Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Jeremiah 2:18
And now what hast thou to do in the way of Egypt, to drink the waters of Sihor? or what hast thou to do in the way of Assyria, to drink the waters of the river?
18. what hast thou to do in the way to Egypt ] The thought is the same as that expressed in Isa 30:1-3. Ever since the time when Psammetichus I (b.c. 663 610), king of Egypt, reduced under his own sway the twelve separate kingdoms into which that country had been formed, there was a party of statesmen at Jerusalem who favoured an Egyptian alliance. This party Jeremiah constantly opposed.
to drink the waters of Shihor ] to hold communication with Egypt, and espouse its cause. The figure has been already suggested by the mention of fountains and cisterns ( Jer 2:13).
Shihor ] The word, which properly means turbid, is shewn by the context to be equivalent to the Nile, a word which itself denotes blue, or dark; so probably in Isa 23:3. Sometimes (as in Jos 13:3; 1Ch 13:5) the name is confined to the easternmost branch of the Nile.
what hast thou to do in the way to Assyria ] Both Israel and Judah had vacillated for many reigns between Egypt and Assyria. Menahem king of Israel bribed Pul king of Assyria to support him, and to him also his successors Pekahiah and Pekah seem to have looked. Hoshea sought the aid of Egypt to enable him to throw off the Assyrian yoke, while Josiah met his death in fighting against it and on behalf of the Eastern empire, Assyria’s successor. Thus subservience now to one now to the other quarter was familiar to those whom Jeremiah addressed. Hosea (Jer 7:2) had likened Israel in its vacillation to “a silly dove, without understanding.”
to drink the waters of the River ] Euphrates, the great river, on which was built Babylon. Cp. Isa 8:7.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Sihor – The Nile. To lean upon Egypt was a violation of the principles of theocracy.
The two rivers are the two empires, and to drink their waters is to adopt their principles and religion. Compare also Isa 8:6-7.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Jer 2:18
What hast thou to do in the way of Egypt.
Words of expostulation
I. Addressing myself to the Christian, I shall use the text in three senses, while I expostulate with you in regard to sin, to worldly pleasure, and to carnal trust.
1. O true believer, called by grace and washed in the precious blood of Christ, What hast thou to do in the way of Egypt, to drink the waters of the muddy river? What hast thou to do with the sins which once delighted thee, and which now find happy pastime for the world? A vision flits before my eye. The Lord God hath made a great feast; armies have met together; terrible slaughter has been the consequence. Mens arms have been red up to the very elbow in blood; they have fought with each other, and there they lie strewn upon the plain–thousands of carcasses bleeding. The vultures sniff the prey from far-off desert wilds; they fly, keen of scent. God hath made a great feast to the fowls of heaven, and to the ravenous beasts of the earth. But what is that I see? I see a dove flying with the same speed as the vulture towards the carrion. O dove, what hath brought thee there in dangerous connection with thy fierce enemies? Whither art thou going? Is there anything in that bloody feast that can content thee? Shall thy meek eyes glare with the fires of anger? Shah thy fair white plumage be stained with gore, and wilt thou go back to thy dove cote with thy pinions bloody red? The question then cannot be answered, because when a Christian goes into sin he commits all inconsistent act–inconsistent with the freedom which Christ has bought for him, and inconsistent with the nature which the Holy Spirit has implanted in him. Christian, what hast thou to do with sin? Hath it not cost thee enough already? What, man! hast thou forgotten the times of thy conviction? There is yet another light in which to put the sin of the believer. Let me repeat the question once again–What hast thou to do in the way of Egypt, to drink the waters of the muddy river? There is a crowd yonder. They have evidently assembled for some riotous purpose. They are attacking one man. There are very many of them. They give Him no space to take His breath, no time to rest. Let me press through the throng and look at the man, I know Him at once. He hath visage more marred than that of any other man. Tis He; it is the Crucified One, it is none other than Jesus, the Son of man, the Saviour of the world. Hark to the blasphemies which are poured into His ears! See how they spit in His face, and put Him co an open shame. Onward they bring Him, and you hear them cry, Crucify Him! crucify Him! crucify Him! They are doing it: they have nailed Him to the tree: yonder is a man with the hammer in his hand who has just now driven in the nail. Look round upon the mob. I can well comprehend why yonder drunkard, why yonder swearer, why the whoremonger, and the like of infamous notoriety, should have joined in this treacherous murder; but there is one man there–methinks I know his face. Ay, I have seen him at the sacramental table, eating the flesh and drinking the blood of Christ: I have seen him in the pulpit saying, God forbid that I should glory save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ: I have seen him on his knees in prayer, pleading what he called The precious blood. What hast thou to do in this counsel of the ungodly, this scene of sin without a parallel?
2. The pleasures of this world do sometimes entice the people of God, and they find some degree of mirth therein. To those Christians who can find pleasure in the common amusements of men, this question may be very pertinently put–What hast thou to do to drink the water of that muddy river? I can never understand that Christianity which alternately goes out to find joy in worldly amusements, and returns home to have fellowship with Christ. In the life of Madame Guyon I have read an anecdote something to this effect. She had been invited by some friends to spend a few days at the palace of St. Cloud. She knew it was a place full of pomp, and fashion, and, I must add, of vice also; but being over-persuaded by her friend, and being especially tempted with the idea that perhaps her example might do good, she accepted the invitation. Her experience afterwards should be a warning to all Christians. For some years that holy woman had walked in constant fellowship with Christ; perhaps none ever saw the Saviours face, and kissed His wounds more truly than she had done. But when she came home from St. Cloud she found her usual joy was departed; she had lost her power in prayer. She felt in going to the lover of her soul as if she had played the harlot against Him. She was afraid to hope that she could be received again to His pure and perfect love, and it took some months ere the equilibrium of her peace could be restored, and her heart could yet again be wholly set upon her Lord. He that wears a white garment must mind where he walks when the worlds streets are so filthy as they are.
3. We are all tried with the temptation to put our trust in things which are seen, instead of things which are not seen. The Lord hath said it–Cursed is he that trusteth in man and maketh flesh his arm, but blessed is he that trusteth in the Lord. Yet Christians often do trust in man, and then our text comes home–What hast thou to do in the way of Egypt, to drink the water of that muddy river? Some trust in horses and some in chariots, but we will stay ourselves upon the Lord God of Israel.
II. Convinced sinner, you feel your lost estate; Gods Holy Spirit has kindly looked upon you, and begun a good work in your soul. And yet during the past week you have fallen into your old sin. Ah! smarting and yet sinning! wounded and yet rebelling! pricked with the ox goad, and yet kicking against the pricks! It is hard for thee! And what was the cause of your sin after all? Was it worth sinning for–to grieve your conscience and vex the Holy Spirit? I have heard of a man who had just begun the Christian life, and he had some months of sorrow owing to a hasty temper. His neighbour had let some of his cattle stray into the field; he asked him to fetch them out again and mend the fence; his neighbour would not, and he flew into such a passion with him that afterwards he sat down and cried. Said he, Why, if all the cows in the field were sold, and I had lost the money, they were not worth the bother I made about them, nor worth one moment of the grief which I have to suffer. Oh! what fools we all are! Let us, however, write ourselves fools in capital letters, if when conscience is tender we yet go and do the very thing which we hate, and choose the very cup which was so bitter to our taste, so nauseous to us just now. You are under conviction of sin, and you have been lately–as it is a festive season–you have been frequenting the dancing room, or the theatre. Now these are amusements for worldlings; let them have them; I would not prevent them for a moment; let every man have his own amusement and his own joy. But what is this to you? What hast thou to do with it?
III. Lastly, to any who are careless. I have a hard task to bring a reasonable question to unreasonable men. Ye tell me that ye love the vanities of this world, and that they content you. I look you in the face and remind you that there have been many madmen in this world besides yourselves. Yet as there is some spark of reason left, let me see if I can kindle a flame of thought therewith. Sinner, God is angry with the wicked every day. What have you to do with joy? you are condemned already, because you believe not on the Son of God. What have you to do with peace–a condemned man dancing in his cell at Newgate with chains about his wrists? What have you to do with merriment? You! If you were sure you should live a week you might spend six days, if you would, in sin; but you are not sure you will live an hour. What have you to do with sin and its pleasures? God is furbishing his sword today; it is sharp and strong as the arm which shall wield it. That sword is meant for you except you repent. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
The believers portion superior to the worlds
Thou hast tasted of better drink than the muddy river of this worlds pleasure can give thee. If thy profession be not a lie thou hast had fellowship with Christ, thou hast had that joy which only the blessed Spirits above and the chosen ones on earth can know. Hast thou eaten the bread of angels, and canst thou live on husks? Good Rutherford once said, I have tasted of Christs own manna and it hath put my mouth out of taste with the brown bread of this worlds joy. What hast thou to do, etc.
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 18. What hast thou to do in the way of Egypt] Why dost thou make alliances with Egypt?
To drink the waters of Sihor?] This means the Nile. See on Isa 23:3.
The way of Assyria] Why make alliances with the Assyrians? All such connexions will only expedite thy ruin.
To drink the waters of the river?] The Euphrates, as nahar or hannahar always means Euphrates, the country between the Tigris and Euphrates, is termed to this day Maher alnahar, “the country beyond the river,” i.e., Mesopotamia.
Instead of cleaving to the Lord, they joined affinity and made alliances with those two nations, who were ever jealous of them, and sought their ruin. Egypt was to them a broken reed instead of a staff; Assyria was a leaky cistern, from which they could derive no help.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
What hast thou to do in the way of Egypt? what business hast thou there? or what dost thou expect from thence? or what need hast thou to go or send messengers thither, if thou wouldst but keep close to me?
Sihor, viz. Nilus; it signifies black, from whence called Melas by the Greeks, either from the blackness of the land it passed through, or of the soil it casteth up. See on Isa 23:3.
To drink the waters: here, and by the same words before, is meant, to seek help from either place, noting their strength, Isa 8:6. A metaphorical allegory, wherein God minds them of two of their broken cisterns, and shows them their folly to go so far when they might have been better supplied nearer home; as if God were not able to help them. Compare Jer 2:36. The river, i.e. Euphrates, often called so by way of eminency; the chief river of Assyria, Isa 7:20.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
18. nowused in a reasoningsense, not of time.
the way of EgyptWhathast thou to do with the way, that is, with going down toEgypt; or what . . . with going to Assyria?
drink . . . watersthatis, to seek reinvigorating aid from them; so Jer 2:13;Jer 2:36; compare “waters,”meaning numerous forces (Isa8:7).
Sihorthat is, theblack river, in Greek, Melas (“black”), theNile: so called from the black deposit or soil it leaves after theinundation (Isa 23:3). TheSeptuagint identifies it with Gihon, one of the rivers ofParadise.
the riverEuphrates,called by pre-eminence, the river; figurative for the Assyrianpower. In 625 B.C., theseventeenth year of Josiah, and the fourth of Jeremiah’s office, thekingdom of Assyria fell before Babylon, therefore Assyria ishere put for Babylon its successor: so in 2Ki 23:29;Lam 5:6. There was doubtless aleague between Judea and Assyria (that is, Babylon), which causedJosiah to march against Pharaoh-necho of Egypt when that king wentagainst Babylon: the evil consequences of this league are foretold inthis verse and Jer 2:36.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And now what hast thou to do in the way of Egypt,…. By worshipping of idols, in imitation of them; or by sending ambassadors thither for help, when they had their Lord, their God, so nigh, had they not forsaken him; nor had Josiah any business to go out against Pharaohnecho, 2Ch 35:21 and, contrary to the express word of God by the Prophet Jeremy, did the Jews which remained in Judea go into Egypt,
Jer 42:19.
To drink the waters of Sihor? which is the river Nile, as Jarchi interprets it. The Septuagint and Arabic versions render it “the waters of Geon”, or “Gihon”: and this also is the same with the Nile, as Josephus k affirms, who says,
“Geon, which runs through Egypt, is the same which the Greeks call Nile.”
So Jerom l from Eusebius,
“Geon is a river, which with the Egyptians is called Nile.”
The Vulgate Latin version renders it, “troubled water”; and such were the waters of the Nile, which had its name of Sihor from the blackness of it; and hence, by the Greeks m, was called Melas; and by the Latines n, Melo. Hence, as Braunius o observes, it was represented by a black stone, as other rivers by a white one; for which reason the black colour was very grateful to the Egyptians; and for the same reason Osiris, which is the very Nile itself, was reckoned black; and the ox Apis they worshipped was a black one, at least part of it, and was covered with black linen cloth; and its priests were also clothed in black, hence called Chemarim, Ho 10:5.
Or what hast thou to do in the way of Assyria; to go after their idolatrous practices, or to send to them for help; for this was the usual method of the Jews; when the Assyrians oppressed them, then they sent to Egypt for help; and when the Egyptians were upon them, then they applied to the Assyrians; and in both cases acted wrong, for they ought to have sought the Lord their God only:
to drink the waters of the river? of the river Euphrates. The sense is, that they preferred the waters of the Nile and of Euphrates, or the gods of the Egyptians and Assyrians, or the help of these people, before the Lord, the fountain of living waters, and his worship and powerful help. The Targum paraphrases this last clause thus,
“why do ye make covenant with the Assyrian, to carry you captive beyond the river Euphrates?”
k Antiqu. l. 1. c. 1. sect. 3. l De locis Hebraicis, fol. 91. H. m Eustathius in Dionys. n Servius in Virgil. Georg. l. 4. p. 343. & in Aeneid. l. 1. p. 541. o Selecta Sacr. l. 4. c. 9. p. 492, & l. 5. Exercit. 4. sect. 8. p. 700, 701.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
As I have just stated, the Prophet confirms what I said, — that the people could not ascribe the cause of their evils to others; for they ought to have imputed to themselves whatever they suffered; and at the same time their sin was doubled, because they looked here and there for vain remedies, and thus accumulated for themselves new causes of misery; for they ought to have acknowledged no other remedy for their evils except reconciliation with God. If, for instance, any one being ill knew the cause of his disease, and instead of adopting the true remedy had recourse to some vain expedients injurious to his recovery, is he not deemed worthy to die for having willfully despised what might have healed him, and for indulging himself in what is deceptive and fallacious? The same thing does Jeremiah now reprove in the people of Israel. “If you carefully inquire,” saith God, “how it is that you are so miserable, you will find that this cannot be ascribed to me, but to your own sins. Now, then, what ought you to have done? what remedy ought you to have sought, except to reconcile yourselves to me, to seek pardon from me, and to strive to correct your wickedness? I would then have immediately healed you; and had you come to me, you would have found me the best physician. And why do you now act in a way quite contrary? for you run after vain helps; now you flee to Egypt, then you flee to Assyria; but you will gain nothing by these expedients.” We now understand the object of the Prophet. For after having proved the people to be guilty of impiety, and shewn that the evils which they suffered could be ascribed neither to God nor to chance, nor to any such causes, he now shews to them, that the one true remedy was to return into favor with God; but that it was an evidence of extreme madness to run now to Egypt, and then to Assyria.
Now this reproof is supported by history; for the people had at one time the Assyrians as their enemies, and at another the Egyptians; and the changes were many. God employed different scourges to awaken the sottishness of the people; at one time, he whistled for the Egyptians, as we shall presently see; at another, he blew the trumpet in Assyria: so that the Israelites might know that they could never be safe without being under the government of God. But all these things being overlooked, such was the blindness of the people, that when they were assailed by the Assyrians, they fled to Egypt and sought aid from the Egyptians, and entered into a treaty with them; afterwards, when a change occurred, they sought a treaty with the Assyrians, and also bought it at a high price.
This madness is what the Prophet now reprobates, when he says, What hast thou to do in the way of Egypt? that is, “What advantage dost thou gain? How great is thy folly, since thou knowest that God is angry with thee, and that thou art suffering many evils? God is adverse to thee, and yet thou thinkest nothing of reconciliation. Thy healing would be to flee to God and to be reconciled to him; but what dost thou now do? Thou fleest to the Assyrians and to the Egyptians. How wretched is thy condition, and how great is thy folly in thus wearying thyself without any advantage!”
Now we may learn from this passage, that whenever God chastises us for our sins, we ought to seek a remedy, and not to rest in those vain comforts which Satan often suggests; for such charms introduce drowsiness, and healable diseases are by such means rendered fatal. What then ought we to do? We ought, as soon as we feel the scourges of God, to seek to return into favor with him; and not in vain shall be our effort. But if we look around us in all directions for help, our evils shall not be lessened but increased. To drink the waters of the Nile, and to drink the waters of Euphrates, is nothing else but to seek aids here and there.
He indeed alludes to the legations which had been sent; for they who went to Egypt drank of the waters of the Nile, and others of Euphrates. He yet speaks metaphorically, as though he had said, “God was ready to help thee, hadst thou betaken thyself to his mercy as thine asylum; but having neglected him, thou thoughtest it more advantageous to have such aids as Egypt and Assyria could bring. Thou thus seekest drink in remote countries, while God could give thee waters.” And he seems to refer to the similitude which he had shortly before used: he had called God the fountain of living waters; as though he had said, “God is to thee a refreshing and perennial fountain, and there would be abundance of waters for thee wert thou satisfied with him; but thy desire is to drink the waters of the Nile, and the waters of the Euphrates.” (44) We now then perceive the meaning of the Prophet.
He, no doubt, speaks of the waters of the Nile and of the Euphrates, because both those nations abounded apparently in wealth and power and in military forces. As, then, the people of Israel trusted in such auxiliaries, the Prophet here reproves their ingratitude, because they were not content with God’s help, though that was not so visible and conspicuous. God, indeed, has help sufficient for us; and were we content with him alone, no doubt an abundance of good things would to a full satisfaction be given to us; and as he is not wearied in doing good, he would supply us with whatever is desirable: but as we cannot see his beneficence with carnal eyes, we are therefore carried away after the allurements of the world. We may hence learn that we are not to seek drink either from the Nile or from the Euphrates, that is, from the enticing things of the world, which make a great shew and display; but that we are, on the contrary, to drink from the hidden fountain which is concealed from us, in order that we may seek it by faith. It now follows —
(44) No doubt this is the peculiar import of the passage, as though the Prophet had said, “What good to thee is to travel to Egypt to drink the waters of Sihor, a muddy river, (as the word imports;) and what good to thee is to travel to Assyria to drink the waters of the river, while thou hast at home a fountain of living, pure and perennial waters?” So Gataker considers the drift of the passage: — “To drink the water of Nilus in Egypt is put here for to seek help and relief there: but he delivereth it in these terms, as if he should say, that they could have nothing to do there, or no errand thither, unless it were to drink of the puddle water of that river, when they had, or might have had, as good, yea, far better than that, nearer at hand, at home. See Jer 18:14; so 2Kg 1:3.” Then the plainest version would be thus, —
And now, what hast thou to do with a journey to Egypt, That thou mightest drink the waters of Sihor? And what hast thou to do with a journey to Assyria, That thou mightest drink the waters of the river?
The comparison evidently is between the waters of Sihor and of the river Euphrates, and the living waters. As in other parts of Scripture the Euphrates is no doubt meant by the river, though here, as in Psa 80:11, and Isa 7:20, the article ה is not prefixed to it. — Ed
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(18) In the way of Egypt . . .?The rebuke becomes more and more specific. Great rivers were, in the poetry of the prophets, the natural symbols of the kingdoms through which they flowed. Sihor (= the turbid or muddy river) here, and in Isa. 23:3 the Nile (though in Jos. 13:3 it stands for the border stream between Palestine and Egypt), represented Egypt. The river, or flood, needing no other name as pre-eminent in its greatness (comp. Jos. 24:14-15), the Euphrates, stood for Assyria (comp. Isa. 8:7). The words point to the tendency to court the alliance now of one, now of the other of the great kingdoms of the world. The policy was no new one. Menahem in Israel, Ahaz in Judah, had courted Assyria (2Ki. 15:19; 2Ki. 16:7-8); Hezekiah, Babylon (Isaiah 39); Hoshea had sought help from Egypt (2Ki. 17:4). The prophet Hosea had rebuked both policies (Hos. 5:13; Hos. 7:11; Hos. 8:9). Even under Hezekiah there was a party seeking the Egyptian alliance (Isaiah 18, 19, 31. Under Manasseh and Amon that party was in power, and the very name of the latter probably bears witness to its influence. Josiah kept as far as possible the position of a neutral, but, when forced into action, and probably guided by the counsels of Hilkiah, resisted the advance of Pharaoh-nechoh (2Ki. 23:29). On his death the Egyptian party again gained ground under Jehoiakim, while Jeremiah, opposing its strength, urged the wisdom of accepting the guidance of events, and submitting to the Chaldans (so far continuing the line of action adopted by Hezekiah), and ultimately was accused of deserting his own people and falling away to their oppressors (Jer. 37:13).
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
18. The way of Egypt, is the way they must go to secure the aid of Egypt. What business have you going down to Egypt for help? God’s way is from Egypt, not to it. Sihor is the Nile, so called because of its black and turbid waters.
The river The Euphrates, upon whose banks stood Nineveh, Assyria’s capital. To “drink the waters of Sihor,” or “the river,” is to lay hold of the strength of Egypt or of Assyria. Neither the Nile nor the Euphrates could take the place of “the river of God,” which is the one unfailing source of supply to his people. Such a substitution would be like that mentioned Jer 2:13, “broken cisterns” for “living waters.”
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Jer 2:18. And now what hast thou to do, &c. The kings of Egypt and Assyria were the most potent monarchs in the neighbourhood of Judea; and according as either of these was the stronger, the Jews made their court to him, and desired his assistance. This is expressed by drinking the waters of Sihor, an Egyptian river, which some suppose to be the Nile; (see Jos 13:3.) and of Euphrates, called here the river, by way of eminence. The expressions allude to Jer 2:13 where human assistances are styled broken cisterns, and opposed to God, who by reason of his omnipotence is called the fountain of living waters. To drink of the waters of these rivers, might possibly allude farther, both to the strong propensity which the Israelites had to return to Egypt, and to that which they shewed for adopting the idolatrous worship of these countries. For the Egyptians worshipped the water, and particularly that of the Nile. See Div. Leg. vol. 3: and Calmet.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Jer 2:18 And now what hast thou to do in the way of Egypt, to drink the waters of Sihor? or what hast thou to do in the way of Assyria, to drink the waters of the river?
Ver. 18. And now what hast thou to do in the way of Egypt? ] Why trusteth thou to carnal combinations, which thou hast formerly found to lack in success? wilt thou never be warned of these broken cisterns? or hast thou a mind to be ground to powder between those two millstones of Egypt and Assyria, after whom thou hankerest? Psa 146:3 , David having entered a caveat against creature confidence, persuades people to trust in God alone. See also Psa 62:8-10 .
To drink the waters of Sihor,
To drink of the water of the river,
a Limosus est Nilus et oblimat Aegyptum.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
the way of Egypt. Reference to Pentateuch (Deu 17:16).
Sihor: i.e. the Nile.
the river: i.e. the Euphrates.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
what hast: Jer 2:36, Jer 37:5-10, Isa 30:1-7, Isa 31:1, Lam 4:17, Eze 17:15, Hos 7:11
Sihor: Jos 13:3
or what hast: 2Ki 16:7-9, 2Ch 28:20, 2Ch 28:21, Hos 5:13
Reciprocal: Gen 16:8 – whence Jdg 2:2 – why have 1Sa 15:14 – What meaneth 1Sa 28:15 – I am sore 1Ki 19:9 – What doest thou 1Ch 13:5 – Shihor Psa 91:11 – in all Isa 8:6 – that go softly Isa 23:3 – Sihor Jer 31:22 – How Lam 5:6 – to the Egyptians Eze 16:28 – General Eze 23:30 – thou hast Eze 29:16 – the confidence
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Jer 2:18. What hast thou means to ask them what right they had to go to those heathen places to partake of what they had. They did not always literally go to those places, but in their hearts they turned in that direction, and in a few instances they made literal application to those heathen localities for favors, Sihor is another name for tbe Nile in Egypt, and the river means the Euphrates in Babylonia, The last place is called Assyria because at the time Jeremiah wrote, the land through which the great river flows was still in the possession of Assyria, though it was destined to he brought under control by the Babylonians by the time the Jews were to be taken to begin their long- predicted captivity of 70 years.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Jer 2:18. And now what hast thou to do, &c. The kings of Egypt and Assyria were the most potent monarchs in the neighbourhood of Judea; and according as either of these was the stronger, the Jews made their court to him, and desired his assistance. This is expressed by drinking the waters of Sihor, an Egyptian river, which some suppose, and Dr. Waterland renders, the Nile; (see note on Isaiah 42; Isaiah 3;) and of the Euphrates, called here the river, by way of eminence. The expressions allude to Jer 2:13, where human assistances are styled broken cisterns, and opposed to God, who, by reason of his all-sufficiency, is called the fountain of living waters. To drink of the waters of these rivers might possibly allude, further, both to the strong propensity which the Israelites had to return to Egypt, and that which they showed for adopting the idolatrous worship of these countries. For the Egyptians worshipped the water, and particularly that of the Nile. See Div. Leg., vol. 3., and Calmet.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
2:18 And now what hast thou to do in the way of {c} Egypt, to drink the waters of Sihor? or what hast thou to do in the way of Assyria, to drink the waters of the {d} river?
{c} To seek help from man, as though God was not able enough to defend you, which is to drink from the puddles and to leave the fountain, Isa 31:1 .
(d) That is, Euphrates.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
God’s people had turned to Egypt and Assyria for refreshment, instead of to Him (cf. Isa 30:1-5). In Jeremiah’s day there was a pro-Egyptian party and a pro-Assyrian party. [Note: Feinberg, p. 392; Graybill, p. 661.] The designation of the Nile River as the shihor (lit. blackness) may have been a way of denigrating the river, which was one of Egypt’s primary gods. The Nile was muddy, and that may be the reason it was called "black."
This reference to the Judahites seeking help from Egypt and Assyria probably dates this sermon sometime before the decline of Assyrian supremacy in the ancient Near East, namely, before 612 B.C., when Nineveh fell (cf. 2Ki 15:19; 2Ki 16:7; 2Ki 17:3; Hos 5:13; Hos 7:11; Hos 8:9).