Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Jeremiah 11:15
What hath my beloved to do in mine house, [seeing] she hath wrought lewdness with many, and the holy flesh is passed from thee? when thou doest evil, then thou rejoicest.
15. The MT. is not really intelligible. It can be approximately corrected from LXX (as in the mg.). Gi. (so Du. and Erbt), quotes Irenaeus (IV. 32), who has adipes, fat pieces, a rendering which can be obtained by a fairly easy change in the consonants of the word in MT. The Hebrew noun which he thus adopts is used several times (e.g. Lev 8:26) of the fat of sacrifices. The weak part of the LXX reading lies in the last clause, where, although the sense given by them is better, the rendering involves considerable change in the Hebrew.
my beloved ] Judah; so ch. Jer 12:7.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
15 17. See summary at commencement of section.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Verse 15. What hath my beloved to do in mine house] This has been supposed to refer to Abraham, Moses, or such eminent servants of God, whose intercession was very powerful. Were even they to appear as intercessors, their prayer should not be regarded. Others think that this is an endearing expression, which properly belonged to the Israelites. When God took them into covenant with himself, they were espoused to him, and therefore his beloved; but now that they have forsaken him, and joined themselves to another, what have they to do with his house or its ordinances, which they wish now to frequent with vows and sacrifices, when they see the evil fast coming upon them? This is probably the sense of this very obscure passage. Dr. Blayney translates, “What hath my beloved to do in my house whilst she practiseth wickedness? Shall vows and holy flesh (sacrifices) be allowed to come from thee? When thou art malignant, shalt thou rejoice?”
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Some make these words the words of the prophet, declaring that God (whom they suppose here called the beloved) was about to forsake the temple. Others make them the words of God, speaking of his prophet, whom he calleth his beloved; or rather, speaking of his people, whom he calleth his beloved, upon the account of his ancient union with them, and marriage to them; this seemeth most probable, and agreeth both with Jer 7:9,10, and also with the usual confidence of the Jews, because of the temple of the Lord, and their formal services of God in it. My people, saith God, though I was formerly their Husband, yet have wrought lewdness with many, that is, committed idolatry with many idols; and now what have they to do more in my house, than a base strumpet which hath turned a whore hath to do in the house of her husband?
And the holy flesh is passed from thee: some by this phrase understand that God would own them no more as a holy people. Others that their circumcision was become uncircumcision. Others more probably understand it of the flesh of the sacrifices they were wont to offer; either they had been remiss in offering the sacrifices God had commanded them; or (which is more probable) the flesh of their sacrifices, being set before idols, as well as before him who was the only true God, became polluted, and was abomination to the Lord. The learned author of our English Annotations notes, that the words may very fairly be translated, and the holy flesh they shall pass away from thee; so the words import a threatening, that because they had polluted and profaned the sacrifices, God would make their sacrifices to cease.
When thou doest evil, then thou rejoicest: and this the Lord would rather do against them, because they were not only evil, but gloried in their wickedness, or at least were full of mirth and jollity as if they had done no iniquity.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
15. my belovedMy electpeople, Judea; this aggravates their ingratitude (Jer12:7).
lewdness with many(Eze 16:25). Rather, “thatgreat (or, manifold) enormity”; literally, “the enormity,the manifold”; namely, their idolatry, which made their worshipof God in the temple a mockery (compare Jer 7:10;Eze 23:39) [HENDERSON].
holy flesh (Hag 2:12-14;Tit 1:15), namely, thesacrifices, which, through the guilt of the Jews, were no longerholy, that is, acceptable to God. The sacrifices on which theyrelied will, therefore, no longer protect them. Judah is representedas a priest’s wife, who, by adultery, has forfeited her share in theflesh of the sacrifices, and yet boasts of her prerogative at thevery same time [HORSLEY].
when thou doestevilliterally, “when thy evil” (is at hand).PISCATOR translates, “Whenthy calamity is at hand (according to God’s threats), thougloriest” (against God, instead of humbling thyself). EnglishVersion is best (compare Pr2:14).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
What hath my beloved to do in mine house,…. These are either the words of the prophet, as Kimchi and Ben Melech think, speaking after this manner; what has God, who is my beloved, he whom my soul loves, and who loves me, to do in the sanctuary, which is my house, and not this people’s, that have defiled it, to cause his Shechinah to dwell there, after so much wickedness has been committed in it? and so Cocceius interprets it of Christ the beloved Son of God, and the beloved of his church and people, withdrawing from the temple, because of the wickedness of the Jews; or they are the words of God concerning the people of the Jews, who were beloved for the Father’s sake; signifying that now, because of their abominations, it was not fitting they should continue in the house of God, or have any shelter and protection there. The Jews interpret k this of Abraham:
seeing she hath wrought lewdness with many; that is, the congregation of Israel, or the church of the Jews, had committed idolatry with many idols; or it was not only a few of them that were guilty of this sin, but a multitude, even their great men, the princes and nobles:
and the holy flesh is passed from thee? which Kimchi and Ben Melech understand of holy and good men, who ceased from among them, were perished and gone; and Jarchi, of the circumcision of the flesh, which was neglected: but it seems best to interpret it of the flesh of sacrifices; which were either laid aside by them, or, if offered and eaten of, were of no service to them, being offered up with a wicked mind; or rather the meaning is, the time was come that these were at an end, the temple being destroyed:
when thou doest evil; the evil of sin; or “when thine evil is” l; the evil of punishment is coming upon thee:
then thou rejoicest; instead of repenting of sin, and mourning for it, or being humbled at approaching judgments, gave themselves up to sensual lusts and pleasures; neither concerned at the one nor at the other; neither grieved for sin, nor trembled at punishment; but amidst all were brisk and jovial; though some say m the word has the signification of trembling; and render it, “then thou shalt tremble”. The Targum of the whole is,
“What (have I to do) with this people, that was beloved before me? they have left the worship of the house of my sanctuary; they have took counsel to sin much; they mingle the flesh of abominations with the holy flesh; they shall go into captivity from thee; because of thy wickedness thou art strong.”
k T. Bab. Menachot, fol. 53. 2. l “quum adest malum tuum”, Junius Tremellius “praesto est”, Piscator; extabit, Cocceius. m R. Sol. Urbin. Ohel Moed, fol. 32. 1.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
As the words are concise, this passage is in various ways perverted by interpreters: brevity is commonly obscure. But the explanation almost universally received is this, — that the Prophet in this sense, think also that the Temple is called his house, on account of his concern for religion, for which he was very zealous. As then he had preferred God’s Temple to all earthly things, they think that he thus spoke, What has my beloved to do in mine house? But Jonathan much more correctly applies the words to God; and doubtless, whoever wisely considers the Prophet’s words will wonder that so many learned men have been mistaken on a point by no means doubtful. God then, no doubt, speaks here; and he calls his people beloved on account of their adoption.
But the expression is ironical: we cannot think otherwise when we consider how great was the impiety of the people, and how unworthy they were of such an honor on account of their ingratitude. It is yet not strange that they were called beloved, as in other places, for they had been chosen by God. They were in a similar way called “upright” in the song of Moses; and yet Moses, in that very song, declared how wickedly they had departed from their God. (Deu 32:15) But he called them “upright” in reference to God; for though men do not answer to their vocation, yet the counsel of God remains firm, and can never be changed by the wickedness of men. Though then all had then become apostates, yet God did not suffer his covenant to be abolished, Hence Paul, in speaking of the Jews, in Rom 11:28, when almost all had become the bitterest enemies to the gospel, and had, through their unfaithfulness, wholly forfeited their privileges, so as to become aliens, yet says that they were beloved on account of their fathers:
“
For you,” he says, “they are indeed for a time enemies;”
which means, that God designed to give their place to the Gentiles, and to adopt them; and yet that, on account of his covenant, they remain, and will remain beloved, that is, with regard to the first adoption.
I shall quote no other similar passages, for it is enough to understand the real meaning of the term: What then has my beloved to do in my house? which means, “Why do the Jews now pretend to come to the Temple to sacrifice to me? Why do they profess themselves to be my people? What have they to do with my house?” that is, “What have they to do with anything like holiness?” Hence he indirectly touches the Jews in two ways, — that they bad precluded themselves from the advantage of offering sacrifices in the temple, — and that it was an increase of their crime, that while they were God’s friends, that is, when he bestowed on them his favor, and embraced them as a father his own children, they yet carried on war with him as his avowed enemies, according to what is elsewhere said,
“
Ah! I will take vengeance on mine enemies.” (Isa 1:24)
We now see that this meaning is the most suitable. God shews that his temple was polluted by the Jews, when they thoughtlessly rushed there to offer their sacrifices; What have you, he says, to do with my house? Nearly the same thing is said in the first chapter of Isaiah; for God there contemptuously reproves the Jews because they trod the pavement of his temple: “I truly do not owe you anything; ye indeed come to my courts, but for what purpose? Ye only wear out the pavement of my temple: Stay then at home, and think not that I am bound to you because ye come to the temple.” So also in this place, What has my beloved to do with my house? He concedes to them the title Beloved, as though he had said, “Ye are, it is true, beloved, and ye think that God is bound to you; for, relying on the covenant which I made with your father Abraham, ye always continue to make this boasting — ‘We are the people of God and his heritage; we are a holy nation and a royal priesthood’ — Beloved ye are,” he says, “but what have you to do with my Temple?”
Then he adds, For she has done abomination with many The gender is here changed, for the relative is feminine: but this mode of speaking is everywhere common, as the people are represented to us under the character of a woman. Then he in effect says, “Behold the daughter of my people hath done abomination with many.” The Jews were not to enter the Temple except they remained as it were fixed in its pure worship; for as it was the only true Temple, and had in it the only true altar, so they ought to have worshipped none but the only true God, and also to have observed one rule only in worshipping him. But he says here that they had done abomination; and thus he charged them with those impious devices, those spurious forms of worship which they had adopted, and thus departed from what had been prescribed to them; for abomination is set here in opposition to the law. He says further, that they did this with many. We hence see that the gate of the Temple was closed against them, for the Temple could not be separated from the law, nor yet from God, to whom it was dedicated The Jews, having forsaken the law, and adopted innumerable idols, thrust themselves into the Temple; and hence we see the reason why God complains that they still came to the Temple: “As then they have done abomination, and done it with many, they have no more anything to do with my law.” The Temple was a visible image of the one true God, and also the holy receptacle of his law. They despised the law, and gloried in innumerable gods: they sought thus to blend the sanctity of the Temple with a multitude of gods, and with their own depravations and devices.
He says afterwards, that the flesh of the sanctuary had passed away from them: The flesh of the sanctuary have passed away Some apply this to all the faithful, according to that saying,
“
Silent before God let all flesh be,” (Hab 2:20)
but this is forced, and without meaning. He speaks no doubt of sacrifices, and says, that the flesh of the sanctuary, that is, sacrifices, had departed from the people. They no doubt still offered sacrifices very regularly; but God did not accept their sacrifices, because they had corrupted his true worship. This then is the reason why he says that the flesh of the sanctuary had departed from the people, as in other places he denies that it was offered to him. At the same time the Jews wished sacrifices to be regarded as offered to him, and doubtless they boldly referred to them in opposition to the prophets. But God did not accept them, though they sought thus to render him as it were a debtor. “It is not to me,” he says, “that ye offer your sacrifices, but to idols.” So also in this place he says, The flesh of the sanctuary is taken away from them; for their sacrifices had become polluted. They were then nothing but putrid carcases; for victims, ought to have been offered in the Temple; but they had polluted the Temple, so that it had become a den of robbers, and like a dunghin, in short, a brothel, as Scripture speaks elsewhere. There was then now, doubtless, no flesh of the sanctuary; (44) that is, no lawful sacrifice, such as God approved.
Let us then know that hypocrites, as soon as they depart from the true worship of God, do nothing that can avail them, though they may busy themselves much, and even weary themselves in worshipping God, for all that they offer is abominable. If then we desire to render to God such services as he will accept and approve, let us regard this truth — that obedience is more valued by him than all sacrifices. (1Sa 15:22)
He adds another complaint, — that when they did evil, they gloried in it. And there is a causal particle introduced, Because, he says, thou gloriest when thou hast done evil The Prophet no doubt means, that they had by no means a right to contend, because they had not only corrupted true religion, but were also proud of their superstitions, and despised God, and set up their own devices against his law. But it was an intolerable thing for men to attempt to subject God to their own will, or rather to their own fancies. Indeed, the faithful do not so purely and so perfectly sacrifice to God, but that some vices are mixed with their offerings; but God nevertheless receives what they offer, though there be some mixture of defilement. How so? Because they acquiesce not in their own performances, but, on the contrary, aspire after purity, though they do not attain it; but when hypocrites exalt themselves against God, and proudly despise his teaching, and prefer their own inventions, and dare even to set up these against his authority, it is doubtless a diabolical presumption, such as contaminates what would otherwise be most holy. (45) It follows —
(44) “Holy fleshes,” κρέα ἅγια, carnes sanctae, is the version of the Septuagint and Vulgate, and “holy flesh” is the Syriac; but the Targum has “the worship of my sanctuary.” Blayney renders it “holy flesh.” The word קדש means holy, or holiness, and מקדש is the sanctuary. — Ed
(45) This verse has been variously rendered and explained. The versions all differ, and the Targum too; and none of them seem to render the original correctly. Blayney, following the Septuagint, has introduced corrections, but not authorized by any MSS. There is no different reading of any consequence. The literal rendering I consider to be as follows: —
15. What, as to my beloved, is in my house her doing? Is not her plotting with many? — Yea, the holy flesh do they take away from thee; When thou doest evil against me, then thou exultest.
The word for “plotting” does not mean “lewdness,” or “abomination,” as rendered by all the versions, but devising, contriving, scheming, machinating; the reference is to the scheme of uniting the worship of God with the worship of idols. The Targum gives the idea, “they have taken counsel to sin greatly.” All the versions agree in giving a Hiphil meaning to יעברו, cause to pass from — to remove or take away. The “many” who advocated the worship of idols took away the holy flesh — the sacrifices, and took them away from her, “the beloved,” as, when given to idols, they would be of no benefit. The words, כי רעתכי, are literally, “when thy evil is against me.” It is a similar mode of expression with קמי, “those who rise up against me,” (2Sa 22:40.) Though it was an evil against God, yet they exulted in what they did. — Ed
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(15) My beloved.sc., Judahor, perhaps, Israel collectivelyas the betrothed of Jehovah. What has she to do, what part or lot has she in that house of Jehovah which she pollutes?
Seeing she hath wrought lewdness with many.The Hebrew is difficult, and probably corrupt. The most probable rendering is What hath my beloved to do in my house, to work it even evil devices? Thy many, i.e. (probably, as in Jer. 3:1), thy many lovers, and the holy flesh (i.e., her sacrifices), will they make it (the guilt of her devices) to pass away from thee? Keeping the present text of the Hebrew the latter clause would run, they shall pass away from thee, i.e., shall leave thee, as thou wert, unreconciled and unforgiven. A conjectural emendation, following the LXX., gives, will thy vows and the holy flesh remove thy evil from thee . . . The general sense is, however, clear. A religion of mere ritual-sacrifices and the like will not avail to save. The Hebrew for lewdness does not convey the idea which we now attach to the English word, but means primarily a plan of any kind, and then a device or scheme in a bad sense, as in Psa. 10:2; Psa. 21:11; Pro. 14:17. Probably the translators, here, as in Act. 17:5; Act. 18:14, used the word in this more general sense. Primarily, indeed, lewd in Old English was simply the opposite of learned.
When thou doest evil, then thou rejoicest.The clause is involved in the same difficulty as the rest of the verse. The English version is tenable, and gives an adequate meaning. By some commentators, however, the passage is rendered, referring evil to the previous sentence, Will they (vows, &c.) remove evil from thee? Then mightest thou rejoice.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
15. What hath my beloved, etc. The language here is characterized by such difficulty as has led many conservative and evangelical commentators to conjecture a corruption of the text. This conjecture is supported by the fact that the ancient Versions do not agree with the Hebrew though neither do they agree among themselves. The Septuagint renders the last part, shall vows and holy flesh turn away thine evil from thee? The Syriac and Vulgate agree in treating the words rendered lewdness and many as in opposition, so that the middle clause would read, to work the enormity, the manifold, alluding to the many-shaped sin of idolatry. But if we reject all suggestions of change in the text, perhaps the most probable rendering of the original as it now stands would be, What hath my beloved in my house? To do wickedness? The chiefs and the holy flesh shall pass away from thee. When thy iniquity is, then thou rejoicest. This term of endearment sounds strangely in the midst of these charges against the nation, and yet it is thoroughly in harmony with the spirit of this book and of the Old Testament. Unworthy and corrupt as this people had become, they were still the “beloved” of the Lord.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Jer 11:15. What hath my beloved to do, &c. The meaning of the verse seems to be, “Why doth this, my chosen and peculiar people, (my spouse, as they love to call themselves, and as they once really were,) make their appearance before me in my house, since they have gone a whoring after several of the idol-nations around them, and therefore have disowned me, and broken the marriage contract or covenant which was between us? The holy flesh is passed from thee: the sacrifices which thou offeredst up to me as an atonement for thy sins, do not at all profit thee, being rendered unacceptable to me, by those many and gross sins in which thou continuest without remorse.” See Lowth and Calmet. Houbigant, dissatisfied with this interpretation, gives the version following: What was the cause, that this my daughter, born at home, should commit her wickedness? Will they who bring thee much holy flesh take away thine iniquities, that thou gloriest concerning it? See his note.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Amidst all these solemn things, and amidst all the judgments coming upon the people; let not the Reader overlook how the Lord graciously adverts to former times, and still calls his Church beloved. I do not presume to determine, what is meant by the holy flesh, passing from the people. But I cannot conclude, that it means only the holy flesh of the sacrifice. Yet if it did; still that sacrifice was typical of somewhat higher. And who is this but Christ? But what is meant then by the holy flesh passing from the Church! I humbly conceive; not that Jesus is passed away from his Church; but his Church hath passed away and lost sight of Him, whom the holy sacrifice typified. Is it not blessed under all to consider, that in it there was as the teil-tree, and as the oak whose substance is in itself. The holy seed is the substance. Destroy it not, a blessing is in it, Isa 6:13 and Isa 65:8 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Jer 11:15 What hath my beloved to do in mine house, [seeing] she hath wrought lewdness with many, and the holy flesh is passed from thee? when thou doest evil, then thou rejoicest.
Ver. 15. What hath my beloved to do in mine house? ] i.e., Mine once beloved people, which had the liberty of mine house, and was welcome thither, but is now discarded and discovenanted, as if a husband should say to his adulterous wife, What maketh this strumpet in my bed, since she hath so many paramours? a
And the holy flesh.
Is passed from thee.
When thou doest evil, then thou rejoicest.
a Vatab.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
the holy flesh: i.e. the sacrifices. Compare Jer 7:21. Hag 2:12. Septuagint reads, “shall vows (or litanies) and holy flesh”, &c.
is passed from thee? = taketh away from thee [thy wickedness]? or, removeth thy evil (i.e. calamity)?
then thou rejoicest : i.e. if such false worship will remove thy calamity, then thou mayest rejoice; but this was impossible.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
holy flesh
See Hag 2:12 i.e. to what purpose the “holy flesh” of sacrifices? Its efficacy is “passed from thee” who rejoicest in evil. Cf. Isa 1:13-15.
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
What: etc. Heb. What is to my beloved in my house, Luk 8:28,*Gr.
my: Jer 2:2, Jer 3:14, Jer 12:7, Hos 3:1, Mat 22:11, Rom 11:28
to do: Jer 3:8, Jer 7:8-11, Jer 15:1, Psa 50:16, Pro 15:8, Pro 21:27, Pro 28:9, Isa 1:11-15, Isa 50:1
seeing: Jer 3:1, Jer 3:2, Eze 16:25-34, Eze 23:2-21
the holy: Hag 2:12-14, Tit 1:15
thou doest evil: or, thy evil is, Pro 2:14, Pro 10:23, Pro 26:18, 1Co 13:6, Jam 4:16
Reciprocal: Deu 32:19 – of his sons Job 20:18 – and he shall Jer 23:11 – in Eze 23:39 – they came Hos 9:15 – I will drive
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Jer 11:15. Lewdness and flesh are literal terms and primarily are involved in fleshly immorality. They are used to apply to spiritual fornication which the people of Judah were committing in going after false gods. The question Is, what business does such a people have in the house of the true God? The people not only practiced this great evil but took satisfaction from eaob instance of the abominable service.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Jer 11:15. What hath my beloved to do in my house, &c. Why doth this, my chosen and peculiar people, as they love to call themselves, make their appearance before me in my house, since they have gone a whoring after several idols of the nations round about them, and thereby have disowned me, and broken the marriage contract that was between us? See note on Jer 2:2. God calls the Jews his beloved people, because they called themselves so, and because they were still beloved for their fathers sake, Rom 11:18; and he would not cast them off utterly, for the sake of the covenant he had made with their progenitors. Lowth. And the holy flesh is passed from thee The flesh of thy sacrifices, which thou offerest up to me as an atonement for thy sins, does not at all profit thee, being rendered unacceptable to me through thy many and great provocations, in the commission of which thou continuest without remorse. Lowth. But the words are rendered by some, The flesh of my sanctuary shall pass from thee, and may mean, that the parts of the victims, which by the Mosaic law were the portion of the priests, should not be given to them, since the temple would be destroyed. According to this interpretation the prophet must be considered as addressing the priests, of whom there were, without doubt, many in Jerusalem. When thou doest evil, thou rejoicest Thou gloriest in thy wickedness. Or, at a time when thou offendest most against my laws, thou exultest, and behavest as if thou didst every thing that is right.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
11:15 What hath my {k} beloved to do in my house, [seeing] she hath wrought lewdness with many, and the holy flesh {l} is passed from thee? when thou doest evil, then thou rejoicest.
(k) My people of Israel whom I have greatly loved till now.
(l) Meaning, that they offer not in the temple to God, but on the altars of Baal and the idols and so rejoiced in their wickedness.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
The Judahites, even though they were beloved by the Lord, had no right to come into His temple to worship Him, because they had committed so many sins, and had not repented. Their sacrifices alone could not make things right with Him. Judgment was inevitable.