Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Jeremiah 24:1
The LORD showed me, and, behold, two baskets of figs [were] set before the temple of the LORD, after that Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon had carried away captive Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah, and the princes of Judah, with the carpenters and smiths, from Jerusalem, and had brought them to Babylon.
1. For the symbol, as probably indicating not a mental picture but actual baskets to which Jeremiah’s attention was directed, cp. note on Jer 1:11 f. See also the kindred symbol in Amo 8:1.
Nebuchadrezzar ] See on Jer 21:2.
Jeconiah ] See on Jer 22:24.
smiths ] The exact meaning of the Hebrew is unknown.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Omit were. Set before, i. e put in the appointed place for offerings of firstfruits in the forecourt of the temple.
Carpenters – Craftsmen (see the marginal reference).
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Jer 24:1
The princes of Judah, with the carpenters and smiths from Jerusalem.
The nobility of work
I. All labour becomes truly noble regarded as the service of God. To regard labour simply as a stern necessity of human life is to convert the workman into a slave, and his toil into drudgery. The glory of the angels is found in the fact they are messengers of God. And all the work of our hand attains its highest glory wrought out in the love and fear of God. The apostle gives us the true point of view (Eph 6:6-8). Here we have God the Taskmaster. Doing the will of God. Not only what we are pleased to call our highest work for Him, but our lowliest toil also, serving Him with two brown hands as Gabriel serves in the presence of the throne with two white wings. Here we have also God the Paymaster. Whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord. God is a grand paymaster, He is a sure one, and rich beyond all hope are they who do His bidding. In the class-meeting a poor man said to me, It was very strange, sir, but the other day, whilst I was looking after my horses, God visited me and wonderfully blessed me; it was very strange He should visit me like this in a stable. Not at all, said I, it is a fulfilment of the prophecy: In that day shall there be upon the bells of the horses Holiness unto the Lord, &c. In an old book I was reading the other day the writer laughed at some commoner who had just been made a peer, because he had his coat of arms burned and painted even upon his shovels and wheelbarrows. In my reckoning, that was a very fine action, and full of significance. If a man is a true man he is a man of God, a prince of God; and he ought to pat the stamp of his nobility on the commonest things with which he has to do.
II. All labour becomes truly noble regarded as a ministry to humanity. Few men, comparatively, realise the social bearing of their toil, and therefore know it as an insipid thing, when in truth it is their rich privilege to taste in all their work the joy of a good Samaritan, for all conscientious work is an essential philanthropy. With one hand we work for ourselves, with the other for the race, and it is one of the purest joys of life to remember this. Let us be blind workers no more, but consciously, lovingly, do our daily work, rejoicing in the social glory and fruitfulness of it. Princes, smiths, carpenters, let us not forget we too toil for the larger happiness of all men, so shall we prove in our toil some of the sublime pleasure Howard knew when he opened the door of the prison, that Wilberforce felt striking off the fetters of the slave, that Peabody tasted when he built homes for the poor.
III. All labour becomes truly noble regarded as a discipline to our higher nature. Many, alas! sink with their work, but the Divine design in the duty of life was the perfection of the worker. Our toil is to develop our whole nature. Our physical being. Our work is neither to pollute nor destroy, but to purify and build up the temple of the body. Sweat does not mean blood, and there is a blessing in the curse. Our work should develop our intellectual self also. Much of our business may become a direct mental education, and it need never hinder the flowering of the mind. But chiefly the work of life ought to subserve our spiritual perfecting. In all true work the soul works and gains in purity and power by its work. The carpenters work tests his moral qualities, and Whilst he builds with brick and stone, timber and glass, he may build up also character with silver, gold, and precious stones; the smith fashions his soul whilst he shapes the iron on ringing anvil; the husbandman may enrich his heart whilst he adorns the landscape; and the weaver at the loom weave two fabrics at once, one that the moth shall fret, the other of gold and fine needlework, immortal raiment for the spirit. The King of glory has consecrated the workshop by His presence and glorified work by His example. (W. L. Watkinson.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
CHAPTER XXIV
Under the emblem of the good and bad figs is represented the
fate of the Jews already gone into captivity with Jeconiah,
and of those that remained still in their own country with
Zedekiah. It is likewise intimated that God would deal kindly
with the former, but that his wrath would still pursue the
latter, 1-10.
NOTES ON CHAP. XXIV
Verse 1. The Lord showed me, and, behold, two baskets of figs] Besides the transposition of whole chapters in this book, there is not unfrequently a transposition of verses, and parts of verses. Of this we have an instance in the verse before us; the first clause of which should be the last. Thus: –
“After that Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon had carried away captive Jeconiah, the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah, with the carpenters and smiths from Jerusalem, and had brought them to Babylon, the Lord showed me, and, behold, two baskets of figs were set before the temple of the Lord.”
Ver. 2. “One basket had very good figs, even like the figs that are first ripe; and the other basket had very naughty figs, which could not be eaten, they were so bad.”
This arrangement restores these verses to a better sense, by restoring the natural connexion.
This prophecy was undoubtedly delivered in the first year of the reign of Zedekiah.
Under the type of good and bad figs, God represents the state of the persons who had already been carried captives into Babylon, with their king Jeconiah, compared with the state of those who should be carried away with Zedekiah. Those already carried away, being the choice of the people, are represented by the good figs: those now remaining, and soon to be carried into captivity, are represented by the bad figs, that were good for nothing. The state also of the former in their captivity was vastly preferable to the state of those who were now about to be delivered into the hand of the king of Babylon. The latter would be treated as double rebels; the former, being the most respectable of the inhabitants, were treated well; and even in captivity, a marked distinction would be made between them, God ordering it so. But the prophet sufficiently explains his own meaning.
Set before the temple] As an offering of the first-fruits of that kind.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
The sum of what God by his prophet revealeth in this chapter is, that he would deal more graciously with those carried into captivity with Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim, of which read 2Ki 24:12; 2Ch 36:10, than with those that should afterward be carried into captivity with Zedekiah. This the prophet hath revealed to him ill a vision of two baskets of figs, as followeth.
Some think these
two baskets of figs were such as the people had brought for their first-fruits, because they are mentioned as
set before the temple; but this might be no more than a vision, or all appearance of two baskets. The time of this vision was some time betwixt the carrying away of Jeconiah, of which we read 2Ki 24:12, &c.; 2Ch 36:10, and the carrying away of Zedekiah his uncle, which was eleven years after. In 2Ki 24:16, there is a particular mention of the king of Babylons carrrying away the craftsmen and the smiths a thousand.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
1. Lord showed me Amo 7:1;Amo 7:4; Amo 7:7;Amo 8:1, contains the sameformula, with the addition of “thus” prefixed.
carried . . . captiveJeconiah (Jer 22:24;2Ki 24:12; 2Ch 36:10).
carpenters, &c.Onethousand artisans were carried to Babylon, both to work for the kingthere, and to deprive Jerusalem of their services in the event of afuture siege (2Ki 24:16).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
The Lord showed me,…. A vision, or in a vision, what follows; for by this it appears that what was seen was not real, but what was exhibited in a visionary way by the Lord, and represented to the mind of the prophet:
and, behold, two baskets of figs were set before the temple of the Lord; or “pots”, as Jarchi; these do not signify the law and Gospel, or the synagogue and church, or the Jews and Christians, or hell and heaven, as some have interpreted it, observed by Jerom; but the Jews that were in captivity with Jeconiah, and those that remained in Jerusalem with Zedekiah, as it is explained in some following verses. These baskets are said to be “set before the temple of the Lord”, not to be sold there, but to be presented to the Lord; in allusion to the baskets of firstfruits, which, according to the law, were thither brought for that purpose, De 26:2; and signify, that the two people represented by them were before the Lord, in his sight, were known to him, and judged by him;
after that Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon had carried away captive Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, and the princes of Judah,
with the carpenters and smiths, from Jerusalem, and had brought them to Babylon: this was done when Jeconiah had reigned but little more than three months, and in the eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign,
2Ki 24:8. This is mentioned, not only to show the time of this vision, which was a little after this captivity, in the beginning of Zedekiah’s reign; but to let us know who the captives were, signified by the good figs. The “carpenters” and “smiths” were carried away with the king and the princes, partly that they might be serviceable to the king of Babylon in his country; and partly that they might not be assisting to their own country in repairing their fortifications, and making instruments of war for them. There were a “thousand” of this sort carried captive, 2Ki 24:16; where the former of these are called “craftsmen”. Jarchi interprets both of the scholars of the wise men; and Kimchi, of counsellors and wise men. The word for “carpenters” is used both of carpenters and blacksmiths; and that for “smiths” may be rendered “enclosers”, or “shutters up”; which the Targum understands of porters or shutters of gates; and some think goldsmiths are meant, that set or enclose precious stones in gold; and others are of opinion that masons are intended, so called from the building of walls for the enclosing of places. The Syriac version renders it “soldiers”; but those are distinguished from them,
2Ki 24:14. The Septuagint version translates it “prisoners”; but so all the captives might be called; and it adds, what is not in the text, “and the rich”; and the Arabic version following that; though it is true they were carried captive; for it is said, “none remained, save the poorest sort of the people of the land”, 2Ki 24:14. This, according to Bishop Usher x, was in the year of the world 3405, and before Christ 599; and so the authors of the Universal History y place it; and Mr. Whiston z also; and Mr. Bedford a a year later; and in the same year that this captivity began was Cyrus the Persian born, who was the deliverer of the Jews from it.
x Annales Vet. Test. p. 123. y Vol. 21. p. 60, z Chronological Tables, cent. 10. a Scripture Chronology, p. 678.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
The Two Fig Baskets-an emblem of the future of Judah’s people. – Jer 24:1 . “Jahveh caused me to see, and behold two baskets of figs set before the temple of Jahveh, after Nebuchadrezzar had carried captive Jechoniah, the son of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, and the princes of Judah, and the work-people and the smiths from Jerusalem, and had brought them to Babylon. Jer 24:2 . One basket had very good figs like the early figs, the other basket very bad figs, which could not be eaten for badness. Jer 24:3 . And Jahveh said to me: What seest thou, Jeremiah? and I said: Figs; the good figs are very good, and the bad figs very bad, which cannot be eaten for badness. Jer 24:4 . Then came the word of Jahveh unto me, saying: Jer 24:5 . Thus saith Jahveh, the God of Israel: Like these good figs, so will I look on the captives of Judah, whom I have sent out of this place into the land of the Chaldeans, for good; Jer 24:6 . And I will set mine eye upon them for good, and will bring them back again to this land, and build them and not pull down, and plant them and not pluck up. Jer 24:7 . And I give them an heart to know me, that I am Jahveh; and they shall be my people, and I will be their God; for they will return unto me with their whole heart. Jer 24:8 . And as the bad figs, which cannot be eaten for badness, yea thus saith Jahveh, so will I make Zedekiah the king of Judah, and his princes and the residue of Jerusalem, them that are left remaining in this land and them that dwell in Egypt. Jer 24:9 . I give them up for ill-usage, for trouble to all kingdoms of the earth, for a reproach and a by-word, for a taunt and for a curse in all the places whither I shall drive them. Jer 24:10. and I send among them the sword, the famine, and the plague, till they be consumed from off the land that I gave to them and to their fathers.”
This vision resembles in form and substance that in Amo 8:1-3. The words: Jahveh caused me to see, point to an inward event, a seeing with the eyes of the spirit, not of the body. The time is, Jer 24:1, precisely given: after Nebuchadnezzar had carried to Babylon King Jechoniah, with the princes and a part of the people; apparently soon after this deportation, at the beginning of the reign of Zedekiah, the king set up by Nebuchadnezzar over Judah. Cf. 2Ki 24:14-17. – The Lord caused the prophet to see in spirit two baskets of figs ( , from , equivalent to , Jer 24:2), (from ) in the place appointed therefor ( ( rofereh ) before the temple. We are not to regard these figs as an offering brought to Jahveh (Graf); and so neither are we to think here of the place where first-fruits or tithes were offered to the Lord, Exo 23:19., Deu 26:2. The two baskets of figs have nothing to do with first-fruits. They symbolize the people, those who appear before the Lord their God, namely, before the altar of burnt-offering; where the Lord desired to appear to, to meet with His people ( , Exo 29:42.), so as to sanctify it by His glory, Exo 29:43. therefore means: placed in the spot appointed by the Lord for His meeting with Israel.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| Vision of the Good and Bad Figs; Promises and Threatenings. | B. C. 599. |
1 The LORD shewed me, and, behold, two baskets of figs were set before the temple of the LORD, after that Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon had carried away captive Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah, and the princes of Judah, with the carpenters and smiths, from Jerusalem, and had brought them to Babylon. 2 One basket had very good figs, even like the figs that are first ripe: and the other basket had very naughty figs, which could not be eaten, they were so bad. 3 Then said the LORD unto me, What seest thou, Jeremiah? And I said, Figs; the good figs, very good; and the evil, very evil, that cannot be eaten, they are so evil. 4 Again the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, 5 Thus saith the LORD, the God of Israel; Like these good figs, so will I acknowledge them that are carried away captive of Judah, whom I have sent out of this place into the land of the Chaldeans for their good. 6 For I will set mine eyes upon them for good, and I will bring them again to this land: and I will build them, and not pull them down; and I will plant them, and not pluck them up. 7 And I will give them a heart to know me, that I am the LORD: and they shall be my people, and I will be their God: for they shall return unto me with their whole heart. 8 And as the evil figs, which cannot be eaten, they are so evil; surely thus saith the LORD, So will I give Zedekiah the king of Judah, and his princes, and the residue of Jerusalem, that remain in this land, and them that dwell in the land of Egypt: 9 And I will deliver them to be removed into all the kingdoms of the earth for their hurt, to be a reproach and a proverb, a taunt and a curse, in all places whither I shall drive them. 10 And I will send the sword, the famine, and the pestilence, among them, till they be consumed from off the land that I gave unto them and to their fathers.
This short chapter helps us to put a very comfortable construction upon a great many long ones, by showing us that the same providence which to some is a savour of death unto death may by the grace and blessing of God be made to others a savour of life unto life; and that, though God’s people share with others in the same calamity, yet it is not the same to them that it is to others, but is designed for their good and shall issue in their good; to them it is a correcting rod in the hand of a tender Father, while to others it is an avenging sword in the hand of a righteous Judge. Observe,
I. The date of this sermon. It was after, a little after, Jeconiah’s captivity, v. 1. Jeconiah was himself a despised broken vessel, but with him were carried away some very valuable persons, Ezekiel for one (Ezek. i. 12); many of the princes of Judah then went into captivity, Daniel and his fellows were carried off a little before; of the people only the carpenters and the smiths were forced away, either because the Chaldeans needed some ingenious men of those trades (they had a great plenty of astrologers and stargazers, but a great scarcity of smiths and carpenters) or because the Jews would severely feel the loss of them, and would, for want of them, be unable to fortify their cities and furnish themselves with weapons of war. Now, it should seem, there were many good people carried away in that captivity, which the pious prophet laid much to heart, while there were those that triumphed in it, and insulted over those to whose lot it fell to go into captivity. Note, We must not conclude concerning the first and greatest sufferers that they were the worst and greatest sinners; for perhaps it may appear quite otherwise, as it did here.
II. The vision by which this distinction of the captives was represented to the prophet’s mind. He saw two baskets of figs, set before the temple, there ready to be offered as first-fruits to the honour of God. Perhaps the priests, being remiss in their duty, were not ready to receive them and dispose of them according to the law, and therefore Jeremiah sees them standing before the temple. But that which was the significancy of the vision was that the figs in one basket were extraordinarily good, those in the other basket extremely bad. The children of men are all as the fruits of the fig-tree, capable of being made serviceable to God and man (Judg. ix. 11); but some are as good figs, than which nothing is more pleasant, others as damaged rotten figs, than which nothing is more nauseous. What creature viler than a wicked man, and what more valuable than a godly man! The good figs were like those that are first ripe, which are most acceptable (Mic. vii. 1) and most prized when newly come into season. The bad figs are such as could not be eaten, they were so evil; they could not answer the end of their creation, were neither pleasant nor good for food; and what then were they good for? If God has no honour from men, nor their generation any service, they are even like the bad figs, that cannot be eaten, that will not answer any good purpose. If the salt have lost its savour, it is thenceforth fit for nothing but the dunghill. Of the persons that are presented to the Lord at the door of his tabernacle, some are sincere, and they are very good; others dissemble with God, and they are very bad. Sinners are the worst of men, hypocrites the worst of sinners. Corruptio optimi est pessima–That which is best becomes, when corrupted, the worst.
III. The exposition and application of this vision. God intended by it to raise the dejected spirit of those that had gone into captivity, by assuring them of a happy return, and to humble and awaken the proud and secure spirits of those who continued yet in Jerusalem, by assuring them of a miserable captivity.
1. Here is the moral of the good figs, that were very good, the first ripe. These represented the pious captives, that seemed first ripe for ruin, for they went first into captivity, but should prove first ripe for mercy, and their captivity should help to ripen them; these are pleasing to God, as good figs are to us, and shall be carefully preserved for use. Now observe here,
(1.) Those that were already carried into captivity were the good figs that God would own. This shows, [1.] That we cannot determine of God’s love or hatred by all that is before us. When God’s judgments are abroad those are not always the worst that are first seized by them. [2.] That early suffering sometimes proves for the best to us. The sooner the child is corrected the better effect the correction is likely to have. Those that went first into captivity were as the son whom the father loves, and chastens betimes, chastens while there is hope; and it did well. But those that staid behind were like a child long left to himself, who, when afterwards corrected, is stubborn, and made worse by it, Lam. iii. 27.
(2.) God owns their captivity to be his doing. Whoever were the instruments of it, he ordered and directed it (v. 5): I have sent them out of this place into the land of the Chaldeans. It is God that puts his gold into the furnace, to be tried; his hand is, in a special manner, to be eyed in the afflictions of good people. The judge orders the malefactor into the hand of an executioner, but the father corrects the child with his own hand.
(3.) Even this disgraceful uncomfortable captivity God intended for their benefit; and we are sure that his intentions are never frustrated: I have sent them into the land of the Chaldeans for their good. It seemed to be every way for their hurt, not only as it was the ruin of their estates, honours, and liberties, separated them from their relations and friends, and put them under the power of their enemies and oppressors, but as it sunk their spirits, discouraged their faith, deprived them of the benefit of God’s oracles and ordinances, and exposed them to temptations; and yet it was designed for their good, and proved so, in the issue, as to many of them. Out of the eater came forth meat. By their afflictions they were convinced of sin, humbled under the hand of God, weaned from the world, made serious, taught to pray, and turned from their iniquity; particularly they were cured of their inclination to idolatry; and thus it was good for them that they were afflicted,Psa 119:67; Psa 119:71.
(4.) God promises them that he will own them in their captivity. Though they seem abandoned, they shall be acknowledged; the scornful relations they left behind will scarcely own them, or their kindred to them, but God says, I will acknowledge them. Note, The Lord knows those that are his, and will own them in all conditions; nakedness and sword shall not separate them from his love.
(5.) God assures them of his protection in their trouble, and a glorious deliverance out of it in due time, v. 6. Being sent into captivity for their good, they shall not be lost there; but it shall be with them as it is with gold which the refiner puts into the furnace. [1.] He has his eye upon it while it is there, and it is a careful eye, to see that it sustain no damage: “I will set my eyes upon them for good, to order every thing for the best, that all the circumstances of the affliction may concur to the answering of the great intention of it.” [2.] He will be sure to take it out of the furnace again as soon as the work designed upon it is done: I will bring them again to this land. They were sent abroad for improvement awhile, under a severe discipline; but they shall be fetched back, when they have gone through their trial there, to their Father’s house. [3.] He will fashion his gold when he has refined it, will make it a vessel of honour fit for his use; so, when God has brought them back from their trial, he will build them and make them a habitation for himself, will plant them and make them a vineyard for himself. Their captivity was to square the rough stones and make them fit for his building, to prune up the young trees and make them fit for his planting.
(6.) He engages to prepare them for these temporal mercies which he designed for them by bestowing spiritual mercies upon them, v.7. It is this that will make their captivity be for their good; this shall be both the improvement of their affliction and their qualification for deliverance. When our troubles are sanctified to us, then we may be sure that they will end well. Now that which is promised is, [1.] That they should be better acquainted with God; they should learn more of God by his providences in Babylon than they had learned by all his oracles and ordinances in Jerusalem, thanks to divine grace, for, if that had not wrought mightily upon them in Babylon, they would for ever have forgotten God. It is here promised, I will give them, not so much a head to know me, but a heart to know me, for the right knowledge of God consists not in notion and speculation, but in the convictions of the practical judgment directing and governing the will and affections. A good understanding have all those that do his commandments, Ps. cxi. 10. Where God gives a sincere desire and inclination to know him he will give that knowledge. It is God himself that gives a heart to know him, else we should perish for ever in our ignorance. [2.] That they should be entirely converted to God, to his will as their rule, his service as their business, and his glory as their end: They shall return to me with their whole heart. God himself undertakes for them that they shall; and, if he turn us, we shall be turned. This follows upon the former; for those that have a heart to know God aright will not only turn to him, but turn with their whole heart; for those that are either obstinate in their rebellion, or hypocritical in their religion, may truly be said to be ignorant of God. [3.] That thus they should be again taken into covenant with God, as much to their comfort as ever: They shall be my people, and I will be their God. God will own them, as formerly, for his people, in the discoveries of himself to them, in his acceptance of their services, and in his gracious appearances on their behalf; and they shall have liberty to own him for their God in their prayers to him and their expectations from him. Note, Those that have backslidden from God, if they do in sincerity return to him, are admitted as freely as any to all the privileges and comforts of the everlasting covenant, which is herein well-ordered, that every transgression in the covenant does not throw us out of covenant, and that afflictions are not only consistent with, but flowing from, covenant-love.
2. Here is the moral of the bad figs. Zedekiah and his princes and partizans yet remain in the land, proud and secure enough, Ezek. xi. 3. Many had fled into Egypt for shelter, and they thought they had shifted well for themselves and their own safety, and boasted that though therein they had gone contrary to the command of God yet they had acted prudently for themselves. Now as to both these, that looked so scornfully upon those that had gone into captivity, it is here threatened, (1.) That, whereas those who were already carried away were settled in one country, where they had the comfort of one another’s society, though in captivity, these should be dispersed and removed into all the kingdoms of the earth, where they should have no joy one of another. (2.) That, whereas those were carried captives for their good, these should be removed into all countries for their hurt. Their afflictions should be so far from humbling them that they should harden them, not bring them nearer to God, but set them at a greater distance from him. (3.) That, whereas those should have the honour of being owned of God in their troubles, these should have the shame of being abandoned by all mankind: In all places whither I shall drive them they shall be a reproach and a proverb. “Such a one is as false and proud as a Jew”–“Such a one is as poor and miserable as a Jew.” All their neighbours shall make a jest of them, and of the calamities brought upon them. (4.) That, whereas those should return to their own land, never to see it more, and it shall be of no avail to them to plead that it was the land God gave to their fathers, for they had it from God, and he gave it to them upon condition of their obedience. (5.) That, whereas those were reserved for better times, these were reserved for worse; wherever they are removed the sword, and famine, and pestilence, shall be sent after them, shall soon overtake them, and, coming with commission so to do, shall overcome them. God has variety of judgments wherewith to prosecute those that fly from justice; and those that have escaped one may expect another, till they are brought to repent and reform.
Doubtless this prophecy had its accomplishment in the men of that generation yet, because we read not of any such remarkable difference between those of Jeconiah’s captivity and those of Zedekiah’s, it is probable that this has a typical reference to the last destruction of the Jews by the Romans, in which those of them that believed were taken care of, but those that continued obstinate in unbelief were driven into all countries for a taunt and a curse, and so they remain to this day.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
JEREMIAH – CHAPTER 24
A VISION: TWO BASKETS OF FIGS
Vs. 1-3: A CONTRAST BETWEEN THE GODLY AND UNGODLY
1. This vision occurred after Nebuchadnezzar’s deportation of Jehoiachin and the choice young men of Judah (princes, carpenters, smith, etc.) to Babylon in 597 B.C., (Jer 29:1-2; 2Ki 24:10-16).
2. The vision was a common means of communicating a divine message to the prophets, (comp. Jer 1:11-14; Amo 8:1-3).
3. IN this vision two baskets of figs were seen setting before the temple of Jehovah.
a. One basket was filled with very GOOD figs, like those that ripen first, (vs. 2a; comp. Mic 7:1, Hos 9:10; Nah 3:12).
b. The other basket contained VERY BAD figs – so bad that they were not fit to eat! (Jer 27:19; comp. Isa 5:4-7).
4. When the Lord asked Jeremiah what he saw, he mentioned the extreme contrast between the VERY good and the VERY bad figs.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
The meaning of this vision is, that there was no reason for the ungodly to flatter themselves if they continued in their wickedness, though God did bear with them for a time. The King Jeconiah had been then carried away into exile, together with the chief men and artisans. The condition of the king and of the rest appeared indeed much worse than that of the people who remained in the country, for they still retained a hope that the royal dignity would again be restored, and that the city would flourish again and enjoy abundance of every blessing, though it was then nearly emptied; for everything precious had become a prey to the conqueror; and we indeed know how great was the avarice and rapacity of Nebuchadnezzar. The city then was at that time almost empty, and desolate in comparison with its former splendor. They however who remained might indeed have hoped for a better state of things, but those who had gone into exile were become like dead bodies. Hence miserable Jeconiah, who was banished and deprived of his kingdom, was apparently undergoing a most grievous punishment, together with his companions, who had been led away with him; and the Jews who remained at Jerusalem no doubt flattered themselves, as though God had dealt more kindly with them. Had they really repented, they would indeed have given thanks to God for having spared them; but as they had abused his forbearance, it was necessary to set before them what this chapter contains, even that they foolishly reasoned when they concluded, that God had been more propitious to them than to the rest.
But this is shewn by a vision: the Prophet saw two baskets or flaskets; and he saw them full of figs, and that before the temple of God; but the figs in one were sweet and savory; and the figs in the other were bitter, so that they could not be eaten. By the sweet figs God intended to represent Jeconiah and the other exiles, who had left their country: and he compares them to the ripe figs; for ripe figs have a sweet taste, while the other figs are rejected on account of their bitterness. In like manner, Jeconiah and the rest had as it were been consumed; but there were figs still remaining; and he says that the lot of those was better whom God had in due time punished, than of the others who remained, as they were accumulating a heavier judgment by their obstinacy. For since the time that Nebuchadnezzar had spoiled the city and had taken from it everything valuable, those who remained had not ceased to add sins to sins, so that there was a larger portion of divine vengeance ready to fall on them.
We now see the design of this vision. And he says that the vision was presented to him by God; and to say this was very necessary, that his doctrine might have more weight with the people. God, indeed, often spoke without a vision; but we have elsewhere stated what was the design of a vision; it was a sort of seal to what was delivered; for in order that the Prophet might possess greater authority, they not only spoke, but as it were sealed their doctrine, as though God had graven on it, as it were by his finger, a certain mark. But as this subject has been elsewhere largely handled, I shall now pass it by.
Behold, he says, two baskets of figs set before the temple. (123) The place ought to be noticed. It may have been that the Prophet was not allowed to move a step from his own house; and the vision may have been presented to him in the night, during thick darkness: but the temple being mentioned, shews that a part of the people had not been taken away without cause, and the other part left in the city; for it had proceeded from God himself. For in the temple God manifested himself; and therefore the prophets, when they wished to storm the hearts of the ungodly, often said,
“
Go forth shall God from his temple.” (Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3.)
The temple then is to be taken here for the tribunal of God. Hence, he says, that these two baskets were set in the temple; as though he said, that the whole people stood at God’s tribunal, and that those who had been already cast into exile had not been carried away at the will of their enemies, but because God designed to punish them.
The time also is mentioned, After Yeconiah the son of Jehohoiakim had been carried away; for had not this been added, the vision would have been obscure, and no one at this day could understand why God had set two baskets in the presence of Jeremiah. A distinction then is made here between the exiles and those who dwelt in their own country; and at the same time they were reduced to great poverty, and the city was deprived of its splendor; there was hardly any magnificence in the Temple, the royal palace was spoiled, and the race of David only reigned by permission. But though the calamity of the city and people was grievous, yet, as it has been said, the Jews who remained in the city thought themselves in a manner happy in comparison with their brethren, who were become as it were dead; for God had ejected the king, and he was treated disdainfully as a captive, and the condition of the others was still worse. This difference then between the captives and those who remained in the land is what is here represented.
(123) Blayney’s rendering is “offered according to law before the temple.” See Deu 26:2. — Ed.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL NOTES. Vide previous chapter. Cf. 2Ki. 24:10-12.
Natural History. Baskets of Figs: Vide Natural History notes on chaps. Jer. 5:17, Jer. 8:13. The first ripe figs (Jer. 24:2), called here bikkurah (cf. Isa. 28:4; Mic. 7:1; Hos. 9:10), denotes the early or spring fig; and is still called boccore in Mauritania, and in Spanish albacora. The usual time for gathering figs is August; the early fig gathered in June is a rarity and delicacy. It is easily shaken off the tree (Nah. 3:12). The very bad figs (Jer. 24:2) were probably sycamore figs; which, unless punctured as they ripen, turn acrid, and cannot be eaten (Jer. 24:3); or, they may have been decayed figs. Baskets of figs used to be offered as firstfruits in the Temple.
HOMILETIC SUMMARY OF CHAPTER 24
THE BASKETS OF FIGS: A PARABLE AND A PROPHECY
Notes:i.
Those who are amid calamity do not necessarily deserve worse than those who temporarily escape.
ii.
Those who temporarily escape calamity may be destined to far heavier chastisements.
iii.
Among those whom disaster overtakes there may be eminently good men. Daniel and Ezekiel were among the first captives!
iv.
Self-elation over immunity from adversity will only invoke more humbling providences. Probably those who remained behind thought themselves better than those who had gone into captivity; but heavier judgments came in due time upon these boasters.
v.
Adversities may have a beneficent design and beneficent influence (Jer. 24:5-8).
I. A nation rent asunderyet arrayed beneath Gods eye.
1. Separated by ordinance of Gods providence. God had permitted the captivity; and He had reserved the part which remained behind.
(a.) In respect of location they were widely separated. Babylon lay far off from Jerusalem.
(b.) In respect of outward advantages they were widely dissimilar. Exiles and residents. Yet both were equally
2. Present under the eye of Gods omniscience. One part was captive in Babylon (Jer. 24:1); the other part remained in Canaan (Jer. 24:8); but both baskets of figs were set before the Temple of the Lord. [The word implies that they were appointed to this place before Gods Temple.] Thus the exiles in Babylon were equally present to Gods eye as those at Jerusalem. Equally under His eye: those afar as those near; those amid adversity as those amid advantages.
(a.) Wherever we are we dwell under the Divine notice. We cannot go beyond His ken. None are forgotten by God. Those afar off were still set before Him.
(b.) Amid our adversities we do not lose the Divine Fatherhood. Even though sent out of this place into the land of the Chaldeans (Jer. 24:4), yet God declares, I will acknowledge them; and I will set Mine eyes upon them for good (Jer. 24:5).
II. A suggestive comparisonindicating vast moral dissimilarities. Two baskets of figs: in the one were very good figs; in the other very naughty figsthe good figs, very good; and the evil, very evil.
1. Their experiences seemed to reverse this estimate. It surprises us to find that those carried away captive were accounted good, while those escaping the miseries of exile are pronounced very bad. Here is teaching that we judge not character by circumstances; that we do not deem those who most suffer to be the greatest sinners. Judge not according to the outward appearance; judge nothing before the time; I have seen the wicked in great power, &c. The facts were that the exiles were the noblest and best of the nation; those left at home were the refuse.
2. Their separation was for a providential purpose. Those of the nation who were of any worth at all were called out and sent away into safe keeping, even though into exile. And there they were in good keeping. Although it seemed worse to be in captivity than to dwell at home, they were really better off in Chaldea. Their removal to Babylon saved them from the calamities which befel the rest of the nation. Whom God loveth He chasteneth.
3. Their distinctive qualities was emphatically marked. Very goodvery bad. Doubtless those who remained at home flattered themselves with being better than those who were exiled, and more pleasing to God than those who suffered captivity. They showed themselves very bad by their pride of heart, by not profiting from the salutary warning of the calamity which had come upon their fellow-countrymen, by not repenting of their own evils and amending their ungodly lives. The exiles showed themselves good by signs of regeneration under the discipline of captivity. God Himself esteemed them more favourably (Jer. 24:5), and saw in them higher excellences and more hopeful qualities than the rest possessed. God looketh not on the outward appearance, but at the heart.
III. A contrasted destinyaccording with their merit and conduct. The good figs were a delicacy (see Natural History note supra); the bad were obnoxiouscould not be eaten. There was a reverse destiny for them. God gave this vision and prophecy to Jeremiah: (a) To cheer the disconsolate captives with a hope of future good; (b) To check the vaunting of the heartless residents by menaces of their impending doom.
1. The gracious destiny of the exiles. (1.) They should be carefully preserved (Jer. 24:5). (2.) They were favourably regarded, and would be acknowledged by God (Jer. 24:4). (3.) Their banishment was for their good (Jer. 24:5). (4.) Their miraculous rescue was pledged them (Jer. 24:6). (5.) Spiritual regeneration should crown all other and temporal benefits (Jer. 24:7). Thus God will devise means whereby His banished ones shall return unto Him.
2. The hopeless desolation of the disobedient. They had refused to act on Gods counsel (chap. Jer. 16:8-9); and now boasted of their prudence in remaining in the city; probably, too, they talked scornfully of the captives. But these people should (1.) Be driven asunder over the earth (Jer. 24:9); whereas the Babylonish captives were altogether in one scene; companions and confederated. (2.) Their calamities would work ill to themnot regenerating them, as the others, but hardening and alienating them the more (Jer. 24:9). (3.) They would be subjected to contempt and ridicule (Jer. 24:9). (4.) No hope or possibility of restoration would be granted them (Jer. 24:10). Whereas their exiled fellow-countrymen were being preserved for better times, they were but reserved for greater woes. Neither those who were carried into Egypt with Jehoahaz (Jer. 24:8), nor those who should flee thither, would share in the blessings promised to the Chaldean exiles. According to their deeds, accordingly He will repay (Isa. 59:19). Gods administrations of chastisement or punishment are regulated by what He discerns are our dispositions and possibilities.
See Addenda: CHASTENED, YET NOT ABANDONED.
Lange supplies the following homiletic summary of the chapter:
GOOD AND BAD FIGSEMBLEMS OF HUMANITY
Humanity in its twofold aspect: well-pleasing or displeasing to God.
I. The prisoners and broken-hearted are, like the good figs, well-pleasing to God. For (1) They know the Lord, and turn to Him; (2) He is their God, and they are His people.
II. Those who dwell proudly and securely are, like the bad figs, displeasing to God. For (1) They live on in foolish blindness; (2) They challenge the judgment of God.
HOMILIES AND COMMENTS ON VERSBS OF CHAPTER 24
Jer. 24:2. Theme: DELICIOUS AND REPUISIVE FRUIT. One basket had very good figs, even like the figs that are first ripe; and the other basket had very naughty figs, which could not be eaten, they were so bad.
See Natural History note above, on the varieties of figs and their ripening periods.
Analogy: Men show varieties in temperament and character, more remarkable than the varieties among figs, and more numerous. And among men the ripening matures at different periods: some being early ripechildren and youth; others reaching maturity only in the autumn years of life; others only in the winter of age. But the differences among men may be summed up thus: good and bad. Two classes only. Gradations there are in each class, but the absolute qualities are only two.
I. Growth under common conditions. These figs were all Palestine figs.
1. Their original stock was the same. All were figs; and grew on trees which were identical in genus. So all men, whatever their nationality or individuality or parentage, spring from the one stockhumanity; and humanity invested with its qualities and possibilities by God.
2. Their advantages were the same. The same soilCanaan; under same fructifying influencesreligious influences, Divine teachings, prophetic counsels and warnings, &c.; guarded by the same careGod watched over both: He the Gardener.
II. Maturing under gracious influences. Both the good and bad reached maturity and ripeness. They could not resist these influences working that result.
1. Maturing influences which compelled development. Probably people dislike their true character being forced to decision and fruition; they would rather remain neutral. But the figs could not escape nor resist the action of earth, air, and sun. This Jewish nation could not escape nor resist the influences of prophetic teaching and providential discipline. On the two sections of the people there had acted developing influences: exile had benefited the captives; whereas exemption from captivity had hardened those who remained in Judah. So on all men providence, religion, grace, and Gods Spirit are acting; compelling the development and manifestation of their temper and character.
2. Maturing influences which tested their true nature. The figs ripened into good figs and naughty figs. The maturing processes do not change the nature of the thing fructified, but only bring it to complete development. So Jeremiahs prophecies and Gods providential dealings did not make them good or naughty, but tested their tendency. Thus lifes incidents and Gospel preaching test us: prove our spirit; try the state and inclinations of our hearts.
III. Resulting in the completest contrast. Very good figs, even the figs first ripea delicious fruit; very naughty figs, which could not be eaten, so badrotten or repulsive fruit.
1. Wholly dissimilar in quality and character. The exiles became humble, repentant, reformed. The resident Jews became insolent, self-secure, defiant. The former became a delicacy as the first ripe figs; the latter obnoxious, could not be eaten. Good and bad. What is our moral quality or spiritual character? Godly or ungodly; sacred or sinful; with Christ or against Him; redeemed or reprobate?
2. God dealt with them according to their state. Not according to their name; both fruits were figs; and both sections of the nation were Jews. But according to their nature and quality: good or naughty. The goodGod will acknowledge (Jer. 24:5), and make better (Jer. 24:7). The badHe would reject (Jer. 24:9) and destroy (Jer. 24:10). The exiles became ripe for Gods mercy; the residents became rotten and repulsivefit for nothing but rejection.
Jer. 24:7. Theme: KNOWING GOD WITH THE HEART. And I will give them an heart to know Me.
God has often kind and gracious purposes towards men when they least imagine it. Truly God is good to Israel. We are very imperfect judges of the character and design of Divine dispensations. No man knoweth good or evil from all that is before him. The good figs, meaning the best and most spiritual part of the nation, were sent to Babylon for their good; and the bad figs, the most corrupt among the Jews, were kept in Jerusalem that they might ripen to ruin. Those who remained in Jerusalem no doubt thought that they were special objects of Divine favour, and that they who were sent first to Babylon were the objects of Gods displeasure: but the reverse was the fact. This may teach us not to be rash and hasty in our conclusions; not to judge before the time; and not to convert calamities into judgments (Luk. 13:1-5).
I. The eminent blessing promiseda heart to know and love God.
i. It is inestimably preciousto know Himknow Him as their God. All knowledge is valuable; but Divine knowledge supremely so. By this is meant not a speculative knowledge, which the devils have in greater perfection than ourselves, and remain devils still; but a spiritual, experimental, and soul-satisfying knowledge of God. It includes a knowledge of Him in His revealed character, in His condescending grace, in His covenant relations, in His providential government, and in the special communion with the souls of His redeemed children. The Lord, the Lord God, merciful and graciousgracious in making His promises; faithful in fulfilling them. God known in the heart is, in effect, to have the Bible opened, the Law opened, the Gospel opened, Christ opened, heaven opened, the covenant of grace opened, and the blessings and immunities of the spiritual life laid opened and revealed. But without thiswithout Christ and the knowledge and love of God shed abroad in the heart, our religion is a mere namelike a husk without the kernel, like a casket without the jewel, like a body without the informing spirit.
ii. It is Gods special gift. I will give. He claims it; He only is competent; He delights to give it. This is not a natural attainment, but a Divine communication and bestowment. All knowledge is essentially from God, for He teacheth the husbandman discretion, and taught Aholiab and Bezaleel how to accomplish the carved work for the tabernaclebut this spiritual knowledge is pre-eminently from Him.
iii. This is often a gradual attainment: begun in conversion, carried on in the successive developments of the Christian life. He who impresses Divine truths upon the mind, at first, in conversion, opens them more fully afterwardsshows their importance, harmony, consistency, and power; removes doubts and jealousies and suspicions concerning them, and renders them vitally influential upon the soul. Then shall we know, if we follow on to know, His going forth is prepared as the morning.
One beam of light breaking in from the Spirit of God does more towards confirming and establishing the mind in the truths of religion, than a thousand arguments of the most subtle disputers, or a thousand sermons of the most eloquent preachers. Hence we read of the demonstration of the Spirit.
iv. It is greatly facilitated by sanctified afflictions. The good figs must be removed to Babylon, to attain a higher knowledge of God, and a greater ripeness of grace. The school of the Cross is the school of light. In captivity it is given them. Afflictions were the means of it.
II. The means of its attainment.
i. Plead the promise in prayer. Oh, how much need have we to wait and pray for its accomplishment in our own experience! Some are weak in knowledge; slow in capacity, like the disciples, who, though they had so good a Master, were but dull scholars. Some have not the knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame. Like the Hebrews, chap. Jer. 5:12. We must open our mouth to God in prayer, that He may open our eyes. Open Thou mine eyes. Lord, that I may receive my sight. Show us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
ii. Honour the methods of Divine instruction: ordinances, providences.
iii. Walk by the light of the truth you know. If you have any saving and spiritual knowledge, be thankful, be humble. Do not abuse the light, but improve it. Live under the power of the truth as it is in Jesus. Resign yourself to its transforming power. Give this knowledge room to work, that it may have free course and be glorified in you.
iv. Guard against all the obstructions to this knowledge: against sloth, against worldliness, against easily-besetting sins. Ye did run well, who hath hindered you? Some men know much, but to little purpose. Their hearts are too strong for their light. This makes them more skilful hypocrites. These make rents and divisions in the Church. They employ the light they have to do the devils work.
III. The uses to which this knowledge is subservient.
i. To our happiness: free from doubt.
ii. To our holiness: alienate us from the world and evil.
iii. To our usefulness: makes us bold for God, a centre of light; emboldens us to act and suffer.Samuel Thodey, A.D. 1856.
See Addenda: CHASTENED, YET NOT ABANDONED.
Theme: AN ENLIGHTENED HEART IS GODS GIFT.
Since He affirms that He would give them a heart to understand, we hence learn
i. That men are by nature blind; and also that, when they are blinded by the devil, they cannot return to the right way.
ii. That men cannot be otherwise capable of light than by having God to illuminate them by His Spirit.
This passage also shows
iii. That until the sinner bows before Gods tribunal and owns Him to be the Judge, he will never be touched with the feeling of true repentance.Calvin.
Comments
He who willingly and readily resigns himself to the will of God [as the exiles did] even to the cross, may escape misfortunes. But he who opposes himself to the hand of God [as the residents in Jerusalem], cannot escape.Cramer.
The captives are dearest to God. By the first greater affliction He prepares their souls for repentance and radical conversion, so that He has in them again His people and inheritance. Oh the gracious God, that He allows those who on account of sin must be so deeply degraded and rendered slaves, even in such humiliation, to be His people! The captives are forgiven their opposition to God. God will show them what His love can do; they shall return, and in true nearness to God be His true Israel.Diedrich.
NOTICEABLE TOPICS IN CHAPTER 24
Topic: JEREMIAHS VISION OF FIGS. Reflections on some of the characteristics of the age we live in. (Jer. 24:1-3.)
It is not difficult to see the force and application of this homely but sententious little allegory. Jeremiah lived in those days of declension and disaster in which the threatened invasion of Judea by the king of Babylon actually took place. Those who were carried away comprised the best of the population with regard to intelligence, religious feeling, and patriotism. Their sorrows and afflictions humbled them, so that they repented of their idolatries and obtained mercy of the Lord. They also found favour with their conquerors, and not a few of them rose to high and influential positions in the court and kingdom of Babylon. The Jews who remained at home with Zedekiah and his princes revolted against God more and more. Their heart was proud and unhumbled. Year after year they sunk deeper into misery, profanity, and vice. They not only provoked the Divine anger increasingly, but awakened the fierce disdain and hatred of their Chaldean masters, so that at length they were so wasted and ravaged by pestilence, battle, poverty, and exile as to be utterly consumed from off the land which God had given to them and to their fathers (see Jer. 24:8-10). These were the evil figs, so evil that they could not be eaten. The figs ought to have been good, but were not. All the figs were figs of the same seasonsay an unusually hot and dry onesuiting the trees in certain localities pre-eminently well, whereas in other localities the trees were blighted and withered, and the figs which grew upon them, dry, dusty, tasteless, and worm-eaten.
We are thus led to think of A SEASON FOR FRUIT, PECULIARLY INTENSE AND ARDENT, causing it to come to pass that good fruit turns out remarkably good, and bad fruit remarkably bad. The point suggested by Jeremiahs vision is, That there occur periods or special circumstances in the religious life of nations, which tend to develop and force the maturation of character with unusual energy and astonishing rapidity. In such times you do not find people merely good or bad; but the good are very good, and the evil very evil. Such a crisis it was with the Jews at the time when Jeremiah prophesied.
We live, at present, in a kind of hothouse atmosphere, which has the effect of rapidly developing, as well as mightily intensifying, all the moral and religious elements which go to constitute personal character. Must not the good be very good, and the evil very evil?
Suggest some of the circumstances and influences which invest the times we live in with this interesting peculiarity, and point out a few of the instances and illustrations of the effect thereby produced.
I. Certain peculiarities of our times and position may be noted.
1. This is an age of extraordinary intellectual and social activity. It is an age of many books and much reading; of fearless inquiry and frequent discovery, &c. It requires a great effort to keep the mind calm, to allay the frenzy of excited feeling, to check the extravagances of new-found liberty, and hold fast to the sober requirements of sound principle and acknowledged truth.
2. Another thing to be noticed is the very full and clear religious light which we enjoy. Compare it with any period since the Apostolic age; the Bible was never more closely and deeply studied than now; never were its great cardinal doctrines so fully established or so generally acknowledged among all sections of the Church; the Gospel was never preached to so many nations as now, and at no period were there in Great Britain so many preachers of evangelical truth as now. It would seem well-nigh impossible for any man to remain in ignorance of the things of God, the claims of Jesus, and the way of salvation.
3. There is also a corresponding increase of activity in the Church. Certainly no age has ever surpassed our own in visible earnestness, in pecuniary liberality, or in the excitement and emulation of real Christian work.
What do all these things necessitate on our part individually? Truly potent and stimulating agencies are in operation, calculated to arouse us to repentance and godly solicitude, and then to prompt and goad us on to vigorous Christian life and action. What bold, what firm, what fruitful Christians we must become if we enter fully into the spirit of the times, considered as engaged on the side of Christ and His Gospel! But if we refuse to do so, if we set ourselves to resist these powerful influences, how strenuous must that resistance be! how determined and resolute and how self-conscious that action of the will which still fights against God and clings to worldliness and sin! It seems impossible for us to be half-hearted, undecided, only negatively good or bad. Truly we must take sides openly, one way or the other. We cannot stand neutral: we must declare ourselves boldly and actively either for Christ or against Him. Behold the two baskets of figs; the good figs must be very good, and the evil figs very evil.
II. Facts are in harmony with these reasonings. Illustrations abound on every side. In this earnest age you find earnest men both for good and evil.
l. Was ever war conducted on so fearful a scale as we have lately witnessed it?
2. In our day, we have also seen such specimens of commercial roguery and robbery, conceived on so magnificent a scale, and executed under so clever and admirable a cloak of hypocrisy, as no previous age has ever presented to the world. Never, assuredly, in any landSodom and Gomorrah unexceptedhave baser things been done than have been discovered in our land, and in our own time.
3. On the other hand, look at the men who stand foremost in the van of religion and philanthropy. These are Gods heroes; worthy of comparison with the spiritual heroes of ancient times, in regard to all that is noble in faith, self-denying in zeal, munificent in giving, or abundant in labours. These are among the good figs, which by Gods grace are very good: and to the production of such instances of exalted and matured piety the present times are not in the least unfavourable.
4. One might speak of books as well as men. We defy any age to show such noble and masterly treatises as are now written by men of sanctified, learning and genius, either in exposition of the Scriptures, or in vindication of their contents. Here again the good figs are very good, even as the evil figs are very evil.
5. Then there are public institutions and societies to be looked at. There are all manner of good institutions set on foot, it is true, but so are there, also, all manner of evil institutions established and seen to be flourishing. The kingdom of Satan is as active and roused up to new exertions as is the kingdom of Christ. Enormous sums of money are spent in the cause of religion; but far, far greater sums are forthcoming to support folly and wickedness, to build temples of mammon-worship and of pleasure, and to uphold the reign of sensuality and impiety.
III. One or two practical lessons ask our attention. We live in stirring times, in which the forces, both of good and evil, like the arts of material warfare, are developing unprecedented resources, and putting forth unheard-of and most gigantic energies; times in which prodigies abound, both of wickedness and of goodness; times in which the good figs are very good, and the naughty figs very bad. It is no small matter to live in England in this nineteenth century. A hotter, more crowded, or more excited moral battle-field was never known in the history of the world. Therefore
1. Let no mans trumpet give an uncertain sound; nor let any one think that he can remain a neutral or uninterested spectator of the conflict. What a heavy responsibility rests upon those who live in such a century as this! The religious and moral influences which bear upon us are mighty beyond all that has gone before us.
2. This is no time for trifling. Let us seek to be good, and do good: and then, behold what glorious possibilities belong to us of being pre-eminently holy, blest, and useful! Ought we not to seek this higher growth in grace? Should we not desire to be, among the lowly, the most humble; among the spotless, the most pure; among the active, the most toilsome; among the meek, the most patient; and among the kind, the most charitable? Let us be instant in prayer; and, like Abraham, strong in faith, giving glory to God. Surely this is a worthy and noble ambition; not merely to be a Christian, but a Christian of the highest order.
3. Each may do great things for God. His talent may be small; but how much may he make of it! What means of knowledge, what incentives to zeal, what facilities for usefulness are within every ones reach! None need be idle or half employed. Now, if ever, may the good figs be very good, even as the naughty figs are very bad. Now, if ever, does the saying of Zechariah apply to Gods Church: And he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the Lord before them. Let us never forget that he who would have God on his side, must take care himself to be always on the side of God.Rev. T. G. Horton (Wolverhampton), in Christian World Pulpit (summarised).
ADDENDA TO CHAPTER 24: ILLUSTRATIONS AND SUGGESTIVE EXTRACTS
Jer. 24:1. CHASTENED, BUT NOT ABANDONED.
Three facts should be here noted:
The exiles were remembered by God, as this vision shows. Also, they were graciously esteemed by Himbetter figs than those who remained at home. Further, God intended good to them. So that when we seem outcast from happiness and hope, God may be only chastening us for our profit, or keeping us away from besotting prosperity (chap. Jer. 22:21), in order that we may be prepared for spiritual elevation (chap. Jer. 24:7).
After the storm, a calm;
After the bruise, a balm;
For the ill brings good in the Lords own time,
And the sigh becomes a psalm.
After the drought, the dew;
After the cloud, the blue;
For the sky will smile in the suns good time,
And the earth grow glad and new.
Mrs. Crawford.
Trapp remarks that Jeconiah was a wicked prince, and therefore written childless. Howbeit, because by the advice of the prophet Jeremiah he submitted to Nebuchadnezzar, he and his company are here comforted, and pronounced more happy, however it might seem otherwise, than those that continued still in the land; and this, say the Hebrews (Rabar, Hugo, Lyra), was not obscurely set forth also by those two baskets of figs, whereof that which was worst showed best, and the other showed worst till they came to be tasted.
Winter brings blessings, so the chill
Of dark adversity;from its cold grasp
The soul revives reanimate,more strong,
And better armed.F. A. Mackay.
Winter will kill vermin which the summer of success and comfort is apt to produce and nourish.
Adversity has the effect of eliciting talents which, in prosperous circumstances, would have lain dormant.Horace.
All-pitying Heaven,
Severe in mercy, chastening in its love,
Oft-times in dark and awful visitation
Doth interpose, and leads the wanderer back
To the straight path, to be for ever after
A firm, undaunted, onward-bearing traveller,
Strong in humility, who swerves no more.
Joanna Baillie.
(Comp. Addenda to chap. 22, PROSPERITY.)
I have read of a fountain that at noonday is cold, and at midnight it grows warm. So many a precious soul is cold Godward and Heavenward in prosperity, and grows warm in the midnight of adversity.Brooks.
Jer. 24:7. THEY SHALL BE MY PEOPLE.
This falling out of lovers shall but be a renewing of love betwixt us. God must sometimes whip His people to duty, and gather them from evil, as well as entice them.Trapp.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
F. The Vision of the Fig Baskets Jer. 24:1-10
The terminology the Lord showed me or caused me to see introduces a prophetic vision. Chapter 24 contains such a vision. There are two types of prophetic visions in the Old Testament, the subjective and the objective. In the subjective vision only the prophet sees the object in question. In the objective vision the object is visible to the physical eyesight. The revelation consists of the significance of the object, not what the prophet sees but what the prophet sees in an object. It is sometimes difficult to ascertain whether a vision is subjective or objective. In the opinion of the present writer the vision of the two fig baskets falls into the category of objective vision. Chapter 24 describes the experience of the prophet in having his attention drawn to the two baskets (Jer. 24:1-3). Then the Lord explains to Jeremiah the meaning of the basket of good figs (Jer. 24:4-7) and the basket of bad figs (Jer. 24:8-10).
1. The experience of the prophet (Jer. 24:1-3)
TRANSLATION
(1) And the LORD showed me, and, behold, two baskets of figs placed before the Temple of the LORD after Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon had taken Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, and the princes of Judah with the craftsmen and the smiths from Jerusalem and had brought them to Babylon. (2) The one basket contained very good figs, like figs that are first ripe; the other basket contained very bad figs, which were so bad they could not be eaten. (3) And the LORD said unto me, What do you see Jeremiah? And I said, Figs! The good figs are very good and the bad ones are so bad they cannot be eaten.
COMMENTS
Jer. 24:1-3 describe the time, place and contents of the prophetic vision. The vision is dated after the deportation of 597 B.C. In this deportation Jeconiah, better known as Jehoiachin (cf. Jer. 22:24), was taken captive along with all the artisans of the land. Jeremiah seems to have been outside the Temple at the time of the vision. God directed his attention to two baskets of figs which had been left for some unexplained reason near the entrance of the Temple (Jer. 24:1). Jeremiah noticed that the first basket contained good figs which were a delight to the eye. Small figs which appear along with the first leaves of spring after ripening are called first-ripe figs. The first-ripe figs are considered a delicacy (cf. Hos. 9:10; Mic. 7:1). The prophet noticed that the other basket contained bad figs, so bad that they could not possibly be eaten. Jeremiah does not say why the figs were bad. Most commentators speculate that they were spoiled and hence worthless, fit only to be thrown away. Another suggestion is that the second basket contained figs which had been allowed to remain too long on the tree. Such fully mature figs taken from the tree late in the season are untasty. As is frequent in prophetic visions the Lord asked Jeremiah to relate what he had observed and the prophet quickly does so, anticipating the interpretation of these symbols which follows (Jer. 24:3).
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
XXIV.
(1) The Lord shewed me . . .The chapter belongs to the same period as the two preceding, i.e., to the reign of Zedekiah, after the first capture of Jerusalem and the captivity of the chief inhabitants. The opening words indicate that the symbols on which the prophet looked were seen in vision, as in Amo. 7:1-4; Amo. 7:7; Zec. 1:8; Zec. 2:1, and the symbols of Jer. 1:11; Jer. 1:13; or, if seen with the eyes of the body, were looked on as with the prophet-poets power of finding parables in all things. The fact that the figs were set before the Temple of the Lord is significant. They were as a votive offering, first-fruits (Exo. 23:19; Deu. 26:2) or tithes brought to the Lord of Israel. A like imagery had been used by Amos (Amo. 8:1-2) with nearly the same formul.
The carpenters and smiths.See 2Ki. 24:14. The word for carpenters includes craftsmen of all kinds. The deportation of these classes was partly a matter of policy, making the city more helpless by removing those who might have forged weapons or strengthened its defences, partly, doubtless, of ostentation, that they might help in the construction of the buildings with which Nebuchadnezzar was increasing the splendour of his city. So Esar-haddon records how he made his captives work in fetters, in making bricks Records of the Past, iii. p. 120). So, from the former point of view, the Philistines in the time of Samuel either carried off the smiths of Israel or forbade the exercise of their calling (1Sa. 13:19). The word for smith is found in Isa. 24:22; Isa. 42:7 in the sense of prison, but, as applied to persons, only here and in the parallel passage of 2Ki. 24:14; 2Ki. 24:16. It has been differently interpreted as meaning locksmiths, gatekeepers, strangers, hod-carriers, and day-labourers. Probably the rendering of the E.V. is right.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
THE SYMBOL TWO FIG-BASKETS, 1-3.
This passage is distinguished, first of all, by the very definite note of time with which it commences, and its contemptuous treatment of the reigning sovereign, Zedekiah. Those who are gone into captivity are the good figs upon which God will continue to look with kindly remembrance, and will bring them again to their own land; while those that remain are but as refuse and worthless fruit.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
1. Showed me In prophetic vision.
Set before the temple of the Lord That is, specially and eminently in the divine presence. Into this place Israel had come by the divine election, and she must endure the tests appropriate to the position.
The carpenters and smiths Carried to Babylon, both to weaken Jerusalem and to increase the resources of Babylon. 2Ki 24:16.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
The Two Baskets of Figs – Zedekiah And Jerusalem Are Fated To Destruction And Exile ( Jer 24:1-10 ).
The subsection opened with a report concerning the future of Zedekiah and Jerusalem, and it now closes with the same, the two forming an inclusio for the subsection. Jeremiah is shown two baskets of figs by YHWH, one containing good figs and the other bad figs. The good figs represent the cream of the people who had been carried off to Babylon (including Daniel and Ezekiel among others). The bad figs represent Zedekiah and those who had remained behind in Jerusalem. The good figs would one day be restored to the land and built up there, and would once again become His people with Him being their God. But the bad figs would be gathered up by Nebuchadrezzar and scattered among the kingdoms to become a reproach wherever they were found, and prior to that would first suffer sword, famine and pestilence. In other words for Zedekiah and his ilk there was to be no future.
Jer 24:1
‘YHWH showed me, and, behold, two baskets of figs set before the temple of YHWH, after Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon had carried away captive Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, and the princes of Judah, with the craftsmen and smiths, from Jerusalem, and had brought them to Babylon.’
The chapter commences with YHWH showing Jeremiah two baskets of figs which had been set before the Temple of YHWH, indicating either that they were being brought before YHWH for Him to pass judgment on them, or that they were an offering to YHWH, either as a firstfruit or a tithe (a remnant). Compare Amo 8:1-2. This took place after Nebuchadrezzar had carried Jehoiachin, together with the princes of Judah (the tribal and clan leaders) and the cream of the people away to Babylon (2Ki 24:10-17).
The inclusion of craftsmen of all kinds was an indication that these exiles were more than hostages. Nebuchadrezzar was stripping Jerusalem of all who could have contributed to its being built up again into a strong city, and at the same time assuring himself of a constant stream of craftsmen for his own building projects. Many would in fact settle in Babylon and not want to return.
Jer 24:2
‘One basket had very good figs, like the figs that are first-ripe, and the other basket had very bad figs, which could not be eaten, they were so bad.’
Of the baskets of figs one contained very good figs, like first ripe figs (signifying the very best, compare Isa 28:4; Hos 9:10). and one contained very bad figs, which were so bad that they could not be stomached. This may suggest that they had been brought before YHWH to be tested, or it may be saying that what Jerusalem is now offering to YHWH is fruit that has gone off, in contrast with what it had previously offered, fruit which had potential.
Jer 24:3
‘Then YHWH said to me, “What do you see, Jeremiah?” And I said, “Figs; the good figs, very good; and the bad, very bad, which cannot be eaten, they are so bad.”
YHWH then asked what Jeremiah saw, and Jeremiah described the two baskets of figs, indicating that one basket contained very good figs and the other very bad figs, so bad that they could not be stomached. (The repetition is made in order to emphasise the important facts). We do not know whether the baskets were simply seen in vision, or whether they were baskets of firstfruits or summer fruits brought as an offering to YWHW which He used to bring an object lesson to Jeremiah (compare the widow’s two mites in Mar 12:41-44). If the latter it may have been intended to indicate two different attitudes revealed by the offerings, with some bringing their very best (like Abel) and others treating YHWH with contempt by bringing rubbish because they did not want to ‘waste’ good fruit..
Jer 24:4-5
‘And the word of YHWH came to me, saying, “Thus says YHWH, the God of Israel, Like these good figs, so will I regard the captives of Judah, whom I have sent out of this place into the land of the Chaldeans, for good.”
YHWH then revealed to him that the good figs represented the captives from Judah who had been ‘sent by Him’ out of ‘this place’ (Judah and Jerusalem) into the land of the Chaldeans, and that He now intended to ‘regard’ them as good (even though on the whole they were not) and had therefore done it with their ‘good’ in mind. This was why He regarded them as being like the good figs. (They were at that stage at least partially responding to Ezekiel’s ministry, no doubt helped by the fact that Daniel was governor of Babylonia).
Jer 24:6
“For I will set my eyes on them for good, and I will bring them again to this land, and I will build them, and not pull them down, and I will plant them, and not pluck them up.”
For YHWH assured Jeremiah that He intended good towards these people, and had ‘set His eyes on them for good’, and would therefore eventually bring them back again to the land of Judah, and rather than pulling them down, would build them, and instead of plucking them up, would plant them. Compare for these ideas Jer 1:10; Jer 12:14-17; Jer 18:7-9; Jer 31:27-28. In other words as a result of His sovereign activity they would be restored to the land and would begin to prosper and be established.
Jer 24:7
“And I will give them a heart to know me, that I am YHWH, and they will be my people, and I will be their God, for they will return to me with their whole heart.”
And what was more He would give them a heart to know Him, and to really appreciate that He really was YHWH, so that they would be His people and He would be their God (compare Jer 31:33-34; Hos 2:23). There would be a full restoration of the covenant, and they would return to Him with their whole heart. And as we know from later records this was on the whole what happened. They became established in the land once again and did experience revival a number of times, so that at times they did genuinely respond to God with all their hearts. This then resulted finally in their being prepared by John the Baptist for the coming of Jesus Christ into the world, with continually among them a strong godly remnant (consider all those mentioned in respect of the birth of Jesus). It finally came into full fruition in the true company of believers after Pentecost.
Jer 24:8
“And as the bad figs, which cannot be eaten, they are so bad, surely thus says YHWH, So will I give up Zedekiah the king of Judah, and his princes, and the residue of Jerusalem, who remain in this land, and those who dwell in the land of Egypt,”
But with the bad, inedible figs it was to be a very different story. They represented Zedekiah and his clique, together with others both in Jerusalem and in Egypt, who would be ‘given up’ because they were unacceptable. They would not be a part of the restoration. Notice that Egypt was seen to have done them no good.
We know very little about settlers in Egypt from Judah around this time, but Egypt had always regularly welcomed refugees from Canaan (they considered that they had a paternal interest in it seeing it as basically their colony), and the Egyptians employed Jewish mercenaries. Thus refugees who were pro-Egyptian sympathisers from both Israel and Judah would probably have fled there at various times during the regular invasions that took place from the north and have found a welcome there. Some would also have gone there with Jehoahaz who would certainly have been accompanied by courtiers and servants in 609 B.C. (2Ki 23:34). And other refugees would probably have followed when Jehoiakim became Nebuchadrezzar’s vassal around 603 BC, and then when Nebuchadrezzar invaded Judah in 598/7 BC.
Jer 24:9
“I will even give them up to be tossed to and fro among all the kingdoms of the earth for evil, to be a reproach and a proverb, a taunt and a curse, in all places where I shall drive them.”
And these bad figs would be ‘tossed to and fro’ among all the kingdoms of the world (compare Jer 15:4; Jer 29:17-18), with nowhere to call their home, becoming recipients of bad treatment (evil) and as well as becoming a reproach, a living illustration, a taunt and a curse in all the places where YHWH drove them (compare Lev 26:36; Deu 28:37; Deu 28:65-67; Isa 43:28). So even those in Egypt would not find safety or full acceptance. This is in fact a good general overall description of the history of the Jews in general because of their insularity.
Jer 24:10
“And I will send the sword, the famine, and the pestilence, among them, until they are consumed from off the land which I gave to them and to their fathers.”
But meanwhile he would send among them His judgments, sword, famine and pestilence (compare Jer 14:12; Eze 14:21), until they were finally consumed off the land which YHWH had given to them and their fathers, a privilege which they had abused. Thus the final fate of those remaining in Judah under Zedekiah was fixed, and it was not a hopeful one. The future would demonstrate what a motley lot they were.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
SECTION 1. An Overall Description Of Jeremiah’s Teaching Given In A Series Of Accumulated, Mainly Undated, Prophecies, Concluding With Jeremiah’s Own Summary Of His Ministry ( Jer 2:4 to Jer 25:38 ).
From this point onwards up to chapter 25 we have a new major section (a section in which MT and LXX are mainly similar) which records the overall teaching of Jeremiah, probably given mainly during the reigns of Josiah (Jer 3:6) and Jehoiakim, although leading up to the days of Zedekiah (Jer 21:1). While there are good reasons for not seeing these chapters as containing a series of specific discourses as some have suggested, nevertheless they can safely be seen as giving a general overall view of Jeremiah’s teaching over that period, and as having on the whole been put together earlier rather than later. The whole commences with the statement, ‘Hear you the word of YHWH O house of Jacob, and all the families of the house of Israel, thus says YHWH —.’ It is therefore directed to Israel as a whole, mainly as now contained in the land of Judah to which many northerners had fled for refuge. We may divide up the main subsections as follows, based partly on content, and partly on the opening introductory phrases:
1. ‘Hear you the word of YHWH, O house of Jacob and all the families of the house of Israel —’ (Jer 2:4). YHWH commences by presenting His complaint against Israel/Judah because they have failed to continue to respond to the love and faithfulness that He had demonstrated to them in the wilderness and in the years that followed, resulting by their fervent addiction to idolatry in their losing the water of life in exchange for empty cisterns. It ends with a plea for them to turn back to Him like an unfaithful wife returning to her husband. This would appear to be mainly his initial teaching in his earliest days, indicating even at that stage how far, in spite of Josiah’s reformation, the people as a whole were from truly obeying the covenant, but it also appears to contain teaching given in the days of Jehoiakim, for which see commentary (Jer 2:4 to Jer 3:5).
2. ‘Moreover YHWH said to me in the days of King Josiah –’ (Jer 3:6). This section follows up on section 1 with later teaching given in the days of Josiah, and some apparently in the days of Jehoiakim. He gives a solemn warning to Judah based on what had happened to the northern tribes (‘the ten tribes’) as a result of their behaviour towards YHWH, facing Judah up to the certainty of similar coming judgment if they do not amend their ways, a judgment that would come in the form of a ravaged land and exile for its people. This is, however, intermingled with a promise of final blessing and further pleas for them to return to YHWH, for that in the end is YHWH’s overall purpose. But the subsection at this time ends under a threat of soon coming judgment (Jer 3:6 to Jer 6:30).
3. ‘The word that came to Jeremiah from YHWH –’ (Jer 7:1). In this subsection Jeremiah admonishes the people about the false confidence that they have in the inviolability of the Temple, and in their sacrificial ritual, and warned that like Shiloh they could be destroyed. He accompanies his words with warnings that if they continued in their present disobedience, Judah would be dispersed and the country would be despoiled (Jer 7:1 to Jer 8:3). He therefore chides the people for their obstinacy in the face of all attempts at reformation (Jer 8:4 to Jer 9:21), and seeks to demonstrate to them what the path of true wisdom is, that they understand and know YHWH in His covenant love, justice and righteousness. In a fourfold comparison he then vividly brings out the folly of idolatry when contrasted with the greatness of YHWH. The section ends with the people knowing that they must be chastised, but hoping that YHWH’s full wrath will rather be poured out on their oppressors (Jer 9:22 to Jer 10:25).
4. ‘The word that came to Jeremiah from YHWH –’ (Jer 11:1). He now deprecates their disloyalty to the covenant, and demonstrates from examples the total corruption of the people, revealing that as a consequence their doom is irrevocably determined (Jer 11:1 to Jer 12:17). The section closes with a symbolic action which reveals the certainty of their expulsion from the land (13).
5. ‘The word that came from YHWH to Jeremiah –’ (Jer 14:1). “The word concerning the drought,” gives illustrative evidence confirming that the impending judgment of Judah cannot be turned aside by any prayers or entreaties, and that because of their sins Judah will be driven into exile. A promise of hope for the future when they will be restored to the land is, however, once more incorporated (Jer 16:14-15) although only with a view to stressing the general judgment (Jer 14:1 to Jer 17:4). The passage then closes with general explanations of what is at the root of the problem, and lays out cursings and blessings and demonstrates the way by which punishment might be avoided by a full response to the covenant as evidenced by observing the Sabbath (Jer 17:5-27).
6. ‘The word that came to Jeremiah from YHWH –’ (Jer 18:1). Chapters 18-19 then contain two oracles from God illustrated in terms of the Potter and his handiwork, which bring out on the one hand God’s willingness to offer mercy, and on the other the judgment that is about to come on Judah because of their continuance in sin and their refusal to respond to that offer. The consequence of this for Jeremiah, in chapter 20, is severe persecution, including physical blows and harsh imprisonment. This results in him complaining to YHWH in his distress, and cursing the day of his birth.
7. ‘The word that came to Jeremiah from YHWH –’ (Jer 21:1). This subsection, which is a kind of appendix to what has gone before, finally confirming the hopelessness of Jerusalem’s situation under Zedekiah. In response to an appeal from King Zedekiah concerning Judah’s hopes for the future Jeremiah warns that it is YHWH’s purpose that Judah be subject to Babylon (Jer 21:1-10). Meanwhile, having sent out a general call to the house of David to rule righteously and deal with oppression, he has stressed that no hope was to be nurtured of the restoration of either Shallum, the son of Josiah who had been carried off to Egypt, nor of Jehoiachin (Coniah), the son of Jehoiakim who had been carried off to Babylon. In fact no direct heir of Jehoiachin would sit upon the throne. And the reason that this was so was because all the current sons of David had refused to respond to his call to rule with justice and to stamp down on oppression. What had been required was to put right what was wrong in Judah, and reign in accordance with the requirements of the covenant. In this had lain any hope for the continuation of the Davidic monarchy. But because they had refused to do so only judgment could await them. Note in all this the emphasis on the monarchy as ‘sons of David’ (Jer 21:12; Jer 22:2-3). This is preparatory to the mention of the coming glorious son of David Who would one day come and reign in righteousness (Jer 23:3-8).
Jeremiah then heartily castigates the false shepherds of Judah who have brought Judah to the position that they are in and explains that for the present Judah’s sinful condition is such that all that they can expect is everlasting reproach and shame (Jer 23:9 ff). The subsection then closes (chapter 24) with the parable of the good and bad figs, the good representing the righteous remnant in exile who will one day return, the bad the people who have been left in Judah to await sword, pestilence, famine and exile.
8. ‘The word that came to Jeremiah concerning all the people of Judah –’ (Jer 25:1). This subsection contains Jeremiah’s own summary, given to the people in a sermon, describing what has gone before during the previous twenty three years of his ministry. It is also in preparation for what is to follow. He warns them that because they have not listened to YHWH’s voice the land must suffer for ‘seventy years’ in subjection to Babylon, and goes on to bring out that YHWH’s wrath will subsequently be visited on Babylon, and not only on them, but on ‘the whole world’. For YHWH will be dealing with the nations in judgment, something which will be expanded on in chapters 46-51. There is at this stage no mention of restoration, (except as hinted at in the seventy year limit to Babylon’s supremacy), and the chapter closes with a picture of the final desolation which is to come on Judah as a consequence of YHWH’s anger.
While the opening phrase ‘the word that came from YHWH to Jeremiah’ will appear again in Jer 30:1; Jer 32:1; Jer 34:8; Jer 35:1; Jer 40:1 it will only be after the sequence has been broken by other introductory phrases which link the word of YHWH with the activities of a particular king (e.g. Jer 25:1; Jer 26:1; Jer 27:1; Jer 28:1) where in each case the message that follows is limited in length. See also Jer 29:1 which introduces a letter from Jeremiah to the early exiles in Babylon. Looking at chapter 25 as the concluding chapter to the first part, this confirms a new approach from Jer 26:1 onwards, (apparent also in its content), while at the same time demonstrating that the prophecy must be seen as an overall unity.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Subsection 7). Words Concerning Various Kings ( Jer 21:1 to Jer 24:10 ).
This subsection proceeds in logical sequence although not chronologically, and will centre on three special themes, firstly on the fact that all hope for Judah in the short term has now gone, secondly that the promises of the false prophets suggesting that any of the current sons of David will be restored to the throne are invalid, and thirdly that while final blessing ‘in coming days’ will truly be at the hands of a son of David, it is meanwhile to be stressed that that ‘son of David’ will not be one of the current regime.
The subsection commences by making clear that prior to the future coming of the exalted son of David the doom of Jerusalem under the present sons of David is certain and will unquestionably happen (echoes of Isaiah). Neither Zedekiah nor any of his current relations (Jehoahaz who had been taken to Egypt and Jehoiachin who had been taken to Babylon) are therefore to be seen as the hope of Judah/Israel.
The whole subsection may be summarised as follows:
A Jerusalem and Judah are unquestionably doomed under Zedekiah (Jer 21:1-10).
B Concerning the current sons of David. None of the current batch of ‘sons of David’ can be seen as presenting any hope for Israel. Uniquely over this period Judah had a plurality of kings. Initially Jehoahaz was hostage in Egypt with Jehoiakim reigning in Jerusalem, and this was followed by three ‘reigning’ kings, one held hostage in Egypt (Jehoahaz, although nothing is known of his fate), one reigning in Jerusalem as ‘regent’ (Zedekiah), and one who was still seen as king in Babylon, (Jehoiachin/Jeconiah/Coniah). But all of them are to be written off as presenting Judah with any hope (Jer 21:11 to Jer 22:30).
C In ‘the days that are coming’ YHWH will attend to the false rulers above and will intervene in the person of the coming Son of David, (the Righteous Shoot (Branch), ‘YHWH our righteousness’) who will rule righteously in YHWH’s Name (Jer 23:1-8).
B Concerning the current prophets. They are promising peace and that no harm will come to Judah, but they are not speaking in the Name of YHWH. There is no current hope for Judah and Jerusalem (Jer 23:9-40).
A The removal of Jehoiachin from Jerusalem has left it in the hands of second rate leaders, which includes their king (regent) Zedekiah, with the result that Jerusalem and its people are without hope and will certainly be destroyed (Jer 24:1-10).
It will be noted that the opening and closing passages form an inclusio based on the guaranteed fate of Jerusalem under Zedekiah. The inadequacy of the sons of David is paralleled by the inadequacy of the prophets (and priests). Central is the promise of the coming Son of David Who will introduce righteousness.
The question may well be asked, however, as to why Zedekiah is mentioned first rather than in the sequence in which the sons of David reigned, namely Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin, Zedekiah. One clear answer to that question lies in the fact that Zedekiah was never sole ruler of Judah. When he died Jehoiachin was still in fact seen as king of Judah. Jeremiah is thus bringing out that Zedekiah was not even under consideration as the hope of Israel. He was a ‘bad fig’ (chapter 24). Furthermore to have placed Zedekiah after Jehoiachin would have been to ignore royal protocol and to suggest openly that Jehoiachin’s reign was over, something which would have caused great dissatisfaction in Judah.
There are in fact four reasons for putting the prophecy about Zedekiah first (quite apart from the coincidence of the name Pashhur):
1. It is intended to demonstrate that the final fulfilment of Jeremiah’s earlier prophecies will take place, regardless of the fact that the Son of David was coming, and was in order to explain why Jeremiah had had to undergo what he did as described in the previous chapter.
2. Had Zedekiah (‘YHWH is righteous’) been dealt with in chronological order, then he could have become confused in people’s minds with the coming of ‘the righteous branch’, ‘YHWH our righteousness’, as will be apparent subsequently. By dealing with him first any likelihood of confusion was avoided.
3. Strictly speaking it was Jehoiachin who was seen as the current reigning monarch, with Zedekiah merely acting as his regent in his absence. This was the position accepted both by the Babylonians, who still called Jehoiachin ‘King Yaukin of Yahuda’ on their ration lists, and in Judah where handles of vessels have been discovered coming from the final days of the city inscribed in the name of ‘Eliakim servant of Jehoiachin’ (and not ‘of Zedekiah’). This is further confirmed by the fact that Ezekiel dates his writings in terms of the exile of ‘King Jehoiachin’ (e.g. Eze 1:2). Zedekiah was seemingly simply seen in Judah as an appointee of Nebuchdrezzar rather than as the appointee of the people. His legitimacy was therefore always in doubt. So it would have been seen as fitting that Jehoiachin be presented as still the main feasible option from among the current choices to be the ‘coming Son of David’, and therefore as rightly finalising the list of options. To have presented the situation otherwise would have been seen as insulting.
4. The opening passage dealing with Zedekiah forms an inclusio with chapter Jer 24:1-10, for both deal with the final demise of Judah and Jerusalem. The intervening passages then justify and explain this coming assured judgment, while at the same time centring on Judah/Israel’s final hope. Thus by this inclusio it is made clear that Jer 21:11 to Jer 23:40 are intended to be viewed against the background of the final catastrophe which must necessarily come before there could be any possibility of restoration.
So in the initial chapter of this subsection the justification for Jeremiah having had to endure such affliction as was described in the previous chapter will first be made clear, for it confirms that such arduous continuing prophecy was necessary in the face of what was to be the future. Furthermore it describes the final ‘smashing of the vessel’ as portrayed in chapter 19, demonstrating that that came to fulfilment, and confirms the certainty of final Babylonian victory as previously asserted to an earlier Pashhur in chapter 20. Thus there were good reasons for putting Jer 21:1-10, which is so clearly out of order chronologically, immediately after chapters 19 & 20 connecting with what has gone before.
However, having initially emphasised the certainty of the doom that was coming on Zedekiah and Jerusalem the passage then goes back in time at Jer 21:11 to YHWH’s open offer of repentance to the one of the house of David (Jer 21:12) who sat on the throne of David (Jer 22:2) if only he, as king of Judah, would turn round in his ways, execute justice and fulfil the covenant (Jer 21:12; Jer 22:3), although even then it was with grave doubts about Judah’s willingness to repent. It is reasonable to see in this an open offer to all the sons of David who came to the throne during Jeremiah’s ministry, and indeed may have been specifically presented to each one by Jeremiah on his accession. In Jer 22:3 the same offer is repeated and accompanied by a promise of the certain triumph of the royal house (Jer 22:4) if only they will respond, but it is again followed by a warning of the consequences if they would not.
Following that Jeremiah then sets out to demolish the false hopes offered to the people by the false prophets. He makes clear that Shallum (Jehoahaz), appointed by the people as Josiah’s heir-apparent as the son of David, will not be returning from Egypt where he had been taken by Pharaoh Necho (Jer 22:10-12; compare 2Ki 23:31-35), and castigates the one who had been appointed in his place (Jehoiakim), because he did not follow in the ways of his father (Jer 22:15-16) and especially because he was crushing the people by his expansive building plans, with no intention of paying for the work that was done (Jer 22:13-17). For him there would only be an ignominious death (Jer 22:19). And finally he emphasises that they were not to look for the return of their reigning king Jehoiachin (Coniah, Jeconiah) from Babylon (Jer 22:20-30; compare 2Ki 24:8-17), who, as we have seen above, was still officially looked on as king both in Babylon (he is described as King Yaukin in Babylonian ration lists) and in Judah. Jeremiah is making clear that while it was true (as earlier prophets had underlined) that Israel’s future hopes did remain with the house of David, and that they would also one day celebrate their deliverance from the north country, it would nevertheless only be after they had first been exiled (Jer 23:1-8), and it would not be by the false shepherds (rulers) who had wrecked the morals of Judah, and certainly not by someone from the house of Jehoiachin (Jeconiah) (Jer 22:30). He then roundly turns on the prophets who were offering precisely those false hopes and completely disposes of them (Jer 23:9-40). Following that in chapter 24 he confirms that Judah’s future hopes do not rest with Zedekiah and his ilk, for while it was true that one day the good figs (those who will repent among the exiles) would return to the land, and be built and planted, and God will again be their God, they will not include the bad figs who were running Judah in the days of Zedekiah, who as already described in Jer 15:4 would be tossed about among all the kingdoms of the earth because of their evil, and who according to Jer 21:1-10 would undoubtedly suffer great devastation and be exiled. Thus Jer 21:1-10 and Jer 24:1-10 form an inclusio for the subsection, a subsection which both demonstrates that there was no point in looking to the current sons of David, and emphasises that one day there would be a son of David who would fulfil all their hopes.
Up to this point most of Jeremiah’s prophecies have not been openly attached to specific situations (Jer 3:6 being a partial exception), but it will be noted that from this point onwards in the narrative there is an undoubted change of approach. Whereas previously time references have been vague and almost non-existent, with the result that we cannot always be sure in whose reign they took place, Jeremiah now addresses his words to various kings, usually by name, and as we have seen the first example is Zedekiah who was the ‘king’ of Judah at the time when Jerusalem was taken for the second time and emptied of its inhabitants at the same time as the Temple was destroyed. This took place in 587 BC. By its very nature it could not have been a part of Jeremiah’s initial writing down of his earlier prophecies, for that was in the days of Jehoiakim, so that this part of chapters 2-25 must have been updated by him later. Furthermore from this point on Jeremiah will openly and constantly urge submission to the King of Babylon by name and title (although compare the first mention in Jer 20:4). On the other hand it will be noted that the subsection has been opened by the same formula as that used previously (contrast the marked change in formula in chapters 26-29) and this would appear to suggest therefore that these chapters are intended as a kind of appendix to chapters 1-20, illustrating them historically and confirming their message and its fulfilment.
To summarise. The subsection opens with the familiar words, ‘The word that came to Jeremiah from YHWH –’ (Jer 21:1). It then goes on to deal with Jeremiah’s response to an appeal from King Zedekiah concerning Judah’s hopes for the future in which he warns that it is YHWH’s purpose that Judah be subject to Babylon and that Judah’s doom is sealed. Meanwhile he warns that there is no hope of the restoration of Shallum (Jehoahaz) the son of Josiah or of Jehoiachin (Coniah), the son of Jehoiakim who had been carried off to Babylon.
He castigates the false shepherds (rulers) of Judah who have brought Judah to this position, but promises that one day YHWH will raise up to David a righteous Branch, a king Who will reign and prosper, and execute righteousness and justice. He will be called ‘YHWH our righteousness’. He then castigates the prophets. For the present Judah’s sinful condition is seen as such that all that Judah can expect is everlasting reproach and shame. The subsection then closes with the parable of the good and bad figs, the good representing the righteous remnant in exile (part of the cream of the population exiled to Babylon (2Ki 24:15-16) who were experiencing the ministry of Ezekiel) who will one day return, the bad the people who have been left in Judah to await sword, pestilence, famine and exile. Destitute of experienced leadership, and under a weak king-regent, they were unstable and too inexperienced to govern well, carrying Judah forward inexorably to its worst moment.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Jer 24:2 One basket had very good figs, even like the figs that are first ripe: and the other basket had very naughty figs, which could not be eaten, they were so bad.
Jer 24:2
Mic 7:1, “Woe is me! for I am as when they have gathered the summer fruits, as the grapegleanings of the vintage: there is no cluster to eat: my soul desired the firstripe fruit .”
E. W. G. Masterman says, “In Palestine and other warm climates the fig yields two crops annually–an earlier one, ripe about June, growing from the “old wood,” i.e. from the midsummer sprouts of the previous year, and a second, more important one, ripe about August, which grows upon the “new wood,” i.e. upon the spring shoots.” [21]
[21] E. W. G. Masterman, “Fig, fig tree,” in International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, ed. James Orr (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., c1915, 1939), in The Sword Project, v. 1.5.11 [CD-ROM] (Temple, AZ: CrossWire Bible Society, 1990-2008).
Note another use of the word “firstripe” in Hos 9:10, “I found Israel like grapes in the wilderness; I saw your fathers as the firstripe in the fig tree at her first time: but they went to Baalpeor, and separated themselves unto that shame; and their abominations were according as they loved.”
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
A Type of Judah’s Future
v. 1. The Lord showed me, and, behold, v. 2. One basket had very good figs, v. 3. Then said the Lord unto me, What seest thou, Jeremiah? And I said, Figs; the good figs very good and the evil very evil, that cannot be eaten, they are so evil. v. 4. Again the word of the Lord came unto me, saying, v. 5. Thus saith the Lord, the God of Israel, v. 6. For I will set Mine eyes upon them for good, v. 7. And I will give them an heart to know Me, that I am the Lord, v. 8. And as the evil figs, which cannot be eaten they are so evil: surely thus salth the Lord, So will I give Zedekiah, the king of Judah, and his princes, v. 9. and I will deliver them to be removed into all the kingdoms of the earth for their hurt, v. 10. And I will send the sword, the famine, and the pestilence,
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
EXPOSITION
Again Jeremiah’s ungrateful task is to take up an attitude of direct opposition to the king (comp. Jer 22:13-30), though, indeed, Zedekiah personally is so weak and dependent on others that he neither deserves nor receives a special rebuke. He and all the people that are left are likened to very bad figs, the good figsthe exileshaving been picked out and sent to Babylon, whence they will one day be restored. The vision is purely an interior process. This is indicated, not only by the phrase, “Jehovah showed me” (comp. Amo 7:1, Amo 7:4, Amo 7:7; Amo 8:1), but by the contents of the vision.
Jer 24:1
Two baskets of figs were set before, etc. (comp. Amo 8:1-3). The description is apparently based on the law of firstfruits (comp. Deu 26:2), where the “basket” is mentioned, though not the word here used. The baskets were set down in readiness to be examined by the priests, who rigorously rejected all fruit that was not sound. The princes of Judah. A short phrase for all the leading men, whether members of the royal family or heads of the principal families (comp. Jer 27:20). The carpenters and smiths; rather, the craftsmen and smiths (“craftsmen” includes workers in stone and metal as well as wood; the Hebrew word is rendered “smith” in 1Sa 13:19).
Jer 24:2
Like the figs that are first ripe. The early spring fig was considered a special delicacy (comp. Isa 27:4; Hos 9:10); “ficus praecox,” Pliny calls it (‘Hist. Nat.,’ 15.19, quoted by Trench). Tristram suggests that the “bad figs” were those of a sycamore tree.
Jer 24:5
Acknowledge them; or, rather knowledge (notice) of them (as Rth 2:10, Rth 2:19).
Jer 24:6
I will build them, etc. (comp. Jer 1:10; Jer 12:16). As the next verse shows. it is not merely outward prosperity that is meant, but spiritual regeneration.
Jer 24:8
And as the evil figs. (So Jer 29:16.) That dwell in the land of Egypt. Those who had fled thither during the war (comp. Jer 42:1-22; Jer 43:1-13.); hardly those who had been carried captive to Egypt with Jehoahaz, who would presumably have been of the better sort, such as are symbolized by the good figs.
Jer 24:9
And I will deliver them, etc. (see on Jer 15:4, and comp. Jer 29:1-32.; Deu 28:37).
HOMILETICS
Jer 24:1-10
Two baskets of figs.
I. MORALLY MEN ARE DIVISIBLE INTO TWO DISTINCT CLASSES. The two baskets of figs represent two classes of Jews: the basket of good figs, Jeconiah and his followers; the basket of bad figs, Zedekiah and his party. The great distinction between these was moral. There were princes in both classes; yet the one stood far higher in the sight of God than the other.
1. The deepest line of cleavage which runs down through all sections of mankind is moral; all other separating marks are more superficial.
2. There are in the main but two classesthe good and the badthough, of course, within each of these great varieties occur.
3. Both of these classes tend to grow extreme. The good figs are very good, the bad are very bad. Character is tendency. As character develops it moves further on along the lines on which it is founded. Good men incline to grow better and bad men worse. Like the rivers which flow down the two sides of a great watercourse, lives that begin in similar circumstances and are near together for a season, if they once diverge, are likely to separate more widely as the years pass.
II. THE REST MEN MAY BE THE GREATEST SUFFERERS. The good figs represent the Jews who suffered most severely from the invasion of Nebuchadnezzar, who were torn from their homes, robbed of their property, driven into captivity; the bad figs represent the seemingly more fortunate Jews over whose head the tide of invasion passes, leaving them still in their homes and in quiet, and also those who escaped from it entirely by a flight into Egypt. We may often notice that very good people are not only not spared, but suffer the most severe calamities. The sinless One was a “man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief.” No greater mistake can be made than that of the three friends of Job. Great misfortunes are certainly not indications of great guilt; often of the reverse.
1. High character may directly invoke trouble. It rouses the opposition of the wicked; it feels called to dangerous tasks and to a mission which excites enmity; it maintains a fidelity that excludes many avenues of escape which would be open to men of lower moral principles.
2. God may bless and honor his better children by sending to them the severer trials. Whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth. Therefore chastisement is an evidence of God’s love. Good men should understand this, and not be surprised at the advent of trouble, but expect it; not be dismayed at the incongruity of it, but recognize its fitness; not despair of themselves, and think that they must be hypocrites after all, nor doubt and distrust God, but submit to what is clearly foretold and wisely arranged.
III. GOD LOOKS FAVORABLY ON THOSE WHO SUBMIT TO HIS CHASTISEMENTS. The good figs represent those Jews who obey the message of Jeremiah and submit to the invasion of the Chaldeans as to a Divine chastisement; the bad figs stand for those Jews who resist. It requires faith to recognize the wisdom and duty of submission. On the face of it such conduct would appear unpatriotic and cowardly, while resistance would seem noble and brave. It may take more courage, however, to submit than to resist. There is a yielding which is calm and reasonable and really brave, since it involves the curbing of instinctive combativeness and the pursuit of an unpopular course-one sure to be misunderstood and to provoke calumny. The sole guide must be sought in the question of what is right, what is God’s will. We are not called to a fatalistic passiveness. There are circumstances in which self-defense or flight may be evidently right. What we are to submit to is not all opposition, all possible trouble, but God’s will, the trouble which we know he has sanctioned. All the good fruit of chastisement will be lost if we rebel against it. No greater proof of faith in the goodness of God and loyalty to the majesty of God can be found than a quiet, unmurmuring acceptance of his harder requirements.
IV. THE HARDEST SUFFERING MAY LEAD TO THE HAPPIEST RESULTS. The captives are to be restored. Those Jews who remain in the land are ultimately to be driven forth as “a reproach and a proverb, a taunt and a curse.” The short, sharp suffering will end in ultimate good. The temporary escape will be followed by final ruin.
1. God’s chastisements are temporary; they will give place to lasting blessedness. The present affliction is light just because it endures “but for a moment” (2Co 4:17). Even if they outlast the present life, what is this brief span of earthly trial compared with the blessedness of an eternity?
2. God’s chastisements work our good. They directly tend to produce the happier future. The tearful sowing is the cause of the joyful harvest. The spiritual improvement wrought in the soul by the discipline of sorrow is at once a source of future blessedness and a justification for it. “It is good for a man that he bear the yoke in his youth.”
3. A culpable avoidance of Divine chastisement is highly dangerous. The escape from temporary trouble must incur greater future trouble; for
(1) it prevents the chastisement from working the good in us which would have led to a happier future, and
(2) it adds a new offence of direct rebellion against God which must invoke upon the head of the offender a terrible judgment.
Jer 24:6, Jer 24:7
Prosperity restored.
I. AFTER CHASTISEMENT HAS BEEN RIGHTLY RECEIVED, GOD LOOKS FAVORABLY ON HIS CHILDREN. He sets his “eyes upon them for good.” Men shrink from the eyes of God as from a keen and fatal scrutiny. But God is not always looking as the Judge. He beholds his children with love. There is a wonderful tenderness in this gaze, like that of a mother fondly watching over her suffering infanta deep pity for sorrow, an earnest care to ward off harm, a kindly will to bestow all real good. It is blessed indeed to be so beheld by God. There are men possessed of such great power and influence that some consider a favorable look from them sufficient to make their fortune. What must be the effect of God setting eyes on a man for good?
II. WHEN GOD LOOKS FAVORABLY ON HIS CHILDREN HE MAY SECURE THEIR TEMPORAL PROSPERITY. This will not always happen, for it will not always be for the real good of men. Still, it does often occur. We are too ready to confine the recognition of God’s action in our lives to the sterner sides of it. God sends prosperity as well as adversity. If he banishes, he restores; if he pulls down, he builds up again. And the joy of the restoration and the glory of the latter building exceed those of earlier times. If earthly prosperity comes from God it is real and solid. God can maintain it after he has bestowed it. He will build so that none shall pull down. The man who is innocently enjoying a prosperity sent by God need have no superstitious fears of a jealous Nemesis. He is not secure from trouble; but he has no special ground for apprehending it simply because he is happy at present.
III. WHEN GOD LOOKS FAVORABLY ON HIS CHILDREN HE WILL CERTAINLY SECURE THEIR SPIRITUAL PROSPERITY. This is seen in a restoration of a true knowledge of God.
1. It is good for us to know God. The knowledge of God is here represented not so much as a subject of duty as in the light of a form of spiritual blessedness. The loss of this knowledge leads to the darkness of a godless life. The enjoyment of this knowledge is eternal life (Joh 17:3).
2. A true knowledge of God is the recognition of God as he isquite another thing from our common conception of his nature. Then we see and feel the grandeur, the mystery, the glory of “the eternal.”
3. This knowledge of God depends on the condition of our hearts. The “heart” represents the whole inner life. When this is rightly disposed we can know God, and only then. What we need, therefore, is not a new revelation, but a change of heart. When our soul is in sympathy with God, when our spiritual vision is open, we can see indications of God’s presence and character which would otherwise be obscure.
4. The right condition of heart for knowing God must be produced by God. God promises to give them a heart to know him. He only can create the heart anew. The greatest blessing of redemption is that he will do this.
IV. THE WELFARE OF GOD‘S CHILDREN IS RESTORED BY THE RESTORATION OF THE CLOSE RELATIONS BETWEEN HIM AND THEM. “They shall be my people, and I will be their God.” This relation is twofold. God exercises paternal influences, they engage in filial duties.
1. God takes them under his care. They are his people, to be guarded and blessed by him. So Christians are God’s peculiar people (1Pe 2:9).
2. They take God for their portion. He is their Godtheirs to worship, serve, love, rejoice in.
V. THE RESTORATION OF TRUE PROSPERITY DEPENDS ON THE GENUINE RETURN OF GOD‘S PEOPLE TO THEIR FIDELITY TO HIM. The restoration was not a mere compensation for the troubles of the exile. Happiness does not necessarily follow trouble. The father runs to meet the prodigal son when he returns, but cannot regard him favor-ably before this.
1. This return must be with the heart. Repentance, of all acts, must be genuine and heartfelt. A formal acknowledgment of God without a change of heart is a mockery and an insult to him, which can bring us no good.
2. This return must be with the whole heart. A partial return to God is no true return. He claims the whole heart or none of it.
Jer 24:10
Sword, famine, and pestilence.
I. TROUBLE BEGETS TROUBLE. War devastating the fields, checking industry, robbing stores, etc; leads to famine; famine and war create horrible causes of pestilence. Trouble does not tend to relieve itself, but the reverse. The poor become poorer, the wretched more miserable. Hence the need of a salvation outside ourselves.
II. TROUBLE IS CUMULATIVE. The full force is not often felt at first. One by one the blows fell upon Job. Thus each is felt most acutely. Though we can bear present calamities unaided, we still need a refuge for the future.
III. TROUBLE IS VARIOUS IN FORMsword, famine, pestilence. If we are not touched by one kind of trouble, we may fall under another. Of what avail is it to escape the sword, only to perish of the pangs of hunger or to fall a victim to the ravages of pestilence? Future punishment will probably be various in kind, yet so adapted to all varieties of character and condition that none of the impenitent will be able to escape.
IV. TROUBLE MUST BE CONQUERED BY REDEMPTION, NOT EVADED BY FLIGHT, We may flee from some trouble, but cannot from all. When this is judicial it is searching and penetrating, so that none can elude it. It is vain to rest in the assurance that we have been able to devise means for resisting many troubles. The army of them is so vast that no victory over scattered detachments can affect our ultimate condition. This fact should not induce despair, but urge us to turn to the full deliverance of Christ’s redemption (Rom 8:1).
HOMILIES BY A.F. MUIR
Jer 24:1-10
The two baskets of figs; or, predetermining influences.
These are not to be understood of the opposite development of character in two sets of persons in slightly differing circumstances, but rather of the primary influence of Divine faith as contrasted with the want of it amidst the trials of life. The people left behind were disposed to felicitate themselves over their brethren who had been carried off into Chaldea, but this impression is corrected by Jeremiah. The exiles were the true people of God, and were to be under his constant supervision and loving care; the others were to be cast off, to become a prey to inner corruption and the unchecked destructive influences of the world.
I. THE MYSTERY OF THE DIVINE ELECTION. From comparatively similar circumstances to evolve distinct types of character and destiny. Out of the same clay to mold the saint and the sinner. It is the old lesson of the potter in another form. There is nothing in a man himself to account for God’s favor. He chooseth whom he will and rejecteth whom he will. Yet is it true that he willeth not the death of a sinner, but rather that all should come unto him and live.
II. THE MANNER IN WHICH ELECTIVE GRACE MANIFESTS ITSELF.
1. Recalling. (Verse 6.) How unlikely under the circumstances! Yet rendered credible by the remarkable individuality of the Jewish people from age to age. Reconstituting. (Verse 6.) The figure is twofoldbuilding and life-growth (cf. Eph 2:21, Eph 2:22). Spiritually recreating. (Verse 7.) The aim of the previous discipline; but the beginning of great national glory and blessedness. For connection of these processes, cf. Rom 8:28-30.
2. Circumstances are made to subserve a merciful purpose. The immediate condition of the Chaldean exiles might appear a harder one than that of their compatriots at home; but in the end this would turn to their salvation. Not only will God overrule all things for the good of his people, but he will use them for their spiritual education. The influence of circumstances is thus shown to depend for the most part upon the spiritual state of those who are surrounded by them.
3. Circumstances are appointed for the destruction of the obstinately impenitent. Moral reprobation and political annihilation were to come upon these. There would be no swerving or slackening in the execution of their sentence. This is agreeable with the character of him who hates sin with an eternal hatred. The climax of misery here indicated is but a faint suggestion of that which will follow upon rejection of the gospel. And yet how simple are the elements of such a punishment! God has but to withdraw his grace, and the inner depravity of nature will work unchecked its fearful consequences, accelerating and directing the external circumstances of life. And all this has another aspect, which is full of comfort to those who are spiritually inclined. The faintest dawn of repentance is the opening of the “door of hope;” and when the heart is changed the tendency of untoward circumstance at once is altered, and the positive blessings of God again return.M.
Jer 24:1-10
Calamity with God and without him.
I. To THE CHILD OF GRACE.
1. It is a chastening.
2. A restoration.
II. To THE UNGODLY.
1. The influence depreciating character.
2. A source of restlessness and fresh transgression.
3. An ever-increasing evil.
4. An ultimate destruction.M.
Jer 24:1-10
Punished for salvation; left alone for destruction.
A general principle of God’s moral government. The flower of Judah, about to be deported to Babylon, are followed by the prophet with wistful gaze. They are the seed of the true Israel; whereas those who are allowed to remain quietly at home are to be of no account in God’s purpose.
I. HOW DIFFERENT OFTEN ARE THE EXTERNAL FROM THE SPIRITUAL PROSPECTS OF MEN! Jeconiah and his companions might have been pitied by their friends left behind. The outward position of any one is no index of his relations with God.
II. PRESENT TRIAL MAY BE A PROOF OF DIVINE LOVE, AND PRESENT IMMUNITY FROM MISFORTUNE IS NOT ALWAYS TO BE TAKEN AS AN EVIDENCE OF DIVINE FAVOR. “Whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.” Punishment was needed to atone for the past and purify for the future. The exile in Babylon, with its deprivation of political and religious privilege, was a new point of view for the captives. It is a familiar experience to hear men who have done well in the world, or who have had a comparatively smooth life, say, “God has blessed us.” This statement is often open to question. God may simply let alone those whom he has given up. The lethargy induced in many by good fortune is to be guarded against. Count them happy that “endure, as seeing him who is invisible.” Inward depravity will soon work the destruction of those in whom it remains.
III. THE GLORY OF THE DIVINE IN MAN IS EVOLVED FROM THE HUMILIATION OF THE HUMAN. A mere remnant. How few of those who went forth would return! Children’s children might be blessed, but not they themselves. And even then it would require not only reorganization, but rebirth in spirituality. It is ever so. A profound and radical change is needed ere any one can become a member of the true eternal Israel. Israel after the flesh is sentenced to death, that Israel after the Spirit may live forever.M.
Jer 24:6
I will set mine eyes upon them for good.
The distressed and afflicted for his sake he ever regards with special attention and interest. “The captives are dearest to God.” Banished from Palestine, they are still “his banished ones,” and he will make them to return. Those who are undergoing severe trials, in circumstances, in faith, etc; but who are truly seeking after God, are to be comforted with this word. It is a promise that has been gloriously fulfilled. It pledges
I. GOD‘S CARE.
1. Protection.
2. Provision, temporal and spiritual.
Although we see him not, he ever sees us and regards us with complacency and love.
II. GOD‘S FAVOR. This indicates interest, but because of something evoking itthe first germs of faith and repentance. When others see them not, he sees the longings of the soul and its efforts after better things; and he will further them.
III. GOD‘S GUIDANCE. Although they were led away into a strange land and amidst an alien people, he would never lose sight of them; but, directing their footsteps, would bring them back again to the land they had left and to himself. It was a strange way, but it was God’s way, and his influence would be continually in them and upon them for good. It is the surest proof that God’s eye is upon us for good when his Spirit is within us. As many as are led of the Spirit are the children of God.M.
Jer 24:7
The conditions and relations of salvation.
I. THE ABILITY TO KNOW GOD IS THE GIFT OF GOD. Not more facts, external, historical, etc; are required. Not a new Biblethe letter of the Bible is probably completed already. Nor even a new mode of spiritual demonstration. But a new heart. We cannot make a new heart. God will save us by renewing:
1. The moral nature.
2. The whole life through it.
II. THE BLESSINGS OF SALVATION CAN ONLY BE SECURED IN ABSOLUTE CONSECRATION. “They shall return unto me with their whole heart.” Complete salvation is impossible without complete faith. To believeto believe simply, to believe wholly,this is the condition of perfect salvation.
III. THE IDEAL ISRAEL MUST EVER BE A THEOCRACY. In the obedience of faith they shall be God’s people, and he will be their God. That upon which we depend in faith is that which we observe and respect in practice; it is the law and inspiration of life. Christ leads us to the Father that he and we may be one in God; not merged, confounded with Deity, but in eternal and ever-blessed subordination to him.M.
HOMILIES BY S. CONWAY
Jer 24:1-10
The two baskets of figs; or, our character and destiny independent of our circumstances.
I. THE SYMBOLS EMPLOYED. The two baskets of figsone very good, the other very evil. But:
1. They had each the same advantages and disadvantages. The same seed, soil, training, climate, sunshine, and other influences teeming on them.
2. They were of directly opposite character. (Jer 24:2.)
II. THE PEOPLE REPRESENTED BY THEM. The men of Judah and Jerusalem. Now:
1. The circumstances of all these were the same. Parentage, religion, teachers, disciplines, privileges, opportunities.
2. But some of these people were symbolized by the good figs, and the other by the evil. Those who had been carried off to Babylon were the good; those who remained still in Jerusalem were the evil.
3. The reverse results might have been looked for. For the good had been dealt with more sternly than the evil. How terrible and sad their lot appeared! Torn away from all their wonted privileges; made to endure a fate which others deserved far more than they; surrounded with idolaters and blasphemers of God. But the evil continued in the possession of all those aids to religion and piety of which those others were deprived. So that the circumstances of the good were less favorable, and those of the evil far more so. Exile, which might have been thought to injure the captives, had done them good; whilst exemption from it, which might have been thought to benefit the evil, had wrought them harm. “With the exiles were some of the choicest spirits of the nation. Ezekiel, second only to Jeremiah himself in the prophets of this epoch; and, probably, the ancestor of Mordecai; and Daniel, with his three companions.” “The exiles became humble, repentant, reformed. The resident Jews became insolent, self-secure, defiant. The former became worthy of comparison with the first ripe figs; the latter as the ‘naughty figs, which could not be eaten.'”
III. THE LESSONS TAUGHT THEREBY. That character and destiny do not depend on circumstances. We should have thought that either all would be alike, or else that the characters and destinies would have been the reverse of what they were.
1. Let the good who may be placed in adverse circumstances take encouragement from this fact. They can surmount and triumph over all the evil influences which surround and oppose them (cf. verse 7.)
2. And the evil are to take warning. Prolonged privilege and opportunity have no necessary saving power. Such advantages may leave them worse than before. It was so here.
IV. OBSERVE THE GREAT ILLUSTRATION OF THE TRUTH TAUGHT HERE IN CHRIST AND HIS CHURCH.
1. Christ was “as a root out of a dry ground.” How utterly opposed to all prospect of his becoming great, and his Name above every name, were the early circumstances in his history! And yet he has triumphed over all.
2. And so with the history of the Church. It was small as “a grain of mustard seed,” feeble as “sheep amidst wolves,” was as a thing of naught and despised. And yet what has it not become, what will it not become? And what is true of Christ and his Church shall be true likewise of all that are his. “Fear not, little flock,” said our Lord; “it is the Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom.”C.
HOMILIES BY J. WAITE
Jer 24:7
A heart to know the Lord.
It was “for good” that God sent the captive portion of his people “into the land of the Chaldeans” (Jer 24:5.) The germs of the better life of the future were preserved in them, and their very tribulations were the instruments of his gracious purpose and blessings in disguise. In the “evil figs”the refuse left behindthere was nothing worth preserving (Jer 24:8). Of all the beneficent Divine purposes, this had in it the promise of highest good”I will give them an heart to know me, that I am the Lord.”
I. A TRUE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD HAS ITS SEAT IN THE HEART. Intellect cannot solve the mystery of his being. Reason alone cannot even demonstrate his existence. “Who by searching can find out God?” “The world by wisdom knew not God.” It is a matter of pure spiritual sensibility. Moral sympathy is the true key to this knowledge. Reverence, humility, love, trust, submission, affections of the heart, are its conditions. Even right ideas of God depend very materially on the state of the heart towards him. The exhalations of a vain, frivolous, corrupt, or carnal heart pervert the soul’s vision and obscure his glory. Only as our hearts are purged from every form of earthly defilement can we behold him as he is. “Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.”
II. GOD HIMSELF CAN ALONE IMPART THIS KNOWLEDGE. “I will give them,” etc. It is a matter of direct Divine revelation; a Divine science in which mere human teaching is of little avail. A secret, silent, gracious power above all natural influences can alone awaken in us those moral affections which lie at the root of it. A true knowledge, like a true Christian faith, must stand “not in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.” The blindness of the man of science to the deeper meaning of nature, and of the skeptical philosopher to the manifestation of God in Christ, and of the worldling to the Divine presence in his own life, does but indicate the lack of this power. God must unveil himself to us, by drawing our hearts into lowly and loving fellowship with himself, before we can truly know him.W.
HOMILIES BY D. YOUNG
Jer 24:1-10
The good and bad figs.
I. CONSIDER THE FIGS GENERALLY. We cannot, of course, say why figs should be chosen rather than another fruit, though the choice can hardly be a mere accident. Some reason probably appeared to the observant of that time which we are without sufficient information to discover. Possibly the goodness of good fruits was more obvious against the badness of bad ones, in the case of the fig than in the case of other fruits. It is to be noticed also that the figure chosen to set forth the difference between the good and the bad in Israel is taken from fruit. It was something presented as the result of growth and in connection with culture. The question was suggested how such a difference should come between the good and the bad. For if trees of the same sort grow in the same soil and have the same attention, and the same external influences, how comes some of the fruit to be very good and some very bad? Notice also the sharpness of the distinction. These fruits were either good or bad. To be excluded from one is to be included in the other. There is no third, no medium class. This exactly agrees with the way of speaking in the New Testament, especially by Jesus himself: e.g. the seed in the good and bad ground, the sheep and goats, the good kinds of fish and the bad ones, the five wise and the five foolish virgins. It is of the first importance to bear in mind that the imperceptible gradations, as we reckon them, count for nothing with God. There are only two kinds of hearts, the good and the bad.
II. CONSIDER THE BLESSINGS ON THAT CLASS IN ISRAEL SET FORTH BY THE GOOD FIGS. Painful external experiences cannot destroy the blessing coming from satisfactory internal character. These people represented by the good figs might say, “If we are indeed as good figs, why make us pass through such pains?” To this it might be answered, in the first place, that it was because of this very goodness that God thus treated them. They were being pruned and cleansed that they might bring forth more fruit. Secondly, when they looked on the fate of those represented by the bad figs, even captivity in a distant land would be seen as a blessing. God bends every word that he here speaks through his prophet so as to form a total of strong consolation and hope.
1. Though these people are called captives of Judah, yet this is only the conventional mode of description. In reality, Jehovah himself sends them into the land of the Chaldeans. So Joseph was made to feel that it was God who had brought him into Egypt.
2. God’s eye is upon his people for good. That which God sees to be good he always regards for good. Whosoever has, to him is given more. Note, too, that the people were not merely remembered, as if God had stayed behind in the land of Israel. He was equally in Israel watching over it against the day of his people’s return, and in the land of the Chaldeans watching over his faithful ones there.
3. There is to be in due time a restoration. He who sends away can also bring back. The external circumstances of his people are completely under his control. He was speaking to those in whose history was written down all the marvelous things of the Exodus from Egypt.
4. There is to be a Divine building and planting. What others had built God had pulled down, what others had planted he had uprooted. Every plant not of the heavenly Father’s planting must be rooted up. All this was done, not for any delight God took in the ruin and the wilderness, but that a nation might be built up in righteousness, and bring forth only good fruit.
5. The giving of a true knowledge of God. God must give this knowledge, for it can only come to a renewed heart. The mere exhibition of God’s name and person to the natural man is not enough. There may be very elaborate intellectual conceptions of Deity without the slightest profit or comfort. When the renewed heart begins to know, then God begins to be truly known. His love must not only be set before us, but must be shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit given to us.
III. THE CURSE ON THOSE SET FORTH BY THE BAD FIGS. There is the greatest possible contrast between the treatment of good fruit and bad fruit. And so there was the greatest possible contrast between the treatment of the people taken to Babylon and the treatment of those remaining at home and nearer home. Upon the surface and at the first aspect it might seem as if these latter had the best of it. And, indeed, there might be no immediate way of making clear the difference. But a difference there assuredly was, and every succeeding year would manifest and emphasize it the more. In the mean time here stood the contrast between the good and bad figs, which would be quite enough for the eye of faith. How the history of the Jewish people justifies the bitter words of Jer 24:9 and Jer 24:10! Again and again the Gentile has treated the Jew according to the words of this prophecy, and found in them and similar words a justification of his treatment, not, of course, that the prophecy did really justify the treatment, but God could speak beforehand of the way in which human passions would assuredly work.Y.
Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary
Jer 24:1. The Lord shewed me This vision happened after the carrying away of Jeconiah, and under the reign of Zedekiah, the last king of Judah. The prophet himself sufficiently explains the meaning of the vision, in which two such baskets of figs were presented to his view as used to be offered up for first-fruits at the temple. The good figs signified those who were already gone into captivity; and the bad figs those who remained and were exposed to the second famine and pestilence.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
III. APPENDIX
(Chap 24)
Postscript to Jer 22:13-30. The Fourth King
Jer 24:1-10
1The Lord [Jehovah] shewed me, and behold, two baskets1of figs were set 2before the temple of the Lord [Jehovah] after that Nebuchadrezzar, king of Babylon, had carried away captive Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah, and the princes of Judah, with the carpenters and smiths, from Jerusalem and had 2brought them to Babylon. One basket had3 very good figs, like the figs first ripe,4and the other basket had very naughty [bad] figs, which could not be eaten,5they 3were so bad. Then said the Lord [Jehovah] unto me, What seest thou, Jeremiah? And I said, Figs; the good figs very good, and the evil [bad] very evil [bad], that cannot be eaten, they are so evil [bad].
4Again the word of the Lord [Jehovah] came unto me, saying:
5Thus saith the Lord [Jehovah], the God of Israel:
Like these good figs, so the captives of Judah,
Whom I have sent away from this place into the land of the Chaldeans,
Will I regard6 for good;
6And will set mine eye upon them for good,
And will bring them back into this land;
And will build them and not pull them down,
And plant them and not pluck them up;
7And will give them a heart to know me, that I am Jehovah,
And they shall be my people;
I however will be their God,
When they return to me with their whole heart.
8But like the bad figs, which cannot be eaten they are so bad,
Thus saith Jehovah: I will make Zedekiah,
The king of Judah and his princes,
And the residue of Jerusalem, that are left in this land,
And those that dwell in the land of Egypt.
9And I will make them a horror,
A calamity for all the kingdoms of the earth,
A shame and a proverb, a taunt and a curse,
In all places whither I shall drive them
10And I will send among them the sword,
The famine and the pestilence;
Till they be entirely extirpated from the land,
Which I gave to them and their fathers.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
After the carrying away of Jehoiachin the prophet beholds in vision, two baskets of figs placed before the temple (Jer 24:1). The figs of one basket were very good, those of the other very bad (Jer 24:2). The prophet, when asked, affirms that he has perceived this correctly (Jer 24:3). Thereupon the Lord Himself interprets the vision: the good figs signify the portion of the people already carried away. The Lord will recognize them as good, bring them back, build and plant, inwardly renew them; He will be their God, they shall be His people (Jer 24:4-7). The bad figs signify the people left in Palestine with Zedekiah, and those who had already emigrated to Egypt (Jer 24:8). These shall be to all nations an object of horror and scorn (Jer 24:9), for the Lord will send among them the sword, famine and pestilence, till they are exterminated from the land (Jer 24:10). The date of this passage may be learned exactly from Jer 24:1. It was the time immediately subsequent to the carrying away of Jeconiah (2Ki 24:10-12). Hitzig correctly remarks, that the expression , after carried away, Jer 24:1, without further distinction, does not permit us to think of another epoch than that immediately subsequent to the deportation. The prophecy is also best explained by the situation at that period. For, as Graf remarks, those who remained may have triumphed over the others, and extolled their good fortune. On this feeling the prophet places a damper by the declaration, that the lot of the captives would be preferable to that of the others (comp. Jer 20:10). At all events the prophecy was delivered before the sending of that letter to the captives, which is treated of in Jeremiah 29. On the relation of this passage to the previous chapters consult the introduction to the Eighth Discourse.
Jer 24:1-2. The Lord they were so bad.The opening is like that of Amo 7:1; Amo 7:4; Amo 7:7; Amo 8:1. Comp. Jer 1:11; Jer 1:13.Shewed me. This distinguishes the subjective act of vision from the object seen, and designates the former as caused by Jehovah. This distinction with respect to physical vision is found times innumerable, (comp. the mode of expression in Gen 13:10; Gen 18:2; Gen 22:4; Gen 22:13, etc.), but has only a rhetorical significance. In passages like this and the above from Amos, to which may be added Zec 1:8; Zec 2:1, etc., it cannot be a seeing with the outward eye which is spoken of. This is apparent, 1, from the object of vision; it is not supposable that baskets of bad and good figs were in reality placed before the temple; 2, from the question, What seest thou? The question evidently has a proper meaning, when there is a possibility of seeing incorrectly. On the point whether this is supposable in visions in a subjective and objective respect comp. the remarks on Jer 1:11; Jeremiah 3, from the general character of the state in which the prophet must have been while talking with God. Such a conversation as is here reported can only have taken place . For man cannot see and hear God with the bodily senses. But if as talking with God he is , then he must also see what God shows him . For it is not supposable that in such a case there would be a duplicity of perception. The case being thus, Khler is right in his remark (on Zec 1:7) wherever the description of a prophetic vision is introduced with the words or (here ) followed by , the prophet thus declares that as or he has beheld a vision, or had a vision, Isa 30:10. As to the way in which the Lord opens the inner sense so that it can behold spiritual things, comp. 2Ki 6:17.Carpenters and smiths. According to 2Ki 24:14-16, Nebuchadnezzar carried away beside the king, his mother and his wives, the princes, the officers, the mighty of the land, the strong and apt for war, and then the craftsmen and smiths. These were all the mighty men of valor, and only the poorest sort of the people were left. Nebuchadnezzar evidently wished to remove all who were fit for war, as well as those who were skilled in the preparation of warlike instruments. The smiths had once before been carried off for a similar purpose by the Philistines (1Sa 13:19). So far all is clear. But who now especially are the ? The word occurs only in the accounts of this occurrence: Jer 29:2; 2Ki 24:14; 2Ki 24:16. Besides with the meaning of custody, prison, in Isa 24:22; Isa 42:7; Ps. 142:8. The ancient translations greatly differ from each other. The LXX. have here (comp. Bar 1:9) in 2Ki 24:14; 2Ki 24:16, : Syr. milites, satellites; Chald. janitores (so also Raschi); Arab. mancipia (comp. the interpretation of Hitzig) [who translates hod-carriers, and refers the term to the descendants of the aborigines, who were condemned to be wood-splitters and water-carriers in Israel (Deu 29:10; comp. Jos 9:21) deriving it from socager, and stranger.S. R. A.] If we derive the word, which is certainly most natural, from , we have either the primitive meaning clausor, shutter, gate-shutter, or the derived: he who prepares what is necessary for shutting, shutting in, i.e., either locksmith; or if we derive from , those who prepare siege-works, engineers (Ewald). Ewald would certainly also allow the word to be taken in the sense of purveyor, by which he understands people who procure for the king the sup-plies of his kingdom. But he omits any further proof. Hitzig, Thenius, who are followed by Graf and (as it seems also) by Meier, who translates daily laborer, compose the word of tribute-service and sojourner, and understand by it common laborers, or hod-carriers, in contrast to skilled artizans. For this interpretation however we find, 1, no analogy in the language, for neither which alone is adduced by Hitzig, nor (Jos 16:10) suit here; 2. that in 2Ki 24:14 it is expressly stated that , the common people, remained, and to these must have necessarily belonged those classes of the people, who were and Compare the connection of the passage (2Ki 24:13-16) and it will be found that Hitzigs explanation does not agree with it. Since then, grammatically, the derivation from claudere is most natural, as there is further a which signifies custody, etc., and consequently the meaning of shutting or of employment in that which serves to shut, or shut up (ex. gr., the bolts of gates, Deu 3:5; 1Ki 4:13; Neh 3:3; Neh 3:6; Neh 3:13, etc.), which is the best founded etymologically, I understand, with most recent Comm. the locksmith, the workman, who makes what serves for shutting up in custody. What may be the relation of to (carpenters), is certainly obscure. Graf is meanwhile wrong in supposing that something more general is here to be designated. It may just as well be intended to set forth only a kind of artificer.
Jer 24:3-7. Then said the Lord with their whole heart. The construction is: as I acknowledge these good figs (am pleased with them), so I acknowledge the captives for good, i.e., to render them good. Comp. Jer 14:11; Psa 86:17; Neh 5:19; Neh 13:31.The tertium comparationis is: as one is pleased with good figs and retains them, but throws the bad away, so shall I be pleased with the captives of Judah and retain them, but reject those who remain.And I will set, etc. Comp. Jer 21:10.and will bring them back. Comp. rems. on Jer 11:14-17.and will build, etc. Comp. Jer 1:10.And they shall be my,etc. Comp. rems. on Jer 11:4.When they, etc. Not if but when. In accordance with the opening words of the verse the thought cannot be expressed hypothetically. Comp. moreover Jer 3:14-17; Jer 4:1-4.
Jer 24:8-10. But like the bad. their fathers.Thus saith Jehovah is a parenthesis. The is phonastic at the beginning of a direct sentence (comp. Naegelsb. Gr. 109, 1, 4), so that the verbum dicendi to be supplied is to be borrowed from Jer 24:5, to which the refers. It is as though the prophet would say, I have already said, I repeat it, that, etc. As to the Jews then already living in Egypt, reference may not be made to Jer 22:11. For those who were carried away with Jehoahaz are certainly included under the promised blessing, Jer 24:5-7, not under the curse. But it is to be supposed that since the invasion of Nebuchadnezzar, after the battle of Carchemish, many Jews fled from Egypt to the king conquered in this battle as to their natural ally, as they also did afterwards (Jeremiah 42. sqq.)A horror, comp. remarks on Jer 15:4.A calamity. This after the example of the LXX. is struck out by Hitzig, Ewald, Umbreit, Graf. But why should not the prophet wish to say that the Jews should not merely be given up themselves to destruction but should be the cause of destruction to others also? Has not the Jewish people, sighing under the curse, even to the most recent times developed the bad elements of its native peculiarity in many ways, to the destruction of the nations among whom it has been driven?A proverb, comp. Jer 29:18; Jer 29:22; Deu 28:37.And I will send, comp. Jer 29:17-22, where Jeremiah repeats the main thoughts of Jeremiah 24.
Footnotes:
[1]Jer 24:1.. This plural form is found in this sense here only (in another sense Gen 30:14). It is to be derived from a sing. . Comp. Olsh. 216, d. Elsewhere the plural of is and 2Ch 35:13; 2Ki 10:7.
[2]Jer 24:1. is to determine, appoint. The Hiph. is diem dixit, in jus vocavit aliquem (Job 9:19; Jer 49:19; Jer 50:44). The Hoph. cannot therefore mean simply positum, collocatum esse. Seb. Schmidt: duo calathi singulariter a Deo ante templum propositi, ut prophetia inde sumeretur. Gaab: The baskets were appointed; they would not have stood there, if God had not had a special object in it. I also believe that in is implied the idea of ex mandato. Yet it seems less probable to me that a mandatum speciale is meant, than that the prophet had in view that mandatum generale, of which we read in Exo 23:19; Exo 34:26; Deu 26:2 sqq. The latter passage is particularly important.
[3]Jer 24:2.. Comp. Naegelsb. Gr., 82, 4.Observe the tropical use of the nominative: continens pro contento. Comp. Ebrard, Dogma v. h. A. M. [Doctrine of the Lords Supper] I. S. 14.
[4]Jer 24:2. . . On account of it is to be regarded as the subject: ficus prcocitatum. The early figs are the nicest. Comp. Isa 28:4; Hos 9:10; Mic 7:1.
[5]Jer 24:2.. The imperf. here as in Jer 24:3; Jer 24:8, might certainly be taken as a simple future;which are not eaten. The prophet then expresses the certainty, that no one will be in a condition to eat these figs. But the sentence may also be taken with in the sense of a general declaration; is then = quales, which kind of figs cannot be eaten. The imperf. is then used to designate the permanent quality. Comp. Naegelsb. Gr., 87, d.
[6]Jer 24:5. = to recognize, with the collateral idea of approval, allowal. Comp. Rth 2:10; Rth 2:19; and the expression in Deu 1:17; Deu 16:19; Pro 24:23.
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
1. On Jer 21:2. King Zedekiah sends word to Jeremiah, that the Lord is to do according to all His miracles, that Nebuchadnezzar may withdraw. A demand rather cavalierly made in such evil circumstances. But the noble are so unfortunate! It is indeed as though it only depended on them to arrange matters with God; as if He were only waiting for them, as if it were a point of honor not to be over-hasty, but first to await a little extremity . It is a very necessary observance for a servant of the Lord, that he try his superiors, whether there is any trace remaining in them of having been once baptized, well brought up and instructed in the fear of the Lord. If he observe anything of this kind, he must insist upon it and especially not allow them to deal too familiarly with the Judge of all the earth, but plainly demonstrate to them their insufficiency and nothingness, if they measure themselves by Him. Though Zedekiah had spoken so superficially, Jeremiah answered him without hesitation, definitely and positively, and accustomed him to a different manner of dealing with the Lord. Zinzendorf. When the ungodly desire Gods help, they commonly appeal not to His saving power to heal them, but to His miraculous power to save them, while they persist in their impenitence. Starke.
2. On Jer 21:8. It is pure grace on the part of God, when He leaves to man the choice between the good and the evil; not that it is permitted him to choose the evil, but that he may choose freely the good, which he is under obligation to do, Deu 30:19. Starke. God lays before us the way of life and the way of death. The way of life is however always contrary to human reason, and that on which it sees merely death and shame. If thou wilt save thyself thou must leave the false Jerusalem, fallen under the judgment, and seek thy life where there seems to be only death. He who would save his life must lose it, and he who devotes it for the sake of the truth will save it. Diedrich.
3. On Jer 21:11-14. To be such a king is to be an abomination to the Lord, and severe judgment will follow. God appoints magistrates for His service and for the use of men; he who only seeks his own enjoyment in office, is lost. Jerusalem, situated on rocks in the midst of a plain, looks secure; but against God neither rocks avail nor aught else. The fire will break out even in them, and consume all around, together with the forest of cedar-houses in the city. The corruption is seated within, and therefore proceeds from within outwards, so that nothing of the former stock can remain. What shall a government do which no longer bears the sword of justice? What shall a church do which is no longer founded on Gods truth as its only power? Diedrich. Comp. moreover on the whole of Jeremiah 24. the extended moral reflections of Cyrillus Alex. . . Lib. I.
4. On Jer 22:1. Jeremiah is to deliver a sermon at court, in which he reminds the king of his office of magistrate, in which he is to administer justice to every man. Cramer.
It was no easy task for Jeremiah to go into the lions den and deliver such an uncourtly message to him. We are reminded of the prophet Jonah. But Jeremiah did not flee as he did.
5. On Jer 22:1-3. [But we ought the more carefully to notice this passage, that we may learn to strengthen ourselves against bad examples, lest the impiety of men should overturn our faith; when we see in Gods church things in such disorder, that those who glory in the name of God are become like robbers, we must beware lest we become on this account alienated from true religion. We must, indeed, desert such monsters, but we must take care lest Gods word, through mens wickedness, should lose its value in our esteem. We ought then to remember the admonition of Christ, to hear the Scribes and Pharisees who sat in Moses seat (Mat 23:2). Calvin.S. R. A.]
6. On Jer 22:10. [Dying saints may be justly envied, while living sinners are justly pitied. And so dismal perhaps the prospect of the times may be, that tears even for a Josiah, even for a Jesus, must be restrained, that they may be reserved for ourselves and our children (Luk 23:28). Henry.S. R. A.]
Nequaquam gentilis plangendus est atque Judus, qui in ecclesia non fuerunt et simul mortui sunt, de quibus Salvator dicit: dimitte mortuos sepelire mortuos suos (Mat 8:22). Sed eos plange, qui per scelera atque peccata egrediuntur de ecclesia et nolunt ultra reverti ad earn damnatione vitiorum. Hieron. Epist. 46 ad Rusticam. Nolite flere mortuum, sed plorate raptorem avarum, pecuni sitientem et inexplebilem auri cupidinem. Cur mortuos inutiliter ploramus? Eos ploremus, qui in melius mutari possunt. Basilius Seleucensis. Comp. Basil, Magn. Homil. 4 de Gratiarum actione post dimid.Ghislerus.
7. On Jer 22:6-9. God does not spare even the authorities. For though He has said that they are gods, when they do not rightly administer their office they must die like men (Psa 82:6) No cedars are too high for God, no splendor too mighty; He can destroy all at once, and overturn, and overturn, and overturn. Eze 21:27, Cramer.
Another passage from which it is seen how perverse and unjustifiable is the illusion that Gods election is a surety against His anger, and a permit to any wilfulness. The individual representatives of the objects of divine election should never forget that God can march over their carcases, and the ruins of their glory, to the fulfilment of His promise, and that He can rebuild on a higher stage, what He has destroyed on a lower. Comp. remarks on Jer 22:24.
8. On Jer 22:13-19. It is blasphemy to imagine that God will be frre et compagnon to all princes as such, and that He has a predilection for them as of His own kind. Does He not say to his majesty the king of Judah, with whom, in respect of the eminence of his dynasty and throne no other prince of earth could compare, that he should be buried like an ass, dragged and cast out before the gates of Jerusalem? This Jehoiakim was however an aristocrat, a heartless, selfish tyrant, who for his own pleasure trampled divine and human rights under foot. If such things were done in the green tree, what shall be done in the dry?
He who builds his house with other peoples property, collects stones for his grave. Cramer.
9. On Jer 22:14. [It was a proof of luxury when men began to indulge in superfluities. In old times the windows were small; for use only was regarded by frugal men; but afterwards a sort of madness possessed the minds of many, so that they sought to be suspended as it were in the air. And hence they began to have wider windows. The thing in itself, as I have said, is not what God condemns; but we must ever remember, that men never go to excesses in external things, except when their hearts are infected with pride, so that they do not regard what is useful, what is becoming, but are carried away by fondness for excess. Calvin.S. R. A.]
10. On Jer 22:15. God may grant the great lords a preference in eating and drinking and the splendor of royal courts, but it is not His will that these be regarded as the main things, but that true religion, right and justice must have the precedence;this is the Lords work. But cursed is he who does the Lords work remissly. Jer 48:10. Cramer.
11. On Jer 22:17. Description of haughty, proud, magnificent, merciless and tyrannical lords and rulers, who are accomplices of thieves. Cramer.
12. On Jer 22:19. [God would have burial a proof to distinguish us from brute animals even after death, as we in life excel them, and as our condition is much nobler than that of the brute creation. Burial is also a pledge as it were of immortality; for when mans body is laid hid in the earth, it is as it were a mirror of a future life. Since then burial is an evidence of Gods grace and favor towards mankind, it is on the other hand a sign of a curse, when burial is denied. Calvin.S. R. A.]
13. On Jer 22:24. Great lords often imagine that they not only sit in the bosom of God, but that they are a pearl in His crown; or as the prophet says here, Gods signet-ring. Therefore, it is impossible that they should not succeed in their designs. But God looks not on the person of the princes, and knows the magnificent no more than the poor. Job 34:19. Cramer.
14. On Jer 22:28. [What is idolized will, first or last, be despised and broken, what is unjustly honored will be justly contemned, and rivals with God will be the scorn of man. Whatever we idolize we shall be disappointed in, and then shall despise. Henry.S. R. A.]
The compliment is a very poor one for a king, who thinks somewhat of himself, and to whom it in a certain measure pertains that he be honored.But here it is the word of the Lord, and in consideration of these words it is declared in 2Ch 36:12, to be evil on the part of Zedekiah, that he did not humble himself before Jeremiah. Teachers must be much on their guard against assuming such purely prophetic, that is, extraordinary acts. It cost the servants of the Lord many a death, who were obliged thus to employ themselves, and when it is easy for one to ape it without a divine calling he thus betrays his frivolity and incompetence, if not his pride and delusion. Zinzendorf.
15. On Jer 22:28-30. Irenus (Adv. Hr. 3:30) uses this passage to prove that the Lord could not have been Josephs natural son, for otherwise he would have fallen under the curse of this passage, and appear as one not entitled to dominion (qui eum dicunt ex Joseph generatum et in eo habere spem, abdicatos se faciunt a regno, sub maledictione et increpatione decidentes, qu erga Jechoniam et in semen ejus est). Basil the Great (Epist. ad Amphilochium) endeavors to show that this passage, with its declaration that none of Jeconiahs descendants should sit on Davids throne, is not in contradiction to the prophecy of Jacob (Gen 49:10), that a ruler should not be lacking from Judah, till He came for whom the nations were hoping. Basil distinguishes in this relation between dominion and royal dignity.The former continued, the latter ceased, and this period of, so to speak, latent royalty, was the bridge to the present, in which Christ rules in an invisible manner, but yet in real power and glory as royal priest, and at the same time represents Himself as the fulfilment of the hope of the nations. In like manner John of Damascus concludes that according to this passage there could be no prospect of the fulfilment of the promise in Gen 49:10, if Mary had not virgineo modo borne the scion of David, who however was not to occupy the visible throne of David. (Orat. II. in Nativ. B. Mari p. med.)Ambrose finally (Comment. in Ev. Luc. L. III. cap. ult.) raises the question how Jeremiah could say, that ex semine Jechoni neminem regnaturum esse, since Christ was of the seed of Jeconiah and reigned? He answers: Illic (Jer 22:30) futuros ex semine Jechoni posteros non negatur et ideo de semine ejus est Christus (comp. Mat 1:11), et quod regnavit Christus, non contra prophetiam est, non enim seculari honore regnavit, nee in Jechoni sedibus sedit, sed regnavit in sede David. Ghislerus.
16. On Jer 23:2. Nonnulli prsmles gregis quosdam pro peccato a communione ceiciunt, ut pniteant, sed quali sorte vivere debeant ad melius exhortando non visitant. Quibus congrue increpans sermo divinus comminatur: pastores, qui pascunt populum meum, vos dispersistis gregem meum, ejecistis et non visitastis eum. Isidor. Hisp. de summo bono she LL. sentt. Cap. 46. Ghislerus.
17. On Jer 23:5-6. Eusebius (Dem. Ev. VII. 9) remarks that Christ among all the descendants of David is the only one, who rules over the whole earth, and everywhere not only preaches justice and righteousness by His doctrine but is Himself also the author of the rising [of the Sun] of righteousness for all, according to Psa 72:7 : , (LXX.) Cyril of Alex. (Glaphyr. in Gen. I. p. 133) explains as justitia Dei, in so far as we are made righteous in Him, not for the sake of the works of righteousness that we have done, but according to His great mercy. Rom 3:24; Tit 3:5.
18. On Jer 23:6. [If we regard God in Himself, He is indeed righteous, but not our righteousness. If we desire to have God as our righteousness, we must seek Christ; for this cannot be found except in Him. Paul says that He has been given or made to us righteousness,for what end? that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him. (1Co 1:30). Since, then, Christ is made our righteousness, and we are counted the righteousness of God in Him, we hence learn how properly and fitly it has been said that He would be Jehovah, not only that the power of His divinity might defend us, but also that we might become righteous in Him, for He is not only righteous for Himself, but He is our righteousness. Calvin. See also a long note in Wordsworth, to show that Jehovah our Righteousness refers to Christ;S. R. A.]
The character of a true church is when the Lytrum, the ransom-money of Jesus Christ, is known and valued by all, and when they have written this secret, foolish and absolutely inscrutable to reason, in the heart with the finger of the living God: that Jesus by His blood has taken away the sins of the world. O let it neer escape my thought, at what a price my soul was bought. This is the evening and morning prayer of every church, which is a true sister from above. Zinzendorf.
19. On Jer 23:5-8. The return under Ezra was also a fulfilment of this promise, but inferior and preliminary: not all came, and those who did come brought their sins back with them. They were still under the Law and had to wait for Righteousness; still in their return they had a pledge that the Messiah was yet to come and prepare the true city of peace. Now, however, all has been long fulfilled and we can enjoy it perfectly, if we have the mind for it. We have now a country of which no tyrant can rob us; our walk and citizenship is in heaven. We have been delivered from all our suffering, when we sit down at the feet of Jesus to hear His word. Then there is a power of resurrection within us, So that we can fly with our souls beyond the world and laugh at all our foes. For Christ has made us righteous by His daily forgiveness, so that we may also bring ourselves daily into heaven. Yea verily, the kingdom of heaven is come very nigh unto us! Jeremiah then longed to see and hear this more nearly, and now we can have it. Diedrich.
20. On Jer 23:9. Great love renders Gods servant so ardent, that he deals powerful blows on the seducers. He does not think that he has struck a wasps nest and embittered his life here forever, for he has a higher life and gives the lower one willingly for love. Yet all the world will hold him for an incorrigible and mad enthusiast, who spares no one. He says himself that he is as it were drunk with God and His word, when he on the other hand contemplates the country. Diedrich.
21. On Jer 23:11. They are rogues. They know how to find subterfuges, and I would like to see him who accuses a false and unfaithful teacher, and manages his own case so that he does not himself come into the dilemma. Zinzendorf.
22. On Jer 23:13-14. In the prophets of Samaria I see folly. This is the character which the Lord gives to error, false religion, heterodoxy. But in the prophets of Jerusalem I find abomination. This is the description of the or thodox, when they apply their doctrine, so that either the wicked are strengthened or no one is converted. Zinzendorf.
23. On Jer 23:15. From the prophets of Jerusalem hypocrisy goes forth into all the land. This is the natural consequence of the superiority, which the consistories, academies, ministers, etc., have and in due measure ought to have, that when they become corrupt they communicate their corruption to the whole region, and it is apparent in the whole land what sort of theologians sit at the helm. Zinzendorf.
24. On Jer 23:16. Listen not to the words of the prophets, they deceive you. Luther says (Altenb. Tom. II. p. 330): But a Christian has so much power that he may and ought to come forward even among Christians and teach, where he sees that the teacher himself is wanting, etc.; and The hearers altogether have the right to judge and decide concerning all doctrine. Therefore the priests and liveried Christians have snatched this office to themselves; because, if this office remained in the church, the aforesaid could retain nothing for their own. (Altenb. Tom. II. p. 508).The exercise of this right on the part of members of the church has its difficulties. May not misunderstanding, ignorance, even wickedness cause this to be a heavy and unjust pressure on the ministers of the word, and thus mediately tend to the injury of the church? Certainly. Still it is better for the church to exercise this right than not to do so. The former is a sign of spiritual life, the latter of spiritual death. It will be easier to find a corrective for some extravagances than to save a church become religiously indifferent from the fate of Laodicea (Rev 3:16).
25. On Jer 23:16. [But here a question may be raised, How can the common people understand that some speak from Gods mouth, and that others propound their own glosses? I answer, That the doctrine of the Law was then sufficient to guide the minds of the people, provided they closed not their eyes; and if the Law was sufficient at that time, God does now most surely give us a clearer light by His prophets, and especially by His Gospel. CalvinS. R. A.]
26. On Jer 23:17. The pastors, who are welcome and gladly seen at a rich mans table, wish him in fact long life, good health, and all prosperity. What they wish they prophesy. This is not unnatural; but he who is softened by it is ill-advised. Zinzendorf.
27. On Jer 23:21. [There is a twofold call; one is internal, the other belongs to order, and may therefore be called external or ecclesiastical. But the external call is never legitimate, except it be preceded by the internal; for it does not belong to us to create prophets, or apostles, or pastors, as this is the special work of the Holy Spirit. But it often happens that the call of God is sufficient, especially for a time. For when there is no church, there is no remedy for the evil, except God raise up extraordinary teachers. Calvin.S. R. A.]
28. On Jer 23:22. If I knew that my teacher was a most abominable miscreant, personally, and in heart the worst enemy of God in his parish; so long as, for any reason, he preaches, expounds, develops, inculcates the word of God; even though he should betray here and there in his expressions, that this word was not dwelling in him; if only he does not ex professo at one time throw down what at another time he teaches of good and true quasi aliud agendo: I assure you before the Lord that I should fear to censure his preaching. Zinzendorf.
29. On Jer 23:23. Gods essential attribute is Omnipresence. For He is higher than heaven, what canst thou do? deeper than hell, what canst thou know? Longer than the earth and broader than the sea (Job 4:8). And He is not far from every one of us (Act 17:27). Cramer.We often think God is quite far from us, when He is yet near to us, has us in His arms, presses us to His heart and kisses us. Luther. When we think the Sun of righteousness, Jesus, is not risen, and is still behind the mountain, and will not come to us, He is yet nearest to us. The Lord is nigh unto them that are of a broken heart. (Psa 34:19) Deus et omni et nullo loco Cuncta Deus replens molem se fundit in omnem. MS. notes to my copy of Cramers Bibel. Si vis peccare, O homo, qure tibi locum, ubi Deus non videat. Augustine.
30. On Jer 23:28. [When any one rejects the wheat because it is covered with chaff, and who will pity him who says that he has indeed wheat on his floor, but that it is mixed with chaff, and therefore not fit for food? If we be negligent, and think that it is a sufficient excuse for despising the Word of God, because Satan brings in his fallacies, we shall perish in our sloth like him who neglects to cleanse his wheat that he might turn it to bread. Calvin.S. R. A.]
He who cannot restrain his mouth or his ink let him expectorate. But let him say openly and honestly that they are his own dreams, which he preaches. The false prophets certainly know that mere falsehood is empty straw. They therefore always mingle some of the genuine word of God amongst it. An unavailing mixture! It is in this mingling that Satans highest art is displayed, so that he at the same time furthers his own work and testifies against himself. Comp. Genesis 3
31. On Jer 23:29. Gods word is the highest reality, life and power, while the dreams of the false prophets are pretence, death and weakness. Gods word is therefore compared to a fire which burns, warms, and enlightens, so that it burns up the hardest flint, melts the thickest ice, illuminates the deepest obscurities. It is compared further to a hammer which crushes the hardest rocks into sand.He who mingles Gods wheat among his straw, will find that the wheat will become fire and burn up the straw (1Co 3:12-15). He Who handles the word of the Lord purely, let him not despair if he sees before him hearts of adamant (Zec 7:12). He who seeks peace is not ashamed to bow beneath the hammer of the word. For the destructive power of the word applies to that in us which is opposed to God, while the God-related elements are loosed and set free by those very crushing blows.He, however, to whom the peace of God is an object of derision, may feed on the straw of this world. But how will it be when finally the day comes that God will come upon him with fire and hammer? What then remains to him as the result of his straw-diet, which is in a condition to withstand the blows of the hammer and the fire?
Help, Lord, against Thy scornful foes,
Who seek our souls to lead astray;
Whose mockeries at mortal woes
Will end in terrible dismay!
Grant that Thy holy word may root
Deep in our hearts, and richer fruit
May ever bear to endless day.
Gods word converts, all other doctrine befools. Luther.
32. On Jer 23:29. Gods word in general is like a fire: the more it is urged the more widely and brightly it extends. God has caused His word to be proclaimed to the world as a matter, which they can dispense with as little as fire. Fire often smoulders long in secret before it breaks out, thus the power of the divine word operates in its time. Gods word can make people as warm as if glowing coals lay upon them; it shines as brightly upon them, as if a lamp were held under their eyes; it tells every one the truth and purifies from all vices. He who deals evilly with Gods word burns himself by it, he who opposes it is consumed by it. But the word of God is as little to blame as a lamp or a fire when an unskilful person is burned by it. Yet it happens that often it will not be suffered in the world, then there is fire in all the streets. That is the unhappy fire of persecution, which is kindled incidentally in the world by the preaching of the Gospel. Jos. Conr. Schaller, Pastor at Cautendorf, Sermons on the Gospels, 1742.
33. On Jer 23:30. Teachers and preachers are not to steal their sermons from other books, but take them from the Bible, and testify that which they speak from their inward experience (Joh 3:11). False teachers steal Gods word, inventing a foreign meaning for it, and using this for the palliation of their errors. StarkeHinc illi at auctions, who can obtain this or that good book, this or that manuscript? Here they are thus declared to be plagiarios; and they are necessarily so because they are not taught of God. But I would rather they would steal from true men of God than from each other.Zinzendorf.
34. On Jer 23:33-40. When the word of God becomes intolerable to men, then men in their turn become intolerable to our Lord God; yea, they are no more than inutile pondus terr, which the land can no more bear, therefore they must be winnowed out, Jer 15:17. Cramer.
35. On Jer 24:5-7. He who willingly and readily resigns himself to the will of God even to the cross, may escape misfortune. But he who opposes himself to the hand of God cannot escape. Cramer.The captives are dearest to God. By the first greater affliction He prepares their souls for repentance and radical conversion, so that He has in them again His people and inheritance. O the gracious God, that He allows even those who on account of sin must be so deeply degraded and rendered slaves, even in such humiliation to be His people! The captives are forgiven their opposition to God; they are separated from the number of nations existing in the world, politically they are dead and banished to the interior. Now, God will show them what His love can do; they shall return, and in true nearness to God be His true Israel. Diedrich.
36. On Jer 24:7. [Since He affirms that He would give them a heart to understand, we hence learn that men are by nature blind, and also that when they are blinded by the devil they cannot return to the right way, and that they cannot be otherwise capable of light than by having God to illuminate them by His Spirit. This passage also shows, that we cannot really turn to God until we acknowledge Him to be the Judge; for until the sinner sets himself before Gods tribunal he will never be touched with the feeling of true repentance. Though God rules the whole world. He yet declares that He is the God of the Church; and the faithful whom He has adopted He favors with this high distinction, that they are His people; and He does this that they may be persuaded that there is safety in Him, according to what is said by Habakkuk, Thou art our God, we shall not die (Hab 1:12). And of this sentence Christ Himself is the best interpreter, when He says, that He is not the God of the dead, but of the living (Luk 20:38). Calvin.S. R. A.]
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
1. On Jer 21:8. This text may be used on all occasions when an important decision is to be made or on the entrance on a new section of life, as, e. g., at synods, diets, New Years, beginning of the church-year, at confirmations, weddings, installations, etc. What the present day demands and promises: I. It demands from us an important choice. II. It promises us, according as we choose, life or death.
2. On Jer 22:2-9. In how far the divine election is conditional and unconditional. I. It is conditional with respect to individual elected men, places, things. For 1, these become partakers of the salvation promised by the election only by behaviour well-pleasing to God; 2, if they behave in a manner displeasing to God, the election does not protect them from destruction. II. The election is unconditional with respect to the eternal ideas lying at the foundation of the single appearances, and their absolute realizations.
3. On Jer 22:24. [Payson:The punishment of the impenitent inevitable and justifiable. I. To mention some awful instances in which God has verified this declaration: (a), the apostate angels; (b) our first parents; (c) destruction of mankind by the flood; (d) the children of Israel; (e) Moses, David, the disobedient prophet, Christ. II. Some of the reasons for such a declaration. Not a disposition to give pain or desire for revenge. It is the nature and tendency of sin to produce misery.S. R. A.]
4. On Jer 23:5-6. The Son of David. What the prophet declares of Him is fourfold: 1. He will Himself be righteous; 2. He will rule well as king and execute judgment and righteousness; 3. He will be our righteousness; 4. Under Him shall Judah be helped and Israel dwell safely.
5. On Jer 23:14. [Lathrop: The horrible guilt of those who strengthen the hands of the wicked. 1. All sin is horrible in its nature. 2. This is to oppose the government of the Almighty. 3. It directly tends to the misery of mankind. 4. It supports the cause of the Evil Spirit. 5. It is to become partakers of their sins. 6. It is horrible as directly contrary to the command of God, and marked with His peculiar abhorrence.S. R. A.]
6. On Jer 23:23-24. The Omnipresence of God. 1. What it means. God is everywhere present, (a). He fills heaven and earth; (b) there is no removal from Him in space; (c) nothing is hidden from Him. 2. There is in this for us (a) a glorious consolation, (b) an earnest admonition. [Charnock, Jortin, and Wesley have sermons on this text, all of very similar outline. The following are Jortins practical conclusions; This doctrine 1. Should lead us to seek to resemble Gods perfections 2. Should deter us from sin. 3. Should teach us humility. 4. Should encourage us to reliance and contentment, to faith and hope.S. R. A.]
7. On Jer 23:29-30. Gods Word and mans word. 1. The former is life and power (wheat, fire, hammer). The latter pretence and weakness (dream, straw). 2. The two are not to be mixed with each other. [Cecil: This shows 1. The vanity of all human imaginations in religion, (a). What do they afford to man? (b). How much do they hinder? 2. The energy of spiritual truth. Let us entreat God that our estimate may be practical.S. R. A.]
8. On Jer 24:1-10. The good and bad figs an emblem of humanity well-pleasing and displeasing to God. 1. The prisoners and broken-hearted are, like the good figs, well-pleasing to God. For (a) they know the Lord and turn to Him; (b) He is their God and they are His people. 2. Those who dwell proudly and securely are displeasing to God, like the bad figs. For (a) they live on in foolish blindness; (b) they challenge the judgment of God.
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
CONTENTS
Under the similitude of good and bad figs, the Lord showeth the state of his faithful people, and the sad end of the ungodly.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
The date of this part of Jeremiah’s prophecy is given, perhaps with a view, that the reference made in it might be the stronger. Many of the people were at this time in Babylon, carried away in the captivity of Jeconiah. And it should seem, that these were among the most zealous and faithful of the people. The Prophets Ezekiel and Daniel were at this time in Babylon with many of the princes. If we consult Eze 1:2-3 and Dan 1:6 , we shall find it so, as appears by the date mentioned.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Figs Good and Bad
Jer 24
There was an immense advantage in living in Old Testament times. The evidence of that advantage is to be found on every page of the Old Testament itself. Men had a living Lord then. They spoke with him in a very reverent familiarity; although they named his name every day, never does the familiarity go below the point of reverence. You could not speak to an Old Testament man without hearing something about “The Lord”; for he said, with a child’s frankness, The Lord said; The Lord told me; I saw the Lord; The Lord sent me; The Lord afflicted me; The Lord gave me deliverance; The Lord healed my diseases, and loaded me with benefits. There was nothing strained about the confession: it was simply, sweetly, gratefully uttered. Where is that Lord today? He was a great Lord; it required the Hebrew tongue to furnish epithets and descriptives by which he could be adequately set forth to the imagination. Is it language we are short of? or is the Lord God himself absent from our thinking? Is it possible to think much about him, and never mention his name? Is it possible to perform the miracle of being so absorbed in the claims of God as never to mention the King? Has it come to this crowning miracle, the devil the miracle-worker, that men can love Christ, and never acknowledge him? We are not insensible to the plea that we must beware of what is denominated for no known reason “cant.” But love surely is inventive enough to find ways of self-expression and self-revelation; surely love must now and then have courage enough to test a popular fear, and to lift itself up in noble testimony, notwithstanding those who would affright it into silence. We now have theories, hypotheses even things so useless as hypotheses! we have laws, persistent forces, marvellous, all-grinding continuity: would God we had the living Father, the gentle, benignant, merciful, redeeming Saviour! It was better to be an old prophet, who even dreamed himself into this sublime association with motive, thought, and destiny eternal, than to be crammed, filled with notions we cannot understand, and theories we never think of applying.
“What seest thou, Jeremiah?” “Two baskets of figs set before the temple.” What is the meaning of these baskets? We cannot tell. Perhaps they were votive offerings. The people who set them there had some object in view. The same baskets are standing in the same place today. Did the Lord see only the baskets of figs? When does the Lord put a final meaning to anything? There is no final meaning to the humblest bird that flutters in the air; it is a minister of Providence, a minister of grace. There is no end to the meaning of a field of wild flowers. We can run past that marvellous display of power, wisdom, and goodness; but God himself is still there, nourishing every root, and filling every cup as with the wine of beauty. Things mean more than they seem to mean: it is the interpreter that is wanting. It is even so with the Bible. We do not want a new writing, we want a new reading; we do not want a new Bible, we simply need the old one to be properly read. The Bible is in the reader: you get out of the Bible what you bring to it. So it is with everything. If this were a philosophical law relating to the Bible only, we might question it because of its uniqueness and singularity, but this law holds good everywhere. We get what we give: our prayers are their answers; no man can pray above the answer he has already in his heart Why do we not see? To look is one thing; to see is another. We have not the same drapery that we find in Oriental narrative or parable, but that is an advantage rather than a disadvantage, because poor readers, superficial observers, never get further than the drapery. They never see the prodigal son; if they saw him they would fall upon his neck before he left his father’s house, and would have the battle out then. The drapery conceals, not reveals, unless we have the living, penetrating eye that pierces through all clothing and accident, and fixes itself intelligibly and critically upon the core, the meaning that roots in the heart. There are many who have seen nothing but clouds in the sky: there are some who have never seen the sky. There are some who have never seen their own children. There are blind hearts, blind understandings, that never see anything as it is, in all its outgoing of suggestion, poetry, apocalypse, possibility: what wonder that they have become the victims of monotony and complain cf commonplace and weariness and tedium, and are always sighing for something that will simply startle them out of the degradation into which they have brought every faculty?
What is the abiding quantity? Remove the drapery, with all its amplitude and colouring, and get at the heart of things, and what is the permanent quantity, which the world might hold as stock to trade with? What is it which around this simple fellowship gathers in order that it may wisely calculate, expend, record its accounts, and divide its balances? The central quantity is History, events, actions, providence. The baskets are not here, the particular literal figs are not here, but all the meaning is present with us through enduring time. History must be read, events must be looked at; for now the world has grown a history; the world has grown a library. Jeremiah had none, Isaiah and Ezekiel had to look around at nature, and endeavour through nature to look telescopically upon infinite distances; in their day there was nothing of what we call with modern significance a literature, a history. Now God is taking shape in events, is robed with incidents, deliverances, interpositions all the marvellous garment which we denominate by the name of Providence. We see only the detail, and therefore we are lost, and sometimes we are almost atheists. If we would see anything like an outline of the sum-total, we must pray, and fear, and trust, and love. We have a mischievous habit of breaking up our lives into little morsels, and looking only at the disintegration; we have not yet: learned the mystery of putting things together into all their meaning, and getting into the rhythm of the divine movement: otherwise there would be no atheists, there would be fewer agnostics, there would be a marvellous multiplication of worshippers; men would be brought to say, Explain it how you will, there are invisible fingers at work in all this machinery of things: history is an argument, history is a theology, history is a Bible: of another kind, yet rooted in the old Bible as to all its philosophies, possibilities, reverences, and divinest outlook and outcome. Thus through the vestibule of history men can walk arm-inarm a thousand strong, saying, Let us enter into the Temple, for it is the hour of prayer, and bless the God of history for the other Temple which he is building, and by which he is vindicating his throne and his providence. If men would read history, Christianity would be safe. If men would read their own history, there would be less need of argument. Some of us have come to a point at which we have perfect rest in God. There may be those who need to have an elaborate and irrational and unintelligible argument by which to prove the existence of God; but no man who has lived a reflective life can look back upon his yesterdays without saying, They came as links, but they have been welded or attached or connected into chains; each day came, it was taken up, looked at, used, laid down; but the days are now a thousand in number, multiplied by ten, and by fifty, and lo! they are not links but chains, golden, strong, and by a mysterious process they uplift themselves, and are hooked on to something stronger than rocks, something brighter than planets.
Who then can wonder at the young being eccentric, having a tendency to intellectual vagary and vagabondage who can wonder? A man cannot read other people’s history until he has read his own; we cannot understand biography until we understand autobiography. We hear the words: the eloquent lecturer expounds the ways historical, the mysteries of course and consequence, and we listen as students wonderingly our principal wonder being why he ever began: but as we advance in life we see that there is an under-current, an under-building, an outer structure, and when we compare the outer with the inner, the material with the spiritual, history with the Bible, we say, All things are one; there is at the heart of all life’s wondrous mystery a Power, inspiring, guiding, shaping, refining, spiritualising, call it by what name you may, at last you will come to call it by the name divine. Why do men not read events? If they would read events they would be believers in providence.
Events are divided. “What seest thou?” I see two kinds of events, one good, and the other vile: and there they are in life. It is so in families: how do you account for it that one son prays, and the other never saw the need of prayer? The one is filial; the other has a heart of stone. The one is always at home; the other never was at home in all his life the meaning of that term in music he never understood. Look at life broadly. What seest thou, O prophet, O man of the piercing eyes, what seest thou? Two events, or series of events, one excellent, the other vile; one leading upward, the other downward. What seest thou? Heaven hell. The vision is still before us; we need to have our attention called to it. He who deals in singularities, in isolations, never enters into the philosophy of providence, the method of the sublime organisation which is denominated the universe. We have perhaps been unjust to the idea of individualism. A man says he can read the Bible at home. We have denied this. He can read it there if he has no other opportunity of reading it; but let him come into the great fellowship, and he will find another reading, in another tone, and he will feel that he needed that marvellous, inexplicable thing called touch, sympathy, fellowship, in order to make him see himself, in the real quality and quantity of his being. We must have public prayer. We can pray alone and must pray there; but we can only pray there with sufficient profitableness for the holy exercise in proportion as we crowd our solitude with memories of the great congregation. How difficult it is for any man to see the intercessor in another man! When we listen to prayer in the public congregation we are not listening to one man, we are not listening to a man confessing his own sins, we are not reduced to that contemptible relation to the universe; if the man who is praying be an intercessor, one to whom is given the gift of public expression, we hear in his voice a thousand voices when he sobs it is because a thousand hearts have broken, when he cries for mercy it is because the world is on its knees. So with events, processes of events, marvellous action and interaction: we must see the whole if we would really say, How awful is this place! this is none other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven.
In Old Testament times the Lord communicated his will to special men. Here we have Jeremiah as representing that whole thought. This would be peculiar, and would be open to a species of objection, if it did not hold good in all the relations of life. Here again we come upon the marvellous distribution of the figs, excellent and vile, full of noble meaning, and full of distressing suggestion. Jeremiah was called to interpret the symbols. Men are called today who have the faculty of interpretation. They do not speak from the point of information, else then they would be but articulate newspapers; they speak from the point of inspiration, consciousness, communion with the Eternal; therefore there is about their words an aroma not to be found otherwhere. One man is a poet, and another not to put it offensively is not a poet: how is that? One man weeps when he sees the morning come: the dawn is so tender, so condescending, so hospitable, so full of promise, and so full of that which cannot at once be apprehended: what is that dawn? Is it an opening battlefield? is it a sick-bed? is it a bright opportunity for doing noble things? The poet cannot tell, but he says, God will be in the centre of it, and if he will reveal himself the day shall be a blessing, though it be full of battle, or though it be quiet with the spirit of peace. One man is a statesman, and another is not; one man can see the whole question, and the other can hardly see any part of it. The man who can only see one point gets credit for being very definite. Poor soul! he gets a reputation for being very clear. If he could see a horizon instead of a point, he would hesitate, he would look about for another and larger selection of words; he would be critical, he would pause between two competitive terms, not knowing which exactly held all the colour of his thought. Some heads are vacant temples. What then? Let us be thankful to God for the Isaiahs, Jeremiahs, Ezekiels, Pauls, and Johns, who have risen to tell us what the Lord meant. Who was it that saw the Lord first on that marvellous morning referred to in the fourth Gospel? It was John. There was a figure on the seashore, a mere outline, a spectre; the people in the boat wondered what it was, and John said, “It is the Lord.” It required John to turn that figure into a Christ: but this is the faculty divine, this is the prophetic function, this is the inworking of that mystery which we call inspiration. It required God to see his own image and likeness in the dust; it required Christ in the very agony of his love to turn common supper wine into sacramental blood. Let us be thankful tor our teachers. Some of us are but echoes we can only tell what we have heard other men say: but let us maintain our friends who have the gift of prayer; if we cannot join them we can listen to them, and say, Hear how he knows us, how he loves us, how he interprets our desires, how by some gift we: cannot understand he puts into words the very thoughts that have been burning in our hearts. These are the men who should lead the civilisation of the world.
The Lord says he will send his people into captivity “for their good,” “Thus saith the Lord, the God of Israel; Like these: good figs, so will I acknowledge them that are carried away captive of Judah, whom I have sent out of this place into the land of the Chaldeans for their good.” How marvellous is the action of love! The parent sends away the child he cannot live without for the child’s good; men undertake long and perilous and costly journeys that they may accomplish a purpose that is good. Jesus Christ himself said to his wondering disciples, “It is expedient for you that I go away.” Who can understand this action of love? It would seem to us to be otherwise: that it would be best for Jesus to remain until the very last wanderer is home; it would seem to our poor reason, which has everything but wings, that it would be best for Jesus Christ to remain upon the earth until he saw the very last little lamb enfolded on the mountains of Israel then he himself could come to be shepherd of the flock. Yet he was hardly here before he said, “It is expedient for you that I go away.” Are we not sent away? have we not lost fortune, station, standing? have we not been punished in a thousand different ways chastised, humiliated, afflicted? have we not been suddenly surrounded with clouds in which there was no light yea, and clouds in which there was no rain, simply darkness, sevenfold night? Yet it was for our good; it was that our vanity might be rebuked, that the centre of dependence might be found, that the throne of righteousness might be seen and approached. “It was good for me that I was afflicted: before I was afflicted I went astray.” Let us look upon our afflictions, distresses, and losses in that light. Life is not easy; life is a sacrifice, an agony, a battle that ends only to begin again, a fight mitigated, not ended, by a night’s repose. Are we to live always the accidental life, the life of mere detail, the life that only happens? or are we to live the life that is governed by law, inspired by a purpose, riveted in God, and travelling through infinite circuits back again to the fountain of its origin? This is the religious life.
What became of the evil figs? The Lord himself could not cure them. The only mercy that could be shown to them was to destroy them. How is it with ourselves? There would seem to be men who cannot be cured, healed, restored; God himself has wasted his omnipotence upon them. There are men who have resisted the Cross, who have gone to perdition over a place called Calvary. Did they see it on the road? Yes. Did they know who died upon that central cross? Yes. Did they hear his voice of love? Yes, outwardly. How have they come to perdition? By pressing their way past the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; if you go back all the miles they have travelled you will find that they crushed under their feet father, mother, home, pastor, friend, companion, wife, child, Bible, altar: what can become of them? God himself can do no more. He is at the gate of the vineyard now, saying, as he looks upon the wild grapes, What could I do for my vineyard more than I have done? Be just, be honest, and say in clear, articulate terms that your soul can hear, I am self-ruined, I am a suicide.
But who can end here? who can turn aside and say, This is the end? May it not be that one more appeal will succeed? may not God himself be surprised by the returning prodigal? may not Omniscience be startled into a new consciousness? We are obliged to use these terms with human meanings: but may it not be that some who are thought to be lost are not lost after all? To be in God’s house is a proof that the loss is not complete. To have even intellectual attention bestowed upon an appeal is to show that life is not extinct. “Turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die?” “As I live, saith the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked.” If any man dies it will be because God cannot help it.
Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker
IX
THE PROPHECIES OF JEREMIAH IN THE REIGN OF ZEDEKIAH
Jer 21
We have here the prophecies of Jeremiah, during the reign of Zedekiah, the last king of the Jewish people. These prophecies are to be found as indicated at the head of this chapter. They are not all the prophecies that Jeremiah uttered or that were written during this reign, but they are the prophecies that he uttered relative to that period and bearing upon the events of that reign. During Zedekiah’s reign he also wrote the messianic prophecy that we shall discuss in the next chapter.
When Jehoiakim burned the roll of his prophecies, he commanded his officers to go and take Jeremiah and Baruch. The Lord hid them or they would have lost their lives as Uriah had. Jeremiah and Baruch remained in hiding during the remainder of Jehoiakim’s wicked reign, four or five years. The latter part of this reign, as given in our books of 1 and 2 Kings and 1 and 2 Chronicles, was a troublous time. Jehoiakim rebelled against Nebuchadnezzar. That king stirred up bands of the Moabites and the Edomites to come and trouble his kingdom. His cities were besieged and he himself was slain and his body cast forth as refuse outside the walls of the city. His son, Jehoiachin, succeeded him to the throne. Jehoiachin was quite young, some authorities say eight years, other authorities, eighteen years of age. His mother reigned with him, and was probably the power behind the throne. Jehoiachin continued the rebellion against Nebuchadnezzar, and the result was that in a little over three months, that great king buried his hosts against Jerusalem and besieged the holy city. Jehoiachin, acting on good and wise advice, surrendered the city, and so he himself with his queen mother and the royal family were deported. Nebuchadnezzar, convinced that he was not a safe man to have upon the throne, had him and his royal family taken to Babylon and confined there. On the succession of “Evil Merodac” to the throne he was given a certain amount of liberty.
About 597 B.C. something over 7,000 of the best blood of Jerusalem, including the princes, the nobles, and the elders, with their wives, their slaves, and the most valuable and choice vessels of the Temple were carried away to Babylon. Ezekiel was carried away with them and began his prophecy in the fifth year of this captivity.
We can readily see that the removal of 7,000 of the best people from Jerusalem, such a thinning of the people, would give an opportunity to the many that were left. These nobles, princes, and elders, who were left in Jerusalem, were congratulating themselves that they were much better than those unfortunates who were carried off into exile. Such a conclusion would be perfectly natural. They were saying, “Those who had to go away and suffer such hardships are bad and so are suffering for their sins. We are left here in peace and so the Lord is with us.” That resulted in pride, and was a very foolish state of mind for this people. Jeremiah knows that destruction is awaiting them, if they continue in their ways of wickedness.
The theme of Jer 24 is Jeremiah’s comparison between those in exile and those left behind. Note the following points:
1. The vision (Jer 24:1-3 ). Jeremiah is shown in a vision two baskets of figs, set before the Temple of the Lord. He goes on to explain the occasion and the time when this occurred. The description is found in verse Jer 24:2 : “One basket of very good figs, like the figs that are first ripe; and the other basket had very bad figs, which could not be eaten, they were so bad.” Jer 24:3 continues the description, as given to Jehovah by the prophet.
2. The fate of the good figs (Jer 24:4-7 ). “Like these good figs so will I regard the captives of Judah.” Those in exile are the ones referred to, and so he says he will take care of them: “I will bring them again into this land: I will set mine eyes upon them for good.”
3. The fate of the bad figs (Jer 24:8-10 ). These bad figs were the people living in Jerusalem, those who were puffed up, regarding themselves better than others because they were so fortunate as to escape deportation. “These bad figs are so bad that they cannot be eaten. So will I give up Zedekiah and the kings of Judah, and his princes and the residue of Jerusalem and those that remain in this land and them that dwell in the land of Egypt. I will even give them up to be tossed to and fro among all the kingdoms of the earth for evil; to be a reproach and a proverb, a taunt and a curse in all the places whither I shall drive them.”
Naturally the effect of that kind of preaching upon the people of Jerusalem was not very gratifying. Jeremiah did not make friends very fast by that kind of comparison and application. But he was a true prophet. He preached God’s truth, whether welcome or not.
The theme of Jeremiah’s 27-29 is Jeremiah’s exhortation to submit to the yoke of Babylon. This prophecy occurred during the first or second year of the reign of Zedekiah, who had been put upon the throne by Nebuchadnezzar as his vassal. The date is about 596 B.C., certainly within two years after the exile under Jehoiachin. There was a movement among the various small nations surrounding Judah, a sort of revival of their political interests. The kings and the princes of these sections had conceived the idea that they could league together and revolt against Babylon. The kings of these various nations had sent their ambassadors to Zedekiah at Jerusalem to form a league, or a conspiracy, by which they could throw off the yoke of Nebuchadnezzar. Zedekiah was but a weakling, a mere tool in the hands of his chief princes. He had a certain reverence for Jeremiah and therefore he consulted him about it. But he feared the princes. He wanted to do right, but being a weak king, he was led to ruin and destruction by bad advice. He was afraid of Jeremiah, afraid of Nebuchadnezzar, afraid of his princes, and afraid of the prophets. To such a man all these nations came for consultation. They held their convention in Jerusalem, and to such a conference Jeremiah came as adviser. He advised that they all submit to Babylon.
Now, in Jer 27:1 there is an interpretation. It says, “In the reign of Jehoiachin,” and it should be, “The reign of Zedekiah.” Compare Jer 27:12 . Somehow that mistake has crept into the text. Jeremiah is commanded to make a yoke. He sets the yoke upon the heads of these ambassadors as a symbol. It is something like his symbolic action with the girdle. He puts the yoke on the heads of these envoys of Moab, Tyre, and the rest; also Zedekiah, the king of Judah, and gives his message. It is in verse Jer 27:6 : “And now have I given all these lands into the hands of Nebuchadnezzar, my servant. The beasts of the field I have given him also.” Verse Jer 27:7 : “And all the nations shall serve him and his sons’ sons till the time of his own land come.” Then destruction shall come upon him: Verse Jer 27:8 : “And it shall come to pass that the nation and the kingdom that shall not serve the same Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, and that will not put their neck under the yoke of the king of Babylon, that nation will I punish, saith Jehovah, with the sword and with famine and with pestilence till I have consumed them by his hand.” Then he throws out this warning: Don’t listen to the preaching of your prophets for they are false. They have not the word of God. Listen to me and submit. No better advice was ever given to a king. Jeremiah was a man who had divine wisdom and gave advice that would have saved the people. He was called to be the savior of his country, and to be the prophet of the nations, the nations mentioned here. He would have saved them all, if they had listened to him.
We have some specific advice of the prophet to Zedekiah, the king, in Jer 27:12-15 . Notice what he says: “And I spake to Zedekiah, the king of Judah, according to all these words, saying, bring your necks under the yoke of the king of Babylon and serve him and his people and live.” But this advice to Zedekiah was to a weakling. He was respectful to the prophet, but afraid of his princes.
In Jer 27:16 he says, “I spake to the priests and the people, saying, Thus [He warns them against these false prophets, which had doubtless been inciting this revolt among the nations by prophesying that they could succeed.] . . . Serve the king of Babylon and live.” These prophets are prophesying a lie unto you. Why should this land become a desolation? These prophets had been preaching to the people that this exile would soon be over; that they would soon bring back the beautiful vessels of the Temple. This was fine talk to the people, for they wanted those vessels back. That suited the people fine, and the prophets knew it, so they just preached what the people wanted. These vessels will not come back. Just wait a little while and see if their prophecies come true. Thus saith the Lord concerning you: You shall be carried to Babylon and you shall be there until the day that I visit that land. Not only are these vessels not coming back, but you are going into exile also. Now, that was not a popular kind of talk, but it was divine wisdom.
A conflict with Hananiah, the false prophet, is described in Jer 28 . Here was a strange incident. We have a conflict between two men, able men, influential men, men of high position and rank; one a false prophet, the other a true prophet. Externally both are good men. Hananiah was the son of a prophet, of the priestly line. Doubtless this Hananiah had been hired by the enemies of Jeremiah to counteract his influence with the people. They hired this man to make the people believe that these vessels would come back. So Hananiah comes forward. He stands in the gate of the Temple and thus addresses the people: “Thus saith Jehovah of hosts, the God of Israel, I have broken the yoke of the king of Babylon; within two full years I will bring into this place all the vessels of the Lord’s house, that Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon, took away from this place. I will bring back Jehoiachin and the royal family within two years and everything will be restored within that two years.”
Now, that was delightful preaching. That was just what the people wanted. But there was Jeremiah and he had to be reckoned with. Hananiah had all the marks of truth in him. Jeremiah seems to have wavered. He treats this man with all the courtesy of a gentleman. He stands there and listens to his message. He stood with the people that stood in the house of the Lord. When Hananiah had finished he said: “Amen: the Lord do so; may it be as you have said.” Jeremiah would have been glad if it had been true. He was patriotic and loyal. Nothing would have rejoiced him more than for this to have happened. “Oh, that it might be so!”
But in Jer 28:7-8 he says, “Nevertheless hear thou this that I speak unto thee. The prophets that spake in the olden time prophesied against many countries and against many kingdoms.” What did he mean by that? That the prophets who were true prophets prophesied destruction; that the punishment was coming. He means to say that the criterion by which one could determine a true prophet was that he prophesied evil. Now this man Hananiah was a false optimist. The true prophet sees the evil as well as the good. So by that process of reasoning he proved that Hananiah was a false prophet. He prophesied only good, hence he could not be a true prophet. I have prophesied evil and therefore I am in line with the tried and true prophets. How did the people like that?
We may well suppose that the majority of them did not like it. When Hananiah saw that the tide was coming his way, that the people were with him, he seized the yoke that Jeremiah was wearing before the people and smashed it to pieces. This is what he says: “Even so will I break the yoke of the king of Babylon before two full years end.” That was a bold stroke. Jeremiah was silenced for the time. But he did not give it up entirely; he went his way and talked to Jehovah about it. God gave him his answer. In Jer 28:13 we have it: “Go, tell Hananiah, saying, Thus saith Jehovah: Thou hast broken the bars of wood; but thou hast made in their stead bars of iron.” This kingdom shall be suddenly destroyed, as for Hananiah the Lord said, “Thou makest this people to trust in a lie. . . Behold, I will send thee away from off the face of the earth: this year thou shalt die, because thou hast spoken rebellion against Jehovah.” And Hananiah died the same year in the seventh month, two months after this incident.
An account of a letter of Jeremiah to the exiles is found in Jer 29 . Zedekiah was the vassal of Nebuchadnezzar and in order to assure him that he was true he sent two messengers to him. Their names are given in Jer 29:3 . These two messengers took letters from Zedekiah to the king in Babylon. Jeremiah took occasion to send a letter by these messengers to the exiles in Babylon. False prophets were over there, too.
They had been predicting that they would soon return to their own land. So Jeremiah sent them a letter, the substance of which is to be found from Jer 29:4 on to the end of the chapter. This we will discuss briefly. He advised the people to settle down, to marry, to be true to the king of Babylon and after seventy years, that is, about two generations, God’s will concerning the king of Babylon would be accomplished, and then they should return to their own place. In Jer 29:13 we have a beautiful statement: “Ye shall seek me, and find me, when ye shall search for me with all your heart.” In Jer 29:21-22 we have this statement regarding two false prophets in Babylon, Ahab and Zedekiah, who were prophesying the destruction of Babylon and the immediate return. Word of this comes to the ears of Nebuchadnezzar. That king was not a man to be trifled with. Here were two exiles stirring up an insurrection in his realm. Jeremiah says, “He roasted them in the fire.” He tried to do the same thing with the three Hebrew children, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. It was not an uncommon thing for a man to burn people to death then. That was the fate of these two false prophets.
But we come to another incident in Jer 29:24 . There was one Shemaiah who sent letters from Babylon to the princes and guardians of the Temple about Jeremiah, and said that this man, this Jeremiah ought not to be at large. Verse Jer 29:26 : “Every man that is mad, and maketh himself a prophet, that thou shouldest put him in the stocks. . . Now therefore, why hast thou not rebuked Jeremiah of Anathoth, who maketh himself a prophet to you, for as much as he hath sent unto us in Babylon, saying, The captivity is long,” and thus and so. Then the men of the Temple read the letter to Jeremiah, and he responds, verse Jer 29:32 : “Behold, I will punish Shemaiah and his seed; he shall not have a man to dwell among this people, neither shall he behold the good that I will do unto my people, saith Jehovah, because he hath spoken rebellion against Jehovah.”
Jeremiah’s advice to Zedekiah during the siege is given in Jer 21 . This chapter is very much out of chronological order. This weak king is still in the hands of his princes, who are trying to throw off the yoke of Babylon. They have been all this time expecting help from Egypt. PharaohNecho who had slain Josiah, king of Judah, had been succeeded by Pharaoh-Hophra. He had overthrown his adversaries at home and was now ready for Asia. There was an Egyptian party in Jerusalem and they soon had their plans ready for Zedekiah. They proposed to form an alliance with this Pharaoh against Nebuchadnezzar. This they did against the advice of Jeremiah. The outcome of the matter was that Nebuchadnezzar swept down upon Judah and Jerusalem to subdue them.
Zedekiah sent an anxious message to Jeremiah inquiring if there was any message from the Lord. His answer was brief. He simply told him that the Lord would not save the city as he did when Isaiah was the prophet. But he says in verse Jer 21:5 : “I myself will fight against you with an outstretched hand and with a strong arm even in anger and in wrath and in great indignation, and I will smite the inhabitants of this city, both man and beasts and they shall die of great pestilence.” This siege was to end in the downfall of the city. In Jer 21:8 he says, “Behold, I set before you the way of life and the way of death. He that abideth in this city shall die by the sword and by famine and by the pestilence, but he that goeth out and falleth away to the Chaldeans that besiege you, he shall live and his life shall be unto him for a prey.”
The incidents of the siege are described in Jer 34 . Under the preaching of Jeremiah and the stress and strain of the siege, the people’s consciences were awakened and they gave heed to the law of Moses and made a covenant that they would liberate all the slaves according to the law of Moses, which said that when a Hebrew became a slave to another that he should be such only six years. That is recorded in the law as found in Exo 21:2 and Deu 15:12 . That law was given by Moses. They usually neglected it, but they did it now while there was pressure on them, but as soon as the pressure was removed they went back to their old ways again, Jer 34:11 : “But afterward, they turned and caused the servants and handmaidens, whom they had caused to go free to return and brought them into subjection for servants and handmaidens.” This occurred while Pharaoh-Hophra was coming up to Jerusalem to relieve the city. Nebuchadnezzar defeated him and drove him back. When the pressure was removed their conscience grew calloused again. Jeremiah broke out in great bitterness against this, Jer 34:17 : “You granted liberty, then you took it back. I proclaim to you a liberty to the sword and to famine. I will make you to be a curse among the nations of the earth.” In spite of all the solemnity with which you made the covenant you broke it. I will cause the Chaldeans to return to the city and make it without inhabitants.
The effect of Jeremiah’s preaching is recorded in Jeremiah 37-39. Jeremiah’s forty years and more of preaching had verily been in vain. The people would not heed. There seemed to be a fixedness in their perverseness. They evidently hardened their hearts to go after idols. There is a saying, “Whom the gods would destroy they first make mad.” It was so with these people. They were mad after idolatry. The siege had now been on more than a year. It lasted eighteen months altogether, accompanied with all the horrors of a siege. These events are recorded in Jeremiah 37-39. We take them up in order:
Jer 37:2 : “Neither he, nor the people of the land, hearkened unto the words of the Lord.” This general statement is followed by the details:
Zedekiah was a weakling. He wanted to do what Jeremiah said, and if he had been stronger he would have done so. So he sent for him and asked his advice. He says, Jer 37:3 : “Pray now unto the Lord our God for us.” Jeremiah answered him, Jer 37:7 : “Behold, Pharaoh’s army that is come forth to help you shall return into their own land; the Chaldeans shall come again and fight against this city. They shall take it and burn it with fire.”
At the time the siege was raised and the Chaldeans went to meet the Egyptians, many people broke out of the city. Jeremiah was one of them. He started to go to his home at Anathoth to take charge of a certain piece of property he had bought, verse Jer 37:12 : “Jeremiah went out of Jerusalem at the gate of Benjamin.” He came in collision with the captain of the ward whose name was Irijah and he said to Jeremiah, “Thou goeth to the Chaldeans; thou art falling away to the Chaldeans.” Many others were doing the same thing and nothing was said about it, but these people now had a chance to get in a blow at Jeremiah, because he had been stoutly counseling the people to surrender to the Chaldeans. Jeremiah said, “I do not fall away to the Chaldeans.” Irijah did not believe him, but seized him and brought him before the princes, “and the princes were wroth with Jeremiah, and smote him, and put him in prison in the house of Jonathan, the scribe.” This is the second time Jeremiah had been arrested, but the first time he was imprisoned.
The king called for Jeremiah and asked him, “Is there any word from the Lord?” “No,” said Jeremiah, “The only word is this: Thou shalt be delivered into the hands of the king of Babylon.” Then he pleads for himself: “Cause me not to return to the house of Jonathan, the scribe, lest I perish there.” Zedekiah, the king, was kindly disposed toward him. He gave him some liberty. He remained in the court of the guard six months or more, guarded by the king.
Then the princes put him in the dungeon. These princes were the real cause of the fall of Jerusalem. They hated Jeremiah. They had been treating with Egypt, and he had advised against them; his counsel had weakened many of the people in their loyalty to the plans of the princes; so they hated him, and now that they had him in their hands they wreaked their vengeance on him. Verse Jer 37:4 : “Then the princes said to the king, Let this man we pray thee be put to death, forasmuch as he hath weakened the hands of the men of war that remain in this city, and the hands of all the people.”
That the king was a weakling is shown in verse Jer 37:5 : “Then Zedekiah, the king, said, Behold he is in your hands; do as you will, for the king is one that can do nothing against you.” There was a certain Justification for these princes who saw only the military aspect of it. If any man had done as did Jeremiah, in connection with the siege of Richmond or Vicksburg, he would have been promptly dealt with as a traitor. So they took Jeremiah and threw him into a deep cistern, or pit. It had no water in it, but it was deep with mud and he sank down into that, and they left him thinking that would be the last of him. At last, they thought, his tongue was silenced. But he was rescued by a slave, an Ethiopian, named Ebedmelech. He felt kindly toward Jeremiah, so he went to the king and the king gave him liberty to rescue him (Jer 38:7-13 ).
Another audience with the king is allowed Jeremiah (Jer 38:14-28 ). This is Jeremiah’s last audience with Zedekiah. Verse Jer 38:17 : “If thou go forth to the king of Babylon thou shalt live, and the people.” He could yet save the city. Then the king told him not to tell anybody about the interview. If there had been a man on the throne, he would have saved the city. Then follows an account of the capture of the city and its destruction (Jer 39:1-10 ). A careful reading of this passage will be sufficient.
Jeremiah was saved by the command of Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon. He had heard about Jeremiah and his services, how he had counseled the people to surrender, and spared his life; told them to take good care of him and let him do as he would.
The prophecy in Jer 39:15-18 is concerning Ebed-melech, the slave who had saved Jeremiah’s life. It is beautiful to see how Jeremiah remembered this man. He writes down in the word of God what should be his reward, thus: “I will surely save thee, saith Jehovah.”
Jerusalem is now a smoking ruin, and the people are scattered far and wide. The nobles and the princes are slain before the king, and his own sons are slaughtered before his own eyes. Zedekiah’s eyes are put out and he is carried captive to Babylon. If he had only followed the advice of Jeremiah, all would have been well. The position of a prophet in the state is supreme; it is the highest honor that can be bestowed upon any man.
QUESTIONS
1. What is the theme of this chapter of this INTERPRETATION and what the historical setting?
2. What is the theme of Jer 24 and how is it presented? Explain fully.
3. What is the theme of Jeremiah 27-29 and what the general condition in Judah and the surrounding nations at this time?
4. How do you explain the name “Jehoiachim” in Jer 27:1 , what the symbolic action of the prophet here and what its meaning? (Jer 27:1-11 .)
5. What is the specific advice of the prophet to Zedekiah, the king, in Jer 27:12-15 ?
6. What is his advice to the priests and the people and how does he meet the prophecies of the false prophets?
7. Give an account of the conflict between Hananiah and Jeremiah (Jer 28 ).
8. Give an account of the letter of Jeremiah to the exiles (Jer 29 ).
9. What is Jeremiah’s advice to Zedekiah during the siege? (Jer 21 .)
10. What are the incidents of the siege? (Jer 34 .)
11. What is the effect of Jeremiah’s preaching and how are the people characterized? (Jeremiah 37-39.)
12. What is the general statement of this in Jer 37:1-2 ?
13. Give an account of the king’s request of Jeremiah and his response (Jer 37:3-10 ).
14. Give an account of Jeremiah’s second arrest and first imprisonment (Jer 37:11-15 ).
15. Give an account of his deliverance from the prison (Jer 37:16-21 ).
16. What was next done with him and what the particulars (Jer 38:4-6 )?
17. How did he escape and what the particulars?
18. Give an account of Jeremiah’s last audience with the king (Jer 38:14-28 ).
19. Give an account of the capture of the city and its destruction (Jer 39:1-10 ).
20. How was Jeremiah saved and what the particulars? (Jer 39:11-14 .)
21. What is the prophecy in Jer 39:15-18 ?
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible
Jer 24:1 The LORD shewed me, and, behold, two baskets of figs [were] set before the temple of the LORD, after that Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon had carried away captive Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah, and the princes of Judah, with the carpenters and smiths, from Jerusalem, and had brought them to Babylon.
Ver. 1. The Lord showed me. ] By showing as well as by saying, hath God ever signified his mind to his people; by the visible as well as by the audible word, as in sacrifices and sacraments, for their better confirmation in the faith.
And, behold, two baskets.
Were set before the temple.
Before the temple.
After that Nebuchadnezzar.
Had carried away captive Jeconiah.
With the carpenters,
And smiths.
a Raban., Hugo., Lyra.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Jeremiah Chapter 24
Jer 24
Fuente: William Kelly Major Works (New Testament)
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Jer 24:1-3
1After Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon had carried away captive Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, and the officials of Judah with the craftsmen and smiths from Jerusalem and had brought them to Babylon, the LORD showed me: behold, two baskets of figs set before the temple of the LORD! 2One basket had very good figs, like first-ripe figs, and the other basket had very bad figs which could not be eaten due to rottenness. 3Then the LORD said to me, What do you see, Jeremiah? And I said, Figs, the good figs, very good; and the bad figs, very bad, which cannot be eaten due to rottenness.
Jer 24:1 Nebuchadnezzar See Special Topic: Kings of Mesopotamia .
This specifically dates this strophe as 597 B.C (cf. 2Ki 24:10-16; 2Ch 36:9-10). The king goes by three names
1. Jeconiah, Jer 24:1; Jer 27:20; Jer 28:4; Jer 29:2
2. Coniah, Jer 22:24; Jer 22:28; Jer 37:1
3. Jehoiachin, Jer 52:31; 2 Kings 24-25
See Appendix Four, #3.
craftsmen This term (BDB 360, cf. Jer 29:2) refers to an engraver of
1. gems (cf. Exo 28:11)
2. stone (cf. 2Sa 5:11)
3. wood (cf. Jer 10:3)
4. metal (cf. Jer 10:9)
It can also mean idol-maker (cf. 2Ki 24:14; 2Ki 24:16; Isa 44:11; Isa 45:16).
smith This ambiguous term (BDB 688, KB 604 II) may refer to a metal worker (NJB, NET). It could also mean harem (REB textual marginal note) or possibly builders or engineers.
two baskets of figs This is another visual image to communicate God’s message vividly to the people of Judah who were left in Jerusalem.
Amos used the same type of imagery in Amo 8:1-3.
set before the temple of the LORD These baskets of figs represented two groups of people. They were seen as offerings to YHWH (cf. Deu 26:2-11), to use for His purposes.
1. good figs – those Judeans already exiled
2. bad figs – those Judeans in Palestine
Jer 24:2 very bad figs These same inedible, rotten figs are mentioned in Jer 29:17.
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
The LORD. Hebrew. Jehovah. App-4.
shewed me = made me see.
behold. Figure of speech Asterismos. App-6.
baskets. Hebrew. dudim. Still used for fruit in Jerusalem.
the temple. See note on Jer 26:2.
carpenters and smiths = craftsmen (or artificers) and armourers.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Chapter 24
Now in chapter 24.
The LORD showed me, and, behold, there were two baskets of figs set before the temple of the LORD, after Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon had carried away the captives Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah, and the princes of Judah, with the carpenters and smiths, from Jerusalem, and had brought them to Babylon ( Jer 24:1 ).
Now in the first captivity or the first time that Nebuchadnezzar came, he did not destroy the city, but he did take captives and he did take treasure. Among those captives that were taken in the first captivity were the young princes-Daniel, Meshach, Shadrach and Abednego. They were all taken in this first captivity. He had taken the king Jeconiah to Babylon and he had set up Zedekiah as the king. But then Zedekiah rebelled against Nebuchadnezzar and he came the second time. And in the second time is when he destroyed the temple, destroyed the city and all. So this message came to Jeremiah after this first captivity when Daniel and others were carried away. Some of the skilled carpenters and all were carried away to Babylon. He saw two baskets of figs.
One basket had very good figs, even like the figs that are first ripe: and the other basket had very naughty figs, which could not be eaten, they were so bad. Then said the LORD unto me, What do you see, Jeremiah? And I said, Figs; the good figs, very good; and the evil, very evil, you can’t even eat them, they are so evil. Again the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, Thus saith the LORD God of Israel; Like these good figs, so will I acknowledge them that are carried away captive of Judah, whom I have sent out of this place into the land of the Chaldeans for their good ( Jer 24:2-5 ).
They had gone away captive, but God said that that was for their good. That’s so that they won’t see this horrible desolation that’s coming. Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, they were the good figs. Those that were taken away captive in that first invasion by Babylon.
For I will set my eyes upon them for good, and I will bring them again to this land: and I will build them, and not pull them down; and I will plant them, and not pluck them up. And I will give them an heart to know me, that I am the LORD: and they shall be my people, and I will be their God: for they shall return unto me with their whole heart ( Jer 24:6-7 ).
And we read of the witness and the testimony that Daniel and Shadrach and Meshach and Abednego were in that Babylonian kingdom.
And as the evil figs, which cannot be eaten, because they are so rotten; surely thus saith the LORD, So will I give Zedekiah the king of Judah, and his princes, and the residue of Jerusalem, that remain in this land, and them that dwell in the land of Egypt: And I will deliver them to be removed into all the kingdoms of the earth for their hurt, to be a reproach and a proverb, a taunt and a curse, in all places whither I shall drive them. And I will send the sword, the famine, and the pestilence, among them, till they be consumed from off the land that I gave unto them and to their fathers ( Jer 24:8-10 ).
So the two groups: those that went in the first captivity, Daniel and others who were the good figs; Zedekiah, the rotten mess that he made of things and those that were with him that were to be destroyed.
“
Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary
Jer 24:1-3
Jer 24:1-3
Jehovah showed me, and, behold, two baskets of figs set before the temple of Jehovah, after that Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon had carried away captive Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, and the princes of Judah, with the craftsmen and smiths, from Jerusalem, and had brought them to Babylon. One basket had very good figs, like the figs that are first-ripe; and the other basket had very bad figs, which could not be eaten, they were so bad. Then said Jehovah unto me, What seest thou, Jeremiah? And I said, Figs; the good figs, very good; and the bad, very bad, that cannot be eaten, they are so bad.
Baskets of figs set before the temple…
(Jer 24:1) The great lesson here, which is missed by many of the commentators, has nothing whatever to do with first-fruits The lesson that thunders from the parable is that proximity to the temple is no sign whatever of the holiness or acceptability of the people living in the vicinity of the Jewish temple. The people in Jerusalem were close to the temple, all right, but they were not close to God! They were exactly like that basket of rotten figs on the very steps of the temple.
The king. the princes … the craftsmen and smiths …..
(Jer 24:1). The cream of the nation had already been deported. All of the skilled artisans and craftsmen and presumably all of the people with special skills. The meaning of smiths is uncertain; but the general import of the verse is plain enough. Both Ezekiel and Daniel were also in that first group of captives. See 2Ki 24:10-17 of the Biblical record of who went to Babylon. The teaching of the parable is that the people left in Judah were inferior to the captives who went to Babylon. Barnes stated that, Those left behind were not worth taking. F4
This estimate proved to be correct. Zedekiah surrounded himself with a group of citizens who persuaded him to form an alliance with Egypt and to resist any further submission to Babylon. That policy, of course, brought on the second siege of Jerusalem, the murder of the vast majority of the population, the destruction of the temple, and the reduction of the whole city to a ruin. In the long ran, the ones remaining in Judah would have by far the worst fate. The one and one half year siege they endured was one of the worst in history, the inhabitants even being reduced to cannibalism.
The good figs. the bad figs …..
(Jer 24:2-3) It seems that so simple a vision should not need much comment; but commentators always find something to write about. We are told that the good figs came from the early crop of a variety that produced two or three crops a year, the first one being far superior to the other two. The bad figs were described as rotten by Harrison, and probably the sycamore fig by Smith. That variety needed to be pricked during the ripening process; and the failure to provide that treatment made the figs inedible!
This little parable is very much like that of the basket of summer fruit in Amo 8:1-3.
The Vision of the Fig Baskets Jer 24:1-10
The terminology the Lord showed me or caused me to see introduces a prophetic vision. Chapter 24 contains such a vision. There are two types of prophetic visions in the Old Testament, the subjective and the objective. In the subjective vision only the prophet sees the object in question. In the objective vision the object is visible to the physical eyesight. The revelation consists of the significance of the object, not what the prophet sees but what the prophet sees in an object. It is sometimes difficult to ascertain whether a vision is subjective or objective. In the opinion of the present writer the vision of the two fig baskets falls into the category of objective vision. Chapter 24 describes the experience of the prophet in having his attention drawn to the two baskets (Jer 24:1-3). Then the Lord explains to Jeremiah the meaning of the basket of good figs (Jer 24:4-7) and the basket of bad figs (Jer 24:8-10).
1. The experience of the prophet (Jer 24:1-3)
Jer 24:1-3 describe the time, place and contents of the prophetic vision. The vision is dated after the deportation of 597 B.C. In this deportation Jeconiah, better known as Jehoiachin (cf. Jer 22:24), was taken captive along with all the artisans of the land. Jeremiah seems to have been outside the Temple at the time of the vision. God directed his attention to two baskets of figs which had been left for some unexplained reason near the entrance of the Temple (Jer 24:1). Jeremiah noticed that the first basket contained good figs which were a delight to the eye. Small figs which appear along with the first leaves of spring after ripening are called first-ripe figs. The first-ripe figs are considered a delicacy (cf. Hos 9:10; Mic 7:1). The prophet noticed that the other basket contained bad figs, so bad that they could not possibly be eaten. Jeremiah does not say why the figs were bad. Most commentators speculate that they were spoiled and hence worthless, fit only to be thrown away. Another suggestion is that the second basket contained figs which had been allowed to remain too long on the tree. Such fully mature figs taken from the tree late in the season are untasty. As is frequent in prophetic visions the Lord asked Jeremiah to relate what he had observed and the prophet quickly does so, anticipating the interpretation of these symbols which follows (Jer 24:3).
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Still speaking to Zedekiah, Jeremiah repeated three prophecies from the past, the first being a vision after Jeconiah’s (Jehoiachin’s) captivity, the second being a message delivered in the fourth year of Jehoiakim, and the last a yet earlier one, delivered in the beginning of Jehoiakim’s reign.
The vision after Jeconiah’s captivity was two baskets of figs, the first containing very good, and the second very bad, figs. The basket of good figs symbolized the captives who had been taken to the land of the Chaldeans. From them in the future Jehovah would restore His own. The basket of bad figs represented Zedekiah and those who remained in the land under him. These in the economy of God were devoted to judgment. This reminder of the vision would serve to make plain to Zedekiah the burden which the prophet had to deliver to him.
False prophets were speaking both among the captives and in Jerusalem, and throughout the remainder of Jeremiahs message to Zedekiah, he denied the authority and inspiration of these false teachers, and insisted upon the accuracy of this vision of the baskets of figs.
Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible
Widespread Corruption
Jer 5:1-6; Jer 19:1-15; Jer 20:1-18; Jer 21:1-14; Jer 22:1-30; Jer 23:1-40; Jer 24:1-10; Jer 25:1-38; Jer 26:1-24; Jer 27:1-22; Jer 28:1-17; Jer 29:1-32; Jer 30:1-24; Jer 31:1-40
Diogenes, the cynic, was discovered one day in Athens in broad daylight, lantern in hand, looking for something. When someone remonstrated with him, he said that he needed all the light possible to enable him to find an honest man. Something like that is in the prophets thought. God was prepared to spare Jerusalem on lower terms than even Sodom, and yet He was driven to destroy her. Both poor and rich had alike broken the yoke and burst the bonds. The description of the onset of the Chaldeans is very graphic. They settle down upon the land as a flock of locusts, but still the Chosen People refuse to connect their punishment with their sin. It never occurred to the Chosen People that the failure of the rain, the withering of their crops, and the assault of their foes, were all connected with their sin. There is nothing unusual in this obtuseness for as we read the history of our own times, men are equally inapt at connecting national disaster with national sin.
How good it would be if the national cry of today were that of Jer 5:24 : Let us now fear before the Lord our God! Notice the delightful metaphor of Jer 5:22. When God would stay the wild ocean wave a barrier of sand will suffice. The martyrs were as sand grains but wild persecutions were quenched by their heroic patience.
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
The twenty-fourth chapter is added here as an appendix, because it relates a vision given after the carrying away of Jeconiah, therefore during the early part of Zedekiah’s reign. Jeremiah was shown by the Lord, in vision, two baskets of figs set before the temple of the Lord (Jer 24:1). The fig tree is the well-known symbol of Judah nationally; as the vine is of Israel as a whole. Judah was likened by the Lord JESUS to a “fig tree planted in a vineyard.” (Luk 13:6)
In the vision following, (Jer 24:1-6) one basket contained good fruit; the other bad figs, so bad that they could not be eaten. They set forth the two classes into which the Lord had divided the people. Those carried away captive by the Chaldeans had been sent away “for their good.” He would watch over them in grace, and eventually restore them (the remnant) to their land, to be once more planted, never to be plucked up again. This last phrase negatives effectually the unworthy theory that would consider the promise fulfilled in the days of Ezra and Nehemiah. Have they not been “plucked up again?” Surely. But when the Lord’s set time has come, they shall be established in their land never to be rooted out of it again. For in that day GOD will give them a heart to know Himself: they shall be His people and He will be their GOD: for they shall do what the former remnant never did – return unto Him with their whole heart” (Jer 24:7).
These then are the good figs to be treasured up by the Lord. The evil figs, which were utterly worthless, typified Zedekiah with the residue of Jerusalem remaining in the land, and those dwelling in defiance of His Word in the land of Egypt. They were to be removed into all the kingdoms of the earth “for their hurt” (as the others “for their good”), and should be “a reproach and a proverb, a taunt and a curse, in all places whither” He should drive them: ever punished by the sword, famine and pestilence until utterly consumed (Jer 24:8-10). Who but one inspired of GOD could have so faithfully predicted, long before it came to pass, that which, for over two millenniums, has been a matter of history, familiar to all?
~ end of chapter 11 ~
Fuente: Commentaries on the New Testament and Prophets
CHAPTER 24
The Two Baskets of Figs
1. The vision of the two baskets of figs (Jer 24:1-3)
2. The vision interpreted (Jer 24:4-10)
Jer 24:1-3. Jeconiah, with the choicest of the nation, had been carried away into captivity. A large portion remained, and were not taken away, and these attributed their escape from exile to some goodness in them. At that time the prophet had a vision. He saw set before the temple two baskets of figs. The one basket was filled with good figs, the second basket with bad figs.
Jer 24:4-10. The good figs are symbolical of those who were carried away into captivity. They were sent away for their good. He promises them good things. They are going to return; He is going to build them; He will plant them. More than that, He will give them a heart to know that He is the Lord. For they shall return unto Me with their whole heart. They are never to be plucked up. This prophecy evidently goes beyond the return of the small remnant from Babylon, yet partially at least it was fulfilled. The bad figs are those who remained with Zedekiah in Jerusalem, but they also should be removed into all the kingdoms of the earth, to be a reproach, a proverb, a taunt and a curse.
Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)
am 3406, bc 598
Lord: Amo 3:7, Amo 7:1, Amo 7:4, Amo 7:7, Amo 8:1, Zec 1:20, Zec 3:1
two: Deu 26:2-4
after: Jer 22:24-28, Jer 29:2, 2Ki 24:12-16, 2Ch 36:10, Eze 19:9
smiths: 1Sa 13:19, 1Sa 13:20
Reciprocal: Gen 41:18 – General 2Ki 24:8 – Jehoiachin 2Ki 24:14 – Jerusalem Est 2:6 – Jeconiah Jer 13:7 – it was Jer 27:6 – my Jer 27:20 – when Jer 28:4 – Jeconiah Jer 29:1 – the elders Jer 29:17 – them like Jer 37:1 – Coniah Eze 3:1 – go Eze 11:15 – thy brethren Eze 17:3 – came Eze 17:13 – he hath also Eze 19:1 – the princes Amo 8:2 – A basket
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
THE PATENT OF NOBILITY
The princes of Judah, with the craftsmen and smiths, from Jerusalem.
Jer 24:1 (R.V.)
Let us see wherein the honour of labour lies.
I. Labour is noble when regarded as the service of God.
II. Labour is noble as it becomes a social service.
III. Labour is noble as it becomes an education of our highest nature.
Illustration
To show their sense of the dignity of work, the Chinese Emperor on one day of the year holds the plough, and the Empress works the loom; but we need no royalty to toy with the instruments of toil to persuade us to the glory of humble service; the Majesty of the skies has consecrated the workshop by His presence and glorified work by His example.
Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary
Jer 24:1. We have previously had some occasions of prophets who were “acting” as a means of emphasizing a subject under consideration. In this chapter we have a case where the Lord does some of it, or at least makes a literal use of the matter he wishes to impress upon Jeremiah. The case is one where some baskets were set before the temple because both represented coming events to which that, institution was related. The date of the vision of the baskets is given which is just after the king of Babylon had taken Jeconiah (Jehoiachin) from his throne in Jerusalem and carried him to Babylon; that event is recorded in 2 Kings 10-16.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Jer 24:1. The Lord showed me Probably in a vision; and behold two baskets of figs Such as used to be offered up for first-fruits; were set before the temple of the Lord Hebrew, , appointed, offered according to law, as Blaney renders the word; that is, they were brought and placed before the temple for an offering of first-fruits, as the law had directed. After Nebuchadnezzar had carried away captive Jeconiah Concerning which, see 2Ki 24:11-16. This was in the eighth year of Nebuchadnezzars reign. With the carpenters and smiths Or, the artificers and armorers, as Blaney translates the words; the former, , being a general name for any handicraftsman, whether working in wood or metal; but the latter, , from , to shut in, or enclose, meaning properly, the armorers who made the coats of mail which enclose the body. And it is reasonable to presume that the king of Babylon would be solicitous to carry all these off, with intent, not to employ them in his own service, but to prevent the Jews, who were left behind, from furnishing themselves with arms in case of a revolt.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Jer 24:2. One basket had very good figs. This was emblematical of the better sort of people, who were carried away under Jeconiah, and sent to Babylon for their good. It is much the same with the fruits imported from the east. Being packed a little before they are quite ripe, they improve on the voyage. The second basket of figs were utterly corrupt, descriptive of the people under Zedekiah, who instead of profiting by the first disaster, offended so much the more, and were despised as perished and worthless figs, and treated as double rebels. They were made a reproach and a proverb among distant nations.
Jer 24:6. I will set mine eyes upon them for good. They shall serve the Lord in Babylon, under the ministry of Ezekiel, and under the patronage of Daniel and his three princely colleagues. For them shall be reserved the treasures of righteousness, once more to see their native land, and rebuild the temple, and prepare the way for the kingdom of God, and the call of the gentiles.
REFLECTIONS.
We read in the second book of Kings, chap. 24., that Nebuchadnezzar, after a short siege, reduced Jerusalem to surrender at discretion. This was about thirteen years before the burning of the temple, and the final captivity. We read farther, that he carried away seven thousand soldiers, ten thousand captives, with the princes and the artists. Hence Jerusalem was left helpless and destitute; yet not hopeless, had the people who remained been faithful to God. Now, after this terrible stroke which divided Judah, Jeremiah had a vision of the two baskets of figs: the one exceedingly good, the other extremely bad. The good figs were fit for exportation; and they represented the calamitous state of the choice men carried to Babylon; a severe, but ultimately a happy stroke of providence. Hereby they were purged of idols; hereby they learned to know God, and to revere the prophets whom their fathers had stoned. And though for the present they lost their lands, they were prepared by adversity to return, and receive all the covenant mercies which the Lord is here pleased to promise them. As the good figs were carried to Babylon to improve in excellence, so the naughty figs were left behind to perish. Or if they fled into Egypt, as many did when the Chaldees approached, it was but to sustain greater calamities; for a refuge of wickedness is no defence. Hence we see, that the Lord often overrules the great and sore afflictions of men for good; and that he calls us to contemplate his providence, as he called the prophet in the temple to look at the basket of figs.
Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Jer 24:1-10. The Good and Bad Figs.The prophet sees (either in vision or actuality; see on Jer 1:11; Jer 1:13; cf. Amo 7:1, etc.) baskets of good and bad figs respectively; Yahweh tells him that the former represent the first body of exiles under Jeconiah (Jehoiachin, 2Ki 24:15 f.) who shall be restored, and the latter the people remaining under Zedekiah, together with those in Egypt. For Ezekiels similar judgment of the Palestinian and Babylonian sections of Judah, see Eze 17:11 ff; Eze 11:17 ff.; the opinion was justified, those deported having been the picked men of the nation; moreover, the future of Judaism, as matter of history, was committed to their charge.
Jer 24:2. For the firstripe fig as a delicacy, see Isa 28:4; Mic 7:1.
Jer 24:5. Chaldeans: i.e. Babylonians, as often; the Kaldu, SE. of Babylonia, became supreme there, c. 626 (pp. 5860).
Jer 24:8. Egypt: see 2Ki 23:34, for the exile thither of Jehoahaz. The Elephantine papyri (p. 79) show the existence of a Jewish community in Egypt, possessing a temple, before 525, possibly from the seventh century, cf. Deu 17:16.
Jer 24:9. Read mg.; omit for evil with LXX.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
24:1 The LORD showed me, and, behold, two {a} baskets of figs [were] set before the temple of the LORD, after Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon had carried away captive Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah, and the princes of Judah, with the craftsmen and smiths, from Jerusalem, and had brought them to Babylon.
(a) The good figs signified them that were gone into captivity and so saved their life, as in Jer 21:8 , and the bad figs them that remained, who were yet subject to the sword, famine and pestilence.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
This prophetic message came to Jeremiah after Nebuchadnezzar had taken King Jehoiachin (Coniah, Jeconiah, cf. Jer 22:24) and many of the other royal counselors, craftsmen, and smiths (or artisans) captive to Babylon in 597 B.C. Nebuchadnezzar was particularly interested in these types of people because he could employ them in his government and extensive building projects. The people taken captive at this time constituted the cream of the country’s leadership (cf. 2Ki 24:14-15).
"After the exile of Jehoiachin and the leading citizens of Judah (2Ki 24:10-17), those who remained seem to have been full of optimism for the future. The new king Zedekiah even became involved in a conspiracy with the surrounding peoples for further rebellion against Babylon (ch. 27). The false prophets spoke of a quick return of the exiles from Babylon (ch. 28). Jeremiah saw that the attitude of the king and his supporters in Judah was wrong. True, there would be a new day for Judah and the people of God, but the future lay with the exiles and not with Zedekiah and his supporters." [Note: Thompson, p. 507.]
Jeremiah saw two baskets of figs in the temple courtyard (cf. Jer 1:11-16; Amo 7:1-9; Amo 8:1-3). This is where people brought their offerings, so these two baskets may have contained two offerings, perhaps first-fruit offerings. It is impossible to determine if Jeremiah saw this scene in a vision or in actuality. As a message his account of his experience resembles a parable.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
CHAPTER VIII
BAD SHEPHERDS AND FALSE PROPHETS
Jer 23:1-40, Jer 24:1-10
“Woe unto the shepherds that destroy and scatter the sheep of My pasture!”- Jer 23:1
“Of what avail is straw instead of Grain?is not My word like fire, like a hammer that shattereth the rocks?”- Jer 23:28-29
THE captivity of Jehoiachin and the deportation of the flower of the people marked the opening of the last scene in the tragedy of Judah and of a new period in the ministry of Jeremiah. These events, together with the accession of Zedekiah as Nebuchadnezzars nominee, very largely altered the state of affairs in Jerusalem. And yet the two main features of the situation were unchanged-the people and the government persistently disregarded Jeremiahs exhortations. “Neither Zedekiah, nor his servants, nor the people of the land, did hearken unto the words of Jehovah which He spake by the prophet Jeremiah.” {Jer 37:2} They would not obey the will of Jehovah as to their life and worship; and they would not submit to Nebuchadnezzar. “Zedekiah did evil in the sight of Jehovah, according to all that Jehoiakim had done; and Zedekiah rebelled against the king of Babylon.” {2Ki 24:18-20}
It is remarkable that though Jeremiah consistently urged submission to Babylon, the various arrangements made by Nebuchadnezzar did very little to improve the prophets position or increase his influence. The Chaldean king may have seemed ungrateful only because he was ignorant of the services rendered to him-Jeremiah would not enter into direct and personal cooperation with the enemy of his country, even with him whom Jehovah had appointed to be the scourge of His disobedient people-but the Chaldean policy served Nebuchadnezzar as little as it profited Jeremiah. Jehoiakim, in spite of his forced submission, remained the able and determined foe of his suzerain, and Zedekiah, to the best of his very limited ability, followed his predecessors example.
Zedekiah was uncle of Jehoiachin, half-brother of Jehoiakim, and own brother to Jehoahaz. Possibly the two brothers owed their bias against Jeremiah and his teaching to their mother, Josiahs wife Hamutal, the daughter of another Jeremiah, the Libnite. Ezekiel thus describes the appointment of the new king: “The king of Babylon took one of the seed royal, and made a covenant with him; he also put him under an oath, and took away the mighty of the land: that the kingdom might be base, that it might not lift itself up, but that by keeping of his covenant it might stand.” {Eze 17:13-14} Apparently Nebuchadnezzar was careful to choose a feeble prince for his “base kingdom”; all that we read of Zedekiah suggests that he was weak and incapable. Henceforth the sovereign counted for little in the internal struggles of the tottering state. Josiah had firmly maintained the religious policy of Jeremiah, and Jehoiakim, as firmly, the opposite policy; but Zedekiah had neither the strength nor the firmness to enforce a consistent policy and to make one party permanently dominant. Jeremiah and his enemies were left to fight it out amongst themselves, so that now their antagonism grew more bitter and pronounced than during any other reign.
But whatever advantage the prophet might derive from the weakness of the sovereign was more than counterbalanced by the recent deportation. In selecting the captives Nebuchadnezzar had sought merely to weaken Judah by carrying away every one who would have been an element of strength to the “base kingdom.” Perhaps he rightly believed that neither the prudence of the wise nor the honour of the virtuous would overcome their patriotic hatred of subjection; weakness alone would guarantee the obedience of Judah. He forgot that even weakness is apt to be foolhardy when there is no immediate prospect of penalty.
One result of his policy was that the enemies and friends of Jeremiah were carried away indiscriminately; there was no attempt to leave behind those who might have counselled submission to Babylon as the acceptance of a Divine judgment, and thus have helped to keep Judah loyal to its foreign master. On the contrary Jeremiahs disciples were chiefly thoughtful and honourable men, and Nebuchadnezzars policy in taking away “the mighty of the land” bereft the prophet of many friends and supporters, amongst them his disciple Ezekiel and doubtless a large class of whom Daniel and his three friends might be taken as types. When Jeremiah characterises the captives as “good figs,” and those left behind as “bad figs,” (chapter 24) and the judgment is confirmed and amplified by Ezekiel, (chapters 7-11) we may be sure that most of the prophets adherents were in exile.
We have already had occasion to compare the changes in the religious policy of the Jewish government to the alternations of Protestant and Romanist sovereigns among the Tudors; but no Tudor was as feeble as Zedekiah. He may rather be compared to Charles IX of France, helpless between the Huguenots and the League. Only the Jewish factions were less numerous, less evenly balanced; and by the speedy advance of Nebuchadnezzar civil dissensions were merged in national ruin.
The opening years of the new reign passed in nominal allegiance to Babylon. Jeremiahs influence would be used to induce the vassal king to observe the covenant he had entered into and to be faithful to his oath to Nebuchadnezzar. On the other hand a crowd of “patriotic” prophets urged Zedekiah to set up once more the standard of national independence, to “come to the help of the Lord against the mighty.” Let us then briefly consider Jeremiahs polemic against the princes, prophets, and priests of his people. While Ezekiel in a celebrated chapter (chapter 8) denounces the idolatry of the princes, priests, and women of Judah, their worship of creeping things and abominable beasts, their weeping for Tammuz, their adoration of the sun, Jeremiah is chiefly concerned with the perverse policy of the government and the support it receives from priests and prophets, who profess to speak in the name of Jehovah. Jeremiah does not utter against Zedekiah any formal judgment like those on his three predecessors. Perhaps the prophet did not regard this impotent sovereign as the responsible representative of the state, and when the long-expected catastrophe at last befell the doomed people, neither Zedekiah nor his doings distracted mens attention from their own personal sufferings and patriotic regrets. At the point where a paragraph on Zedekiah would naturally have followed that on Jehoiachin, we have by way of summary and conclusion to the previous sections a brief denunciation of the shepherds of Israel.
“Woe unto die shepherds that destroy and scatter the sheep of My Pasture!
Ye have scattered My flock, and driven them away, and have not cared for them; behold, I will visit upon you the evil of your doings.”
These “shepherds” are primarily the kings, Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim, and Jehoiachin, who have been condemned by name in the previous chapter, together with the unhappy Zedekiah, who is too insignificant to be mentioned. But the term shepherds will also include the ruling and influential classes of which the king was the leading representative.
The image is a familiar one in the Old Testament and is found in the oldest literature of Israel, {Gen 49:24} J. from older source. {Mic 5:5} but the denunciation of the rulers of Judah as unfaithful shepherds is characteristic of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and one of the prophecies appended to the Book of Zechariah. (Chapters 9-11, Zec 13:7-9.) Eze 34:1-31 expands this figure and enforces its lessons:-
“Woe unto the shepherds of Israel that do feed themselves! Should not the shepherds feed the sheep? Ye eat the fat, and ye clothe you with the wool. Ye kill the fatlings: but ye feed not the sheep. The diseased have ye not strengthened, Neither have ye healed the sick, Neither have ye bound up the bruised, Neither have ye brought back again that which was driven away, Neither have ye sought for that which was lost, But your rule over them has been harsh and violent, And for want of a shepherd they were scattered, And became food for every beast of the field.” {Eze 34:2-3}
So in Zec 9:1-17, etc., Jehovahs anger is kindled against the shepherds, because they do not pity His flock. {Zec 10:3; Zec 11:5} Elsewhere {Jer 25:34-38} Jeremiah speaks of the kings of all nations as shepherds, and pronounces against them also a like doom. All these passages illustrate the concern of the prophets for good government. They were neither Pharisees nor formalists; their religious ideals were broad and wholesome. Doubtless the elect remnant will endure through all conditions of society; but the Kingdom of God was not meant to be a pure Church in a rotten state. This present evil world is no manure heap to fatten the growth of holiness: it is rather a mass for the saints to leaven.
Both Jeremiah and Ezekiel turn from the unfaithful shepherds whose “hungry sheep look up and are not fed” to the true King of Israel, the “Shepherd of Israel that led Joseph like a flock, and dwelt between the Cherubim.” In the days of the Restoration He will raise up faithful shepherds, and over them a righteous Branch, the real Jehovah Zidqenu, instead of the sapless twig who disgraced the name “Zedekiah.” Similarly Ezekiel promises that God will set up one shepherd over His people, “even My servant David.” The pastoral care of Jehovah for His people is most tenderly and beautifully set forth in the twenty-third Psalm. Our Lord, the root and the offspring of David, claims to be the fulfilment of ancient prophecy when He calls Himself “the Good Shepherd.” The words of Christ and of the Psalmist receive new force and fuller meaning when we contrast their pictures of the true Shepherd with the portraits of the Jewish kings drawn by the prophets. Moreover the history of this metaphor warns us against ignoring the organic life of the Christian society, the Church, in our concern for the spiritual life of the individual. As Sir Thomas More said, in applying this figure to Henry VIII, “Of the multitude of sheep cometh the name of a shepherd.” A shepherd implies not merely a sheep, but a flock; His relation to each member is tender and personal, but He bestows blessings and requires service in fellowship with the Family of God.
By a natural sequence the denunciation of the unfaithful shepherds is followed by a similar utterance “concerning the prophets.” It is true that the prophets are not spoken of as shepherds; and Miltons use of the figure in “Lycidas” suggests the New Testament rather than the Old. Yet the prophets had a large share in guiding the destinies of Israel in politics as well as in religion, and having passed sentence on the shepherds-the kings and princes-Jeremiah turns to the ecclesiastics, chiefly, as the heading implies, to the prophets. The priests indeed do not escape, but Jeremiah seems to feel that they are adequately dealt with in two or three casual references. We use the term “ecclesiastics” advisedly; the prophets were now a large professional class, more important and even more clerical than the priests. The prophets and priests together were the clergy of Israel. They claimed to be devoted servants of Jehovah, and for the most part the claim was made in all sincerity; but they misunderstood His character, and mistook for Divine inspiration the suggestions of their own prejudice and self-will.
Jeremiahs indictment against them has various counts. He accuses them of speaking without authority, and also of time serving, plagiarism, and cant.
First, then, as to their unauthorised utterances: Jeremiah finds them guilty of an unholy license in prophesying, a distorted caricature of that “liberty of prophesying” which is the prerogative of Gods accredited ambassadors.
“Hearken not unto the words of the prophets that prophesy unto you.
They make fools of you:
The visions which they declare are from their own hearts,
And not from the mouth of Jehovah.
Who hath stood in the council of Jehovah,
To perceive and hear His word?
Who hath marked His word and heard it?
I sent not the prophets-yet they ran;
I spake not unto them-yet they prophesied.”
The evils which Jeremiah describes are such as will always be found in any large professional class. To use modern terms-in the Church, as in every profession, there will be men who are not qualified for the vocation which they follow. They are indeed not called to their vocation; they “follow,” but do not overtake it. They are not sent of God, yet they run; they have no Divine message, yet they preach. They have never stood in the council of Jehovah; they might perhaps have gathered up scraps of the Kings purposes from His true councillors; but when they had opportunity they neither “marked nor heard”; and yet they discourse concerning heavenly things with much importance and assurance. But their inspiration, at its best, has no deeper or richer source than their own shallow selves; their visions are the mere product of their own imaginations. Strangers to the true fellowship, their spirit is not “a well of water springing up unto eternal life,” but a stagnant pool. And, unless the judgment and mercy of God intervene, that pool will in the end be fed from a fountain whose bitter waters are earthly, sensual, devilish.
We are always reluctant to speak of ancient prophecy or modern preaching as a “profession.” We may gladly dispense with the word, if we do not thereby ignore the truth which it inaccurately expresses. Men lived by prophecy, as, with Apostolic sanction, men live by “the gospel.” They were expected, as ministers are now, though in a less degree, to justify their claims to an income and an official status, by discharging religious functions so as to secure the approval of the people or the authorities. Then, as now, the prophets reputation, influence, and social standing, probably even his income, depended upon the amount of visible success that he could achieve.
In view of such facts, it is futile to ask men of the world not to speak of the clerical life as a profession. They discern no ethical difference between a curates dreams of a bishopric and the aspirations of a junior barrister to the woolsack. Probably a refusal to recognise the element common to the ministry with law, medicine, and other professions, injures both the Church and its servants. One peculiar difficulty and most insidious temptation of the Christian ministry consists in its mingled resemblances to and differences from the other professions. The minister has to work under similar worldly conditions, and yet to control those conditions by the indwelling power of the Spirit. He has to “run,” it may be twice or even three times a week, whether he be sent or no: how can he always preach only that which God has taught him? He is consciously dependent upon the exercise of his memory, his intellect, his fancy: how can he avoid speaking “the visions of his own heart”? The Church can never allow its ministers to regard themselves as mere professional teachers and lecturers, and yet if they claim to be more, must they not often fall under Jeremiahs condemnation?
It is one of those practical dilemmas which delight casuists and distress honest and earnest servants of God. In the early Christian centuries similar difficulties peopled the Egyptian and Syrian deserts with ascetics, who had given up the world as a hopeless riddle. A full discussion of the problem would lead us too far away from the exposition of Jeremiah and we will only venture to make two suggestions.
The necessity, which most ministers are under, of “living by the gospel,” may promote their own spiritual life and add to their usefulness. It corrects and reduces spiritual pride, and helps them to understand and sympathise with their lay brethren, most of whom are subject to a similar trial.
Secondly, as a minister feels the ceaseless pressure of strong temptation to speak from and live for himself-his lower, egotistic self-he will be correspondingly driven to a more entire and persistent surrender to God. The infinite fulness and variety of Revelation is expressed by the manifold gifts and experience of the prophets. If only the prophet be surrendered to the Spirit, then what is most characteristic of himself may become the most forcible expression of his message. His constant prayer will be that he may have the childs heart and may never resist the Holy Ghost, that no personal interest or prejudice, no bias of training or tradition or current opinion, may dull his hearing when he stands in the council of the Lord, or betray him into uttering for Christs gospel the suggestions of his own self-will or the mere watchwords of his ecclesiastical faction.
But to return to the ecclesiastics who had stirred Jeremiahs wrath. The professional prophets naturally adapted their words to the itching ears of their clients. They were not only officious, but also time serving. Had they been true prophets, they would have dealt faithfully with Judah; they would have sought to convince the people of sin, and to lead them to repentance; they would thus have given them yet another opportunity of salvation.
“If they had stood in My council,
They would have caused My people to hear My words;
They would have turned them from their evil way,
And from the evil of their doings.”
But now:-
“They walk in lies and strengthen the hands of evildoers,
That no one may turn away from his sin.
They say continually unto them that despise the word of Jehovah,
Ye shall have peace;
And unto every one that walketh in the stubbornness of his heart they say,
No evil shall come upon you.”
Unfortunately, when prophecy becomes professional in the lowest sense of the word, it is governed by commercial principles. A sufficiently imperious demand calls forth an abundant supply. A sovereign can “tune the pulpits”; and a ruling race can obtain from its clergy formal ecclesiastical sanction for such “domestic institutions” as slavery. When evildoers grow numerous and powerful, there will always be prophets to strengthen their hands and encourage them not to turn away from their sin. But to give the lie to these false prophets God sends Jeremiahs, who are often branded as heretics and schismatics, turbulent fellows who turn the world upside down.
The self-important, self-seeking spirit leads further to the sin of plagiarism:-
“Therefore I am against the prophets, is the utterance of Jehovah,
Who steal My word from one another.”
The sin of plagiarism is impossible to the true prophet, partly because there are no rights of private property in the word of Jehovah. The Old Testament writers make free use of the works of their predecessors. For instance, Isa 2:2-4 is almost identical with Mic 4:1-3; yet neither author acknowledges his indebtedness to the other or to any third prophet. Uriah ben Shemaiah prophesied acording to all the words of Jeremiah, {Jer 26:20} who himself owes much to Hosea, whom he never mentions. Yet he was not conscious of stealing from his predecessor, and he would have brought no such charge against Isaiah or Micah or Uriah. In the New Testament 2 Peter and Jude have so much in common that one must have used the other without acknowledgment. Yet the Church has not, on that ground, excluded either Epistle from the Canon. In the goodly fellowship of the prophets and the glorious company of the apostles no man says that the things which he utters are his own. But the mere hireling has no part in the spiritual communism wherein each may possess all things because he claims nothing. When a prophet ceases to be the messenger of God, and sinks into the mercenary purveyor of his own clever sayings and brilliant fancies, then he is tempted to become a clerical Autolycus, “a snapper up of unconsidered trifles.” Modern ideas furnish a curious parallel to Jeremiahs indifference to the borrowings of the true prophet, and his scorn of the literary pilferings of the false. We hear only too often of stolen sermons, but no one complains of plagiarism in prayers. Doubtless among these false prophets charges of plagiarism were bandied to and fro with much personal acrimony. But it is interesting to notice that Jeremiah is not denouncing an injury done to himself; he does not accuse them of thieving from him, but from one another. Probably assurance and lust of praise and power would have overcome any awe they felt for Jeremiah. He was only free from their depredations, because-from their point of view-his words were not worth stealing. There was nothing to be gained by repeating his stern denunciations, and even his promises were not exactly suited to the popular taste.
These prophets were prepared to cater for the average religious appetite in the most approved fashion-in other words, they were masters of cant. Their office had been consecrated by the work of true men of God like Elijah and Isaiah. They themselves claimed to stand in the genuine prophetic succession, and to inherit the reverence felt for their great predecessors, quoting their inspired utterances and adopting their weighty phrases. As Jeremiahs contemporaries listened to one of their favourite orators, they were soothed by his assurances of Divine favour and protection, and their confidence in the speaker was confirmed by the frequent sound of familiar formulae in his unctuous sentences. These had the true ring; they were redolent of sound doctrine, of what popular tradition regarded as orthodox.
The solemn attestation NEUM YAHWE, “It is the utterance of Jehovah,” is continually appended to prophecies, almost as if it were the sign manual of the Almighty. Isaiah and other prophets frequently use the term MASSA (A.V., R.V., “burden”) as a title, especially for prophecies concerning neighbouring nations. The ancient records loved to tell how Jehovah revealed Himself to the patriarchs in dreams. Jeremiahs rivals included dreams in their clerical apparatus:-
“Behold, I am against them that prophesy lying dreams-Neum Yahwe-
And tell them, and lead astray My people
By their lies and their rodomontade;
It was not I who sent or commanded them,
Neither shall they profit this people at all, Neum Yahwe.”
These prophets “thought to cause the Lords people to forget His name, as their fathers forgot His name for Baal, by their dreams which they told one another.”
Moreover they could glibly repeat the sacred phrases as part of their professional jargon:-
“Behold, I am against the prophets,
It is the utterance of Jehovah,
That use their tongues
To utter utterances”
“To utter utterances”-the prophets uttered them, not Jehovah. These sham oracles were due to no Diviner source than the imagination of foolish hearts. But for Jeremiahs grim earnestness, the last clause would be almost blasphemous. It is virtually a caricature of the most solemn formula of ancient Hebrew religion. But this was really degraded when it was used to obtain credence for the lies which men prophesied out of the deceit of their own heart. Jeremiahs seeming irreverence was the most forcible way of bringing this home to his hearers. There are profanations of the most sacred things which can scarcely be spoken of without an apparent breach of the Third Commandment. The most awful taking in vain of the name of the Lord God is not heard among the publicans and sinners, but in pulpits and on the platforms of religious meetings.
But these prophets and their clients had a special fondness for the phrase “The burden of Jehovah,” and their unctuous use of it most especially provoked Jeremiahs indignation:-
“When this people priest, or prophet shall ask thee,
What is the burden of Jehovah?
Then say unto them, Ye are the burden.
But I will cast you off, Neum Yahwe.
If priest or prophet or people shall say,
The burden of Jehovah, I will punish that man and his house.”
“And ye shall say to one another,
What hath Jehovah answered? and,
What hath Jehovah spoken?
And ye shall no more make mention of the burden of Jehovah:
For (if ye do) mens words shall become a burden to themselves.
Thus shall ye inquire of a prophet,
What hath Jehovah answered thee?
What hath Jehovah spoken unto thee?
But if ye say, The burden of Jehovah,
Thus saith Jehovah: Because ye say this word, The burden of Jehovah.
When I have sent unto you the command,
Ye shall not say, The burden of Jehovah,
Therefore I will assuredly take you up,
And will cast away from before Me both you
And the city which I gave to you and to your fathers.
I will bring upon you everlasting reproach
And everlasting shame, that shall not be forgotten.”
Jeremiahs insistence and vehemence speak for themselves. Their moral is obvious, though for the most part unheeded. The most solemn formulae, hallowed by ancient and sacred associations, used by inspired teachers as the vehicle of revealed truths, may be debased till they become the very legend of Antichrist, blazoned on the Vexilla Regis Inferni. They are like a motto of one of Charles Paladins flaunted by his unworthy descendants to give distinction to cruelty and vice. The Churchs line of march is strewn with such dishonoured relics of her noblest champions. Even our Lords own words have not escaped. There is a fashion of discoursing upon “the gospel” which almost tempts reverent Christians to wish they might never hear that word again. Neither is this debasing of the moral currency confined to religious phrases; almost every political and social watchword has been similarly abused. One of the vilest tyrannies the world has ever seen-the Reign of Terror-claimed to be an incarnation of “Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity.”
Yet the Bible, with that marvellous catholicity which lifts it so high above the level of all other religious literature, not only records Jeremiahs prohibition to use the term “Burden,” but also tells us that centuries later Malachi could still speak of “the burden of the word of Jehovah.” A great phrase that has been discredited by misuse may yet recover itself; the tarnished and dishonoured sword of faith may be baptised and burnished anew, and flame in the forefront of the holy war.
Jeremiah does not stand alone in his unfavourable estimate of the professional prophets of Judah; a similar depreciation seems to be implied by the words of Amos: “I am neither a prophet nor of the sons of prophets.” One of the unknown authors whose writings have been included in the Book of Zechariah takes up the teaching of Amos and Jeremiah and carries it a stage further:-
“In that day (it is the utterance of Jehovah Sabaoth) I will cut off the names of the idols from the land,
They shall not be remembered any more;
Also the prophets and the spirit of uncleanness
Will I expel from the land.
When any shall yet prophesy, His father and mother that begat him shall say unto him,
Thou shalt not live, for thou speakest lies in the name of Jehovah”:
“And his father and mother that begat him shall
Thrust him through when he prophesieth.
In that day every prophet when he prophesieth
Shall be ashamed of his vision;
Neither shall any wear a hairy mantle to deceive:
He shall say, I am no prophet;
I am a tiller of the ground,
I was sold for a slave in my youth.”
No man with any self-respect would allow his fellows to dub him prophet; slave was a less humiliating name. No family would endure the disgrace of having a member who belonged to this despised caste; parents would rather put their son to death than see him a prophet. To such extremities may the spirit of time serving and cant reduce a national clergy. We are reminded of Latimers words in his famous sermon to Convocation in 1536:
“All good men in all places accuse your avarice, your exactions, your tyranny. I commanded you that ye should feed my sheep, and ye earnestly feed yourselves from day to day, wallowing in delights and idleness. I commanded you to teach my law; you teach your own traditions, and seek your own glory.”
Over against their fluent and unctuous cant Jeremiah sets the terrible reality of his Divine message. Compared to this, their sayings are like chaff to the wheat; nay, this is too tame a figure-Jehovahs word is like fire, like a hammer that shatters rocks. He says of himself:-
“My heart within me is broken; all my bones shake:
I am like a drunken man, like a man whom wine hath overcome,
Because of Jehovah and His holy words.”
Thus we have in chapter 23, a full and formal statement of the controversy between Jeremiah and his brother prophets. On the one hand, self-seeking and self-assurance winning popularity by orthodox phrases, traditional doctrine, and the prophesying of smooth things; on the other hand, a man to whom the word of the Lord was like a fire in his bones, who had surrendered prejudice and predilection that he might himself become a hammer to shatter the Lords enemies, a man through whom God wrought so mightily that he himself reeled and staggered with the blows of which he was the instrument.
The relation of the two parties was not unlike that of St. Paul and his Corinthian adversaries: the prophet, like the Apostle, spoke “in demonstration of the Spirit of power”; he considered “not the word of them which are puffed up, but the power. For the kingdom of God is not in word, but in power.” In our next chapter we shall see the practical working of this antagonism which we have here set forth.