Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Jeremiah 13:7
Then I went to Euphrates, and digged, and took the girdle from the place where I had hid it: and, behold, the girdle was marred, it was profitable for nothing.
Verse 7. And behold, the girdle was marred; it was profitable for nothing.] This symbolically represented the state of the Jews: they were corrupt and abominable; and God, by sending them into captivity, “marred the pride of Judah, and the great pride of Jerusalem,” Jer 13:9.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Whether the prophet really made such a journey, or all this was but a vision, is very uncertain. When he came to the place, or in his vision, he thought, when he came to the place, that he saw all the girdle rotted; and good for nothing but to be thrown upon a dunghill.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
Then I went to Euphrates,…. In a vision; this is the second journey, of which [See comments on Jer 13:5],
and digged; the hole, in process of time, being stopped up with soil or sand, that were thrown up over it; this digging was in a visionary way; see Eze 8:8:
and took the girdle from the place where I had hid it; which he knew again by some token or another:
and, behold, the girdle was marred; or “corrupted” q; it was become rotten by the washing of the water over it, and its long continuance in such a place:
it was profitable for nothing; it could not be put upon a man’s loins, or be wore any more; nor was it fit for any other use, it was so sadly spoiled and so thoroughly rotten. It is in the Hebrew text, “it shall not prosper to all” r things; that is, not “to anything” s, as many render it.
q “corruptum erat”, Munster, Montanus, Schmidt; “computruerat”, Pagninus. r “non proficiet omnibus”, Vatablus. s “Non prosperabitur cuiquam”, Montanus; “ad ullam rem”, Junius & Tremellius, Piscator.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
The Prophet, by saying that he went to the Euphrates, confirms what he had narrated: he did not indeed mean that he actually went there, but his object was to give the Jews a vivid representation. It is then what Rhetorians call a scene presented to the view; though the place is not changed, yet the thing is set before the eyes by a lively description. (71) Thus the Prophet, as the Jews were deaf, exhibited to their view what they would not hear. This is the reason why he says that he went. For the same purpose is what follows, that at the end of many days God had bidden him to take out the girdle Here also is signified the length of the exile. As to the hole in a rock, what is meant is disgrace; for without honor and esteem the Jews lived in banishment, in the same manner as though they were cast into a cavern. Hence by the hole is signified their ignoble and base condition, that they were like persons removed from the sight of all men and from the common light of day. By the end of many days, is meant, as I have said, the length of their exile, for in a short time they would not have become putrified, and except indeed this had been distinctly expressed, they would have never been convinced of the grievousness of the calamity which was nigh them. Hence he says that the days would be many, so that they might contract putridity while hidden in the hole.
(71) Many agree with Calvin that this was a vision and not an actual transaction, such as Gataker, Lowth, Blayney, Adara Clarke, &c. Henry hesitates, but Scott seems to be strongly in favor of a real transaction. Bochart and Venema hold also the latter opinion, only they think that פרת here does not mean “Euphrates,” but Ephrata, that is, Bethlehem, in Judea; but this cannot be maintained. Lowth refers to an instance where a vision is related as a fact, without any mention being made that it was a vision, that is, Gen 15:5 : God brought Abraham forth and shewed to him the stars; and yet it appears from Jer 13:12 that the sun was not set. Blayney remarks, that “the same supposition of a vision must be admitted in other cases, particularly Jer 25:15.” Gataker refers to similar instances in Eze 8:3; Eze 11:24. It was most probably a vision; and the Prophet related to the people what God had in a supernatural way exhibited to him. — Ed.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(7) The girdle was marred.The symbolism is explained in Jer. 13:9. The girdle stained, decayed, worthless, was a parable of the state of Judah after the exile, stripped of all its outward greatness, losing the place which it had once occupied among the nations of the earth.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
7. Digged Showing that Jeremiah had filled in with gravel or earth above the girdle, and so concealed it.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Jer 13:7 Then I went to Euphrates, and digged, and took the girdle from the place where I had hid it: and, behold, the girdle was marred, it was profitable for nothing.
Ver. 7. Then I went to Euphrates. ] See on Jer 13:4 . Those that are for an actual journey allege that Jeremiah might do this without danger in the days of Jehoiakim, who was the King of Babylon’s vassal, and paid him tribute.
And, behold, the girdle was rotted, it was profitable for nothing.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
it was. Some codices, with one early printed edition, read “and it was”.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
it was: Jer 13:10, Jer 24:1-8, Isa 64:6, Eze 15:3-5, Zec 3:3, Zec 3:4, Luk 14:34, Luk 14:35, Rom 3:12, Phm 1:11
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Jer 13:7, There is no logical explanation for the state Of the girdle nor for the lesson the Lord means to teach by it. That still remains to be brought out after the importance of the subject has been emphasized by the “acting’ of the prophet. All that Jeremiah saw was that the girdle was ruined when he found it,