Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Jeremiah 31:20
[Is] Ephraim my dear son? [is he] a pleasant child? for since I spoke against him, I do earnestly remember him still: therefore my bowels are troubled for him; I will surely have mercy upon him, saith the LORD.
20. God is represented as the speaker. He asks Himself whether Ephraim is still beloved by Him. The answer is contained in the words that follow. As often as He makes mention of him, His affection towards him is stirred. The picture is of course adapted to human modes of thought and feeling, and represents God as acting in the same way in which a man would, when thinking upon the ingratitude and rebellion of a son, whom he nevertheless cannot but continue to love.
pleasant child ] lit. a child of delights, a beloved child.
as often as I speak against him ] or, as often as I speak of him.
my bowels are troubled ] lit. as mg. sound. The meaning is, my heart yearns. See on Jer 4:19.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Verse 20. Is Ephraim my dear son?] It is impossible to conceive any thing more tenderly affectionate than this. Let us consider the whole account. The ten tribes, called here Ephraim, for the reason before alleged, are represented as acknowledging their sins. I have heard Ephraim bemoaning himself; and in his lamentation he says,
1. Thou hast chastised me.
2. Though he at first rebelled against the chastisement, yet at last he submitted and acknowledged his offences.
3. He turned from all his offenses; he was converted.
4. After his conversion, ( shubi,) he repented; after conviction came contrition, as before stated.
5. Being in a state of godly sorrow, he was instructed, hivvadei, he got a thorough knowledge of the desperate wickedness of his heart and life.
6. Having received this instruction, he was filled with excessive grief; which is signified here by smiting on his thigh. See above.
7. He finds that from his youth up he had been sinning against God; and although his youthful sins had long passed from his memory, yet the light of God brought them back, and he was ashamed and confounded at the sight of them.
8. In this state of confusion and distress God sees him; and, commiserating his state, thus speaks: –
1. Is Ephraim my dear son? Bad as he is in his own sight, and in the sight of my justice, he is now a penitent, and to me is precious.
2. However loathsome and disfigured he may be with sin and sorrow, he is to me a pleasant child – a child of delights; one in whose conversion I delight, and my angels rejoice.
3. I did speak against him: ki middey dabberi bo, for “from the abundance of my speaking in him;” accusing, threatening, promising, exhorting, encouraging; “I do still earnestly remember him.” God has taken much pains with him, and is unwilling to give him up; but now that he repents, he has not received the grace of God utterly in vain.
4. God feels a yearning desire towards him; hamu meai lo, “my bowels are agitated for him.” I feel nothing towards him but pity and love. When a sinner turns to God, God ceases to be angry with him.
5. God expresses his determination to save him; rachem arachamennu, “I will be affectionately merciful to him, with tender mercy, saith the Lord.” He shall find that I treat him as a father does a returning prodigal son. So every penitent is sure to find mercy at the hand of God.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Interpreters run into a very great variety in their explications of this text; that which seemeth to be the cause of it is, that, amongst the Hebrews, affirmative interrogations are notes of the vehement denial of the thing as to which the question is propounded, which leads some to interpret these words into a denial that Ephraim was his
dear son, or a
pleasant child, and denying the truth of his professed repentance. But certainly this is quite contrary to the whole scope of the prophet. The reverend author of the English Annotations hath observed, that the affirmative interrogation sometimes in Scripture doth imply a negative, for the negative particle is suppressed, and is put for so that, Is Ephraim my dear son? here, is the same with, Is not Ephraim my dear son? He gives for instances 1Sa 2:27,28, where did I? plainly is the same with did I not? So Job 20:4, where we have supplied not, Knowest thou not, &c.? So Jer 3:6, where, Hast thou seen? is the same with, Hast thou not seen? So Eze 20:30; Amo 6:2. So that though the particle prefixed be an affirmative particle, yet it is often put for and signifieth negatively, the negative being suppressed and to be understood. I have also sometimes thought that even here it may be fairly enough interpreted, Is Ephraim now become my dear son? Is he a pleasant child? Is his heart turned? So is mine. For since I spake against him, or with him, or of him, , Ar. Montanus translateth it, from the sufficiency of my speaking with him; the reason of the difference is, signifies to suffice, and it signifies time. I see no reason to vary from our translation, since, or from the time, as the same particle signifieth, 1Sa 18:30; 1Ki 14:28; Isa 28:19, I spake against him by my threatenings, I do remember him with the affection and compassion of a father.
My bowels are troubled for him, is as much as, I have pitied him; as the bowels of parents are turned and troubled for their children in calamities; therefore, saith God, I will certainly show him favour.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
20. Is Ephraim my dear son?c.The question implies that a negative answer was to be expected.Who would have thought that one so undutiful to His heavenly Fatheras Ephraim had been should still be regarded by God as a “pleasantchild?” Certainly he was not so in respect to his sin.But by virtue of God’s “everlasting love” (Jer31:3) on Ephraim’s being “turned” to God, he wasimmediately welcomed as God’s “dear son.” This verse setsforth God’s readiness to welcome the penitent (Jer 31:18Jer 31:19), anticipating hisreturn with prevenient grace and love. Compare Lu15:20: “When he was yet a great way off, his fathersaw him and had compassion,” c.
spake againstthreatenedhim for his idolatry.
rememberwith favor andconcern, as in Gen 8:1 Gen 30:22.
bowels . . . troubled forhim (Deu 32:36; Isa 63:15;Hos 11:8) namely, with theyearnings of compassionate love. The “bowels” include theregion of the heart, the seat of the affections.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
[Is] Ephraim my dear son?…. Questions put in this form, in the Hebrew language, usually more vehemently deny; and then the sense must be, Ephraim is not my dear son: and agreeably to this all the following clauses must be interpreted; which seems quite contrary to the scope and design of the context: wherefore it seems better to render the words thus, “[Is not] Ephraim my dear son?” w yes, he is; and so is everyone that stands in the relation of children to the Lord, they are all of them his dear children, Eph 5:1; his beloved ones, loved by him with an everlasting love; they are “precious” to him, as the word used signifies; they are dear to him as the apple of his eye; they are highly esteemed of by him; they are his jewels and peculiar treasure: how precious they are to him appears by his parting with his own most precious Son for their sakes; by sympathizing with them under all their afflictions; by providing so largely and liberally for them; by feeding them with the most delicious food; by clothing them with the robe of righteousness, and garments of salvation; by protecting them with a guard of angels, and preparing an incorruptible inheritance for them;
[is he] a pleasant child? or, “is he [not] a child of delights” x? verily he is: and so are all the children of God by adopting grace; they are pleasant to him for delights; they are little images of himself, in whom he is well pleased; they are lovely and comely in his sight, through the perfect comeliness of Christ, that is put upon them; their speech is comely and pleasant to him; their prayer is his delight; and especially he loves to hear them cry “Abba”, Father, though they do but lisp it out; just as parents take pleasure in their children, which are images of themselves, and comely in their view; particularly when they begin to talk, and can just lisp out their names. Moreover, as the little actions of children, though there may be a great deal of childishness in them, are pleasing to their parents, so are the acts of grace and duty well pleasing to God; those of faith, hope, fear, and love, and the several duties of religion, though but imperfectly performed: and their nearness to him, and communion with him, which he indulges them with, show his delight in them; he kisses them with the kisses of his mouth; he dandles them on his knee, and comforts them, as one whom his mother comforts; he carries them in his bosom; he takes them by the hand, and teaches them to go, and lays meat before them;
for since I spake against him; in his word, and by his providences; by way of complaint, as a peevish, perverse, backsliding, and rebellious child; by way of threatening with the rod, in case of impenitence and obstinacy; by way of rebuke, though in love, for many misdemeanors and offences; and in a providential, though not in a judicial way: God has nothing against his children in a judicial way, all their sins being stoned for by Christ; but in a providential way he has many things against them for their correction and chastisement; at least which seem to be against them, though they all work together for their good. However, as he here says,
I do earnestly remember him still; or, “in remembering I will” or “do remember him still” y; constantly as well as earnestly; God never forgets his children, though they and others may think he does; see
Isa 49:14; he forgets their sins, but not their persons; he is ever mindful of his covenant with them, and remembers his promises to them; he remembers both his love to them, and their love to him; yea, he remembers their thoughts of him, their words concerning him, and their works done in his name, and to his glory; his dear children are had in everlasting remembrance, and are never forgotten by him;
therefore my bowels are troubled for him; sound for him, or yearn toward him; so that he did not do what he threatened, or was seemingly about to do. The phrase is expressive of great relentings, strong and melting pity in his heart, towards his his dear and delightful children; see Ho 11:8;
I will surely have mercy on him, saith the Lord; or show mercy to him; as the Lord does to his children, by receiving them graciously upon, their return; by manifesting and applying pardoning grace; by bestowing fresh mercies and favours on them; and by bringing them safe to eternal glory and happiness.
w “nonne filius pretiosus mihi?” Pagninus, Montanus. x “nonne natus delicarum?” Montanus; “unum natus delicarum?” Schmidt. y “recordando recordabor ejus iterum”, Schmidt; so Pagninus, Montanus, Calvin; “recordor”, Junius & Tremellius, Piscator.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
God here complains of the Israelites, because he had produced so little an effect on them by his great goodness: for the adoption with which he had favored them was an immense benefit;but by their ingratitude they had in a manner annihilated that favor. God then here asks, what sort of people the Israelites had been. But a question makes a thing stronger; for he who asks a question shews that he speaks not of a thing uncertain, but the knowledge of which is so conspicuous that it cannot be denied. It is then the same as though he had said, that Ephraim was unworthy of any honor or esteem, and that he was no object of delight. We now then perceive what God means in the beginning of the verse, even that the people were unworthy of any mercy, because they had abolished, as far as they could, the favor of adoption: for by the word son, he refers to that special favor, the covenant which he had made with the seed of Abraham.
In the first place, he calls him a son, בן, ben, and then a child, ילד, ilad, which refers to his birth: but by these two names, God here intimates that they were to him a peculiar people, as he everywhere calls those his sons who were the descendants of Abraham; for circumcision was to them a symbol and pledge of the covenant; and so the time is a circumstance that ought to be noticed, because God does not shew here what the Israelites were before he had chosen them to be his people. But as I have already said, he charges them with ingratitude, since the time they had been adopted by him as his children. He then calls them sons, or children, by way of concession, and with regard to their adoption, as Jerusalem was called the holy city, because it was God’s habitation. There is then a concession as to the name given to them. But he afterwards adds, that this son was not precious, that is, worthy of any honor, and that he was not an object of delight; as though he had said, that he was of a perverse and wicked disposition, so that he could not take any delight in him, as by another simile he complains in Jer 2:21, as we have seen, that the Jews were become bitter to him,
“
My vine have I planted thee; why then art thou turned to me into bitterness?”
So also now he says, that the Israelites were indeed his sons, but that they were evil-disposed sons, disobedient sons, sons who only vexed their father, who wounded his feelings, who filled him with sorrow.
He then adds, For from the time I spake in him, so it is literally. It is commonly agreed that these words are to be read with those which follow. “For from what time I spake;” and thus the relative אשר, asher, is to be understood; but literally it is, “For from the time I spake in him,” בו, bu, or, as some render it, “concerning him;” but it may suitably be rendered “with him.” Then they read, in connection with this, Remembering I will yet remember him
This passage, on account of its brevity, is obscure, and therefore ambiguous; but the common opinion is this, — that though Ephraim was not a child of delight, yet God would be merciful towards him; and thus they take כי ki, in an adversative sense, “notwithstanding,” or yet: “Is Ephraim a precious son? Is he a child of delight? yet remembering I will still remember him;” as though he had said, that he would not be prevented by the people’s wickedness, for he would still pity him according to his infinite goodness, or that his goodness would surpass their wickedness. This sense is plausible; yet it may be doubted whether this be the meaning. Some read the words, “From the time I spake concerning him,” that is, while I now speak of him: but I know not whether this explanation can stand. I am therefore inclined to the opinion of those who refer this to threatenings, even that from the time God had spoken against Israel, he was yet ready to be reconciled to them, according to what is said by the Prophet Habakkuk,
“
In wrath wilt thou remember mercy.” (Hab 3:2)
But this ought to be rather understood of the covenant, as though God had said, “From the time I spake with him, I will remember him;” that is, that he might shew the reason why he dealt so mercifully with the people. For as their wickedness and corruption were so great, a doubt might arise, “Can God still patiently endure them?” Here then our attention is called back to the fountain of gratuitous mercy, even that God would forgive his people, because he had once chosen them.
But still when I narrowly weigh everything, I think the meaning of the Prophet to be different. I therefore separate the two clauses, “From the time I spake with him,” and, “Remembering I will yet remember him;” for the sentence is harsh, when we say, “From the time I spake with him,” and then add, “I will yet remember him.” But the exposition, the most suitable in my opinion, is this, “From the time I spake with him,” (for ב means with) that is, I desisted not continually to exhort him to repentance, and yet I effected nothing; notwithstanding I will still remember him; that is, “Though I have found this people very perverse, and though they have long given many proofs of their obstinacy, for I have spoken to them for a long time, nevertheless I will still remember them.” For the people deserved eternal ruin who had been so often warned; but God declares that he would still be propitious to them, though he had spoken to them for a time, that is, a long time; for he had not ceased for a long space of time to exhort that people by his Prophets, but with no success. So then I read the words, “From the time I spake with him,” separately from what follows, and connect them with the former clauses, “Is he a precious son? Is he a child of delight?” For he complains that they had been rebellious and untameable, not only from the time he had only once addressed them and sought to do them good, but for several ages. He therefore declares that the people themselves had no hope, because they had been intractable for a long time. He yet adds, though it was so, Remembering I will still remember him (40)
And he enhances the benefit of this reconciliation, and says, Therefore sounded have my bowels for him, (41) pitying I will pity him Here God ascribes to himself human feelings; for the bowels are moved and make a noise under immoderate grief; and we sigh and groan deeply, when we are pressed down by great sorrow. So also when God expresses the feelings of a tender father, he says that his bowels made a noise, because he wished to receive his people again into favor. This, indeed, does not properly belong to God; but as he could not otherwise express the greatness of his love towards us, he thus speaks in condescension to our capacities. It follows —
(40) This verse has been variously explained. The two questions are taken by Calvin and by others as strong negatives: but this is not always the ease; both ה and אם are often taken as strong affirmatives. See Jer 3:6; 1Sa 2:27; Eze 20:30; Amo 6:2. This sense is what the context requires; for this verse is an answer to penitent Ephraim. Neither the Sept., nor the Vulg., nor the Syr., nor the Targ. retain the interrogatory form: but they retain the meaning, if the questions be taken affirmatively, not otherwise. The next words I render thus, —
For since my words are in him, Remembering I will still remember him.
This is according to the Sept., and the general drift of the Targ. The Syr. gives another meaning, —
For at the time when I speak against him, Remembering I still remember him.
There are no other versions which come so near to the original. — Ed.
(41) The word for “sounded,” means to tumultuate, to be agitated, to be greatly moved or disturbed. It is rendered by the Vulg., “are troubled — conturbata;” by the Syr. and Targ., “are moved.” It may be rendered “trouble” here. See Isa 16:1 l, where the action of the bowels is compared to the harp, not surely to its sound, but to the vibration of its cords. See also Isa 63:15. — Ed.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(20) Is Ephraim my dear son?Literally, a child of delighti.e., fondled and caressed.
Is he a pleasant child?We have to ask whether an affirmative or negative answer is implied to these questions. On the former view, the words express the yearning of a fathers heart towards the son whom he still loves in spite of all his faults. Jehovah wonders, as it were, at his affection for one who has been so rebellious. On the latter, they give prominence to the faults as having deprived him of all claim to love, even though the fathers heart yearned towards the prodigal in pity. The former gives, beyond all doubt, the best meaning. In every word, whether of reproof or invitation, there was implied a loving remembrance.
For since I spake against him.Better, As often as I speak to him. The preposition can hardly have the meaning of against, for which Jeremiah uses different words, and implies rather (as in the communed with of 1Sa. 25:39; When she shall be spoken for, Song Son. 8:8)speaking with a view to win. By some commentators (Ewald) the word for speak is rendered smite, but the ordinary rendering gives an adequate meaning. The original gives both for earnestly remember and surely have mercy the Hebrew idiom of reduplicationRemembering, I remember; pitying, I pity. The thought expressed is that Jehovah could not bring himself to utter the sentence of rejection. His love turned to the penitent who turned to Him. We have something like a foreshadowing of the love of the father of the prodigal in Luk. 15:20.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
Jer 31:20. Is Ephraim my dear son? &c. Some render this passage, Is not Ephraim my dear son? Is he not a delightful child? Verily, the oftener I speak of him, I shall still remember him more and more: therefore my bowels yearn upon or towards him, &c. Houbigant, however, defends the common reading; he thinks that God means to deny that Ephraim was his son, in order to shew him that his bowels were moved towards him solely through free mercy, and not on account of any merit or deservings of this people.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Jer 31:20
Ver. 20. Is Ephraim a dear son? is he a pleasant child? ] q.d., Ay sure he is; and never more dear and pleasant than when thus beblubbered; like as some faces appear most oriently beautiful when they are most enstamped with sorrow. Heb., Is he a child of delight? q.d., He may seem to be otherwise by my hard dealing with him; but so he is assuredly – “Behold, he whom thou lovest is sick.” Joh 11:3
For since I spake against him, I do earnestly remember him still.
Therefore my bowels are troubled for him.
a A, K . – Herod.
child = a young child. Hebrew. yalad.
My bowels are troubled. Figure of speech Anthropopatheia. Reference to Pentateuch (Deu 32:36). Compare Duke Jer 15:20.
Is Ephraim: Jer 31:9, Jer 3:19, Psa 103:13, Pro 3:12, Luk 15:24, Luk 15:32
for: Deu 32:36, Jdg 10:16, Isa 57:16-18, Lam 3:31, Lam 3:32, Hos 11:8, Hos 11:9
my bowels: Gen 43:30, 1Ki 3:26, Son 5:4, Phi 1:8
are troubled: Heb. sound, Jer 48:36, Isa 16:11, Isa 63:15
I will: Isa 55:7, Isa 57:18, Hos 14:4, Mic 7:18, Mic 7:19
Reciprocal: Job 30:27 – General Job 33:24 – Deliver Psa 25:6 – thy tender mercies Psa 32:5 – forgavest Isa 21:2 – all the Isa 49:15 – yet Isa 66:2 – to this Jer 3:12 – for I am Jer 9:7 – shall Jer 33:26 – and have Lam 1:20 – my bowels Eze 18:23 – not that Hos 3:1 – according Joe 2:18 – and pity Zec 10:6 – for I have Mal 3:17 – and I Luk 1:54 – General Luk 7:13 – he Luk 15:18 – Father Luk 15:20 – But Joh 8:41 – we have Act 26:20 – repent Rom 9:4 – the adoption Eph 5:1 – as Col 3:12 – bowels Phm 1:12 – mine
Jer 31:20. The first clause of this verse sounds ns if it questioned the matter, but actually it is a declaration that Ephraim (the 10 tribes) was the dear child of God. For that reason tbe Lord loved him in spite of his sins and wished to save him.
Jer 31:20. Is Ephraim my dear son? Is he, &c. These questions are designed to be answered in the affirmative, as appears from the inference, therefore my bowels are moved for him. It seems that, to suit the idiom of our language, and fully to express the sense of the original, the particle not ought to have been supplied, and the clause to have been read, Is not Ephraim my dear son? Is he not a pleasant child? That is, is he not one that I have set my affections on, as a parent does upon a child in whom he delights? Thus Dr. Waterland, Lowth, and many others interpret the words. Houbigant, however, defends the common reading, and thinks that God means to deny that Ephraim was his son, in order to show him that his bowels were moved toward him solely through free mercy, and not on account of any merits or deservings of his people. For since I spake against him Or, of him, as the same phrase in the original is translated Jer 48:27. I do earnestly remember him still Ever since I have so severely reproved and chastised him, my thoughts toward him have been thoughts of peace. I have a fatherly kindness and affection for him. Therefore my bowels are troubled for him Or, yearn over him, as Josephs bowels yearned toward his brethren, even when he spake roughly to them. Observe, reader, when God afflicts his people, yet he does not forget them; when he casts them out of their land, yet he does not cast them out of his sight, nor out of his mind. Even then, when God is speaking against us, yet he is acting for us, and designing our good in all; and this is our comfort in our affliction, that the Lord thinketh upon us, though we have forgotten him. When Israels afflictions extorted a penitent confession and submission, it is said, (Jdg 10:16,) his soul was grieved for the misery of Israel: for he always afflicts with the greatest tenderness. It was his compassion that mitigated Ephraims punishment, (Hos 11:8-9,) My heart is turned within me, &c., and now the same compassion accepted Ephraims repentance, and induced God to say, I will surely have mercy upon him.
31:20 [Is] Ephraim {a} my dear son? [is he] a pleasant child? for since I spoke against him, I do earnestly {b} remember him still: therefore my heart is troubled for him; I will surely have mercy upon him, saith the LORD.
(a) As though he would say no for by his iniquity he did what lay in him to cast me off.
Yahweh still regarded the people of Ephraim as His dear son and delightful child. Even though He had rebuked him, He still remembered and yearned for him. He would surely have mercy on these people (cf. Hos 11:1-4; Hos 11:8-9).
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)