According to ver. 1, this word of the Lord came to Jeremiah in the fourth year of the reign of Jehoiakim, and, according to ver. 11, previous to the arrival of Nebuchadnezzar and his host before Jerusalem; therefore perhaps in the summer of the year 606 B.C., for Jerusalem was taken for the first time by Nebuchadnezzar in the ninth month (December) of that year.
Vers. 1-11. Jeremialis dealings with the Ilecliahites — Ver. 2. Jeremiah is to go to the house, i.e. the family, of the Rechabites, speak with them, and bring them into one of the chambers of the temple, and set before them wine to drink. D^nn IV3, vers. 2, 3, 18, is exchanged for MTWTTW *», ver. 5, from which it is apparent that "the house of the Rechabites "
does not mean their dwelling-place, but the family, called in 1 Chron. ii. 55 2?Tn% According to this passage, the Rechabites were a branch of the Kenites, i.e. descendants of the Kenite, the father-in-law of Moses (Judg. i. 16), who had gone to Canaan with the Israelites, and dwelt among them, partly in the wilderness on the southern frontier of the tribe of Judah (1 Sam. xv. 6, xxvii. 10, xxx. 29), partly at Kadesh in Naphtali (Judg. iv. 11, 17, v. 24). Their ancestor, or father of the tribe, was Rechab, the father of Jonadab, with whom Jehu made a friendly alliance (2 Kings x. 15, 23). Jonadab had laid on them the obligation to live in the special manner mentioned below, in order to keep them in the simplicity of nomad life observed by their fathers, and to preserve them from the corrupting influences connected with a settled life, rtojfv, 11 cells of the temple," were additional buildings in the temple fore-courts, used partly for keeping the stores of the temple (1 Chron. xxviii. 12), partly as dwellings for those who served in it, and as places of meeting for those who came to visit it; see Ezek. xl. 17. — Ver. 3. In executing the command of the Lord, Jeremiah took (went for) Jaazaniah, son of Jeremiah, son of Habaziniah, and all his brethren, and sons, and the whole house of the Rechabites, and brought them into the temple-chamber of the sons of Hanan. Jaazaniah was probably the then chief of the Rechabites. The chamber of the sons of Hanan was situated pext the princes' chamber, which stood over that of Maaseiah the door-keeper. Nothing further is known about Hanan the son of Jigdaliah; here he is called 11 the man of God," an honourable title of the prophets, — see e.g. 1 Kings xii. 22, — for, according to the usual mode of construction, DWKTI G^K does not belong to Jigdaliah, but to Hanan, cf. xxviii. 1, Zech. i. 1. "The chamber of the princes" is the chamber where the princes, the chiefs of the people, used to assemble in the temple. Its position is more exactly described by '& ^HSOj « over the chamber of Maaseiah," but not very clearly for us, since the buddings of the temple fore-courts are nowhere else more exactly described; however, see on xxxvi. 10. Maaseiah was *[&*] 10W, " keeper of the threshold," i.e. overseer of the watchmen of the temple gates, of which, according to Hi. 24 and 2 Kings xxv. 18, there were three, who are there mentioned along with the high priest and his substitute Maaseiah is probably the same whose son Zephaniah was fta mrftn, cf. Hi. 24 with xxxvii. 3, xxix. 25, and xxi. 1. — Ver. 5 f. There, Jeremiah caused bowls filled with wine to be set before the Itechabites, and commanded them to drink. (ETr? are large goblets, bowls, out of which drinking-cups TniDb] were filled.) But they explained that they did not drink wine, because their father, i.e. their ancestor, Jonadab had forbidden them and their posterity to drink wine for ever, as also to build houses, to sow seed, and to plant vineyards, i.e. to settle themselves down in permanent dwellings and to pursue agriculture. D37 r\^\ N.i, " And there shall not be to you," sc. what has just been named, i.e. ye must not possess houses, growing-crops, or vineyards (cf. ver. 9),1 but ye are to dwell in tents all your life, that ye may live long, etc. This promise is an imitation of that found in Ex. xx. 12. — Vers. 8-10. This command of their forefather they ol in all points, and therefore dwell in tents; and only because of Nebuchadnezzar's arrival in the country have they come to Jerusalem, in order to find refuge for a time from the army of the Chaldeans and that of Aram (the Arameans). The special mention of the army of Aram in connection with that of the Chaldeans is perhaps due to the frequent predatory incursions made, at an earlier period, on Israel and Judah by the Syrians. According to 2 Kings xxiv. 2, after Jeboiakim had rebelled against Nebuchadnezzar, hostile bands of Arameans invaded Judah for the purpose of laying waste the country.
Vers. 12-19. The example of the Rechabites is one for Judah. — Jeremiah is to proclaim the word of the Lord to the people of Judah, as follows: Ver. 13. "Thus saith Jahveh of hosts,
1 These injunctions, given by Jonadab to his posterity, that lie might make them always lead a nomad life, are quoted by Diodorus Siculus, xix. 9-4, as a law among the Nabateans: N&'^&c tm\v uvrolg, /W'/Jte oi'tou oKtiouv, f*.r,T£ guTivnv pr.Oiv (£vt6i/ Kup—oXosov, ftjfrt or;u x,ov;iJt)xi, /aire oixi'ctv hutclaKVJct^n'j; while the object of the law is stated to have been the maintenance of their freedom against the more powerful who sought to bring them into subjection. And even at the present day the Bedouins imagine that they are prevented, by the nobility of their descent from Ishmael, from engaging in agriculture, handicraft, or the arts; cf. Arvieux, Sitten der Beduiutn-Araler, 5 f.
the God of Israel: Go and say to the men of Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, Will ye not receive instruction by listening to my words? saith Jahveh. Ver. 14. The words of Jonadab the son of Rechab, who commanded his sons not to drink wine, are performed, and they have drunk no wine to this day, but have obeyed the command of their father. But / have spoken unto you, rising up early and speaking, yet ye have not listened unto me. Ver. 15. And I sent unto you all my servants the prophets, rising early and sending them, saying, Turn ye, now, every one from his evil way, and do good deeds, and do not go after other gods, to serve them; then shall ye dwell in the land which I have given to you and to your fathers. But ye did not incline your ear, nor hearken unto me. Ver. 16. Yea, the children of Jonadab the son of Rechab have observed the commandment of their father which he commanded them, while this people have not hearkened unto me. Ver. 17. Therefore, thus saith Jahveh, the God of hosts, the God of Israel: Behold, I will bring upon Judah and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem all the evil which I have uttered reirardino' them, because I spake unto them and they did not hear, and I called unto them, but they did not answer. Ver. 18. And to the house of the Rechabites Jeremiah said: Thus saith Jahveh of hosts, the God of Israel, Because ye have listened to the command of Jonadab your father, and have kept all his commandments, and have done according to all that he commanded you, Ver. 19. Therefore, thus saith Jahveh of hosts, the God of Israel, Jonadab the son of Rechab shall not want a man to stand before me for ever."
The command, " Go and speak to the men of Judah," etc., shows that it was not in the chamber of the temple, in presence of the Rechabites, but probably in one of the temple fore-courts, that Jeremiah addressed the following word of the Lord to the people assembled there. In order to shame the Jews thoroughly, he shows them the faithfulness with which the Rechabites observe the ordinances of their, ancestor Jonadab. The character of the address, as one intended to rouse feelings of shame, is indicated even at the beginning of ver. 13: " Will ye not receive instruction by hearkening to the words of the Lord 1 " The Hoph. Dpfl is construed as a passive with the accus.; in the older writers we frequently find this construction, in which the passive is used impersonally, hence the sing, is here employed: cf. Ges. § 143, 1, Ew. § 295, b. u To this day " — now for nearly 300 years without interruption; for Jonadab was already held in high esteem when Jehu ascended the throne, 883 B.C. (2 Kings x. 15). Judah, on the contrary, does not listen to the commandments which his God unceasingly inculcates on him, but rather wanders after other gods, to serve them. On ver. 15 cf. xxv. 4, 5. noriKfTTK stands for noisrrpy Xxv. 5. — In ver.
16, where the introductory *3j two, indicates a culmination, the idea is once more briefly expressed. Nagelsbach incorrectly renders *3 "because" and makes ver. 16 the protasis to ver. 17. "Such a protasis with because (quia), without any connection with what precedes, is contrary to the use of language " (Hitzig). On the threat of punishment in ver. 17, see xi. 11. — Ver. 18. The declaration concerning the Rechabites is introduced by the formula, " And to the house of the Kechabites Jeremiah said; " thereby, too, it is shown that the statement does not form an integral portion of the preceding address, but was uttered by Jeremiah perhaps at the close of his transactions with them (ver. 11). But it is not given till now, in order to signify to the people of Judah that even fidelity to paternal commands has its own rewards, to make the threat uttered against Judah all the more impressive. On the promise ver. 19, cf. xxxiii. 18. Since V.r? ^^y denotes the standing of a servant before his master, and in vii. 10 is used of the appearance of the people before the Lord in the temple, *JW TOj) seems here also to express not merely the permanence of the family, but in addition, their continuance in the service of the Lord, without, of course, involving sacerdotal service; cf. on the other hand, xxxiii. 18, where this service is more exactly described. The acknowledgment of the Lord on the part of the Rechabites is a necessary result of their connection with Israel.1
1 According to the account of the Jewish missionary Wolff, there are still some Rechabites in Asia, in Mesopotamia and Yemen, who affirm that they are descended from Hobab the brother-in-law [A.V. "father-in-law;" but see Smith's Bible Dictionary, vol. i. hobab] of Moses. Wolff points out that part of the desert of Yemen near Senaa as the special locality where these Rechabites live. Cf. Dr. Joseph Wolff, ein Wanderleben, von Dr. ^engelmann, Hamburg 1863, S. 65 u 196.
In the fourth year of the reign of Jehoiakim the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah, bidding him commit to writing all the addresses he had previously delivered, that Judah might, if it were possible, still regard the threatenings and return (vers. 1-3). In accordance with this command, he got all the words of the Lord written down in a book by his attendant Baruch, with the further instruction that this should be read on the fast-day in the temple to the people who came out of the country into Jerusalem (vers. 4-8). When, after this, in the ninth month of the fifth year of Jehoiakim, a fast was appointed, Baruch read the prophecies to the assembled people in the chamber of Gemariah in the temple. Michaiah the son of Gemariah mentioned the matter to the princes who were assembled in the royal palace; these then sent for Baruch with the roll, and made him read it to them. But they were so frightened by what was read to them that they deemed it necessary to inform the king regarding it (vers. 9-19). At their advice, the king had the roll brought and some of it read before him; but scarcely had some few columns been read, when he cut the roll into pieces and threw them into the pan of coals burning in the room, at the same time commanding that Baruch and Jeremiah should be brought to him; but God hid them (vers. 20-26). After this roll had been burnt, the Lord commanded the prophet to get all his words written on a new roll, and to predict an ignominious fate for King Jehoiakim; whereupon Jeremiah once more dictated his addresses to Baruch (vers. 27-32).
Since Jeremiah, according to vers. 3, 6, 7, is to get his addresses written down that Baruch may be able to read them publicly on the fast-day, now at hand, because he himself was prevented from getting to the temple, the intention of the divine command was not to make the prophet put down in writing and gather together all the addresses he had hitherto given, but the writing down is merely to serve as a means of once more presenting to the people the whole contents of his prophecies, in order to induce them, wherever it was possible, to return to the Lord. In the fourth year of Jehoiakim, Nebuchadnezzar, after vanquishing the Egyptians at the Euphrates, advanced against Judah, took Jerusalem, and made Jehoiakim tributary. In the same year, too, Jeremiah had delivered the prophecy regarding the giving up of Judah and all nations for seventy years into the power of the king of Babylon (chap, xxv.); this was before Jie had been bidden write down all his addresses. For, that he did not receive this command till towards the end of the fourth year, may be gathered with certainty from the fact that the public reading of the addresses, after they were written down, was to take place on the fast-day, which, according to ver. 9, was not held till the ninth month of the fifth year. The only doubtful point is, whether they wire written down and rend before or after the first capture of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar. Most modern commentators take the former view;. Hitzig Bays, briefly and decidedly, " According to ver. 29, the Chaldeans had not as yet appeared in the country." But this is not mentioned in ver. 29. The threatening in this verse, " The king of Babylon shall come and destroy this land, and exterminate men and beasts from it," does not prove that the king of Babylon had not yet come to Judah, but merely that the country had not yet been destroyed, and men and cattle exterminated from it. When Jerusalem was first taken, Nebuchadnezzar contented himself with subjecting Jehoiakim under his supreme authority and requiring the payment of tribute, as wvll as carrying away some of the vessels of the temple and some hostages. The devastation of Judah and the extirpation of men and beasts did not commence till the second subjugation of Jerusalem under Jehoiakim, and was completed wdien the city was utterly destroyed, in Zedekiah's time, on its third subjugation. The settlement of the question that has been raised depends on the determination of the object for which the special fast-day in the fifth year was appointed, whether for averting the threatened invasion by the Chaldeans, or as a memorial of the first capture of Jerusalem. This question we have already so far decided in the Commentary on Daniel, p. Gti, where it is stated that the fast was held in remembrance of that day in the year when Jerusalem was taken for the first time by Nebuchadnezzar; we have also remarked in the same place, that Jehoiakim either appointed or permitted this special
"->"• '1- firs, thought of revolt." However, every form „ ^tance to the king of Babylon could only Issue in the ruin of Judah. Accordrngly, Jeremiah made Baruch read his pwpheces pubhely to the people assembled in the temple on that day • by way of counterpoise to the king's desire'" the Prophet also hade him announce to the king that the kin., of Baby o„ wo ld com(. L nj fo destroy the knd> and ^ b
°nt °f " both men and beasts. These circumstances give the first complete explanation of the terror of the princes when they hstened to the reading of the book (ver. 16), as well as of the wrath of the king, exhibited by his cutting the book in pieces and throwing,t,nto the fire: he saw that the addresses of the prophet were more calculated to damp those religious aspira-.ons of the people on which he ba.sed his hopes, than to rouse the nation against continued submission to the Chaldeans. Not till now, too, when the object of the appointment of the fastday was perceived, did the command given by God to the prophet to write down his prophecies appear in its proper light. bhortly before, and in the most earnest manner, Jeremiah had reminded the people of their opposition to the word of God preached by him for twenty-three years, and had announced to them, as a punishment, the seventy years' subjugation to the Chaldeans and the desolation of the country; yet this announcement of the fearful chastisement had made no deeper or more lasting impression on the people. Hence, so Ion- as the threatened judgment was still in the distance, not much could be expected to result from the reading of his addresses in the temple on the fast-day, so that the command of God to do so should appear quite justified. But the matter took a considerably different form when Nebuchadnezzar had actually taken Jerusalem and Jehoiakim had submitted. The commencement of the judgments which had been threatened by God was the proper moment for laying before the hearts of the people, once more, the intense earnestness of the divine message, and for urging them to deeper penitence. Just at this point the reading of the whole contents of the prophecies delivered by Jeremiah appears like a final attempt to preserve the people, on whom judgment has fallen, from complete destruction.
Vers. 2-8. The word of the Lord to Jeremiah was to this effect: " Take thee a book-roll, and write on it (Tp&K for nhv) all the words that I have spoken unto thee concerning Israel and Judah, and concerning all the nations, from the day I spake unto thee, from the days of Josiah till this day. Ver. 3. Perhaps the house of Judah will hear all the evil which I meditate doing to them, that they may return every one from his evil way, and that I may forgive their iniquity and their sin." WBB* here means, to hear correctly and lay to heart; cf. xxvi. 3. Hitzig views the command as meaning, not that Jeremiah is now for the first time to write down his addresses (which would be an impossibility for the most faithful memory), but that he is merely to write them down together in one book, out of the several scattered leaves and scraps. Graf has already refuted this view, though more fully than was necessary. It is not a copying, word for word, of every separate address that is meant, but merely a writing down of the essential contents of all his oral discourses. This is quite clear, not merely from what is stated in ver. 3 as the object of this command, but also from the character of these collected addresses, as they are preserved to us. That the expression u all the words" is not to be understood in the most rigid sense, follows from the very fact that, when Jeremiah anew wrote down his prophecies, ver. 32, he further added " many similar words" to what had been contained in the first book-roll, which was burned by Jehoiakim. But Jeremiah might perhaps be able to retain in his memory the substance of all the addresses he had delivered during the twenty-three years, since all of them treated of the same subjects— reproof of prevailing sins, threat of punishment, and promises. — Ver. 4. Jeremiah carries out the divine command by making Baruch write down on a book-roll all the words of the Lord, out of his mouth ( 'd*V *BD, i.e. at the dictation of Jeremiah); and since he himself is prevented from getting to the house of the Lord, he bids him read the words he had written down in the ears of the people in the temple on the fast-day, at the same time expressing the hope, ver. 7: " Perhaps their supplication will fall down before the Lord, and they will return each one from his wicked way; for great is the wrath and the anger which the Lord hath expressed concerning this people. Baruch, who is mentioned so early as xxxii. 12 ff as the attendant of the prophet, was, according to the passage now before us, his amanuensis, and executed his commissions. ■WW <:n, according to xxxiii. 1 and xxxix. 15, might mean, « I am in prison;" but this does not accord with the request of the princes, ver. 19, that Jeremiah should hide himself. Moreover ^ does not mean "seized, captus," but « stopped, restrained! hindered; see on Neh. vi. 10. The cause of hindrance is not mentioned, as being away from the purpose of the narrative " To road in the roll in the ears of the people," i.e. to read to the people out of the book. Div ara does not mean " on any fast-day whatever," but, " on the fast-day." The article is omitted because there was no need for defining the fast-day more exactly. The special fast-day mentioned in ver 9 is intended. 'U! DTunn fen, « their supplication will fall down before the Lord," i.e. reach unto God, as if it were laid before His feet. ^ is transferred from the posture of the suppliant —his falling down before God— to his supplication. Plence, in HiphiL, to make the supplication fall down before the Lord is equivalent to laying the request at His feet; xxxviii. 26, xlii. 9, Dan. ix. 18, 20. If the supplication actually comes before God,' it is also heard and finds success. This success is pointed out in U1 Wfo « that they may repent." If man, in a repentant spirit, supplicates God for grace, God grants him power for conversion. But the return of the people from their wicked way is indispensable, because the wrath which God has expressed concerning it is great, i.e. because God has threatened a heavy judgment of wrath.— Ver. 8. Baruch executes his commission. Vers. 9-19. The reading of the look in the temple.— Ver. 9. In the fifth year of Jehoiakim, in the ninth month, " they proclaimed a fast before the Lord,— all the people in Jerusalem, and all the people who had come out of the cities of Judah to Jerusalem." Di* vry>9 to call, declare, appoint a fast; cf. 1 Kings xxi. 9, 12, 2 Chron. xx. 3. From the tenor o'f the words, the people who lived in Jerusalem and those who had come thither out of the country might seem to have called the fast. But this is impossible; for the people from the cities of Judah evidently came to Jerusalem only in consequence of the fast being appointed. Hence Graf is of opinion that Eto N"j[5 seems here used in a general way of the keeping of such a fast. This view is not confirmed by any parallel instances. The expression is inexact, and the inexactness has arisen from the effort to attain greater conciseness of expression. The meaning is this: a fast was proclaimed, and all the people in Jerusalem and out of the cities of Judah came to worship the Lord in the temple. It remains doubtful with whom the appointment originated, — whether with the king, or with the high priest and the priesthood. The ninth month corresponds to our December, and consequently came round with the cold season; cf. ver. 22 f. The fast-day was a special one; for in the law only the day of atonement, in the seventh month, was prescribed as a fast-day. On the object of this measure, see supra, p. 94 f. — Ver. 10. On this day Barach read the addresses of Jeremiah out of the book to the people who had come to the temple, in the " chamber of Gemariahj the son of Shaphan, the scribe, in the upper forecourt, at the entrance of the new gate of the house of the Lord." Gemariah the son of Shaphan was one of the king's private scribes, a secretary of state. For, according to ver. 12, he belonged to the princes, and was probably a brother of Alnkam the son of Shaphan, who had already shown himself, before this, a protector of the prophet (xxvi. 24). The chamber which he had in the temple was situated in the upper forecourt, at the entrance of the newT gate, whose position we cannot exactly determine (see on xxvi. 10), but which led from the outer to the inner court of the priests, which rose higher than the others. — Ver. 11. Micaiah, a son of Gemariah, was also listening to the reading; and he it was who brought the news into the palace. He made for the room, i.e. the office, of Elishama, the secretary of state, where the princes, viz. Elishama, Delaiah the son of Shemaiah, Elnathan the son of Achbor (cf. xxvi. 22), Gemariah the son of Shaphan, and Zedekiah the son of Hananiah, had just met for a consultation; and he mentioned to them what he had heard. — Ver 14. On this information the princes sent Jehudi (perhaps one of the under-officers of the secretary of state) to Baruch, to bring him, with the book from which he had read. From the designation, " Jehudi son of Nethaniah, son of Shelemiah, son of Cushi," Hitzig and Graf conclude that the first and last are not proper names, but appellatives, " the Jew" and " the Cushite," and account for the use of them on the ground that, through the application of the law given in Deut. xxiii. 7, 8 to Cushites as well as Egyptians, the ancestor was a Cushite, and only his great-grandson became a Jew, or Jewish citizen, and was called " Jehudi." But this view is opposed (1) by the fact that the names of the father and the grandfather are true proper names, and these, moreover, contain the name Jah (Jahveh), — hence are genuine proper names of Israelites; moreover, (2) even in olden times Jehudith occurs as a woman's name, Gen. xxvi. 34. According to this, Jehudi is a true proper name, and at the most, Cushi is but a surname of the great-grandfather, given him because of his descent from the Cushites. Further, the law, Deut. xxiii. 7, applies only to the posterity of the Edomites and Egyptians, that these should not be received into the congregation of the Lord till the third generation; this ordinance was based on grounds which did not permit of its application to other nations. These might be naturalized even in the first generation on undergoing circumcision, with the exception of Canaanites, Ammonites, and Moabites, who were not to be admitted into the Israelitish community even in the tenth generation, Deut. xxiii. 3. — Ver. 15. When Baruch came, the princes, in token of friendly and respectful treatment, bade him sit down and read to them out of the book he had brought with him. Ver. 16. But when they heard all the words read, " they were afraid one at another; " i.e. by looks, gestures, and words, they gave mutual expression of their fear, partly because of the contents of what had been read. Although they were generally acquainted with the sense and the spirit of Jeremiah's addresses, yet what had now been read made a powerful impression on them; for Baruch plainly had read, both to the people in the temple and to the princes, not the whole book, but only the main portions, containing the sternest denunciations of sin and the strongest threats of punishment. The statement, " he read in (out of) the book the words of Jeremiah" (ver. 10), does not mean that he read the whole book; this would only have wearied the people and weakened the impression made. But they were partly also terrified, perhaps, by the boldness of a declaration which so decidedly opposed the desires and hopes of the king; for the thought of the event mentioned xxvi. 20 ff. would at once suggest to them the danger that might arise to the lives of Jeremiah and Baruch from the despotic character of the king. They said therefore to Baruch, " We must tell the king all these things." For it was clear that the matter could not long remain concealed from the king, after the public reading in the temple. Hence they dared not, agreeably to their official relation to the king, hide from him what had taken place. — Ver. 17. Meanwhile, in order to inform themselves more exactly regarding what had happened, they ask Baruch, " Tell us, how hast thou written all these words at his mouth?" Thereupon Baruch replied, "He used to call aloud these words to me," i.e. he used to dictate them to me by word of mouth, " and I wrote them in the book with ink." The imperfect expresses the repeated or continued doing of anything; hence tfJK here means to dictate, which requires considerable time. In the following circumstantial clause is found the participle 2T\b *3W, while I was writing; and so I myself was doing nothing else all the time than writing down what was dictated. Some commentators have found a stumbling-block in PBD in the question of the princes (ver. 17); the LXX. and Ewald omit this word, inasmuch as Baruch does not explain till afterwards that he had written down the words from the mouth of Jeremiah. Others, like Venema, take PBD as a question =VBDn. Both explanations are arbitrary and unnecessary. The princes knew quite well that the substance of the book was from the mouth of Jeremiah, i.e. contained his addresses; but Baruch, too, might have composed the book from the oral discourses of the prophet without being commissioned by him, without his knowledge also, and against his will. Accordingly, to attain certainty as to the share of the prophet in this matter, they ask him, and Baruch answers that Jeremiah had dictated it to him. — Ver. 19. Thereupon the princes advised Baruch to hide himself and Jeremiah; for they know beforehand that Jehoiakim would put to death the witnesses of the truth.
Vers. 20-2G. The reading of the book before the ling. — Ver. 20. The princes betook themselves to the king rmn, into the inner fore-court (leaving the book-roll in the chamber of the secretary of state), and gave him an account of the matter. TOJ is the inner court of the palace, in which the royal dwellingapartments are situated. TpDH, to entrust a thing or person to any one (xl. 7), hence to deposit, preserve, Isa. x. 28. — Ver. 21. Thereupon the king makes Jehudi fetch the book, and causes it to be read before himself and the assembled princes. *JE>y OT, to stand over, since the one who is standing before his master, while the latter is sitting, overtops him; cf. Gen. xviii. 8. The king was sitting, as is stated in ver. 22 by way of preparation for what follows, in the winter-house, i.e. in that portion of the palace which was erected for a winter residence, in the ninth month, i.e. during the winter, and the pot of coals was burning before him. The rooms of eastern houses have no stoves, but in the middle of the floor there is a depression, in which is placed a sort of basin with burning coals, for the purpose of heating the apartment: cf. Keil's Bibl. Archdol. ii. § 95, S. 7. For the expression nxn-nNl, " and as for the fire-pot, it was burning before him," cf. Ewald, § 277, d. — Ver. 23. Now, " when Jehudi had read three or four columns, he [the king] cut it [the book-roll] with the pen-knife and threw [the pieces] into the fire, in the pot of coals, till the whole roll was consumed on the fire in the pot of coals." HinPT, properly a doors," are not leaves, but divisions of a book. The opinion of Hitzig, that leaves are to be understood, and that the Megillahj therefore, was not a roll, properly speaking, but a book with leaves, cannot be substantiated. In the synagogues, the Jews even at the present day, according to the ancient custom, use real rolls, which are rolled up on a stick. On these the Scripture text is written, though not in lines which occupy the whole breadth of the roll; the whole space is divided into parts. lt Scribebatur" says Buxtorf in Institutione epistolari Hcbr. p. 4, il volumen lineis, non per longitudinem totius chartoe aut pergamenti deductis, sed in plures areas diuisis, quomodo sunt latera paginarum in libris complicatis. Isto? propterea voce metaplwricd vocantur HinTl januce valvWj quod figuram januce referant." The subject of *}T\\>\ is not Jehudi, as Hitzig thinks, but the king, and the word does not signify "he cut it out," but "he cut it in pieces" (the suffix refers to «"|p^r}). We are not, with many expositors, to view the corfduct of the king in such a way as to think that, whenever Jehudi had read some portions, he cut these off and threw them into the fire, so that the book was, with these interruptions, read through to the end, and at the same time gradually destroyed. Such conduct Graf justly characterizes as trifling and silly, and not in harmony writh the anger of a king having a violent disposition. But we cannot see how the imperfect mp (in Niigelsbach's opinion) proves that Jehudi read the whole, when the text states that only three or four columns were read. The meaning, peculiar to the imperfect, of the continuation or repetition of an act, is fully made out by supposing that the king cut down the roll bit by bit, and threw the pieces into the fire one after the other. Neither does the expression fwBJTva Drny imply that the whole book was read; for E*pn does not denote the completion of the reading, but the completion of the burning: hence the words are to be translated, " till the whole roll had completely got upon the fire," i.e. was completely burnt; cf. ~?K Dfl, Gen. xlvii. 18. The inf. absol. *EBfrTI is a continuation of the finite verb, as frequently occurs, e.<j. in xiv. 5, xxxii. 44. — Ver. 24 f. In order to characterize the conduct of the king, the writer remarks, u Yet the king and his servants who heard all these words (which Jehudi had read) were not afraid, nor did they rend their garments (in token of deep sorrow); and even when Elnathan, Delaiah, and Gemariah addressed the king, requesting him not to burn the roll, he did not listen to them." So hardened was the king, that he and his servants neither were terrified by the threatenings of the prophet, nor felt deep sorrow, as Josiah did in a similar case (2 Kings xxii. 11, cf. 1 Kings xxi. 27), nor did they listen to the earnest representations of the princes. ^JJJ are the court-attendants of the king in contrast with the princes, who, according to ver. 16, had been alarmed by what they heard read, and wished, by entreaties, to keep the king from the commission of such a wicked act as the destruction of the book. Ewald, on the contrary, has identified VH2y with the princes, and thereby marred the whole account, while he reproaches the princes with " acting as the wretched I instruments of what they knew to be the sentiments prevailing at court/' — Ver. 26. Not content with destroying the book, Jehoiakim also wished to get Baruch and Jeremiah out of the way; for he ordered the king's son Jerahmeel and two other men to go for Baruch the scribe and Jeremiah the prophet; " but the Lord hid them," i.e. graciously kept them out of the sight of the spies. tgwna is not the son of Jehoiakim, — if so, we would find simply fo3"IW; but a royal prince is meant, cf. xxxviii. 6, 1 Kings xxii. 26, 2 Kings xi. 1, 2, Zeph. i. 8.
Vers. 27-32. The punislnnent which is to come on Jehoiakim for his wicked act. — Ver. 27 ff. After the burning of the roll by the king, Jeremiah received from the Lord the command to get all that had been on the former roll written on another, and to announce the following to Jehoiakim the kincr: Ver. 29. "Thus saith Jahveh: Thou hast burned this roll, whilst thou sayest, Why hast thou written thereon, The king of Babylon shall surely come and destroy this land, and root out man and beast from it? Ver. 30. Therefore thus saith Jahveh regarding Jehoiakim the king of Judah: He shall not have one who sits upon the throne of David, and his corpse shall be cast forth to the heat by day and to the frost by night. Ver. 31. And I shall punish him, his servants, and his seed for their iniquity, and bring on them and on all the inhabitants of Judah and all the men of Judah all the evil which I have spoken to them; but they did not hear." On the meaning of ver. 29Z> see p. 94, supra. The threatening expressed in ver. 30 f. is really only a repetition of what is given in xxii. 18, 19, and has already been explained there. u There shall not be to him one who sits upon the throne of David," i.e. he is not to have a son that shall occupy the throne of David after him. This does not contradict the fact that, after his death, his son Jehoiachin ascended the throne. For this ascension could not be called a sitting on the throne, a reign, inasmuch as he was immediately besieged in Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, and compelled to surrender after three months, then go into exile to Babylon. On ver. 31 cf. xxxv. 17, xix. 15.— Ver. 22. Thereupon Jeremiah made his attendant Baruch write all the words of the former roll on a new one, " out of his mouth," i.e. at his dictation; and to these he added many other words like them.
nErD, i.e. of like import with those on the previous roll. Hence we perceive that on the first roll there were written down not all the several addresses fully, but only the most important parts of his oral announcements.
B. EXPERIENCES AND UTTERANCES OF JEREMIAH DURING THE SIEGE AND CAPTURE OF JERUSALEM. — CHAP. XXXVII.-XXXIX.
Chap, xxxvii. Declaration regarding the Issue of the Siege; Imprisonment of Jeremiah and Conversation with the King.
Vers. 1-10. The account of what befell Jeremiah and what he did during the last siege of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans, until the taking of the city, is introduced, vers. 1 and 2, with the general remark that Zedekiah, — whom Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon had made king in the land of Judah in place of Coniah (on which name see on xxii. 24), — when he became king, did not listen to the words of the Lord through Jeremiah, neither himself, nor his servants (officers), nor the people of the declaration of the prophet regarding the issue of the siege, which he sent to the kinxz by the messengers who were to beseech him for his intercession with the Lord. Vers. 3-5. The occasion of this declaration was the following: Zedekiah sent to Jeremiah
xxxviii. 1), and Zephaniah the son of Maaseiah, the priest (see
Jahveh our God." This message was sent to Jeremiah while he still went in and out among the people, and had not yet been put in prison (Nv3, ver. 4 and Hi. 31, an unusual form for
K73, vers. 15 and 18, for which the Qeri would have us in both too, had marched out of Egypt to oppose the Chaldeans; and the latter, when they heard the report of them (BJ9?*, the news of their approach), had withdrawn from Jerusalem fa® rpy, see on xxi. 2), viz. in order to repulse the Egyptians. Both of these circumstances are mentioned for the purpose of giving a clear view of the state of things: (a) Jeremiah's freedom to go in and out, not to prepare us for his imprisonment afterwards, but to explain the reason why the king sent two chief officers of the realm to him, whereas, after his imprisonment, he caused him to be brought (cf. ver. 17 with xxxviii. 14); and (b) the approach of the Egyptians joined with the raising of the sieo;e, because this event seemed to afford some hope that the city would be saved. — This occurrence, consequently, falls within a later period than that mentioned in chap. xxi. — Ver. 6. Then came the word of the Lord to this effect: Ver. 7. u Thus saith Jahveh, the God of Israel: Thus shall ye say to the kino- of Judah who hath sent you to me to ask at me, Behold, the army of Pharaoh, which marched out to your help, will return to Egypt, their own land. Ver. 8. And the Chaldeans shall return and fight against this city, and take it, and burn it with fire. Ver. 9. Thus saith Jahveh: Do not deceive yourselves by thinking, The Chaldeans will quite withdraw from us; for they will not withdraw. Ver. 10. For, even though ye had beaten the whole armv of the Chaldeans who are hVhting with you, and there remained of them only some who had been pierced through and through, yet they would rise up, every man in his tent, and burn this city with fire." In order to cut off every hope, the prophet announces that the Egyptians will bring no help, but withdraw to their own land before the Chaldeans who went out to meet them, without having accomplished their object; but then the Chaldeans will return, continue the siege, take the city and burn it. To assure them of this, he adds: " Ye must not deceive yourselves with the vain hope that the Chaldeans may possibly be defeated and driven back by the Egyptians. The destruction of Jerusalem is so certain that, even supposing you were actually to defeat and repulse the Chaldeans, and only some few grievously wounded ones remained in the tents, these would rise up and burn the city." In wl "^vH the inf. abs. is to be observed, as strengthening the idea contained in the verb: " to depart wholly or completely; " Tjin is here to u depart, withdraw." D^JK in contrast with />]n are separate individuals. "^"J*?* pierced through by sword or lance, i.e. grievously, mortally wounded.
Vers. 11-15. The imprisonment of Jeremiah. — During the time when the Chaldeans, on account of the advancing army of Pharaoh, had withdrawn from Jerusalem and raised the siege, " Jeremiah went out of the city to go to the land of Benjamin, in order to bring thence his portion among the people." iTrflj in accordance with later usage, for Wj as in iii. 9; cf. Ewald, § 345, b. B£Tp ppnp is explained in various ways. P?H? for PyHOr can scarcely have any other meaning than to share, receive a share; and in connection with B$p, " to receive a portion thence," not, to receive an inheritance (Syr., Chald., Vulg.), for QE'P does not suit this meaning. The LXX. render rov dyopdaai i/celdev, which Theodoret explains by 7rplaa6cu aprovs. All other explanations have still less in their favour. We must connect D^n "nina with 'W Tcb? since it is unsuitable for O'fD P?ib. — Ver. 13. When he was entering the gate of Benjamin, where Jeriah the son of Shelemiah kept watch, the latter seized him, saying, " Thou dearest to go over to the Chaldeans" ( /* «J, see on xxi. 0). The gate of Benjamin (xxxviii. 7; Zech. xiv. 10) was the north gate of the city, through which ran the road to Benjamin and Ephraim; hence it was also called the gate of Ephraim, 2 Kings xiv. 13, Neh. viii. 16. J"Hp2 /£?, " holder of the oversight," he who kept the watch, or commander of the watch at the gate. " The accusation was founded on the well-known views and opinions of Jeremiah (xxi. 9); but it was mere sophistry, for the simple reason that the Chaldeans were no longer lying before the city" (Hitzig). — Ver. 14. Jeremiah replied: " A lie [= not true; cf. 2 Kings ix. 12]; I am not going over to the Chaldeans. But he gave no heed to him; so Jeriah seized Jeremiah, and brought him to the princes. Ver. 15. And the princes were angry against Jeremiah, and smote him, and put him in prison, in the house of Jonathan the scribe; for they had made it the prison," — probably because it contained apartments suitable for the purpose. From ver. 16 we perceive that they were subterranean prisons and vaults into which the prisoners were thrust; and from ver. 28 and xxxviii. 26, it is clear that Jeremiah was in a confinement much more severe and dangerous to his life. There he sat many days, i.e. a pretty long time.
Vers. 16-21. Examination of the prophet by the king, and alleviation of his confinement. — Ver. 16 ff. u When Jeremiah had got into the dungeon and into the vaults, and had sat there many days, then Zedekiah the king sent and fetched him, and questioned him in his own house (palace) secretly," etc. Ver. 16 is by most interpreters joined with the foregoing, but the words N2 *3 do not properly permit of this. For if we take the verse as a further confirmation of D*)£n *B*jJ5, " the princes vented their wrath on Jeremiah, beat him," etc., " for Jeremiah came...," then it must be acknowledged that the account would be very long and lumbering. NJ »3 is too widely separated from *B¥£. Hence the LXX. have kcu rj\0ov, — some codices, indeed, ore f)\6ov; and Ewald, Hitzig, and Graf would change *9 *3 into *bj1. But the passages, 1 Sam. ii. 21, where Igfi *3 is supposed to stand for *$&% and Isa. xxxix. 1, where PW?5 is thou£jht to have arisen out of WW '•a, 2 Kin^s xx. 12, are not very strong proofs, since there, as here, no error in writing is marked. The Vulgate has itaque ingressus; many therefore would change *3 into |3; but this also is quite arbitrary. Accordingly, with Rosenmiiller, we connect ver. 16 with the following, and take *3 as a temporal particle; in this, the most we miss is) copulative, or W. In the preceding sentence the prison of the prophet is somewhat minutely described, in order to prepare us for the request that follows in ver. 20. Jeremiah was in a TiarW^ " house of a pit," cf. Ex. xii. 29, i.e. a subterranean prison, and in Hariri. This word only occurs here: but in the kindred dialects it means vaults, stalls, shops; hence it possibly signifies here subterranean prisoncells, so that ni*3nn~7S more exactly determines what "»i3iTTr>3 is. This meaning of the word is, at any rate, more certain than that given by Eb. Scheid in Rosenmiiller, who renders nnn by flexa, curvata; then, supplying ligna, he thinks of the stocks to which the prisoners were fastened. — The king questioned him "tf}-2> " *n secret?" namely, through fear of his ministers and court-officers, who were prejudiced against the prophet, perhaps also in the hope of receiving in a private interview a message from God of more favourable import. To the question of the king, " Is there any word from Jahveh? " Jeremiah replies in the affirmative; but the word of God is this, " Thou shalt be given into the hand of the king of Babylon," just as Jeremiah had previously announced to him; cf. xxxii. 4, xxxiv. 3. — Jeremiah took this opportunity of complaining about his imprisonment, saying, ver. 18, u In what have I sinned against thee, or against thy servants, or against this people, that ye have put me in prison? Ver. 19. And where are your prophets, who prophesied to you, The king of Babylon shall not come against you, nor against this land?" Jeremiah appeals to his perfect innocence (ver. 18), and to the confirmation of his prediction by its event. The interview with the king took place when the Chaldeans, after driving the Egyptians out of the country, had recommenced the siege of Jerusalem, and, as is evident from ver. 21, were pressing the city very hard. The Kethib VX is to be read fafc, formed from HJM with the suffix S; the idea of the suffix lias gradually become obscured, so that it stands here before a noun in the plural. The Qeri requires RHt, The question, Where are your prophets? means, Let these prophets come forward and vindicate their lying prophecies. Not what these men had prophesied, but what Jeremiah had declared had come to pass; his imprisonment, accordingly, was unjust. — Besides thus appealing to his innocence, Jeremiah, ver. 20, entreats the king, " Let my supplication come before thee, and do not send me back into the house of Jonathan the scribe, that T may not die there." For 'n Nr^n see on xxxvi. 7. The king granted this request. " He commanded, and they put Jeremiah into the court of the watch [of the royal palace, see on xxxii. 2], and gave him a loaf of bread daily out of the bakers' street, till all the bread in the city was consumed;" cf. lii. 6. The king did not give him his liberty, because Jeremiah held to his views, that were so distasteful to the king (see on xxxii. 3). " So Jeremiah remained in the court of the guard."
In this chapter two events are mentioned which took place in the last period of the siege of Jerusalem, shortly before the capture of the city by the Chaldeans. According to ver. 4, the number of fighting men had now very much decreased; and according to ver. 19, the number of deserters to the Chaldeans had become large. Moreover, according to ver. 9, famine had already begun to prevail; this hastened the fall of the city.
Vers. 1-13. Jeremiah is cast into a miry pit, but drawn out again by Ebedmelech the Cushite. Vers. 1-6. Being confined in the court of the guard attached to the royal palace, Jeremiah had opportunities of conversing with the soldiers stationed there and the people of Judah who came thither (cf. ver. 1 with xxxii. 8, 12), and of declaring, in opposition to them, his conviction (which he had indeed expressed from the beginning of the siege) that all resistance to the Chaldeans would be fruitless, and only bring destruction (cf. xxi. 9 f.). On this account, the princes who were of a hostile disposition towards him were so embittered, that they resolved on his death, and obtain from the king permission to cast him into a deep pit with mire at the bottom. In ver. 1 four of these princes are named, two of whom, Jucal the son of Shelemiah, and Pashur the son of Malchiah, are known, from xxxvii. 3 and xxi. 1, as confidants of the king; the other- two, Shephatiah the son of Mattan, and Gedaliah the son of Pashur, are not mentioned elsewhere. Gedaliah was probably a son of the Pashur who had once put Jeremiah in the stocks (xx. 1, 2). The words of the prophet, vers. 2, 3, are substantially the same as he had already uttered at the beginning of the siege, xxi. 9 (rvrp as in xxi. 9). Ver. 4. The princes said to the king, " Let this man, we beseech thee, be put to death [for the construction, see on xxxv. 14]; for therefore [i.e. because no one puts him out of existence, — \3T7V as in xxix. 28] he weakens the hands of the men of war who remain in this city, and the hands of all the people, by speaking words like these to them; for this man does not seek the welfare of this people, but their ill." Nfpp for HS")^ to cause the hands of any one to be relaxed, i.e. to make him dispirited; cf. Ezra iv. 4, Isa. xxxv. 3. BH'l with?, as Job x. 6, Deut. xii. 30, 1 Chron. xxii. 19, etc., elsewhere with the accusatival DK; cf. xxix. 7 et passim. On this point cf. xxix. 7. The allegation which the princes made against Jeremiah was possibly correct. The constancy with which Jeremiah declared that resistance was useless, since, in accordance with the divine decree, Jerusalem was to be taken and burnt by the Chaldeans, could not but make the soldiers and the people unwilling any longer to sacrifice their lives in defending the city. Nevertheless the complaint' was unjust, because Jeremiah was not expressing his own personal opinion, but was declaring the word of the Lord, and that, too, not from any want of patriotism or through personal cowardice, but in the conviction, derived from the divine revelation, that it was only by voluntary submission that the fate of the besieged could be mitigated; hence he acted from a deep feeling of love to the people, and in order to avert complete destruction from them. The courage of the people which he sought to weaken was not a heroic courage founded on genuine trust in God, but carnal obstinacy, which could not but lead to ruin. — Ver. 5. The king said, " Behold, he is in your hand, for the king can do nothing alongside of you." This reply indicates not merely the weakness and powerlessness of the king against his princes, but also his inward aversion to the testimony of the man of God. u That he would like to save him, just as he afterwards does (ver. 10)," is not implied in what he says, with which he delivers up the prophet to the spite of his enemies. Though the princes had at once put Jeremiah to death, the king would not even have been able to reproach them. The want of courage vigorously to oppose the demand of the princes did not spring from any kindly feeling towards the prophet, but partly from moral weakness of character, partly from inward repugnance to the word of God proclaimed by Jeremiah. On the construction #W p« instead of the participle from /tojj which does not occur, cf. Ewald, § 321, a. B3HX is certainly in form an accusative; but it cannot be such, since iin follows as the accusative: it is therefore either to be pointed D3DK or to be considered as standing for it, just as IfltK often occurs for "HAN, " with," i.e. " along with you." — Ver. G. The princes (E^) novv cast Jeremiah into the pit of the king's son (^>b"|3, see on xxxvi. 26) Malchiah, which was in the court of the prison, letting him down with ropes into the pit, in which there was no water, but mud; into this Jeremiah sank. The act is first mentioned in a general way in the words, " they cast him into the pit;" then the mode of proceeding is particularized in the wTords, u and they let him down," etc. On the expression VlJSJpD "linn, « the pit of Malchiah," cf. Ewald, § 290, d: the article stands here before the nomen regens, because the nomen rectum, from being a proper name, cannot take it; and yet the pit must be pointed out as one well known and definite. That it was very deep, and that Jeremiah must have perished in it if he were not soon taken out again, is evident from the very fact that they were obliged to use ropes in letting him down, and still more so from the trouble caused in pulling him out (vers. 10-12). That the princes did not at once put the prophet to death with the sword not owing to any feeling of respect for the king, because the latter had not pronounced sentence of death on him, but because they sought to put the prophet to a painful death, and yet at the same time wished to silence the voice of conscience with the excuse that they had not shed his blood. — Vers. 7-13. The deliverance of Jeremiah. Ebedmelech the Cushite, a eunuch, heard of what had happened to Jeremiah. D*"tp £»N signifies a eunuch: the t^N shows that Dnp is here to be taken in its proper meaning, not in the metaphorical sense of an officer of the court. Since the king had many wives (ver. 22 f.), the presence of a eunuch at the court, as overseer of the harem, cannot seem strange. The law of Moses, indeed, prohibited castration (Deut. xxiii. 2); but the man was a foreigner, and had been taken by the king into his service as one castrated. "TO fin is a proper name (otherwise it must have been written ^3?); the name is a genuine Hebrew one, and probably may have been assumed when the man entered the service of Zedekiah. — On hearing of what had occurred, the Ethiopian went to the king, who was sitting in the gate of Benjamin, on the north wall of the city, which was probably the point most threatened by the besiegers, and said to him, Ver. 9, a My lord, O king, these men have acted wickedly in all that they have done to Jeremiah the prophet, whom they have cast into the pit; and he is dying of hunger on the spot, for there is no more bread in the city." TO "^TIN «nn, lit.: " they have done wickedly what they have done." nojl cannot be translated, " and he died on the spot," for Ebedmelech wishes to save him before he dies of hunger. But neither does it stand for Hb;i? " so that he must die." The imperfect with Vav consecutive expresses the consequence of a preceding act, and usually stands in the narrative as a historic tense; but it may also declare what necessarily follows or will follow from what precedes; cf. Ewald, § 342, a. Thus nop stands here in the sense, " and so he is dying," i.e. u he must die of hunger." vnnn, « 0n his spot," i.e. on the place where he is; cf. 2 Sam. ii. 23. The reason, " for there is no longer any bread (ZiJ?7} with the article, the necessary bread) in the city," is not to be taken in the exact sense of the words, but merely expresses the greatest deficiency in provisions. As lon^ as Jeremiah was in the court of the prison, he received, like the officers of the court, at the king's order, his ration of bread every day (xxxvii. 21). But after he had been cast into the pit, that royal ordinance no longer applied to him, so that he was given over to the tender mercies of others, from whom, in the prevailing scarcity of bread, he had not much to hope for. — Ver. 10. Then the king commanded the Ethiopian, " Take hence thirty men in thine hand, and bring up Jeremiah out of the pit before he dies." 1*1*3, " in thine hand/1 i.e. under your direction; cf. Num. xxxi. 49. The number thirty has been found too great; and Ewald, Ilitzig, and Graf would read HtfvP, because the syntax requires the singular ^"N after tTBW, and because at that time, when the fighting men had already decreased in number (ver. 4), thirty men could not be sent away from a post in danger without difficulty. These two arguments are quite invalid. The syntax does not demand Bfy"; for with the tens (20-90) the noun frequently follows in the plural as well as in the singular, if the number precede; cf. 2 Sam. iii. 20, 2 Kings ii. 16, etc.; see also Gesenius' Grammar, § 120, 2. The other argument is based on arbitrary hypotheses; for the passage neither speaks of fighting men, nor states that they would be taken from a post in danger. Ebedmelech was to take thirty men, not because they would all be required for drawing out the prophet, but for making surer work in effecting the deliverance of the prophet, against all possible attempts on the part of the princes or of the populace to prevent them. — Ver. 11. Ebedmelech took the men at his hand, went into the kind's house under the treasurv, and took thence rags of torn and of worn-out garments, and let them down on ropes to Jeremiah into the pit, and said to him, " Put, I pray thee, the rags of the torn and cast-off clothes under thine arm-pits under the ropes." Jeremiah did so, and then they drew him out of the pit by the ropes. ""^'^n nrw is a room under the treasury. ^pa, in ver. 12 D*W/3, from n?::.
to be worn away (of clothes), are ra^s. HUHD (from 3HD, to drao-. drag about, tear to pieces) are torn pieces of clothing, crpp worn-out garments, from ns>o, in Niphal, Isa. li. 6, to vanish, dissolve away. The article at ntoHDn is expunged from the i for sake of uniformity, because it is not found with B'nta; but it may as well be allowed to stand as be removed. mPW D*T, properly the roots of the hands, are not the knuckles of the hand, but the shoulders of the arms. Oyjni? nnnp? under the ropes; i.e. the rags were to serve as pads to the ropes which were to be placed under the arm-pits, to prevent the ropes from cutting the flesh. When Jeremiah had been drawn out in this way from the deep pit of mire, he remained in the court of the prison.
Vers. 14—28. Conversation between the Jang and the prophet. — Ver. 11. King Zedekiah was desirous of once more hearing: a message of God from the prophet, and for this object had him brought into the third entrance in the house of the Lord. Nothing further is known about the situation and the nature of this entrance; possibly it led from the palace to the temple, and seems to have been an enclosed space, for the king could carry on a private conversation there with the prophet. The king said to him, " I ask you about a matter, do not conceal anything from me." He meant a message from God regarding the final issue of the siege, cf. xxxvii. 7. Jeremiah, knowing the aversion of the king to the truth, replies, ver. 15: "If I tell thee [sc. the word of the Lord], wilt thou not assuredly kill me? And if I were to give thee advice, thou wouldst not listen to me." Ver. 16. Then the king sware to him secretly, "As Jahveh liveth, who hath made us this soul, I shall certainly not kill thee, nor deliver thee into the hand of these men who seek thy life." "tKW ns, as in xxvii. 8, properly means, " with regard to Him who has created us." The Qeri expunges HK. "These men" are the princes mentioned in ver. 1. — Ver. 17 f. After this solemn asseveration of the king, Jeremiah said to him, " Thus saith Jahveh, the God of hosts, the God of Israel: If thou wilt assuredly go out to the princes of the king of Babylon [i.e. wilt surrender thyself to them, cf. 2 Kings xviii. 31, xxiv. 12], then thy soul shall live, and this city shall not be burned with fire, and thou and thy house shall live. But if thou dost not go out to the princes of the king of Babylon, then this city will be given into the hand of the Chaldeans, and they shall burn it with fire, and thou shalt not escape out of their hand." The word of God is the same that Jeremiah had already repeatedly announced to the king, cf. xxxiv. 2-5, xxxii. 4, xxi. 4-10. The princes (chiefs, generals) of the king of Babylon are named, because they commanded the besieging army (xxxix. o, 13); Nebuchadnezzar himself had his headquarters at Biblah, xxxix. 5. — Ver. 10 ff. Against the advice that he should save his life by surrendering to the Chaldeans, Zedekiah suggests the consideration, " I am afraid of the Jews, who have deserted pS 733 as in xxxvii. 13] to the Chaldeans, lest they give me into their hands and maltreat in-." - ^Vn;?, illudere alicui, to abuse any one by mockery or ill-treatment; ef. Num. xxii. 21), 1 Chron. x. 4, etc. Jeremiah replies, ver. 20 f., "They will not give thee up. Yet, pray, listen to the voice of Jahveh, in that which I say to thee, that it may be well with thee, and that thy soul may live. Ver. 21. But if thou dost refuse to go eut [i.e. to surrender thyself to the Chaldeans], this is the word which the Lord hath shown me [has revealed to me]: Y r. 22. Behold, all the women that are left in the house of the king of Judah shall be brought out to the princes of the king of Babylon, and those [women] shall say, Thy friends have misled tliee and have overcome thee; thy feet are sunk in the mud, they have turned away back. Ver. 23. And all thy wives and thy children shall they bring out to the Chaldeans, and thou shalt not escape out of their hand; for thou shalt be seized by the hand of the king of Babylon, and thou shalt burn this city with fire." — After Jeremiah had once more assured the king that he would save his life by voluntary surrender, he announces to him that, on the other alternative, instead of his becoming the sport of the deserters, the women of his harem would be insulted. The women who remain in the king's house, as distinguished from "thy wives" (ver. 23), are the women of the royal harem, the wives of former kings, who remain in the harem as the concubines of the rei^nin^ kin£. These are to be brought out to the generals of the Chaldean king, and to sing a satire on him, to this effect: " Thy friends have misled thee, and overpowered thee," etc. The first sentence of this song ia from Obad. ver. 7, where *flRH0n.stands instead of WPDn. The friends (wf '$#**, cf. xx. 10) are his great men and his false prophets. Through their counsels, these have led him astray, and brought him into a bog, in which his feet stick fast, and then they have gone back; i.e. instead of helping him out, they have deserted him. leaving him sticking in the boo-. The expression is figurative, and the meaning of the figure is plain ("f:i is plural).)''z, air. Xey., is equivalent to HJEl, a bog, Job viii, 11. Moreover, the wives and children of Zedekiah are to fall into the hands of the Chaldeans. D'xyio, the participle, is used instead o{ the finite tense to express the notion of indefinite personality: "they bring them out." T3 LMEnn, properly, "to be seized in the hand,'' is a pregnant construction for, " to fall into the hand and be held fast by it." "Thou shalt burn this city," i.e. bring the blame of burning it upon thyself. Ewald, Ilitzig, and Graf, following the LXX., Syr., and Chald., would change *t\m into *Hfen, but needlessly.— Vers. 24-27. From the king's weakness of character, and his dependence on his evil counsellors, neither could this interview have any result. Partly from want of firmness, but chiefly from fear of the reproaches of his princes, he did not venture to surrender himself and the city to the Chaldeans. Hence he did not wish that his interview with the prophet should be known, partly for the purpose of sparing himself reproaches from the princes, partly also, perhaps, not to expose the prophet to further persecutions on the part of the great men. Accordingly, he dismissed Jeremiah with this instruction: " Let no man know of these words, lest thou die." But if the princes should learn that the king had been speaking with him, and asked him, u Tell us, now, what thou hast said to the king, do not hide it from us, and we will not kill thee; and what did the king say to thee? " then he was to say to them, 11 1 presented my supplication before the king, that he would not send me back to the house of Jonathan, to die there." As to the house of Jonathan, see on xxxvii. 15. On ^nn T'SD cf. xxxvi. 7, xxxvii. 20.— Vers. 27, 28. What the king had supposed actually occurred, and Jeremiah gave the princes, who asked about the conversation, the reply that the king had prepared for him. W30 l^nn., they went away in silence from him, and left him in peace; cf. 1 Sam. vii, 8. "OW)»$ *6 "3, for the matter, the real subject of the conversation did not become known. So Jeremiah remained in the court of the prison till the day of the capture of Jerusalem. — The last sentence of ver. 28 belongs to the following chapter, and forms the introductory sentence of the passage whose conclusion follows in xxxix. 3.
In vers. 1-14 the events which took place at the taking of Jerusalem are summarily related, for the purpose of showing how the announcements of Jeremiah the prophet have been fulfilled.1
\ rs. 1-3. "And it came to pass, when Jerusalem had been taken (in the ninth year of Zedekiah the king of Judah, in
1 The greater portion of the section vers. 1-14 is set down by Movers, Hitag, Ewald, and G the interpolation of a later gloeser, compiled either oat of chap, lil 4-16, or from 2 Kings xxv. Vers..'5, n, 12, and 14 are supposed by Efitzig to be all thai auine, on the ground that these are the only portions containing independent statements, not derived from any other source. They treat simply of the person of tho prophet, and state how, at the command of Nebuchadnezzar, Nebuzaradan^ the captain of the body-guard, brought Jeremiah out of the court of the prison and delivered him over to the rare of Cedaliah. If we gather together the verses that are left as genuine, we find, of course, that the subject treated of in them is what occurred when Jeremiah was liberated from his confinement in the court of the prison. But neither is the difference between ver. 14 and chap. xl. 1 ff. thereby settled, nor the difficulty removed, that Nebuzaradan, the captain of the body-guard, was not present with the army when Jerusalem was taken; according to lii. 12, it was not till a month after that event that he was sent to Jerusalem from Riblah by the king, who was staying there. Vers. 11 and 12, too, retain the appearance of being interpolations. Ewald and Graf, accordingly, consider these two verses also as later insertions. But even this view does not settle the differences and difficulties that have been raised, but only increases them; for it would represent Jeremiah as being set at liberty, not by Nebuzaradan, as is related xl. 1 ff., but by the Chaldean generals named in ver. 3. — When, however, we inquire into the grounds taken as the foundation of this hypothesis, the fact that the LXX. have omitted vers. 4, 10, and 13 can prove nothing, since vers. 1 and 2 are found in the LXX., although these also are supposed to be spurious. The only argument adduced for the attempted excision, viz. that vers. 1, 2, 4-10 break the connection, proves absolutely nothing in itself, but merely receives importance on the the tenth month, Nebuchadrezzar and all his army had come against Jerusalem ami besieged it; in the eleventh year of Zedekiahj in the fourth month, on the ninth of the month, was the city broken into), then came all the princes of the king of Babylon and sat down at the middle gate, — Nereal-sharezer Samgar-nebo, Sarsechim, chief chamberlain, Nergal-sharezer, chief magician, and all the rest of the princes of the king of Babylon." These three verses, to which the last clause of chap, xxxviii. 28 belongs, form one period, broken up by a pretty long piece inserted in it, on the beginning and duration of the siege of Jerusalem; so that, after the introductory clause T^- nI?] ( =?3 as m xxxvii. 11), chap, xxxviii. 28, the conclusion does not come till the word *K3J, ver. 3. In the parenthesis, the length of the siege, as stated, substantially agrees with lii. 4- 7a and 2 Kings xxv. l-4a, only that in these passages supposition that the present section could only treat of the liberation of Jeremiah, and must contain nothing that is mentioned elsewhere regarding the taking of Jerusalem. But this supposition is quite unwarranted. That vers. 1 and 2 are inserted parenthetically cannot afford any ground of suspicion as regards their genuineness; and that, in vers. 4-10, mention is brietly made of Zedekiah's being seized and condemned, of the destruction of Jerusalem, and the carrying away of the people, except the very meanest, — this also cannot throw suspicion on the genuineness of these verses; for these statements obviously aim at showing how the word of the Lord, which Jeremiah had proclaimed repeatedly, and once more a short time before the storming of the city, had been fulfilled. Finally, it follows from this that these statements agree with those given in chap. lii. and in 2 Kings xxv. regarding the capture and destruction of Jerusalem; but it does not follow that they have been derived from the latter as their source. The language in the disputed verses is peculiarly that of Jeremiah. The expression miiT nivfc) is found in Jer. xxvii. 20; while in lii. 10, instead of it, we find ITfliT1 *"lfe>"?3j and in 2 Kings xxv. the whole sentence is
Thus we must set down as groundless and erroneous the allegation made by Hitzig and Graf, that these verses of our chapter have been derived from 2 Kings xxv.; for the form of the name Nebuchadnezzar (with n) in ver. 5 instead of Nebuchadrezzar, which agrees with 2 Kings xxv., and which has been brought to bear on this question, can prove nothing, just because not only in ver. 11 but also in ver. 1 (which also is said to be taken from 2 Kings xxv.) we find Nebuchadrezzar.
the time when the siege began is further determined by the mention of the day of the month, BHTO "tifrjtej which words are omitted here. The siege, then, lasted eighteen months, all but one day. After the besiegers had penetrated into the city through the breaches made in the wall, the princes, i.e. the chief generals, took up their position at u the gate of the midst." OB*, " they sat down," i.e. took up a position, fixed their quarters. " The gate of the midst," which is mentioned only in this passage, is supposed, and perhaps rightly, to have been a gate in the wall which divided the city of Zion from the lower city; from this point, the two portions of the city, the upper and the lower city, could most easily be commanded. — With regard to the names of the Babylonian princes, it is remarkable (1) that the name Nergal-sharezer occurs twice, the first time without any irmation, tin1 second time with the official title of chief magician: (2) that the name Samgar-nebo has the name of God (Nebo or Nebu) in the second half, whereas in all other compounds of this kind that are known to us, Nebu forms the first portion of the name, as in Nebuchadnezzar, Nebuzaradan, Nebushasban (ver. 13), Naboned, Nabonassar, Nabopolassar, etc.; (3) from this name, too, is omitted the title of office, while we find one with the following name. Moreover (4) in ver. 13, where the Babylonian grandees are again spoken of, instead of the four names, only three are given, but every one of them with a title of office; and only the third of these, Nergal-sharezer, the chief magician, is identical with the one who is named last in ver. 3; while Nebushasban is mentioned instead of the Sarsechim of ver. 3 as D^d"!"], chief of the eunuchs (high chamberlain); and in place of Nergal-sharezer, Samgar-nebo, we find Nebuzaradan as the commander of the body-guards (E^nzitp 2"\). On these four grounds, Hitzig infers that ver. 3, in the passage before us, has been corrupted, and that it contained originally only the names of three persons, with their official titles. Moreover, he supposes that 12ED is formed from the Persian *l>- and the derivation-syllable >£=, Pers.,,, and means " he who has or holds the cup," the cup-bearer; thus corresponding to np^ 31, Rab-shakeh, "chief cup-bearer," 2 Kings xviii. 17, Isa. xxxvi. 2. He also considers B^p")'^ a Hebraizing form of hence Mp^ = Dn9 n1> of which the former has been a marginal gloss, afterwards received into the text. This complicated combination, however, by which Hitzig certainly makes out two official titles, though he retains no more than the divine name Nebu as that of Rabsaris, is founded upon two very hazardous conjectures. Nor do these conjectures gain much support from the renewal of the attempt, made about fifty years since by the late P. von Bohlen, to explain from the Neo-Persian the names of persons and titles occurring in the Assyrian and Old-Babylonian languages, an attempt which has long since been looked upon as scientifically unwarranted. Strange as it may seem that the two persons first named are not further specified by the addition of an official title, yet the supposition that the persons named in ver. 3 are identical with those mentioned in ver. 13 is erroneous, since it stands in contradiction with lii. 12, which even Hitzig recognises as historically reliable. According to lii. 12, Nebuzaradan, who is the first mentioned in ver 13, was not present at the taking of Jerusalem, and did not reach the city till four weeks afterwards; he was ordered by Nebuchadnezzar to superintend arrangements for the destruction of Jerusalem, and also to make arrangements for the transportation of the captives to Babylon, and for the administration of the country now bein^ laid wraste. But in ver. 3 are named the generals who, when the city had been taken by storm, took up their position within it. — Nor do the other difficulties, mentioned above, compel us to make such harsh conjectures. If Nergal-sharezer be the name of a person, compounded of two words, the divine name, Nergal (2 Kings xvii. 30), and Sharezer, probably dominator tuebitur (see Delitzsch on Isa. xxxvii. 38), then Samgar-Nebu-Sarsechim may possibly be a proper name compounded of three words. So long as we are unable wTith certainty to explain the words "I3pp and D^D"i^ out of the Assyrian, we can form no decisive judgment regarding them. But not even does the hypothesis of Hitzig account for the occurrence twice over of the name Nergal-sharezer. The Nergal-sharezer mentioned in the first passage was, no doubt, the commander-in-chief of the besieging army; but it could hardly be maintained, with anything like convincing power, that this officer could not bear the same name as that of the chief magician. And if it be conceded that there are really errors in the strange words *33"H|DD and D*3p")bj we are as yet without the necessary means of correcting them, and obtaining the proper text.
In vers. 4-7 are narrated the flight of Zedekiah, his capture, and his condemnation, like what we find in lii. 7-11 and 2 Kings xxv. 4-7. "When Zedekiah the kimr of Judah and all the men of war saw them (the Chaldean generals who had taken up their position at the mid-gate), they fled by night out of the city, by the way of the king's garden, by a gate between the walls, and he went out by the way to the Arab ah. Ver. 5. But the army of the Chaldeans pursued after them, and over- k Zedekiah in the steppes of Jericho, and captured him, and brought him to Nebuchadnezzar the king <>f Babylon, to Riblah, in the land of Ilamath; and he pronounced judgment on him." Hitziff and Graf c< that t he connection of these events, made by EX"} "iw\\'_, is awkward, and say that the king would not have waited till the Chaldean generals took up their position at the mid-gate, nor could he see these in the night-time; that, moreover, he would hardly have waited till the city was taken before he fled. These objections are utterly worthless. If the city of Zion, in which the royal palace stood, was separated from the lower city by a wall, then the king might still be quite at ease, with his men of war, in the upper city or city of Zion, so long as the enemy, who were pushing into the lower city from the north, remained at the separating wall, near the middle gate in it; and only when he saw that the city of Zion, too, could no longer be held, did he need to betake himself to flight with the men of war around him. In actual fact, then, he might have been able to see the Chaldean generals with his own eyes, although we need not press Eso so much as to extract this meaning from it. Even at this juncture, flight was still possible through the south gate, at the king's garden, between the two walls. Thenius, on 2 Kings xxv. 4, takes DTibh to mean a double wall, which at the southern end of Ophel closed up the ravine between Ophel and Zion. But a double wall must also have had two gates, and Thenias, indeed, has exhibited them in his plan of.Jerusalem; but the text.speaks of but one gate (-iyL"). « The two walls" are rather the walls which ran along the eastern border of Zion and the western border of Ophel. The gate between these was situated in the wall which ran across the Tyropoean valley, and united the wall of Zion and that of Ophel; it was called the horse-gate (Neh. iii. 28), and occupied the position of the modern " dung-gate" (Bab-el Moghdribeh); see on Neh. iii. 21, 2$. It was not the "gate of the fountain;' as Thenius (Bucher der Kon. S. 456), Xagelsbach, and others imagine, founding on the supposed existence of the double wall at the south end of Ophel. Outside this gate, where the valley of the Tyropoeon joined with the valley of the Kidron, lav the king's garden, in the vicinity of the pool of Siloam; see on Neh. iii. 15. The words 'W im introduce further details as to the king's flight. In spite of the preceding plurals iWW *lTO?\ the sing. K£ is quite suitable here, since the narrator wishes to give further details with regard to the flight of the king alone, without bringing into consideration the warriors who fled alonowith him. Nor does the following Dmns militate against this view; for the Chaldean warriors pursued the king and his followers, not to capture these followers, but the king. Escaped from the city, the king took the direction of the n2iyy the plain of the Jordan, in order to escape over Jordan to Gilead. But the pursuing enemy overtook him in the steppes of Jericho (see on Josh. iv. 13, pp. 50, 51 of Clark's Translation), and thus before he had crossed the Jordan; they led him, bound, to Eiblah, before the king of Babylon. « Riblah in the land of Hamath" is still called Riblek, a wretched village about 20 miles S.S.W. from Hums (Emesa) on the river el Ahsy (Orontes), in a large fertile plain in the northern portion of the Bekda, on the great caravan-track which passes from Palestine through Damascus, Emesa, and Hamath to Thapsacus and Carchemish on the Euphrates; see Robinson's Bill. Res. iii. 545, and on 2 Kings xxiii. 33 (vol. ii. p. 160 of Clark's Translation).— On "131 D^ttS'f?, to speak judgment, pronounce sentence of punishment, see on i. 16. Nebuchadnezzar caused the sons of Zedekiah and all the princes of Judah (Dnh, nobles, lords, as in xxvii. 30) to be slain before the eyes of the Jewish king; then he put out his eyes and bound him with brazen fetters, to carry him away to Babylon (K^ for KW?), where, according to lii. 11, he remained in confinement till his death.
Vers. 8-10 contain a brief notice regarding the fate of the city of Jerusalem and its inhabitants, joined on to the passage preceding, in order to prepare the way for a short account of the treatment which Jeremiah experienced at the same time. From the more detailed notice regarding the fate of the city, given in lii. 12 ff., -2 Kin::- \.w. ie that the destruction of the city and the carrying away of the people took place one month after their fall, and that the king of Babylon had appointed bnzaradan, the commander of his body-guards, to go to.lerum for the purpose of carrying out those matters. In these verses of ours, a] Ian is mentioned as the one who carried out the judgment that had been pronounced ( \vr. 10 U.);
M if it had all OC< Immediately after the capture of the city, and BS if N ' P nadan had been always on the spot. For the writer of this chapter did not need to give « historically ea account of the separate events; it was merely necessary briefly to mention the chief points, in order to place in proper light the treatment exp I by the prophet. The Chaldeans burned the king's home (the palace; and DVn"iT3. This latter exi n, taken in tion with u the king's house," signifies the rest of the city apart from the king's palace; hence ^2 is used in a collective The temple i- not mentioned, as being of no [Uence for the immediate purpose of this short notice. — Ver. 9. "And the rest of the people that had remain d in the city, and the deserters who had deserted to him, and the rest of the ] c< pie that remained, Nebuzaradan, the chief of the body-guards, led captive to Babylon. Ver. 10. But of the poorest of the people, who had nothing, Nebuzaradan left some in the country, and he gave them vineyards and arable fields at the same time." ty after OW refers, ad sensum, to the king of Babylon; his name, certainly, is not given in the immediate context, but it is readily suggested by it. In lii. 15 we find fcia sfop-^J instead of TOf; yet we might also refer this last-named word to the following subject, Nebuzaradan, as the representative of the king. D^natp'ai, properly, chief of the slayers, Le. of th< itioners, is the chief of the king*s body- urd, who occupied the first place among the royal attendants; on Gen. wwii. 36. 1>\ the addition of the words Di'3 n', on that day, i.e. then, the more general account regarding Jerusalem and its inhabitants is concluded, for the purpose of attaching to it the notice regarding the fate of the prophet Jeremiah, vers. 1 1 1 1.
Vers. 11-14. Nebuchadnezzar gave orders regarding Jeremiah, through Nebuzaradan, the chief of the body-guards: u Take him, and set thine eyes upon him, and do him no harm; hut, just as he telleth thee, so do with him." In obedience to this command, (< Nebuzaradan, the chief of the body-guards, sent, — and Nebushasban the head chamberlain, and Nergalsharezer the chief magician, and all (the other) chief men of the king of Babylon, — they sent and took Jeremiah out of the court of the prison, and delivered him over to Gedaliah the son
Ahikam, the son of Shaphaiu, to take him out to the house. Thus he dwelt among the people." — On the names of the Chaldean grandees, see on ver. 3. Instead of the chief chamberlain (Dnp-ari) Sarsechim, there is here named, as occupying this office, Nebushasban, who, it seems, along with Nebuzaradan, was not sent from Riblah till after the taking of Jerusalem, when Sarsechim was relieved. "We cannot come to any certain conclusion regarding the relation in which the two persons or names stand to one another, since Nebushasban is only mentioned in ver. 13, just as Sarsechim is mentioned only in ver. 3. Gedaliah the son of Ahikam, the man who had already on a former occasion given protection to Jeremiah (xxvi. 24), was, according to xl. 5, placed by the king of Babylon over the cities of Judah, i.e. was nominated the Chaldean governor over Judah and the Jews who were left in the land. To him, as such, Jeremiah is here (ver. 14) delivered, that he may take him into the house. T\\2 is neither the temple (Hitzig) nor the palace, the kings house (Graf), but the house in which Gedaliah resided as the governor; and we find here IVan, not foV?3, since the house was neither the property nor the permanent dwellingplace of Gedaliah. — According to this account, Jeremiah seems to have remained in the court of the prison till Nebuchadnezzar came, to have been liberated by Nebuzaradan only at the command of the king, and to have been sent to Gedaliah the governor. Bat this is contradicted by the account in xl. 1 ff., according to which, Nebuzaradan liberated the prophet in Hamah, where he had been kept, confined by manacles, among the captives of Judah that were to be carried to Babylon: Nebuzaradan sent for him, and gave him his liberty. This contradiction has arisen simply from the intense brevity with which, in this verse, the fate of Jeremiah at the capture and destruction of Jerusalem is recorded; it is easy to settle the difference in this way: — When the city was taken, those inhabitants, especially males, who had not carried arms, were seized by the Chaldeans and carried out of the city to Ramah, where they were held prisoners till the decision of the king regarding their fate should be made known. Jeremiah shared this lot with his fellow-countrymen. When, after this, Nebuzaradan came to Jerusalem to execute the king's commands regarding the city and its inhabitants, at the special order of his monarch, he sent for Jeremiah the prophet, taking him out from among the crowd of prisoners who had been already carried away to Bamah, loosed him from his fetters, and gave him permission to choose his place of residence. This liberation of Jeremiah from his confinement might, in a summary account, be called a sending for him out of the court of the prison, even though the prophet, at the exact moment of his liberation, was no longer in the court of the prison of the palace at Jerusalem, but had been already carried away to Ramah as a captive.
Vers. 15-18. Jeremiah's message of comfort to Ebedmelech. — Ver. 15. " Now to Jeremiah there had come the word of the Lord, while he remained shut up in the court of the prison, as follows: Ver. 16. Go and speak to Ebedmelech the Cushite, saying, Thus saith Jahveh of hosts, the God of Israel: Behold, I will bring my words against this city for evil and not for good, and they shall take place before thee on that day. Ver. 17. But I will deliver thee on that day, saith Jahveh; neither shalt thou be given into the hand of the men of whom thou art afraid. Ver. 18. For I will surely save thee, neither shalt thou fall by the sword, and thine own life shall be thy spoil, because thou hast trusted me, saith Jahveh." — This word of God for Ebedmelech came to the prophet, no doubt, very soon after his deliverance from the miry pit by this pious Ethiopian; but it is not given till now, and this by way of supplement, lest its introduction previously should break the chain of events which occurred at the time of that deliverance, chap, xxxviii. 14- xxxix. 13. Hence rvn, Ver. 15, is to be translated as a pluperfect. <w Go and say," etc., is not inconsistent with the fact that Jeremiah, from being in confinement, could not leave the court of the prison. For Ebedmelech could come into the prison, and then Jeremiah could go to him and declare the word of God. u Behold, I will bring my words against this city," i.e. I shall cause the evil with which I have threatened Jerusalem and its inhabitants to come, or, to be accomplished (*30 with N dropped, as in xix. 15, and "?« for by), ^izb vrn, « and these words are to take place before thy face," i.e. thou shalt with thine own eyes behold their fulfilment, mnr\ Di'ii, i.e. at the time of their occurrence. But thou shalt be saved, not fall into the hands of the enemy and be killed, but carry away thy body out of it all as booty; cf. xxi. 9, xxxviii. 2. " Because thou hast trusted me;" i.e. through the aid afforded to my prophet thou hast continued thy faith in me.
Chap. xl. and xli. Liberation of Jeremiah. Murder of Gedaliah by Ishmael, and its results.
Chap. xl. 1-6. The liberation of Jeremiah by Nebuzaradan, the chief of the body-guards. — The superscription, " The word which came to Jeremiah from the Lord, after that Nebuzaradan, the captain of the body-guard, had let him go from Ramah," does not seem to be appropriate; for in what follows there is no word of God declared by Jeremiah, but first, 2-6, we are told that Jeremiah was liberated and given in charge to Gedaliah; then is told, xl. 7-xli. 18, the story of the murder of Gedaliah the governor by Ishmael, together with its consequences; and not till xlii. 7 ff. is there communicated a word of God, which Jeremiah uttered regarding the Jews who wished to flee to
Egypt, and had besought him for some revelation from God (xlii. 1-6). The heading of our verse cannot refer to this prophecy, not merely for the reason that it is too far removed, but still more because it has a historical notice introducing it, xlii. 1-6. Our superscription rather refers to i. 1-3; and "9*1 here, as well as there, mean?, not a single prophecy, but a number of prophecies. Just as njrv "Qi in i. 2 forms the heading for all the prophecies uttered by Jeremiah from the thirteenth year of Josiah till the destruction of Jerusalem and the carrying away of the people in the eleventh year of Zedekiah, so the words 'W 1BW "O^n of this verse form the superscription for the prophecies which Jeremiah uttered after the desfruction of Jerusalem, i.e. to the section formed by chap, xl.-xlv., although chap. xliv. xlv. have headings of their own; these, however, are subordinate to the heading of this chapter, in the same way as the titles in vii. 1, xi. 1, xiv. 1, etc. fall under the general title given in i. 2. 3. — Regarding Nebuzaradan and the discharge of Jeremiah at Kainah (i.e. er Ram, see on xxxi. 15), cf. the explanations given on xxxix. 13 (p. 12 I of this volume). In what follows, from innps onwards, further details are given regarding Jeremiah's liberation. " When he (Nebuzaradan) sent for him, he (Jeremiah), bound with fetters, was among all the captives of Jerusalem and Judah who were being carried away to Babylon." Those who were to be carried away had been gathered together to Ramah, which lies about five miles north from Jerusalem; thence they were to set out for Babylon. D*|9?« (= D^T, Job xxxvi. 8, Isa. xlv. 14), " fetters," — here, according to ver. 4, " manacles," by which, perhaps, two or more prisoners were fastened to one another. — Vers. 2-4. When Jeremiah had been brought, the commander of the guards said to him, u The Lord thy God hath declared this evil against this place, and the Lord hath brought it on (brought it to pass), and hath done as He spake; for ye have sinned against the Lord, and have not hearkened to His voice: thus hath this thing happened to you." The mode of expression is that of Jeremiah; but Nebuzaradan may have expressed the thought, that now there had been fulfilled what Jeremiah had predicted in the name of God, because the people, by their rebellion, had broken the oath they had sworn before their God
(cf. Ezck. xvii. 13 IT.), and had thereby sinned against Him. The article before "Ol, required by the Qeii, is unnecessary; cf, Ewald, § 293, a; Gesenius, § 112, 2, a. — Ver. 4. Nebuzaradan then declared him free: " And now, behold, I free thee this day from the shackles on thine hands. If it please thee to come with me to Babylon, then come, and I will set mine eve upon thee (t.e. take thee under my protection, cf. xxxix. 12). But if it please thee not to come with me to Babylon, then let it be so. See, the whole country is before thee (cf. Gen. xiii. 9, xx. 5, etc.); whithersoever it pleases thee, and seems right to thee to go, go." Ver. 5. And because Jeremiah had not yet returned, he said, " Go back to Gedaliah,... whom the king of Babylon hath set over the cities of Judah, and remain with him among the people; or go wherever it seemeth right to thee to go." And the commander of the guard gave him what provisions he required and a present, and sent him away; thereafter Jeremiah went to Gedaliah to Mizpah, and remained there among the people who had been left behind in the land (ver. 6). The words 3HP) *6 *3Yyi were certainly misunderstood by the old translators, who made various conjectures as to their meaning; even yet, Dahler, Movers, Graf, and Xiigelsbach are of opinion that " it is impossible to understand" this sentence, and that the text is plainly corrupt. Luther renders: u for no one will any longer return thither." Hitzig considers this translation substantially correct, and only requiring to be a little more exactly rendered: u but there, no one returns home again." Apart, however, from the consideration that on this view ^"J'y, which stands at the head of the sentence, does not get full justice paid to it, the thought does not accord with what precedes, and the reference of the suffix to the indefinite u person" or "one" is extremely forced. According to what goes before, in which Nebuzaradan gives the prophet full liberty of choosing whether he would go with him to Babylon or remain in the country, in whatever part he likes, and from the following advice which he gives him, " Go, or return, to Gedaliah," the words M^J fc6 &p9 on account of the third person (3N^)j cannot certainly be an address of the chief captain to Jeremiah, and as little can they contain a remark about going to Babylon. The words are evidently, both as to their form and their contents, a circumstantial clause, containin cr a statement regarding the relation of Jeremiah to the proposal of the chief captain (and this is the view taken long ago by Kimchi), i.e. a parenthetical remark of the narrator, accordin ct to which Nebuzaradan demands that he shall remain with Gedaliah, in the sense, " and yet he was not going back," or, still better, on account of the imperfect WJ, " because he was still unwilling to go back," namely, to this or that place indefinitely; then Nebuzaradan further said, " Return, then, to Gedaliah." If we supply "»***! before 'U1 03*^ with which Nebuzaradan brings the matter to a close, the meaning is quite clear. It is evident from ver. 4 that Nebuzaradan stopped a little in order to let Jeremiah decide; but since the prophet did not return, i.e. neither decided in the one way nor the other, he adds 'Ul n^ri, and thereby puts an end to the indecision. nrnx means a portion of food, or victuals; cf. Hi. 34 and Prov. xv. 17. Mizpah, where Gedaliah had taken up his position, is the Mizpah of the tribe of Benjamin, where Samuel judged the people and chose Saul to be king (1 Sam. vii. 15 ff., x. 17); doubtless the modern Neby Stumcil, live miles north-west from Jerusalem, a short distance south-west from Ramah; see on Josh, xviii. 26.
Vers. 7-12. Return of those who had bten dispersed: they gather round Gedaliah. — Whilst the country and its capital were being conquered, many of the men of war had dispersed here and there through the land, and fled for refuge to regions difficult of access, where they could not be reached by the Chaldeans; others had even escaped into the territory of the Moabites, Ammonites, and Edomites. When these heard that now, after the destruction of Jerusalem and the carrying away of the captives, the king of Babylon had appointed Gedaliah as governor over the few people who had been left behind in. the country, they returned from their several places of refuge, and came to Mizpah to Gedaliah, who promised them protection and safety, on condition that they would recognise the authority of the king of Babylon and peaceably cultivate the soil. Dv'n ^b'? " leaders of the forces, captains." rrtfe>3, " in the country," as opposed to the city; nTfe>, " fields," as in xvii. 3. E«TtrjK; « their men," the troops under the captains.
ins Tjjfifl *3, u that lie had committed to his oversight and rare." " Men,1' viz. old, weak, infirm men; " women and children," whose husbands and fathers had perished; " and some of the poor of the country, of those who had not been carried captive to Babylon" (P partitive), i.e. the poor and mean people whom the Chaldeans had left behind in the country (xxxix. 10). — Ver. 8 ff. These captains came to Mizpah, namely () explicative), Ishmael the son of Nethaniah (according to xli. 1, the grandson of Elishama, and of royal blood), Johanan and Jonathan the sons of Kareah (cf. ver. 13 and xli. 11, 16, xlii. 1 ff.; the name Jonathan is omitted in 2 Kin^s xxv. 23; see on this passage), Seraiah the son of Tanhumeth, and the sons of Ephai the Netophathite (from Netophah in the vicinity of Bethlehem, 1 Chron. ii. 54, Ezra ii. 22), Jezaniah («W; but in 2 Kings xxv. 23 WJT|p) the Maachathite, from Maachah, a district in Syria near llermon, Deut. iii. 14, Josh. xii. 5. These men, who had borne arms against the Chaldeans, were concerned for their safety when they returned into the country. Gedaliah sware to them, i.e. promised them on oath, 11 Be not afraid to serve the Chaldeans; remain in the country and serve the king of Babylon, and it shall be well with you. And as for me, behold, I shall remain at Mizpah to stand before the Chaldeans who will come to us," i.e. as lieutenant of the king of Babylon, to represent you before the Chaldean officers and armies, to maintain your rights and interests, so that you may be able to settle down where you choose, without anxiety, and cultivate the land. " And as for yourselves, gather ye wine and fruit (Y\P, see on 2 Sam. xvi. 1) and oil, and put them in your vessels." *)?« is used of the ingathering of the fruits of the ground. It was during the fifth or sixth month (2 Kings xxv. 8), the end of July or beginning of August, that grapes, figs, and olives became ripe; and these had grown so plentifully in comparison with the small number of those who had returned, that they could gather sufficient for their wants. "And dwell in your cities, cities which ye seize," i.e. which you shall take possession of. Ver. 11 ff. Those Jews also who had fled, during the war, into the neighbouring countries of Moab, Ammon, Edom, etc., returned to Judah when they learned that the king of Babylon had left a remnant, and placed Gedaliah over them; they came to Mizpah to Gedaliah, who appointed them places to dwell in, and they gathered much wine and fruit, i.e. made a rich vintage and fruit harvest. IV1KP jflj, " to give a remainder," as it were to leave a remainder (v "Wrtn, xliv. 7, or rP D-ib>, Gen. xlv. 7).
Vers. 13-16. Gedaliah is forewarned of IshmaeFs intention to murder him. — After the return of those who had taken refuge in Moab, etc., Johanan the son of Kareah, together with the rest of the captains who were scattered here and there through the country, came to Gedaliah at Mizpah, to say to him: u Dost thou know indeed that Baalis the king of the Ammonites hath sent Ishmael the son of Nethaniah to take thy life? " The words u that were in the country" are neither a gloss, nor a thoughtless repetition by some scribe from ver. 7 (as Hitzig and Graf suppose), but they are repeated for the purpose of distinguishing plainly between the captains with their men from the Jews who had returned out of Moab, Ammon, and Ivlom. V?) nizn, « to strike the soul, life" = to kill; cf. Gen. xxzvii. 21, Deut. xix. (>. What induced the king of Ammon to think of assassination, — whether it was personal hostility towards Gedaliah, or the hope of destroying the only remaining support of the Jews, and thereby perhaps putting himself in possession of the country, — cannot be determined. That he employed Ishmael for the accomplishment of his purpose, may have been owing to the fact that this man had a personal envy of Gedaliah; for Ishmael, being sprung from the royal family (xl. 1), probably could not endure being subordinate to Gedaliah.— The plot had become known, and Gedaliah was secretly informed of it by Johanan; but the former did not believe the rumour. Johanan then secretly offered to slay Ishmael, taking care that no one should know who did it, and urged compliance in the following terms: " Why should he slay thee, and all the Jews who have gathered themselves round thee be scattered, and the remnant of Judah perish?" Johanan thus called his attention to the evil consequences which would result to the remnant left in the land were he killed; but Gedaliah replied, u Do not this thing, for thou speakest a lie against Ishmael." The Qeri needlessly changes vyn~?K into nj?JW?"7K; cf. xxxix. 12.
Chap. xli. vers, 1-10. Murder of Gedaliah and his follower*, well us other Jews, by Tshmael. — Vers. 1-3. The warning of Johanan had been only too well founded. In the seventh month, — only two months, therefore, after the destruction of Jerusalem ami the appointment of Gedaliah as governor, — [shmael came with ten men to Mi/pah, and was hospitably received by Gedaliah and invited to his table. Ishmael is here more exactly described as to his family descent, for the purpose of throwing a stronger light upon theexceeding cruelty of the murders afterwards ascribed to him. lie was the son of Nethaniah, the son of Klishama, — perhaps the secretary of state mentioned xxxvi. 12, or more likely the son of David who bore this name, 1} Sam. v. (), 1 Chron. iii. 8, xiv. 7; so that Ishmael would belong to a lateral branch of the house of David, be of royal extraction, and one of the royal lords. T'ftn W1 cannot be joined with Ishmael as the subject, because in what follows there is no further mention made of the royal lords, but only of Ishmael and his ten men; it belongs to what precedes, SHtt? nSvtsn, so that we must repeat \o before *3\ The objections of Niigelsbach to this view will not stand examination. It is not self-evident that Ishmael, because he was of royal blood, was therefore also one of the royal nobles; for the D^SH certainly did not form a hereditary caste, but were perhaps a class of nobles in the service of the king, to which class the princes did not belong simply in virtue of their being princes. But tlie improbability that Ishmael should have been able with ten men to overpower the whole of the Jewish followers of Gedaliah, together with the Chaldean warriors, and (according to ver. 7) out of eighty men to kill some, making prisoners of the rest, is not so great as to compel us to take ipan ^i in such a meaning as to make it stand in contradiction with the statement, repeated twice over, that Ishmael, with his ten men, did all this. Eleven men who are determined to commit murder can kill a large number of persons who are not prepared against such an attempt, and may also keep a whole district in terror.1 a And they did eat bread there together," i.e. they were invited by Gedaliah to