, for Jahveh is good, for His mercy is for ever/ who bring thank-offerings into the house of Jahveh. For I will turn again the captivity of the land, as in the beginning Baith Jahveh. Ver. 12. Thus saith Jahveh of hosts:&In this place, which is laid waste, without man and beast, and in all its cities, there will yet be pasture-ground for shepherds making their flocks lie down in. Ver. 13. In the cities of the hilt country, in the cities of the plain, and in the cities of the south, in the land of Benjamin, and in the environs of Jerusalem, and in the cities of Jirdah, the flock shall yet pass under the hand of one who counts them, saith Jahveh."
With ver. 4 begins the statement concerning the great and incomprehensible things which the Lord will make known to His people; it is introduced by »3, which marks the ground or reason,— so far as the mere statement of these things gives reason for the promise of them. The word of the Lord does not follow till ver. 6 and onwards. In vers. 4 and 5 are mentioned those whom the word concerns, — the houses of Jerusalem (ver. 4), and the people that defend the city (ver. 5). Corresponding to this order, there comes first the promise to the city (ver. 6) and then to the people. Along with the houses of the city are specially named also the houses of the kings of Judah; not, perhaps, as Hitzig thinks, because these, being built of stone, afforded a more suitable material for the declared object, — for that these alone were built of stone is an unfounded supposition,— but in order to show that no house or palace is spared to defend the city. " Which are broken down " refers to the houses, not only of the kings, but also of the city. They are broken, pulled down, according to Isa. xxii. 10, in order to fortify the walls of the city against the attacks of the enemy, partly to strengthen them, partly to repair the damage caused by the battering-rams directed against them. This gives the following meaning to the expression annrrtai nttbn"^K: in order to work against the mounds, i.e. the earthworks erected by the enemy, and against the sword. The sword is named as being the chief weapon, instead of all the instruments of war which the enemy employs for reducing the city; cf. Ezek. xxvi. 9. It is against the laws of grammar to understand D^rw as referring to the destruction of the enemy by the siege material; for, on such a supposition, "vK would require to designate the efficient cause, i.e. to stand for 'JBD (cf. iv. 26), but neither '<-&* nor bv can mean this. — The first half of ver. 5 is difficult, especially D*K3, which the LXX. have omitted, and which Movers and Ilitzig would expunge, with the absurd remark, that it has come here from xxxi. 38; this is an easy and frivolous method of setting aside difficulties. All other ancient translations have read E>'?, and have attempted to point out how its genuineness is ascertained on critical grounds.1 To connect D*K3 closely with what precedes is impossible; and to understand it as referring to the houses, qua' dirutOB adhibentur ad dimieandum cum Chaldans (C. B. Michaelis), is incompatible with the idea contained in Xi2. Still more inadmissible is the view of L. de Dieu, Yenema, Schnurrer, Dahler, and Rosenmuller: venientibus ad oppugnandum cum Chaldceis; according to this view. ""J'ZTN musl be the nominative or subject to D*K3. D^.'TS Dn^.T> can only signify, " to contend with the Chaldeans" (against them); cf. xxxii. 5. According to this view, only the dews can be the subject of D'K3« tt They come to make war with the Chaldeans, and to iill them (the houses) with the dead bodies of men, whom I (the Lord) slay in my wrath." The subject is not named, since it is evident from the whole scope of the sentence what is meant. We take the verse as a predication regarding the issue of the conflict, — but without a copula; or, as a statement added parenthetically, so that the participle may be rendered, " while they come," or, u get ready, to fight." Ni2, used of the approach of an enemy (cf. Dan. i. 1), is here employed with regard to the advance of the Jews to battle
1 The different attempts to solve the difficulty by conjectures are of such a natui rcely to deserve mention. Ewald would change D^zi: 3"inn into D^inn, " that are broken down opposite the earthworks and the cannons." But the plural of 2~in is ni3"in, Ezek. xxvi. 29, and cannot possibly mean cannons. E. Meier would read DSN3 3*Hnn, " and for the destruction of those who are pressing in." Then CNH must be the enemy who are pressing in: but how does this agree with what follows, " in order to fight with the Chaldeans"? Lastly, Niigelsbach would change "DK D^TJ-DH into DvfcTP-^, to obtain the idea that the earthworks and the sword come for the purpose of contending against Jerus' 'cm (!).
against the besiegers of the city. The second infinitival clause, t; to till them," represents the issue of the struggle as contemplated by the Jews, in order to express most strongly its utter f ruitlessness; while the relative clauses, "whom I have slain " etc., bring out the reasons for the evil consequences. Substantially, the statement in ver. 5 is parallel to that in ver. 4, so that we might supply the preposition Sty' (by)): "and concerning those who come to fight," etc. Through the attachment of this second predication to the first by means of the participle, the expression has become obscured. In the last clause, 1PN is to be connected with Drurrity.
In view of the destruction of Jerusalem now beginning, the Lord promises, ver. 6, " I will apply to it (the city) a bandage (see xxx. 17) and a remedy," i.e. a bandage which brings healing, "and heal them" (the inhabitants); for, although the suffix in DTiaa-] might be referred to the houses, yet the following clause shows that it points to the inhabitants. Hitzig takes WJJ in the meaning of fe, " I roll to them like a stream," and appeals to Am. v. 24, Isa. xlviii. 18, lxvi. 12, where the fulness of prosperity is compared to a stream, and the waves of the sea; but this use of n?3 is as uncertain here as in xi. 20. We keep, then, to the well-established sense of revealing, making known (cf. Ps. xcviii. 2, where it is parallel with JH^n), without any reference to the figure of sealed treasure-chambers (Deut. xxviii. 12), but with the accessory notion of the unfolding of the prosperity before all nations (ver. 9), as in Ps. xcviii. 2. rnnjj is here to be taken as a noun, " fulness, wealth," from iny, an Aramaizing form for "OT, to be rich (Ezek. xxxv. 13). RDKI Di?J5> does not mean " prosperity and stability," but " peace and truth; " but this is not to be toned down to " true peace," i.e. real, enduring happiness (Nagelsbach). HpX is the truth of God, i.e. His faithfulness in His promises and covenants, as in Ps. lxxxv. 11, 12, where mercy and truth, righteousness and peace, are specified as the gracious benefits with which the Lord blesses His people. — Ver. 7. The attainment of this prosperity consists in the change of the wretchedness and misery of Judah and Israel (the whole covenant people) into permanent happiness, and their being built up, — i.e. the firm establishment of their civil prosperity through the secure possession and enjoyment of the good things of the land, — as in the beginning, i.e. the time previous to the rending of the state through the falling away of the people into idolatry; cf. Isa. i. 26, 1 Kines xiii. 6. For TtQti MK TC'n see xxxii. 44.— Ver. 8. This prosperity gains stability and permanence through the people's being cleansed from their sins by their being forgiven, which, according to xxxi. 34, will form the basis of the new covenant. Regarding the anomalous form 7i3p for "v3/, Hitzig supposes that in the scriptio continxia a transcriber wished to keep the two dntives BWjWjP 7]7 separate by inserting the 1. But the form D^3, xxxi. 34, is equally irregular, except that there the insertion of the 1 may be explained in this, or in some similar way. — Ver. 9, In consequence of the renovation of Israel externally and internally, Jerusalem will become to the Lord a name of delight, i.e. a name which affords joy, delight. W* here signifies, not fame, but a name. But the name, as always in Scripture, is the expression of the essential nature; the meaning therefore is, " she will develope into a city over which men will rejoice, whenever her name is mentioned/' On the following words, "for praise and for glory," i.e. for a subject of praise, etc., cf. xiii. 11. "ia'W), "to all," or "among all nations." How far Jerusalem becomes such is shown by the succeeding clauses: "who shall hear... and tremble and quake because of the good," i.e. not from fear " because they are seized with terror through these proofs of the wonderful power of God in contrast with the helplessness of their idols, and through the feeling of their miserable and destitute condition as contrasted with the happiness and prosperity of the people of Israel" (Graf). Against this usual view of the words, it has already been remarked in the Berleburger Bible, that it does not agree with what precedes, viz. with the statement that Jerusalem shall become a name of joy to all nations. Moreover, "ins and tn, in the sense of fear and terror, are construed with *3SB or IP; here, they signify to shake and tremble for joy, like "inB in Isa. Ix. 5, cf. Hos. iii. 5, i.e., as it is expressed in the Berleburger Bible, " not with a slavish fear, but with the filial fear of penitents, which will also draw and drive them to the reconciled God in Christ, with holy fear and trembling." Calvin had previously recognised this Messianic idea, and fitly elucidated the words thus: hcec duo inter juncta, ncmpe pavor et tremor, qui nos humiliet coram Deo et juluaa qua* noterigat, ut audeamus familiar iter adip sum accede' re. eniN may be for D*K, cf. i. 16; but probably W is construed with a double accusative, as in Isa. xlii. 16.
The prosperity which the Lord designs to procure for His people is, yers. 10-13, further described in two strophes (vers. 10-1 and 12-13); in vers. 10, 11, the joyous life of men. In the land now laid waste, gladness and joy shall once more prevail, and God will be praised for this. The description -it is desolate," etc, does not imply the burning of Jerusalem' In. 12 ff, but only the desolation which began about the end of the siege. "In this place" means "in this land;" this is apparent from the more detailed statement, "in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem." « The voice of gladness," etc, forms the subject of the verb W, On the expression see vii. 34, xvi. 9, xxv. 10. There* is here added: " the voice of those who say, < Praise the Lord,' " etc—the usual liturgic formula in thanksgiving to God; cf. 2 Chron. v. 13, vii. 3, Ezra iii. 11, Ps. Cvi. 1. rnifl, praiSe and thanks in word and deed; see xvii. 26. On miBr-JIN y&x see xxxji. 44. ^he rendering, "I shall bring back the captives of the land" (here as in ver. 7), is both grammatically indefensible, and further, unsuitable: (a) inappropriate, on account of njiwras, for no previous restoration of captives had taken place; the leading of the people out of Egypt is never represented as a bringing back from captivity. And (b) it is grammatically untenable, because restoration to Canaan is expressed either by "i>K K*3n n*?'?j after Deut. xxx. 5; or by ye>n, with the mention of the place (n??"^j; cf. Jer. xvi. 15, xxiv. 6, xxxii. 37, etc.— Vers. 12, 13. In the land which is now laid waste, and emptied of men and beasts, shepherds, with their flocks, shall again move about and lie down. " This place " is specified by the mention of the several parts of the land, as in xxxii. 44, xvii. 26. n.?° *3P#, at the hands, i.e. under the guidance, of him who counts them, viz. the shepherd, who counted the sheep when he took them out to the pasture as well as when he brought them back into the fold; cf. Virgil, Eel. iii. 34.
Vers. 14-26. The re-establishment of the Davidic monarchy and of the Levitical priesthood. — Ver. 14. "Behold, days are coming, saith Jahveh, when I will perform the good word which I have spoken to the house of Israel, and concerning the house of Judah. Ver. 15. In those days and at that time will I cause to sprout unto David a sprout of righteousness, and lie shall do iudijmcnt and righteousness in the land. Ver. 16. In those days shall Judah be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely; and this is how she shall be called, ' Jahveh our righteousness.1 Ver. 17. For thus saith Jahveh: David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel. Ver. 18. Nor shall the Levitical priests want a man before me to offer a burnt-offering, to burn a meat-offering, or to perform sacrifice every day.
\:. 19. " And the word of Jahveh came unto Jeremiah, saying: Ver. 20. Tims saith Jahveh, If ye shall be able to break mv covenant (with) the day and my covenant (with) the night, bo that there shall not be day and night in their proper time, Ver. 21. Then also shall my covenant with David my servant be broken, BO that he shall not have a son to reign upon his throne, and with the Levites, the priests, my ministers. Ver. 22. As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, nor the -and of the sea measure 1, so will I multiply the seed of David my servant, and the Levites who serve me.
\ ■ p. 23. i( And the word of Jahveh came to Jeremiah, saving: Ver. 24. Hast thou not seen what this people have spoken, saying, ' The two families which the Lord hath chosen, these He hath rejected?' and my people they have despised, so that thev are no longer a nation before them. Ver. 25. Thus saith Jahveh: If my covenant with day and night doth not exist, if I have not appointed the laws of heaven and earth, Ver. 2G. Then also will I reject the seed of Jacob and David my servant, so as not to take any of his seed as rulers over the seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. For I will turn their captivity, and take pity on them."
Vers. 14-18 contain the promise of the restoration of the monarchy and the priesthood. Vers. 19-26 further present two special messages from God, in the form of supplements, which guarantee the eternal continuance of these institutions.1
1 The portion contained within vers. 14-2G is wanting in the LXX.; for
The promise in vers. 14-10 has already been given in substance in chtp. Kill. 5, 6, and in our verses it is only formally extended, and thereby made more prominent. In ver. 14 it is designated as the establishment, i.e. the realization, of the good word which the Lord has spoken concerning Israel and Judah. " The good word" is, according to Dent, xxviii. 1-14, the blessing which the Lord has promised to His people if they obey His commands; cf. 1 Kings viii. 56. Here also must "the good word" be taken in the same general meaning; for our verse forms the transition from the promise of the restoration and blessing of Israel in the future (vers. G-13) to the special promise of the renewal and completion of the Davidic monarchy (ver. 15 ff.). In xxix. 10, on the contrary, " the good word" is specially referred, by the following infinitival clause, to the deliverance of the people from Babylon. But it is unlikely that " the good word" refers to the "sprout" of David, which is expressly promised in xxiii. 5 ff., and repeated here, ver. 15 f.; for here a like promise to the Levites follows, while there is none in chap. xxiii., and it is here so closely linked with the promise regarding David, that it must be viewed as a portion of the " good word." In the change from aS to?V in ver. 14, we must not, with Hengstenberg, seek a real difference; for in Jeremiah these prepositions often interchange without any difference of meaning, as in xi. 2, xviii. 11, xxiii. 35, etc. The blessing promised to the people in the " good word" culminates in the promise, ver. 15 f., that the Lord will cause a righteous sprout to spring up for David. On the meaning of this promise, see the remarks on xxiii. 5; 6. The difference made in the repeti- this reason, and chiefly because of the promise of the eternal duration, not merely of the royal house of David, but also of the Levitical priests, and their innumerable increase, J. D. Michaclis and Jahn have considered it spurious. To these must be added Movers, who takes vers. 18, 2lb-2b as later interpolations, and Hitzig, who treats the whole passage as a series of separate additions made in a later age. On the other side, Kueper, Wichelhaus, and Hengstenberg (Christoloc/y, vol. ii. pp. 459-461 of Clark's Translation) have shown the utter worthlessness of these reasons, and Graf also has defended the genuineness of the passage. So too has Ewald, who says (Propheten, ii. 2G9), " Nothing can be so preposterous and unreasonable as to find in this passage, xxxiii. 19-26, or in chap, xxx.-xxxiii. generally, additions by a later prophet."
tion of that promise is really unimportant. CPOVK instead of T^bpn does not change the sense. D^V?, to cause to sprout or grow, corresponds to the figure of the niMt, under which the Messiah is represented in both passages. ni?"JV n*?V *s onb' a more sonorous expression for P*TC nev. The words u He shall rule as king and deal wisely," which in xxiii. 5 bring into prominence the contrast between the kingdom of the Messiah and that of the godless shepherd of the people, were unnecessary for the connection of our passage. Besides, in xxiii. G Israel is named together with Judah, instead of which, we have here, in ver. 16, Jerusalem; accordingly, the name u JaJtveJt Tsidkenu" is referred to Jerusalem, while in xxiii. G it is predicated of the sprout of David. The mention of Jerusalem instead of Israel is connected with the general scope of our prophecy, viz. to comfort the covenant people over the destruction of Jerusalem (ver. 1 f.). But that, through the mention simply of Judah and its capital, the ten tribes are not to be excluded from participation in the coming prosperity, may be seen even from ver. 14, where "the good word" is referred to Israel and Judah, and still more plainly from vers. 24, -6, where this promise is made sure to the whole seed of Israel. The transference of the name Jahvch Taidkenu from the sprout of David to the city of Jerusalem is connected with the fact, that the name only expresses what the Messiah will bring to the people (see xxiii. 6); the righteousness which He works in and on Jerusalem may, without changing the substance of the thought, be attributed to Jerusalem itself, inasmuch as Jerusalem reflects the righteousness which is bestowed on her by the Messiah. — This promise is, ver. 17, further confirmed by the renewal of that which the Lord had given King David, through Nathan the prophet, 2 Sam. vii. 12-16, and that, too, in the form in which David himself had expressed it in his address to Solomon, shortly before his death, 1 Kings ii. 4, and in which Solomon had repeated it, 1 Kings viii. 25 and ix. 5. The formula '))) ms* N7, M there never will be cut off from David one sitting," etc., has the meaning, David will never want a descendant to occupy his throne; or, the posterity of David will possess the kingdom for ever. A temporary loss of the throne is not thereby excluded, but only such a permanent loss as would be caused by the family of David becoming extinct, or by the kingdom in Israel either passing over to some other family, or in some way or other coming to an end; see on 1 Kings ii, 4. — The very same promise is given to the Levitical priests, i.e. the priests of the tribe or family of Levi (D^n D^H3 as in Dent. xvii. 9, 18, xviii. 1, etc.). They shall never want one to bring and prepare an offering before the Lord. Burntoffering, meat-offering, and sin-offering are the three species of sacrifice which were to be brought, according to the law, as in xvii. 26. By means of the apposition " the Levites," the priests are designated as the legitimate priesthood, established as such in virtue of God's choice of the tribe of Levi, in contrast with priests such as Jeroboam appointed, out of the common people, for the worship set up by him. Not only shall Israel have priests, but priests out of the tribe of Levi, which was chosen by God for the sacerdotal office, as the medium of communicating His gracious gifts. The designation of the priests as u the Levites " corresponds, accordingly, to the kings of the family of David. Such a view explains this addition to our passage, to which critics such as Hitzig have taken objection. The Davidic kingdom and the Levitical priesthood were the two pillars and bases of the Old Testament theocracy, on which its existence and continuance depended. The priesthood formed the medium of approach for the people into divine favour. The kingdom assured them of the divine guidance.1 Both of these pillars were broken with the destruction of Jerusalem and of the temple; the theocracy then appeared to have ceased to exist. At this time, when the kingdom, with its ordinances of justice and of grace, bestowed by God, was being dissolved, the Lord, in order to keep His people from despair, declares that these two institutions, in accordance with His promise, shall not fall to the ground, but shall stand for ever. By this, God's own people received a pledge for the re-establishment and renovation of the kingdom of God. Such is the object of this promise. — As to the kind and mode of reinsti-
1 Continebatur autem salus populi duabus istis partibus. Nam, sine rege, erant veluti corpus truncum aut mutilum; sine sacerdote mera erat dissipatio. Nam sacerdos erat quasi medius inter Deum et populam, rex autem representabat Dei personam. — Calvin.
tution of both of these ordinances, which were abolished when the state came to rain, the prophecy now before us gives no explanation; but in the emphatic confirmation of the prophecy which follows, we find brief indications which clearly show that the restoration spoken of will not be a reinstitution of the old form which is now perishing, but a renovation of it, in its essential features, to a permanent existence.
The confirmations of these promises, which follow them in vers. 19—26, are each introduced by separate headings, perhaps not merely to render them more prominent, but because the Lord revealed them separately to the prophet; but it by no means follows from this that they are later additions, without any connection. Ver. 20 f. u If ye shall break my covenant with the day,... then also will my covenant with David... be broken." This if betokens the impossible; man cannot alter the arrangement in nature for the regular alternation of day and night. BWJ and H>pn are in apposition to Wlfj " my covenant the day — the night," for " my covenant with regard to the day and the night, which is this, that day and night shall return at their appointed tin The 1 before W3p is explanatory. POTTOE^ are adverbs, u day and night," for " the regular alternation of day and night." These divine arrangements in nature are called a covenant; because God, after the flood, gave a pledge that they should uninterruptedly continue, in a covenant made with the human race; cf. Gen. ix. 0 with viii. 22. As this covenant of nature cannot be broken by men, so also the covenant of grace of the Lord with David and the Levites cannot be broken, i.e. annulled. The covenant with David consisted in the promise that his kingdom should endure for ever (see ver. 17); that with the Levites, in the eternal possession of the right to the priesthood. The institution of the priesthood is certainly not represented in the law as a covenant; it consisted merely in the choice of Aaron and his sons as priests by God, Ex. xxviii. 1. But, inasmuch as they were thereby brought into a peculiar relation to the Lord, and thus had vouchsafed to them not merely privileges and promises, but also had laid on them duties, the fulfilment of which was a condition of receiving the privileges, this relation might be called a covenant; and indeed, in Num. xxv. 11 ff., the promise given to Phinehas, that lie should have the priesthood as an eternal possession, is called a covenant of peace and an eternal covenant of priesthood. This promise concerned the whole priesthood in the person of Phinehas, and the Levites also, inasmuch as the Levites were given to the priests; hence there is mention made in Mal.'ii. 4, 8, of a covenant with Levi. In this prophecy, too, mention is made of the priests alone. The general idea contained in the words " the Levites," placed first, is more clearly defined by the apposition " the priests," and restricted to the priests of the tribe of Levi. — Ver. 22. In order to make still more impressive the pledge given, that the covenant with David and the Levitical priesthood can never be broken, the Lord adds the promise of a numerous increase of the seed of David and the Levites. vj\s* as correlative to f? stands for "WW?; for in the accusative lies the general reference to place, time, kind, and manner; cf. E\v. § 360a, 333a. The comparison with the innumerable host of stars and the immeasurable quantity of the sand reminds us of the patriarchal promises, Gen. xv. 5, xxii. 17. In this way, the promises that apply to all Israel are specially referred to the family of David and the Levites (" the Levites," ver. 22, is abbreviated from " the Levites, the priests," ver. 21). This transference, however, is not a mere hyperbole which misses the mark; for, as Jahn observes, an immense increase of the royal and priestly families would only have been a burden on the people (Graf). The import of the words of the verse is simply that the Lord purposes to fulfil the promise of His blessing, made to the patriarchs in favour of their whole posterity, in the shape of a numerous increase; but this promise will now be specially applied to the posterity of David and to the priests, so that there shall never be wanting descendants of David to occupy the throne, nor Levites to perform the service of the Lord. The question is not about a " change of the whole of Israel into the family of David and the tribe of Levi" (Hengstenberg); and if the increase of the family of David and the Levites correspond in multitude with the number of all the people of Israel, this increase cannot be a burden on the people. But the question, whether this promise is to be understood literally, of the increase of the ordinary descendants of David and the
Levites, or spiritually, of their spiritual posterity, cannot be decided, as Hengstenberg and Nagelsbach think, by referring to the words of the Lord in Ex. xix. 6, that all Israel shall be a kingdom of priests, and to the prophetic passages, Isa. lxi. 6, lxvi. 23 ff., according to which the whole people shall be priests to God, while Levites also shall be taken from among the heathen. For this prophecy does not treat of the final glory of the people of God, but only of the innumerable increase of those who shall attain membership in the family of David and the Levitical priests. The question that has been raised is rather to be decided in accordance with the general promises regarding the increase of Israel; and in conformity with these, we answer that it will not result from the countless increase of the descendants of Jacob according to the flesh, but from the incorporation, among the people of God, of the heathen who return to the God of Israel. As the God-fearing among the heathen will be raised, for their piety, to be the children of Abraham, and according to the promise, Isa. lxvi. 20 ff., even Levitical priests taken from among them, so shall the increase placed in prospect before the descendants of David and Levi be realized by the reception of the heathen into the royal and sacerdotal privileges of the people of God under the new covenant.
This view of our verse is confirmed by the additional proof given of the promised restoration of Israel, vers. 23-26; for here there is assurance given to the seed of Jacob and David, and therefore to all Israel, that they shall be kept as the people of God. The occasion of this renewed confirmation was the allegation by the people, that the Lord had rejected the two families, i.e. Israel and Judah (cf. xxxi. 27, 31*, xxxii. 20), called, Isa. viii. 14, the two houses of Israel. With such words they despised the people of the Lord, as being no longer a people before them, i.e. in their eyes, in their opinion. That those who spoke thus were Jews, who, on the fall of the kingdom of Judah, despaired of the continuance of God's election of Israel, is so very evident, that Hengstenberg may well find it difficult to understand how several modern commentators could think of heathens, — Egyptians (Schnurrer), Chaldeans ( Jahn), Samaritans (Movers), or neighbours of the Jews and of Ezekiel on the Chebar (Hitzig). The verdict pronounced on what these people said, « they despise, or contemn, my people," at once relieves us from any need for making such assumptions, as soon as we assign the full and proper force to the expression " my people "= the people of Jahveh. Just as in this passage, so too in xxix. 32, " this people" is interchanged with " my people " as a designation of the Jews. Moreover, as Graf correctly says, the expression " this people" nowhere occurs in the prophets of the exile as applied to the heathen; on the contrary, it is very frequently employed by Jeremiah to designate the people of Judah in their estrangement from the Lord: iv. 10, v. 14, 23, vi. 19, vii. 33, viii. 5, ix. 14, xiii. 10, xiv. 10, xv. 1, 20, and often elsewhere. " My people," on the other hand, marks Judah and Israel as the people of God. In contrast with such contempt of the people of God, the Lord announces, " If my covenant with day and night does not stand, if I have not appointed the laws of heaven and earth, then neither shall I cast away the seed of Jacob." The a6 is repeated a second time before the verb. Others take the two antecedent clauses as one: " If I have not made my covenant with day and night, the laws of heaven and earth." This construction also is possible; the sense remains unchanged. ^13 rbb\ D2i< is imitated from ver. 20. " The laws of heaven and earth" are the whole order of nature; cf. xxxi. 35. The establishment, institution of the order of nature, is a work of divine omnipotence. This omnipotence has founded the covenant of grace with Israel, and pledged its continuance, despite the present destruction of the kingdom of Judah and the temporary rejection of the guilty people. But this covenant of grace includes not merely the choosing of David, but also the choosing of the seed of Jacob, the people of Israel, on the ground of which David was chosen to be the ruler over Israel. Israel will therefore continue to exist, and that, too, as a nation which will have rulers out of the seed of David, the servant of the Lord. " The mention of the three patriarchs recalls to mind the whole series of the promises made to them " (Hengstenberg). The plural vbvm does not, certainly, refer directly to the promise made regarding the sprout of David, the Messiah, but at the same time does not stand in contradiction with it; for the revival and continued existence of the Davidic rule in Israel culminates in the Messiah. On 'til -VJ'S »3 cf. xxxi. 23, xxx. 3, 18, and the explanations on xxxii. 44. The Qeri 3^K rests on ver. 11, but is unnecessary; for -VJ'tf makes good enough sense, and corresponds better to DVHDTn^ in so far as it exactly follows the fundamental passage, Deut. xxx. 3, where Dm is joined with nuirns »0,
III.— THE LABOUR AND SUFFERING OF THE PROniET BEFORE AND AFTER THE CONQUEST AND DESTRUCTION OF JE- RUSALEM.— Chap. XXXIV.-XLV.
Under this title may be placed the whole of the contents of these twelve chapters, which fall into three divisions. For ch. xxxiv.-xxxvi. contain partly utterances of Jeremiah in the early part of the siege of Jerusalem under Zedekiah, partly matters of fact in Jehoiakim's time. Next, mention is made, in ch. xxxvii.-xxxix., of the toils and sufferings of the prophet during that siege, until the fall of the city; then, in ch. xl.-~ xliv., is depicted his active labour among the people who had been left behind in the land by the Chaldeans, and who afterwards fled to l^gypt; finally, as an appendix to the account of his labours among the people, we find, in ch. xlv., the words of comfort addressed to Baruch by Jeremiah. The second of these divisions is marked by a historical introduction, ch. xxxvii. 1, 2, and the third by a somewhat lengthened prophetic heading. Only ch. xxxiv.-xxxvi., which we regard as the first division, seems to be without an external bond of unity. Graf, Ewald, Nagelsbach, and others have consequently marked them as appendices; but in this way neither their position nor their connection is at all accounted for. The relation of ch. xxxiv. to the following is analogous to that of ch. xxi. Just as the collection of special announcements regarding judgment and deliverance, ch. xxi., was introduced by the utterances of the prophet in the beginning of the last siege of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans; so too, in our third division, the collected evidences of the labours of Jeremiah before and after the destruction of Jerusalem, are introduced, cli. xxxiv., by the utterances which predict quite definitely what shall be the issue of the siege of the city and the fate of the king and people. The first of these utterances is set in a frame°of historical statements regarding the siege (vers. 1, 7); this setting marks it out as an introduction to the notices following. But the second utterance, vers. 8-22, refers to the fact of the manumission of the Hebrew men- and maid-servants during the siege, and the cancelling of that measure afterwards. The following chaps., xxxv. xxxvi., furnish two proofs of the activity of the prophet under Jehoiakim, which, on account of their historical nature, could not be introduced till now, since they would not admit of being inserted in the collection of the particular prophecies of coming judgment, ch. xxi.-xxix.
This chapter contains two prophecies of the time of the siege of Jerusalem under Zedekiah, of which the first, vers. 1-7, announces to the king the fruitlessness of resistance to the power of the Chaldeans; the second, vers. 8-22, threatens the princes and people of Judah with severe judgments for annulling the manumission of the Hebrew men- and maid-servants. Both of these utterances belong to the first period of the siege, probably the ninth year of the reign of Zedekiah.
Vers. 1-7. The message to Zedekiah is regarded by Hitzig, Ewald, Graf, Nagelsbach, etc. as a supplement to ch. xxxii. 1 ff., and as giving, in its complete form, the prophecy to which ch. xxxii. 3 ff. was referred, as the reason of the confinement of Jeremiah in the court of the prison. Certainly it is so far true that Jeremiah, in vers, 2-5, expresses himself more fully regarding the fate of King Zedekiah at the fall of Jerusalem into the hands of the Chaldeans than in ch. xxxii. 3-5, xxi. 3 ff., and xxxvii. 17; but we are not warranted in drawing the inference that this message forms a historical appendix or supplement to ch. xxxii. 3 ff., and was the occasion or reason of Jeremiah's imprisonment. See, on the contrary, the remarks on xxxii. 3 ff. It is not given here as an appendix to explain the reason of the prophet's imprisonment, but as a prophecy from which we may see how Kinu Zedekiah was forewarned, from the very beginning of the siege, of what its issue would be, that he might frame his conduct accordingly. Nor does it belong to the period when Nebuchadnezzar, after beating off the Egyptians who had come to the relief of the beleaguered city, had returned to the siege of Jerusalem, but to the earliest period of the siege, when Zedekiah might still cherish the hope of defeating and driving off the Chaldeans through the help of the Egyptians. — According to ver. 1, the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah when "Nebuchadnezzar and," i.e. with, " all his host, and all the kingdoms of the land of the dominion of his hand, and all the nations, were fighting against Jerusalem and all her towns." The words are multiplied to represent the strength of the Chaldean army, so as to deepen the impression of overpowering might, against which resistance is vain. The army consists of men drawn from all the kingdoms of the territory he rules, and of all nations. IT rirj'Dp px means the same as SPb&BB pK, li. _!8, the territory over which his dominion, which includes many kingdoms, extends. The LXX. have omitted " all the nations" as superfluous. See a like conglomeration of words in a similar description, Ezek. xxvi. 7. "All her towns" are the towns of Judah which belong to Jerusalem; see xix. 15. According to ver. 7, the strong towns not yet taken are meant, especially those strongly fortified, Lachish and Azekah in the plain (Josh. xv. 39, 35), the former of which is shown still under the name Um Lakhis, while the latter is to be sought for in the vicinity of Socho; see on Josh. x. 3, 10, and 2 Chron. xi. 9. — Jeremiah is to say to the king:
Ver. 2b. " Thus saith Jahveh: Behold, 1 will deliver this city into the hand of the king of Babylon, that he may burn it with fire. Ver. 3. And thou shalt not escape from his hand, but shalt certainly be seized and delivered into his hand; and thine eyes shall see the eyes of the king of Babylon, and his mouth shall speak with thy mouth, and thou shalt go to Babylon. Ver. 4. But hear the word of Jahveh, 0 Zedekiah, king o{ Jadah. Thus saith Jahveh concerning thee: Thou shalt not die by the sword. Ver. 5. In peace shalt thou die; and as with the burnings of thy fathers, the former kings who were before thee, so shall they make a burning for thee, and thev shall wail for thee, [crying, | ' Alas, lord! ' for I have spoken the word, saith Jahveh."— On vers. 2, 3, cf. xxxii. 3-5. " But hear," ver. 4, introduces an exception to what has been said before; but the meaning of vers. 4, 5 is disputed. They are usually understood in this way: Zedekiah shall be carried into exile to Babylon, but shall not be killed with the sword, or executed, but shall die a peaceful death, and be buried with royal honours. But C. B. Michaelis, Venema, Hitzig, and Graf take the words as an exeeption that will occur, should Zedekiah follow the advice given him to deliver himself up to the king of Babylon, instead of continuing the struggle. Then what is denounced in ver. 3 will not happen; Zedekiah shall not be carried away to Babylon, but shall die as king in Jerusalem. This view rests on the hypothesis that the divine message has for its object to induce the king to submit and give up himself (cf. xxxviii. 17 f.). But this supposition has no foundation; and what must be inserted, as the condition laid before Zedekiah, " if thou dost willingly submit to the king of Babylon," is quite arbitrary, and incompatible with the spirit of the words, "But hear the word of Jahveh," for in this case ver. 4 at least would require to run, " Obey the word of Jahveh" ("\21Z y»^ nj.T), as xxxviii. 20. To take the words « "Qi ym in the sense, " Give ear to the word, obey the word of Jahveh," is not merely inadmissible grammatically, but also against the context; for the word of Jahveh which Zedekiah is to hear, gives no directions as to how he is to act, but is simply an intimation as to what the end of his life shall be: to change or avert this does not stand in his power, so that we cannot here think of obedience or disobedience. The message in vers. 4, 5 states more in detail what that was which lay before Zedekiah: he shall fall into the hands of the king of Babylon, be carried into exile in Babylon, yet shall not die a violent death through the sword, but die peacefully, and be buried with honour, — not, like Jehoiakim, fall in battle, and be left unmourned and unburied (xxii. 18 f.). This intimation accords with the notices given elsewhere as to the end of Zedekiah (xxxii. 5, xxxix. 5-7). Although Zedekiah died a prisoner in Babylon (lii. 11), yet his imprisonment would not necessarily be an obstacle in the way of an honourable burial after the fashion of his fathers. When Jehoiachin, after an imprisonment of thirty-seven years, was raised again to royal honours, then also might there be accorded not merely a tolerably comfortable imprisonment to Zedekiah himself, but to the Jewrs also, at his death, the permission to bury their king according to their national custom. Nor is anything to be found elsewhere contrary to this view of the words. The supposition that Zedekiah caused the prophet to be imprisoned on account of this message to him, which Nagelsbach lias laboured hard to reconcile with the common acceptation of the passage, is wholly devoid of foundation in fact, and does not suit the time into which this message falls; for Jeremiah was not imprisoned till after the time when the Chaldeans were obliged for a season to raise the siege, on the approach of the Egyptians, and that, too, not at the command of the king, but by the watchman at the gate, on pretence that he was a deserter. u Thou shalt die in peace," in contrast with " thou shalt die by the sword," marks a peaceful death on a bed of sickness in contrast with execution, but not (what Graf introduces into the words) in addition, his being deposited in the sepulchre of his fathers. " With the burnings of thy fathers," etc., is to be understood, according to 2 Chron. xvi. 14, xxi. 19, of the burning of aromatic spices in honour of the dead; for the burning of corpses was not customary among the Hebrews: see on 2 Chron. xvi. 14. On " alas, lord!" see xxii. 18. This promise is strengthened by the addition, " for I have spoken the word," where the emphasis lies on the ^N: / the Lord have spoken the word, which therefore shall certainly be fulfilled. — In vers. 6, 7 it is further remarked in conclusion, that Jeremiah addressed these words to the king during the siege of Jerusalem, when all the cities of Judah except Lachish and Azekah were already in the power of the Chaldeans. "WOO HJJ is not in apposition to iTW np, but belongs to ViKttO: " they were left among the towns of Judah as strong cities;" i.e. of the strong cities of Judah, they alone had not yet been conquered.
Vers. 8-22. Threatening because of the re-enslave-
MF.M OF THE LIBERATED HEBREW MEN- AND MAID-SERVANTS. — Vers. ^-11 describe the occasion of the word of the Lord, which follows in vers. 12-22. It came to Jeremiah "after King Zedekiah had made a covenant with all the people in Jerusalem, to proclaim liberty to them, that every one should send away his man-servant, or his maid-servant, being a Hebrew or Hebrewess, so that none should impose servitude on any one of them who was a Jew, his brother. Ver. 10. And all the princes and all the people who entered into the covenant obeyed, each one setting free his man-servant and his maid-servant, and not imposing servitude on them any more: they obeyed and each one set them free. Ver. 11. But they turned round afterwards, and brought back the servants and the handmaids whom they had set free, and brought them under subjection, for servants and for handmaids." The covenant which Zedekiah concluded with all the people at Jerusalem, according to what follows, consisted in a solemn vow made before the Lord in the temple, probably confirmed by sacrifices, to set free the male and female slaves of Hebrew descent, in conformity with the law, Ex. xxi. 1-4, Deut. xv. 12. The law required the. gratuitous manumission of these after seven years of service. This time, indeed, is not mentioned in our verses, but it is assumed as well known through the law. But, in the general departure of the people from the Lord and His commandments, the observance of this law had probably long been intermitted, so that, in consequence of the solemn engagement to obey it once more, a great number of Hebrew male and female slaves received their freedom, inasmuch as very many had served longer than seven years; however, we need not suppose that all bond men and women were liberated at once. The resolution, ver. 9, that every one should liberate his Hebrew man- or maid-servant, and that no one should continue to impose servitude on a Jew, his brother, i.e. compel him any longer to serve as a slave, is conditioned by the law, which is assumed as well known: this also accords with the expression E3"*"ny wX>, which is used in a general way of the treatment of Hebrew men- and maid-servants, Lev. xxv. 39. However, it is also possible that a liberation of all bond men and women took place without regard to the duration of their servitude, partly for the purpose of averting, by such obedience to the law, the calamity now threatening the city, and partly also to employ the liberated slaves in the defence of the city; for, according to ver. 21 f., the emancipation took place during the siege of Jerusalem, and after the departure of the Chaldeans the solemn promise was revoked. The expression IfrVl KJjJ, " to proclaim liberty," is taken from Lev. xxv. 10, but it does not prove that the manumission took place on a sabbath- or a jubilee-year, cnj refers ad scnsiun to those who were bondmen and had a right to be set free. The general expression is explained by D%fcten n?*^ and this again is more closely defined by DITTO:nW> (cf. Lev. xxv. 39). VWW «Wa ^K, (that no one should labour) " through a Jew, who is his brother," i.e. a fellow-countryman; i.e. that no one should impose servitude on a Jew, as being a compatriot. u To enter into a covenant'' is to assume its obligation; cf. 2 Chron. xv. 12, Ezek. \vi. 8. The Ketliib zvs%zy receives, in the Qeri, the vowels of the Kal, since the Iliphil of this verb does not occur elsewhere, only the Kal, cf. 2 Chron. xxviii. 10; but the alteration is unnecessary.— the Iliphil may intensify the active meaning.
Vers. 12-22. The threat of puniihment, — Ver. 12. "Then came the word of Jahveh to Jeremiah from Jahveh, saying: Ver. lo. Thus saith Jahveh, the God of Israel, 'I made a covenant with your fathers in the day when I brought them out of the land of Egypt, from a house of bondmen, saying, Ver. 14. At the end of seven years shall ye set free each man his brother, who is a Hebrew that sold himself to thee; and he shall serve thee six years, then shalt thou send him away from thee free: but your fathers hearkened not unto me, nor inclined their ear. Ver. 15. But you had turned just now, and had done what is right in mine eyes, because each man proclaimed liberty to his neighbour, and ye had made a covenant before me in the house on which my name is called. Ver. 16. But ye turned again and profaned my name, and each one made his man-servant and his handmaid, whom he had sent away free, at their pleasure, to return, and ye brought them into subjection, to be men- and maid-servants to you. Ver. 17. Therefore, thus saith Jahveh, Ye have not hearkened unto me in proclaiming liberty each man to his brother, and each man to his neighbour: behold, I proclaim a liberty for you, saith Jahveh, to the sword, to the pestilence, and to famine, and I will deliver you up for maltreatment to all the kingdoms of the earth. Ver. 18. And I shall make the men who have transgressed my covenant, that have not kept the words of the covenant which they concluded before me, like the calf which they cnt in two, and between whose pieces they passed. Ver. 19. The princes of Judah and the princes of Jerusalem, the courtiers, and the priests, and all the people of the land, who passed through between the pieces of the calf, Ver. 20. Them will I give into the hand of their enemies, and into the hand of those who seek their life, so that their corpses shall be for food to the birds of heaven and to the beasts of the earth. Ver. 21. And Zedekiah, king of Judah, and his princes will I give into the hand of their enemies, and into the hand of those who seek their life, and into the hand of the army of the king of Babylon, that has departed from against you. Ver. 22. Behold, I will command, saith Jahveh, and will make them return to this city, and they shall fight against it, and shall take it, and shall burn it with fire; and the cities of Judah will I make a desolation, without an inhabitant."
In vers. 13-16 the Lord sets before the people and their rulers their new offence; in vers. 17-22 He announces to them the punishment for this new deed by which the covenant is broken. In order to place the transgression in its proper light, He mentions, first of all, that, when He led Israel out of Egypt, He concluded with them a covenant to the effect that every one of them should set free his Hebrew servant at the end of seven years; He also mentions that their fathers had transgressed this covenant (vers. 13, 14). The designation of Egypt as a house of bondmen, as in Ex. xiii. 3, 14, xx. 2, Deut. vi. 12, etc., possesses a special emphasis, and points to what is mentioned in Deut. xv. 15 as the motive for obeying the law referred to in the address. Because Israel was a servant in Egypt, and the Lord has redeemed him out of this house of bondmen, therefore must they not treat as slaves their brethren who had fallen into poverty, but set them free after six years of service. The expression u at the end (after the lapse) of seven years " is to be understood in the same way as the expression "after eight days." As this just means "when seven days are completed," so also, according to the law, Ex. xxi. 2, Deut. xv. 12, the emancipation was to follow in the seventh year, after six full years of service. u Who sold himself to thee" is an expression copied from Deut. xv. 12. — From this sin of their fathers they had now for a little turned away, and, in a solemn covenant, resolved to free the bondmen, as the law decreed (ver. 15); but they have immediately profaned the name of the Lord again by revoking this decree, viz. by breaking the covenant made before God. DJMM?, "according to their pleasure/' like rttPDi?, Deut. xxi. 14. — Ver. 17 ff. The announcement of punishment. Because ye have not hearkened, by proclaiming, every one, liberty to his bondman (this certainly had been done, but was again undone by annulling the decree), therefore I proclaim liberty for you; i.e. you, who have hitherto been my servants (Lev. xxv. 55), I discharge from this relation, — deliver you up to your fate as regards the sword, etc., that the sword, famine, and pestilence may have power over you. For nyir^ see xv. 4. — In ver. 18 the construction is disputed. Many, including Luther, take /OT as the second object to Wi:; " 1 will make the men.... the calf," i.e. like the calf. But, though iro is frequently construed with a double accusative with the meaning of making some thing another thing (cf. e.y. ver. 22, Gen. xvii. 5, Ex. vii. 1), yet in such a case the predicativeobject does not readily take the article. Moreover, fTO, in the sense required here, to make like = treat as, is joined with 3, as in Isa. xli. 2, Ezek. xxviii. 2, 6, Gen. xlii. 30, 1 Kings x. 27, etc. Finally, Rosenmiiller objects: continuata versu 19 personarum descriptio et repetitio verbi WD1 ver. 20 vix permittunt, propositionem hoc versu absolvi. For these reasons, L. de Dieu, Rosenmiiller, Ewald, and Graf have taken 2Jyn as being in apposition to H*}3«?, and the enumeration "princes of Judah," etc., ver. 19, as a continuation or exposition of D^WKflj ver. 18, and cnis WTJlj ver. 20, as a resumption of the same words in ver. 18. According to this view, vers. 18-20 would form a series of appositions: u I will give the men... that have not kept the words of the covenant which they concluded before me.... the princes of Judah who passed between the parts of the calf, — these will I give into the hands of their enemies."
Bat, apart from the consideration that the enumeration of the covenant-breakers (viz. the princes of Judah, etc.), which is added by way of apposition in ver. 19, ought not to come in till after the apposition to rnzn, which would be a harsh and complicated arrangement of the members of the sentence, this construction seems untenable for the following reasons: (a) "The calf that they cut," etc., which forms the explanatory apposition to u the covenant," is separated from it by the intervening clause, " which they made before me." And (b), even though we might modify this harshness by repeating 'WTW before 'WR, yet the mode of expression, " they have not performed the words of the calf which they cut in two, and between whose parts they passed," would be a very stiff and unnatural one for w they have not performed what they vowed or sware in presence of the parts of the calf which they had halved, and when they passed through between these pieces." With Maurer and Hitzig, therefore, we abide by the older view, which takes OTJ as the second object to WIJ1 i; "I will make the men... the calf," or, better, "like the calf which they cut in two," etc. The article is used with «y because this predicate is more exactly determined by relative clauses, and «yn stands for «JJ3, since, as often happens, the 3 of likeness is dropped to give more point to the idea. "We make ver. 19 begin a new sentence, and take the names of this verse as objects absolute, which, by BrriK following WW, are subordinated to the verb: " As for the princes of Judah.... them shall I give...." — From ver. 18 we see that, when alliances were entered into, the contracting parties slaughtered an <iV, " calf," i.e. a young bullock, cut it in two halves, and went through between the pieces that wer,e placed opposite one another. See on Gen. xv. 10 for details regarding this most ancient custom and its meaning: according to the account of Ephraem Syrus, it is of Chaldean origin. Thus are explained the phrases used to signify the making of a covenant, n"1")? rn3? to cut a covenant, op/aa TefxveLv, foedus ferire, i.e. ferienda hostia foedus facer e. We cannot with certainty infer, from the threatening pronounced in this passage, that this rite originally signified nothing more than that he who broke his promise would be treated like the animal that had been slaughtered. For the threatening is merely a conclusion drawn from the sacred act; but this does not exclude a deeper meaning of the rite. — Vers. 19-22 give the real explanation of the threatening attached to the ritual of the covenant. Princes, officers of the court, priests and people, who have transgressed the covenant, shall die by the hand of the enemy, and perish ignominiously. On ver. 20b, cf. vii. 33, xvi. 4, etc. On ^pnp see on Gen. xxxvii. 36. King Zedekiah also, with his princes, his retinue, shall fall into the hand of his enemies, ay, into the hands of the Chaldeans, who have now withdrawn from Jerusalem (on 7W3 n^y see on xxi. 2). See also xxxvii. 5-8.
By the command of God, Jeremiah brings the family of the Rechabites (who had fled for refuge to Jerusalem before the approach of the Chaldeans) into one of the chambers of the temple, and sets before them some wine to drink (vers. 1-5). They decline to drink, because the head of their family had forbidden them the use of wine, as well as the possession of houses and the cultivation of the soil, and had commanded them to live in tents (vers. 6-11). Jeremiah is to put this before the people of Judah. The Rechabites faithfully observe the command of their ancestor, while the people of Judah transgress the commands of their God, which are continually presented to them (vers. 12-16). Therefore the threatened calamity shall fall upon Judah; but the house of Rechab, as a reward for their faithfulness to the injunctions of their ancestor, shall continue for ever (vers. 17-19).