Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Jeremiah 31:31
Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
31. a new covenant ] which in contrast to that ratified at Sinai, and forfeited by the people’s repeated disobedience, shall have the essential element of stability and permanence.
and with the house of Judah ] In the light of Jer 31:33, where no such clause occurs, this is probably a gloss by a scribe who desired that his own tribe should not be omitted from mention. The omission moreover restores the inah measure.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
31 34. See introd. summary to the section. These vv. are quoted in Heb 8:9-12. Cp. Eze 37:23-27. We have here the announcement of a new covenant which should supersede that made at the time of the Exodus from Egypt, differing from it (i) in permanence, (ii) in the principle by which it should be maintained unbroken. The Law consisted of duties imposed upon the people from without; the spring of action which should produce willing conformity to the new covenant was to be wholly within. Deu 30:6 speaks of the people’s hearts being circumcised to love the Lord with all their heart and soul, but here the motive power that belongs to the new dispensation is for the first time made plain. The sense of forgiveness ( Jer 31:34) through God’s grace shall call out such a spirit of gratitude as shall ensure a willing service, depending on inward not outward motives, based on love, not fear. The new covenant therefore is at once to replace the old (see Heb 8:8-12), but, though new in springs of action, it is to be still the same in substance. Thus the passage forms the climax of Jeremiah’s teaching. The religious failure hitherto consisted in gross and repeated acts of disobedience to the outward ordinances imposed on Israel as a national unit. It was necessary in future to get behind ordinances to the source itself of the evil so as to reach the individual heart. If that heart was attuned to the recognition of its relationship to God, all would thenceforth be right. When the inward hostility to the externally imposed law has been changed to a ready conformity, because that law is recognised as no longer an outside matter, but has become part of the individual’s own personality, then the Divine and human wills become identified. Religion will now have acquired a title, no longer superficial, to the name national; for each individual will be renewed in heart. Thus “while other prophets did much to interpret religion and to enforce its demands, [Jeremiah] transformed the very conception of religion itself” (Peake, I. 46).
The genuineness of the passage has been doubted or denied by various commentators from Movers onwards, and it is rejected, though very reluctantly, by Du., but on grounds which are shewn by Co. to be quite inconclusive. Du. considers it to be the production of an author of late date, zealous for the faithful observance of legal ordinances, and he denies the spiritual character of the conceptions which the words seem plainly to indicate. But the contrast is a marked one between the external nature of the Sinaitic legislation, and the internal change in the individual’s personality, involved in the New Covenant which is to take its place. What was that Sinaitic legislation in Jeremiah’s view? Ch. 7 tells us that it was, in a word, the Decalogue (see specially Jer 31:9), written with the finger of God. These precepts are now to be written in men’s hearts, and so to ensure an intuitive obedience, “the living pulse-beat of an automatic morality” (Co.).
The very brevity of the utterance (even if we admit the possibility of a slight amount of modification by Baruch or others) supports the acceptance of it as genuine. Its date will naturally be the period of the overthrow of the old rgime in the destruction of Jerusalem (b.c. 586). Under circumstances such as these the prophet gives utterance to what is surely a sublime triumph of faith, as he raises on the ruins of the old a new and more spiritual structure.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Jer 31:31-37
I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah.
The new covenant
The old and new covenants are placed in opposition to each other. The latter is represented as being–
I. More effective in its provisions.
1. Spiritual.
2. Loving.
3. Cheerful.
4. Diligent.
5. Persevering.
II. More comprehensive in its range.
1. An important truth implied. It is the duty of those who have tasted that the Lord is gracious, to be zealous in instructing those around them.
2. A cheering assurance given. They shall all know Me, &c.
3. A striking reason adduced. For I will forgive their iniquity, &c. To know God savingly, is to know Him as a sin-forgiving God, and that the enjoyment of His pardoning mercy is an evidence of our interest in all the other blessings of the Gospel covenant.
III. More secure as regards its stability. Thus saith the Lord, which giveth the sun, &c. The carnal and hypocritical He would indeed cast off; but for the encouragement of the spiritual seed of Israel, the most stable things in the universe are referred to as a pledge of the immutability of His gracious purposes. (Expository Outlines.)
The new covenant
I. The Christian religion is described as a new covenant. This covenant would be new, for it had predecessors, and God is said to have made a covenant with Noah when He promised that a judgment like the flood should not be repeated, and with Abraham when He promised Canaan to his descendants for an everlasting possession, and imposed the condition of circumcision. But by the phrase the old covenant is meant especially the covenant which God made with Israel as a people when Moses descended from Mount Sinai. At later periods in Israels history this covenant was again and again renewed–as by Joshua, at Shechem; as by King Asa, at Jerusalem; as by Jehoida, the priest, in the temple, and by the priesthood and people together, under Hezekiah, and under the auspices of Ezra and Nehemiah in later days still, after the great captivity. It was renewed and it was continually broken. It was a Divine work, and yet, through mans perverseness, it was a continuous failure. The new covenant: it is a phrase which sounds somewhat strange to the ears of Christians, who have been accustomed all their life to talk of the New Testament. A covenant is a compact or agreement, and it implies something like equal fights between those who are parties to it. Monarchs make covenants or treaties with monarchs, nations with nations. Even when, as sometimes happens, the government of a great Power enters into contracts with a house of business, or with an individual, this is because the firm or the person in question is for the purposes of the contract on terms of equality with the negotiating government, as having at disposal some means of rendering it a signal service, which, for the moment, throws all other considerations into the background. And this general equality between parties to a covenant may be further illustrated by the case of the most sacred of all possible human contracts, the marriage tie–that marriage tie which, by the law of God, once made, can be dissolved only by death, and in which it is the glory of the Christian law–I do not speak of human legislation in Christian times–to have secured to the contracting parties equal rights. It is, then, a little startling to find this same word employed to describe a relation between the infinite and eternal God and the creatures of His hand. He wants nothing when He has everything to give. Man needs everything, and can do nothing that will increase the blessedness that is already infinite, or enhance a power which, as it is, knows no bounds. But here are covenants between God and man, covenants in which there seems no place for reciprocity, covenants in which indulgence or endowment is all on one side, and acknowledgment, or, rather, failure, on the other; covenants in naming which language seems to forget its wonted meaning, and to betray us into misconceptions, which bring, to say the least, bewilderment and confusion; and yet, in reality, when God speaks of making a covenant with man, He is only giving one more instance of that law of condescension of which the highest results appeared when He, the Infinite, took on Him a human form, when He, the Eternal, entered as a man into fellowship with the children of time. A covenant, then, is a contract or compact, and the question cannot but occur to us, Might the covenant which God makes with His people not come to be called, as it is called, a testament? for the words covenant and testament represent in our English Bibles a single word in each of the original languages. The Greek-speaking Jews of Alexandria, who some 200 years or more before our Lord turned the Old Testament, bit by bit, from Hebrew into Greek, as it was wanted for use in the service of their synagogue, and then made of these fragments the great version which we to-day call the Septuagint, used the Greek word for will to translate the Hebrew word for covenant, because they observed that the old covenant of God with the patriarchs and with Israel did involve actual bequests such as was the possession of Canaan, which could only be inherited in a distant future. And thus the Hebrew word meaning a contract was strained, if you please, by its actual use to mean a testament, and the Greek word meaning primarily, although not exclusively, a will acquired by its associations the sense of a covenant or contract. He who by His providence controls the course of human events and the currents of human thought does also most assuredly take human speech so that it may do His work, and it is His doing and not any chance irregularity that the original word in the New Testament has thus come to mean both covenant and testament, for that which it was intended to describe answered to both meanings. Religion as such, and the religion of the Gospels especially, is at once a compact with God and a bequest from God. The Gospel, I say, is a compact or covenant, because its blessings are provisionally bestowed. They must be met by faith, hope, love, repentance. And it is also a will or testament more obviously than was the Mosaic covenant, for it was made by our Divine Lord when His death was in full view, and when He, who alone could use such words without folly or without blasphemy, took the cup into His blessed hands, and when He had given thanks He gave it to His followers, saying, Drink ye all of this; for this is My blood of the New Testament, which is being poured out for you and for many for the remission of sins. And yet this very testament is so conditioned as to be a covenant too, and the solemn words to which I have just referred were but an echo in an after age of the saying in the prophets, Behold, I make a new covenant.
II. Of this new covenant in the gospels there were according to jeremiah to be three characteristics. We cannot suppose that he is giving us an exhaustive description. He selects these three points because they form a vivid and easily understood contrast between the new covenant and the old, between Christianity and Judaism.
1. In those who have a real part in the new covenant the law of God was not to be simply or chiefly an outward rule, it was to be an inward principle. The law was to be no longer an outward rule condemning the inward life or even rousing the spirit of rebellion: it was to be an inward operation, not running counter to the will, but shaping it and claiming obedience, not from fear but from love, and from love heightened to enthusiasm. It was to present itself, not as a summons from without the will, but as an impulse from within the soul; not as declaring that which has to be done or foregone, but as describing that which it was already a joy to forego or to do; in short, a new power, the Spirit of Christ, giving Christians s new nature; the nature of Christ would be within the soul and would effect a change.
2. The second token of a part in the new covenant is the growth of the soul in the knowledge of Divine truth. In ancient Israel, as now, men learned what they could learn about God from human teachers, but the truths which they learned, though inculcated with great industry, were, in the majority of cases, not really mastered, because there was no accompanying process of interpretation and readjustment from within. It was to be otherwise in the future. In the new covenant the Divine Teacher, without dispensing with such human instruments as we are, would do the most important part of the work Himself. He would make truth plain to the soul, and would enamour the soul with the beauty of truth by such instruction as is beyond the reach of human argument and human language, since it belongs altogether to the world of spirits. Ye have an unction from the Holy One, said St. John to his readers, and ye know all things. Listen not, cries St. Augustine, too eagerly to the outward words: the true Master sits within.
3. A third characteristic of the new covenant was to be the forgiveness of sins. This, although stated last, is really a precedent condition of the other two. This is a true saying., and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save stoners, and this salvation of His must begin with pardon, and this pardon is the crowning triumph of the new covenant between God and man. (Canon Liddon.)
The new covenant
This particular portion of the chapter is the only clear evangelical declaration in the Book. It reads more like Isaiah than Jeremiah. It must have been a great gladness to that sad-hearted and sorrowful prophet to have this glimpse of coming restoration and grace for his sinful and sorely afflicted people. He was all the more glad to pour in this balsam because he had hitherto been giving them salt for their wounds and wormwood to drink.
I. The new plantation. Hitherto it had been his sad and sorrowful duty to declare to the people Gods purpose to root out, to pull down, and to destroy and throw down; but now the time has come to fulfil his task of declaring Gods purpose to build and to plant (Jer 1:10). The devastation of the lend of Israel end Judah had been complete, the slain of the people vast in numbers; the utter taking away and dispersing of the ten tribes had left but a remnant even before the captivity of Judah. The promise of a restoration of Judah to the land would be, even when fulfilled, but the return of a mere handful of people and cattle. So small, indeed, that the land would still seem to be desolate for want of inhabitants, and in poverty for want of cattle. In view of this very discouraging outlook the prophet speaks this most comforting promise.
1. The sowing–I will sow the house of Israel and the house of Judah with the seed of man, and with the seed of beast. The same promise was made to Israel and Judah by Eze 36:9-11, and by Hos 2:23. This promise seems to include the gathering in of the Gentiles as well, just as the same covenant promise is made to them as to the returned Jews. The figure is one of the greatest encouragement. The remnant of the people and cattle are as the handful of seed for the ground, but God will so bless them that they shall increase like seed sown before s great harvest that shall fill the land. The same thought is expressed in Psa 72:16. This prophecy was scarcely realised in the return from Babylon, but it had the beginning of its fulfilment then. There is a suggestion here of the method of multiplication of the people; as seed sown in the ground multiplies into a great harvest, so shall living Christians multiply themselves in those whom they are the means of converting to God. How Andrew multiplied himself when he found Peter, who after was the means of winning three thousand souls at one preaching! Stephen multiplied himself through Saul of Tarsus. In this latter case seed was literally sown in the ground, and out of the martyr blood sprung the apostle of the Gentiles.
2. The watching–And it shall come to pass that like as I have watched over them to pluck up, &c., so will I watch over them to build and to plant, saith the Lord. The growth of Gods kingdom in the earth among men is not a mere process of nature. It goes on in the power of Gods special and supernatural gifts of grace, and is carried forward under His watchful eye and fostering care. Not one least convert makes his appearance in the world but that God watches over him to protect and defend. His promise is that their soul shall be as a watered garden (verse 12). It is comforting to know that Gods promise of grace and favour is as true as His threats have proved. If sin has abounded to our ruin, let us know that grace doth much more abound to our salvation.
3. The new individual relation between God and the people. The saying which the prophet alludes to: The fathers have eaten a sour grape and the childrens teeth are set on edge, shall no longer be in vogue when that day of grace of which the prophet speaks comes. He condemns the saying, as does Eze 18:1-3. There was a certain truth in the saying, but it had been perverted, and the entire proverb had been quoted in such a way as to cast a reproach of injustice upon God. As a matter of fact, there is a law of heredity, both physical and moral, to which every one must submit. It is impossible to shut one s eyes to the fact; but then according to Gods law, and especially according to His grace, moral responsibility does not attach to this hereditary transmission of consequences unless the heir consents to the fathers sin and walks in his way. Any individual descendant may break the heredity at any point he pleases by turning to the Lord. It is also true that in former times God dealt with the nation as such, rather than with individuals. The nations sin brought their present calamities upon them, in which many individually righteous men suffered; but in the days to come the national will give place to the individual relation. This for two reasons. First, the nation as a whole will have learned righteousness in that day, and so it will come to pass that the individual transgressor will be so conspicuously by himself, that it will be seen at a glance that his suffering or judgment will rest upon the fact of his own sin. Hitherto the individually righteous man had been so rare in the nation that he was overlooked and swept away in the tide of the nations punishment, just as Caleb and Joshua were carried back into the wilderness for forty years with the whole unbelieving nation. But, second, there is s distinct advance in thought by the prophet in the direction of that individuality of relation which characterises the new covenant in distinction from that which was so apparent in the old. Under the law the oneness and entirety of the nation was maintained; under the Gospel the individual soul is brought before God. Every one of us shall give an account of himself to God (Rom 14:12). Nothing could more mark the great advance in thought than this prophetic declaration.
II. The new covenant. As if to explain and justify his new doctrine, he announces the fact of a new covenant. This is the first distinct announcement of the new dispensation under this title. This covenant is to differ radically in terms and contents from the old covenant which God made with the children of Israel when He brought them out of Egypt. Reference is clear to the New Testament dispensation, as may be seen from Heb 8:1-13. By a covenant is meant an appointment by God. We are not to understand that God entered into a contract with man. He appointed certain things, promised certain things, upon certain conditions which the people were to perform. But the covenant or agreement was wholly of His own making. The old covenant, so far as the blessings were concerned, had failed utterly because of the utter failure of the people to do the things which God commanded. Therefore He has taken it away and substituted another covenant, based upon better promises–one in which He not only proposes blessings, but undertakes to fulfil the conditions upon which they shall flow in to us.
1. Some contrasts. The old covenant was broken by the disobedience of the people, though in the administration thereof God had acted throughout as a forgiving husband who was constantly compounding the sins of an unfaithful wife. But this new covenant is kept and secured by the performance of all its conditions by God Himself, acting in and through Christ (Heb 8:6). The old covenant was a faulty one, never intended indeed to be the means of their salvation, but only to remind them of their sin and show them their helplessness. Not faulty in the thing it was intended to accomplish, but in its final ability to save; whereas the new covenant, made in and with Christ for our sakes, is a perfect covenant in terms and in fulfilment, and so does secure our salvation (Heb 8:6-13; Heb 10:1-22; Rom 8:3-4). The old covenant had a complicated and elaborate ceremonial, which could not be understood or administered except by priests and ministers, and then but imperfectly; the new covenant is simply based on the one complete offering which Jesus Christ has made for all time and for all people; He being at once tabernacle, priest, altar, offering, and minister. We simply, as sinners, go to God by Him, confess that we are stoners, acknowledge that we are helpless either to get rid of sin or maintain righteousness, and call upon Him to save us. This He does fully, freely, and eternally by His grace, without any merit of our own. Under the old covenant the provisions for the cancelling of sins were not only imperfect but utterly futile, every offering made by man through the priests being in fact but a remembrance of sin, not a removal of it; whereas in this new covenant there is perfect provision (Heb 10:1-39.). Therefore on its basis the forgiveness of sins is freely proclaimed (verse 34; Heb 10:17-18).
2. Chief characteristics. The prophet mentions three–
(1) Inwardness. I will put My law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts. The terms of the old covenant, indeed its whole contents, were written first on tables of stone and then all its detail in external laws, which the people were compelled to bind between their eyes, on their wrists, and fix them on the door-plates of their houses and the posts of their gates. The whole relation was as between an outward law and an outward obedience. The law commanded and the subject had to obey. The law of Moses did not take account of thoughts or motives, only of actions. The action was not that of faith, but of works. But this new covenant is not so proclaimed and written. Jesus shows in the Sermon on the Mount that true righteousness extends to thoughts and motives, and so the true life of God is not in externals, but in heart relation to God. Therefore we are Gods children, not by national or family relation, but by a new birth, by faith in Jesus Christ. We obey the law not because of outward pressure, but from inward conviction, not by the fear of external punishment, but by the constraint of an inward love. In the new creation which comes to believers under the new covenant (2Co 5:17), they are not bound by a multitude of statutes and minute rules, but constrained by a personal love to and for Jesus Christ. It is now an affectionate loyalty to a Divine Person; no longer a fearful obedience to an external, cold and pitiless law. An old writer says, in answer to an anxious inquiry as to what a Christian may and may not do: Love God and do what you please. That is, if the heart is controlled by the love of God, if the law is written in the heart, then the Christian will know what is right and wrong by the instinct of the law of righteousness in him, and will only desire to do that thing which heart and conscience teach him. Christ in us the hope of Glory is the best law a Christian can have. This is to walk with God, and to walk with God is certainly to walk in paths of righteousness.
(2) Knowledge. And they shall teach no more every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know Me from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord. I think the sense of this passage is that, under the new covenant with the law in the inward parts and written in the heart, the system shall not be dependent on intellectual training or culture. Philosophical or scientific knowledge must be painfully taught and more painfully learned. The young child is often as enlightened in the things of the Spirit as the aged scholar; the ignorant negro as intelligent in spiritual things as his cultured master. This knowledge is for the least as well as the greatest, and is dependent not so much upon teaching and learning as upon spiritual apprehension (1Co 1:13 -end, 2:1-10). So also John declares that, with this law in our hearts and the Spirit of God for a teacher, we are not dependent upon anyone to teach us the essential truth of the Gospel (1Jn 2:27).
(3) Universality. From the least to the greatest is an expression which carries with it the idea of universality as to the race. The old covenant was confined to the Jewish people, the new covenant, or the Gospel, is for all people. The terms of the covenant of grace are the same to all; the masses of heathendom are to be dealt with just as the so-called Christian nations. There is no difference now, for as all have sinned, all have been brought under the provisions of grace. Let the covenant, then, be published abroad.
3. The contents of the Covenant. These are three–
(1) I will be their God. This was a promise under the old covenant; it shall be more than confirmed under the new. They had forfeited the right of having Him for their God by their breach of His covenant, but now that which could not be theirs by law comes to be theirs by Grace. After His resurrection, Jesus sent this message to His disciples (Joh 20:17). This is the relation now. He is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and in the same close and blessed way He is our God and Father.
(2) They shall be My people. Not an outward and earthly people, but an heavenly and spiritual. Every one shall be born of the Spirit, and each one is so an offspring of God. This promise is often emphasised in the closing Book of Revelation (Rev 21:3-4).
(3) The forgiveness of sin. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more (Mat 26:28). This is the great promise which the apostle held out to the people: Be it known unto you, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins (Act 13:38). We might multiply passages innumerable to show this great blessing, and how it glows in the forefront of all those of the new covenant. Not only does He forgive our iniquities, but He utterly forgets them (Psa 32:1).
III. Assurances. The wonderful covenant promises are now guaranteed by such assurances as must satisfy any people or any soul. God appeals to the heavens, where He has set the sun, moon, and stars for lights by day and night, whose permanence is accepted; He appeals to the ocean, which obeys some mysterious power, and never fails. As long as they endure, so shall the terms of this covenant stand. When heaven and earth can be measured and searched out, and the ordinances of heaven and earth fail, then shall the seed of Israel fail, but not till then (verses 36, 37). (G. F. Pentecost, D. D.)
Jeremiahs prophecy of the new covenant
1. Of two things we may be sure beforehand.
(1) The prophets hope of permanent well-being in the future wilt not be based on any expectation of the people doing better, but rather on the faith that God in His grace will do more for them and in them. The action of Divine love may, nay, doubtless will, transform human nature so as to make the people of the new covenant veritable sons of God; but the initiative will lie with God, not with men; and just on that account the new covenant will be stable as the ordinances of the sun and moon and stars.
(2) Since the new constitution is to be introduced on the express ground of dissatisfaction with the old, its provisions will be found to have a pointed reference to those of the latter, and to be of such a character as to supply the needful remedy for their defects.
2. Looking now into the prophecy itself, we find that the description which it gives of the peculiarities of the new covenant exactly answers to these expectations.
(1) God appears most conspicuously throughout as the agent. He is the doer, man is the passive subject of His gracious action. He is the giver, man is but the receiver. The old covenant ran, Now therefore, if ye will obey, &c. (Exo 19:5). In the new covenant there is no if, suspending Divine blessing and favour on mans good behaviour. God promises absolutely to be their God, and to regard them as His people, and to insure the relation against all risk of rupture by Himself making the people what He wishes them to be.
(2) There is an obvious reference to the defects of the old covenant in the provisions of the new. Whereas, in the case of the old, the law of duty was written on tables of stone; in the case of the new, the law is to be written on the heart; whereas, under the old, owing to the ritual character of the worship, the knowledge of God and His will was a complicated affair in which men generally were helplessly dependent on a professional class, under the new, the worship of God would be reduced to the simplest spiritual elements, and it would be in every mans power to know God at first hand, the sole requisite for such knowledge as would then be required being a pure heart.
(3) Whereas, under the old, the provisions for the cancelling of sin were very unsatisfactory, and utterly unfit to perfect the worshipper as to conscience, by dealing thoroughly with the problem of guilt–of which no bettor evidence could be desired than the institution of the great day of atonement, in which a remembrance of sin was made once a your, and by which nothing more than an annual and putative forgiveness was procured–under the new, on the contrary, God would grant to His people a real, absolute, and perennial forgiveness, so that the abiding relation between I-lira and them should be as if sin had never existed.
3. We must enter a little into detail by way of further explanation.
(1) That the contrast is rightly taken in the first of the three conditions will be disputed by few, if any. One cannot read the words, I will put My law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts, without thinking of the tables of stone which occupy so prominent a place in the history of the Sinaitic covenant. And the writing on the heart suggests very forcibly the defects of the ancient covenant, in so far as it had the fundamental laws of life. The slabs on which the ten words are inscribed may abide as a lasting monument, proclaiming what God requires of man, saying to successive generations, Remember to do this and to avoid doing that. But while the stone slabs may avail to keep men in mind of their duty, they are utterly impotent to dispose them to perform it; in witness whereof we need only refer to Israels behaviour at the foot of the mount of lawgiving. Manifestly the writing on the heart is sorely wanted in order that the law may be kept, not merely in the ark, but in human conduct. And that, accordingly, is what Jeremiah puts in the forefront in his account of the new covenant, on which restored Israel is to be constituted. How the mystic writing is to be achieved he does not say, perhaps he does not know; but he believes that God can and will achieve it somehow; and he understands full well its aim and its certain result in a holy life.
(2) Dispute is most likely to arise in connection with the second condition, referred to in the words, They shall teach no more every man his neighbour, &c. The primary lesson we take to be, that spiritual knowledge in the new time will take the place occupied by ritual under the old. Spiritual knowledge is a kind of knowledge which can be communicated to each man at first hand, and which indeed can be communicated in no other way. God, as a Spirit, reveals Himself to each human spirit, to each individual man who has a pure heart and who worships in spirit and in truth. On the other hand, the knowledge of positive precepts, such as those contained in the ritual system, can be only obtained at second hand. One man, who has himself been taught, must teach others. The reason, the conscience, or the heart could never reveal Gods will as embodied in such carnal ordinances. And only on supposition that a tacit reference to the ritual system is intended can the full force of the words They shall teach no more every man his neighbour be perceived. For what was it in the Sinaitic covenant that made men dependent on their neighbour for the knowledge of God? Surely it was the ritual system. The priest s lips kept knowledge, and men had to seek the Torah, the needful instruction in religious ritual, at his mouth. And it was a grievous bondage, a sure index that the old covenant could not be the final form of Gods relation with men, but was destined one day to be antiquated and replaced by a better covenant with better promises. For these reasons, we find in this part of the oracle concerning the new covenant the prediction that the ritual law would form no part of the final covenant between God and His people, and that in the good time coming men should not be kept dependent on priests and far from God by an elaborate ceremonial; but, taught of the Spirit, should worship God as Father, offering unto Him the spiritual rational service of devout thoughts and gracious affections. So it was understood by the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, who gives prominence to the ritual of the old covenant as one of the things most urgently demanding antiquation (Heb 9:1).
(3) The third blessing of the new covenant, the complete and perpetual forgiveness of sin, is so clearly defined that no dispute can arise as to its nature; the only point open to debate is the feature of the old covenant, to which it contains a tacit reference. We assumed that the mental reference is to the provision in the Levitical system for the cancelling of sin, especially the great day of atonement. Jeremiah evidently speaks as one who feels that the old Sinaitic covenant, at this point as at others, was seriously defective. It made elaborate arrangements for cancelling the sins of ignorance and precipitancy committed by the people, so that these might not interrupt their fellowship with God; and yet there was no real effective forgiveness. For many of the more grievous offences there was not even an atonement of any kind provided. The Levitical forgiveness was thus both partial and shadowy; the problem of human sin was not thoroughly grappled with. All this Jeremiah felt; and therefore, in his picture of the ideally perfect covenant, he assigns a place to a forgiveness worthy of the name–a forgiveness covering the whole of Israels sins: her iniquities as well as her errors; and not merely covering them, but blotting them out of the very memory of heaven.
4. But on what does this free, full, and absolute forgiveness of the new covenant rest? The Levitical forgiveness was founded on Levitical sacrifices. Is the forgiveness of the new covenant to be founded on the sacrifice of nobler name? That is a question which the student familiar with his New Testament will very naturally answer in the affirmative; and we all know the answer given in the Epistle to the Hebrews. But if it be asked, What is Jeremiahs answer to the question? we must reply, None. The glorious thought that the ideals of priesthood and of sacrifice can then only be realised when priest and victim meet in one person, does not seem as yet to have risen above the horizon. And yet one may well hesitate to make an assertion when he reads Isa 53:1-12, or even those significant words of Jeremiah himself, I was like a lamb that is brought to the slaughter. The idea that a man, and not a beast, is the true sin-bearer is struggling into the prophetic consciousness. If the sun of this great doctrine is not yet risen, its dawn may be discerned on the eastern sky. (A. B. Bruce, D. D.)
A new covenant
I. The blessings of the new covenant.
1. God undertakes to write His law in our hearts.
2. God undertakes to establish a relation between Himself and us.
3. God undertakes to give us the knowledge of Himself.
4. God undertakes to pardon all our iniquities.
II. The difference between the old and new covenants.
1. In the freeness of their grants.
2. In the extent of their provisions.
3. In the duration of their benefits. (G. Brooks.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 31. A new covenant] The Christian dispensation.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
The apostles application of this, Heb 8:8-10, puts us out of doubt that this promise referred to the gospel times. It was not only made with the Jews, but all those who should be ingrafted into that olive; but it is said to be made with them, either as those two terms signify the whole church, with whom that covenant was made (they being the whole church which God had upon the earth at that time); or because they were the only people that had broken the first covenant, the Gentiles being strangers at that time to the covenant of promise, Eph 2 12, covenants being usually renewed upon one partys violation of them; or because it was at first made with the Jews, though it concerned also those that were afar off, even as many as the Lord should call, Act 2:39. Neither is it called the new covenant because it was as to the substance new, for it was made with Abraham, Gen 17:7, and with the Jews, Deu 26:17,18. And it was then confirmed by the blood of Christ, though not actually shed, yet as he was
the Lamb slain from the beginning of the world, whose blood was typified by the blood of the paschal lamb, and of all those living creatures killed for sacrifice, but upon many other accounts, thus enumerated by divines.
1. Because it was new in the notion of a testament, not confirmed by the actual death of Christ till gospel times.
2. Because it was revealed and preached after a new manner, more fully and particularly, plainly and clearly.
3. Because it had no such mixture of promises of temporal blessings as it had when first made with the laws.
4. Nor was the ceremonial law any part of it, as it was to the Jews, who were obliged to approve themselves Gods people by a strict observance of that.
5. It was in the publication extended both to Jews and Gentiles, which the former was not.
6. In regard of the efficacy of the Spirit attending the publication of it, in a much fuller and larger manner, with the distribution of its gifts and graces, enabling souls to fulfil it.
See more in the English Annotations upon this subject.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
31. the days . . . new covenant with. . . Israel . . . JudahThe new covenant is made with literalIsrael and Judah, not with the spiritual Israel,that is, believers, except secondarily, and as grafted on the stockof Israel (Ro 11:16-27).For the whole subject of the thirtieth and thirty-first chapters isthe restoration of the Hebrews (Jer 30:4;Jer 30:7; Jer 30:10;Jer 30:18; Jer 31:7;Jer 31:10; Jer 31:11;Jer 31:23; Jer 31:24;Jer 31:27; Jer 31:36).With the “remnant according to the election of grace” inIsrael, the new covenant has already taken effect. But with regard tothe whole nation, its realization is reserved for the lastdays, to which Paul refers this prophecy in an abridged form (Ro11:27).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Behold, the days come, saith the Lord,…. This refers to Gospel times, as is clear from the quotation and application by the apostle, Heb 8:8; and it is owned by a modern Jew l to belong to the times of the Messiah. It is introduced with a “behold”, as a note of attention, pointing to something of moment, and very agreeable and desirable, as the covenant of grace, its blessings and promises, are; and as a note of admiration, it being justly to be wondered at that God should make a covenant with such sinful and unworthy creatures as he has;
that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house Judah; by this “covenant” is meant the covenant of called new, not because newly made, for it was with the elect in Christ from everlasting; so early was Christ set up as the Mediator of it; and so early were promises made, and blessings given, to them in him: nor because newly revealed; for it was made known to all the saints, more or less, under the former dispensation, particularly to David, to Abraham, yea, to our first parents immediately after the fall, though more clearly manifested under the Gospel dispensation; but because of its new mode of exhibition; not by types, and shadows, and sacrifices, as formerly; but by the ministry of the word, and the administration of Gospel ordinances; and in distinction from the former covenant, which is done away, as to the mode of it; and because it is a famous covenant, an excellent one, a better covenant, best of all; better than the covenant of works, and even better than the covenant of grace, under the former administration; in the clear manifestation and extensive application of it; and in the ratification of it by the blood of Christ; besides, it provides and promises new things, as a new heart, and a new spirit; to which may be added, that it may be called new, because it is always new; it continues, it stands firm, as Kimchi observes, and shall not be made void; it will never be succeeded nor antiquated by any other covenant, or any other mode of administration of it. The persons with whom this covenant is said to be made are “the house of Israel and of Judah”; which was literally true of them in the first times of the Gospel, to whom the Gospel was first preached, and many of them were called by grace, and had an application of covenant blessings made to them; and is mystically to be understood of God’s elect, whether Jews or Gentiles; the Israel after the spirit; Israelites indeed, Jews inwardly, even all that are fellow citizens of the saints, and of the household of God, the middle wall of partition being broken down: and this “making” of a covenant with them intends no other than a making it known unto them; showing it to them, and their interest in it; in God, as their covenant God; and in Christ, as the Mediator of it; and an application of the blessings and promises of it to them.
l Abendana, not. in Miclol Yophi in loc.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
The new covenant. – Jer 31:31. “Behold, days are coming, saith Jahveh, when I will make with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah a new covenant; Jer 31:32. Not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I laid hold of their hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, which covenant of mine they broke, though I had married them to myself, saith Jahveh; Jer 31:33. But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith Jahveh: I will put my law within them, and on their heart will I write it; and I will become to them a God, and they shall be to me a people. Jer 31:34. And they shall no more teach every man his neighbour and every man his brother, saying, Know ye Jahveh, for all of them shall know me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, saith Jahveh; for I will pardon their iniquity, and their sins will I remember no more. Jer 31:35. Thus saith Jahveh, [who] gives the sun for light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and stars for light by night, who rouses the sea so that its waves roar, Jahveh of hosts is His name: Jer 31:36. If these ordinances move away from before me, saith Jahveh, then also will the seed of Israel cease to be a people before me for ever. Jer 31:37. Thus saith Jahveh: If the heavens above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth below can be searched out, then will I also reject all the seed of Israel because of all that they have done, saith Jahveh. Jer 31:38. Behold, days come, saith Jahveh, when the city shall be built for Jahveh, from the tower of Hananeel unto the gate of the corner, Jer 31:39. And the measuring-line shall once more go out straight over the hill of Gareb, and turn round towards Goah. Jer 31:40. And all the valley of the corpses and of the ashes, and all the fields unto the valley of Kidron, unto the corner of the gate of the horses towards the east, [shall be] holiness to Jahveh; it shall not be plucked up nor pulled down again for ever. The re-establishment of Israel reaches its completion in the making of a new covenant, according to which the law of God is written in the hearts of the people; thereby Israel becomes in truth the people of the Lord, and the knowledge of God founded on the experience of the forgiveness of sins is such that there is no further need of any external means like mutual teaching about God (Jer 31:31-34). This covenant is to endure for ever, like the unchangeable ordinances of nature (Jer 31:35-37); and in consequence of this, Jerusalem shall be guilt as the holy city of God, which shall never be destroyed again (Jer 31:38-40).
Jer 31:31-32 does not mean “to make an appointment,” but “to conclude a covenant,” to establish a relation of mutual duties and obligations. Every covenant which God concludes with men consists, on the side of God, in assurance of His favours and actual bestowal of them; these bind men to the keeping of the commands laid on them. The covenant which the Lord will make with all Israel in the future is called “a new covenant,” as compared with that made with the fathers at Sinai, when the people were led out of Egypt; this latter is thus implicitly called the “old covenant.” The words, “on the day when I took them by the hand,” etc., must not be restricted, on the one side, to the day of the exodus from Egypt, nor, on the other, to the day when the covenant was solemnly made at Sinai; they rather refer to the whole time of the exodus, which did not reach its termination till the entrance into Canaan, though it culminated in the solemn admission of Israel, at Sinai, as the people of Jahveh; see on Jer 7:22. (On the punctuation of , cf. Ewald, 238, d, Olshaus. Gramm. 191, f.) is not a conjunction, “ quod, because,” but a relative pronoun, and must be combined with , “which my covenant,” i.e., which covenant of mine. “They” stands emphatically in contrast with “though I” in the following circumstantial clause, which literally means, “but I have married them to myself,” or, “I was their husband.” As to , see on Jer 3:14. Hengstenberg wrongly takes the words as a promise, “but I will marry them to myself;” this view, however, is incompatible with the perfect, and the position of the words as a contrast with “they broke.”
(Note: In the citation of this passage in Heb 8:8., the words are quoted according to the lxx version, , although this translation is incorrect, because the apostle does not use these words in proving any point. These same words, moreover, have been rendered by the lxx, in Jer 3:14, .)
The two closely connected expressions indicate why a new covenant was necessary; there is no formal statement, however, of the reason, which is merely given in a subordinate and appended clause. For the proper reason why a new covenant is made is not that the people have broken the old one, but that, though Jahveh had united Israel to Himself, they have broken the covenant and thereby rendered it necessary to make a new one. God the Lord, in virtue of His unchangeable faithfulness, would not alter the relation He had Himself established in His love, but simply found it anew in a way which obviated the breaking of the covenant by Israel. For it was a defect connected with the covenant made with Israel at Sinai, that it could be broken on their part. This defect is not to exist in the new covenant which God will make in after times. The expression “after those (not these) days” is remarkable; is not the same as , and yet the days meant can only be the “coming days;” accordingly, it is “those days” (as in Jer 31:29) that are to be expected. The expression “after these days” is inexact, and probably owes its origin to the idea contained in the phrase “in the end of the days” ( , cf. Jer 23:20).
Jer 31:33-37 The character of the new covenant: “I (Jahveh) give (will put) my law within them, and write it upon their heart.” is the opposite of , which is constantly used of the Sinaitic law, cf. Jer 9:12; Deu 4:8; Deu 11:32; 1Ki 9:6; and the “writing on the heart” is opposed to writing on the tables of stone, Exo 31:18, cf. Jer 32:15., Jer 34:8, Deu 4:13; Deu 9:11; Deu 10:4, etc. The difference, therefore, between the old and the new covenants consists in this, that in the old the law was laid before the people that they might accept it and follow it, receiving it into their hearts, as the copy of what God not merely required of men, but offered and vouchsafed to them for their happiness; while in the new it is put within, implanted into the heart and soul by the Spirit of God, and becomes the animating life-principle, 2Co 3:3. The law of the Lord thus forms, in the old as well as in the new covenant, the kernel and essence of the relation instituted between the Lord and His people; and the difference between the two consists merely in this, that the will of God as expressed in the law under the old covenant was presented externally to the people, while under the new covenant it is to become an internal principle of life. Now, even in the old covenant, we not only find that Israel is urged to receive the law of the Lord his God into his heart, – to make the law presented to him from without the property of his heart, as it were, – but even Moses, we also find, promises that God will circumcise the heart of the people, that they may love God the Lord with all their heart and all their soul (Deu 30:6). But this circumcision of heart and this love of God with the whole soul, which are repeatedly required in the law (Deu 6:5; Deu 10:12, Deu 10:16), are impossibilities, unless the law be received into the heart. It thus appears that the difference between the old and the new covenants must be reduced to this, that what was commanded and applied to the heart in the old is given in the new, and the new is but the completion of the old covenant. This is, indeed, the true relation between them, as is clearly shown by the fact, that the essential element of the new covenant, “I will be their God, and they shall be my people,” was set forth as the object of the old; cf. Lev 26:12 with Exo 29:45. Nevertheless the difference is not merely one of degree, but one of kind. The demands of the law, “Keep the commandments of your God,” “Be ye holy as the Lord your God is holy,” cannot be fulfilled by sinful man. Even when he strives most earnestly to keep the commands of the law, he cannot satisfy its requirements. The law, with its rigid demands, can only humble the sinner, and make him beseech God to blot out his sin and create in him a clean heart (Psa 51:11.); it can only awaken him to the perception of sin, but cannot blot it out. It is God who must forgive this, and by forgiving it, write His will on the heart. The forgiveness of sin, accordingly, is mentioned, Jer 31:34, at the latter part of the promise, as the basis of the new covenant. But the forgiveness of sins is a work of grace which annuls the demand of the law against men. In the old covenant, the law with its requirements is the impelling force; in the new covenant, the grace shown in the forgiveness of sins is the aiding power by which man attains that common life with God which the law sets before him as the great problem of life. It is in this that the qualitative difference between the old and the new covenants consists. The object which both set before men for attainment is the same, but the means of attaining it are different in each. In the old covenant are found commandment and requirement; in the new, grace and giving. Certainly, even under the old covenant, God bestowed on the people of Israel grace and the forgiveness of sins, and, by the institution of sacrifice, had opened up a way of access by which men might approach Him and rejoice in His gracious gifts; His Spirit, moreover, produced in the heart of the godly ones the feeling that their sins were forgiven, and that they were favoured of God. But even this institution and this working of the Holy Spirit on and in the heart, was no more than a shadow and prefiguration of what is actually offered and vouchsafed under the new covenant, Heb 10:1. The sacrifices of the old covenant are but prefigurations of the true atoning-offering of Christ, by which the sins of the whole world are atoned for and blotted out.
In Jer 31:34 are unfolded the results of God’s putting His law in the heart. The knowledge of the Lord will then no longer be communicated by the outward teaching of every man to his fellow, but all, small and great, will be enlightened and taught by the Spirit of God (Isa 54:13) to know the Lord; cf. Joe 3:1., Isa 11:9. These words do not imply that, under the new covenant, “the office of the teacher of religion must cease” (Hitzig); and as little is “disparity in the imparting of the knowledge of God silently excluded” in Jer 31:33. The meaning simply is this, that the knowledge of God will then no longer be dependent on the communication and instruction of man. The knowledge of Jahveh, of which the prophet speaks, is not the theoretic knowledge which is imparted and acquired by means of religious instruction; it is rather knowledge of divine grace based upon the inward experience of the heart, which knowledge the Holy Spirit works in the heart by assuring the sinner that he has indeed been adopted as a son of God through the forgiveness of his sins. This knowledge, as being an inward experience of grace, does not exclude religious instruction, but rather tacitly implies that there is intimation given of God’s desire to save and of His purpose of grace. The correct understanding of the words results from a right perception of the contrast involved in them, viz., that under the old covenant the knowledge of the Lord was connected with the mediation of priests and prophets. Just as, at Sinai, the sinful people could not endure that the Lord should address them directly, but retreated, terrified by the awful manifestation of the Lord on the mountain, and said entreatingly to Moses, “Speak thou with us and we will hear, but let not God speak with us, lest we die” (Exo 20:15); so, under the old covenant economy generally, access to the Lord was denied to individuals, and His grace was only obtained by the intervention of human mediators. This state of matters has been abolished under the new covenant, inasmuch as the favoured sinner is placed in immediate relation to God by the Holy Spirit. Heb 4:16; Eph 3:12.
In order to give good security that the promise of a new covenant would be fulfilled, the Lord, in Jer 31:35., points to the everlasting duration of the arrangements of nature, and declares that, if this order of nature were to cease, then Israel also would cease to be a people before Him; i.e., the continuance of Israel as the people of God shall be like the laws of nature. Thus the eternal duration of the new covenant is implicitly declared. Hengstenberg contests the common view of Jer 31:35 and Jer 31:36, according to which the reference is to the firm, unchangeable continuance of God’s laws in nature, which everything must obey; and he is of opinion that, in Jer 31:35, it is merely the omnipotence of God that is spoken of, that this proves He is God and not man, and that there is thus formed a basis for the statement set forth in Jer 31:35, so full of comfort for the doubting covenant people; that God does not life, that He can never repent of His covenant and His promises. But the arguments adduced for this, and against the common view, are not decisive. The expression “stirring the sea, so that its waves roar,” certainly serves in the original passage, Isa 51:15, from which Jeremiah has taken it, to bring the divine omnipotence into prominence; but it does not follow from this that here also it is merely the omnipotence of God that is pointed out. Although, in rousing the sea, “no definite rule that we can perceive is observed, no uninterrupted return,” yet it is repeated according to the unchangeable ordinance of God, though not every day, like the rising and setting of the heavenly bodies. And in Jer 31:35, under the expression “these ordinances” are comprehended the rousing of the sea as well as the movements of the moon and stars; further, the departure, i.e., the cessation, of these natural phenomena is mentioned as impossible, to signify that Israel cannot cease to exist as a people; hence the emphasis laid on the immutability of these ordinances of nature. Considered in itself, the putting of the sun for a light by day, and the appointment of the moon and stars for a light by night, are works of the almighty power of God, just as the sea is roused so that its waves roar; but, that these phenomena never cease, but always recur as long as the present world lasts, is a proof of the immutability of these works of the omnipotence of God, and it is this point alone which here receives consideration. “The ordinances of the moon and of the stars” mean the established arrangements as regards the phases of the moon, and the rising and setting of the different stars. “From being a nation before me” declares not merely the continuance of Israel as a nation, so that they shall not disappear from the earth, just as so many others perish in the course of ages, but also their continuance before Jahveh, i.e., as His chosen people; cf. Jer 30:20. – This positive promise regarding the continuance of Israel is confirmed by a second simile, in Jer 31:37, which declares the impossibility of rejection. The measurement of the heavens and the searching of the foundations, i.e., of the inmost depths, of the earth, is regarded as an impossibility. God will not reject the whole seed of Israel: here is to be attentively considered. As Hengstenberg correctly remarks, the hypocrites are deprived of the comfort which they could draw from these promises. Since the posterity of Israel are not all rejected, the rejection of the dead members of the people, i.e., unbelievers, is not thereby excluded, but included. That the whole cannot perish “is no bolster for the sin of any single person.” The prophet adds: “because of all that they have done,” i.e., because of their sins, their apostasy from God, in order to keep believing ones from despair on account of the greatness of their sins. On this, Calvin makes the appropriate remark: Consulto propheta hic proponit scelera populi, ut sciamus superiorem fore Dei clementiam, nec congeriem tot malorum fore obstaculo, quominus Deus ignoscat . If we keep before our mind these points in the promise contained in this verse, we shall not, like Graf, find in Jer 31:37 merely a tame repetition of what has already been said, and be inclined to take the verse as a superfluous marginal gloss.
(Note: Hitzig even thinks that, “because the style and the use of language betoken the second Isaiah, and the order of both strophes is reversed in the lxx (i.e., Jer 31:37 stands before Jer 31:35.), Jer 31:35, Jer 31:36 may have stood in the margin at the beginning of the genuine portion in Jer 31:27-34, and Jer 31:37, on the other hand, in the margin at Jer 31:34.” But, that the verses, although they present reminiscences of the second Isaiah, do not quite prove that the language is his, has already been made sufficiently evident by Graf, who points out that, in the second Isaiah, is nowhere used of the roaring of the sea, nor do we meet with and , , , nor again in the Niphal, or (but in Isa 40:21); other expressions are not peculiar to the second Isaiah, since they also occur in other writings. – But the transposition of the verses in the lxx, in view of the arbitrary treatment of the text of Jeremiah in that version, cannot be made to prove anything whatever.)
Jer 31:38-39 Then shall Jerusalem be built up as a holy city of God, and be no more destroyed. After , the Masoretic text wants , which is supplied in the Qeri. Hengstenberg is of opinion that the expression was abbreviated here, inasmuch as it has already occurred before, several times, in its full form (Jer 31:27 and Jer 31:31); but Jeremiah does not usually abbreviate when he repeats an expression, and has perhaps been dropped merely through an error in transcription. “The city shall be built for Jahveh,” so that it thenceforth belongs to Him, is consecrated to Him. The extent of the new city is described as being “from the tower of Hananeel to the gate of the corner.” The tower of Hananeel, according to Neh 3:1 and Zec 4:10, was situated on the north-east corner of the city wall; the gate of the corner was at the north-west corner of the city, to the north or north-west of the present “Jaffa Gate;” see on 2Ki 14:13; 2Ch 26:9; cf. Zec 14:10. This account thus briefly describes the whole north side. Jer 31:39. The measuring-line ( as found here, 1Ki 7:23 and Zec 1:16, is the original form, afterwards shortened into , the Qeri) further goes out , “before itself,” i.e., straight out over the hill Gareb. does not mean “away towards, or on” (Hitzig); nor is the true reading , “as far as, even to,” which is met with in several codices: the correct rendering is “away over,” so that a part, at least, of the hill was included within the city bounds. “And turns towards Goah.” These two places last named are unknown. From the context of the passage only this much is clear, that both of them were situated on the west of the city; for the starting-point of the line spoken of is in the north-west, and the valley of Ben-hinnom joins in at the end of it, in the south, Jer 31:40. means “itching,” for in Lev 21:20; Lev 22:22 means “the itch;” in Arabic also “the leprosy.” From this, many expositors infer that the hill Gareb was the hill where lepers were obliged to dwell by themselves, outside the city. This supposition is probable; there is no truth, however, in the assumption of Schleussner, Krafft ( Topogr. von Jerus. S. 158), Hitzig, and Hengstenberg, that the hill Bezetha, included within the city bounds by the third wall of Agrippa, is the one meant; for the line described in Jer 31:39 is not to be sought for on the north side of the city. With Graf, we look for the hill Gareb on the mount which lies westward from the valley of Ben-hinnom and at the end of the valley of Rephaim, towards the north (Jos 15:8; Jos 18:16), so that it is likely we must consider it to be identical with “the top of the mountain” mentioned in these passages. This mountain is the rocky ridge which bounds the valley of Ben-hinnom on the west, and stretches northwards, on the west side of the valley of Gihon and the Lower Pool ( Birket es Sultn), to near the high road to Jaffa, where it turns off towards the west on the under (i.e., south) side of the Upper Pool ( Birket el Mamilla); see on Jos 15:8. It is not, as Thenius supposes ( Jerusalem before the Exile, an appendix to his commentary on the Books of Kings), the bare rocky hill situated on the north, and overhanging the Upper Pool; on this view, Goah could only be the steep descent from the plateau into the valley of Kidron, opposite this hill, towards the east. Regarding Goah, only this much can be said with certainty, that the supposition, made by Vitringa and Hengstenberg, of a connection between the name and Golgotha, is untenable; lexical considerations and facts are all against it. Golgotha was situated in the north-west: Goah must be sought for south-west from Jerusalem. The translation of the Chaldee, “cattle-pond,” is a mere inference from , “to bellow.” But, in spite of the uncertainty experienced in determining the positions of the hill Gareb and Goah, this much is evident from the verse before us, that the city, which is thus to be built anew, will extend to the west beyond the space occupied by old Jerusalem, and include within it districts or spots which lay outside old (i.e., pre-and post-exile) Jerusalem, and which had been divided off from the city, as unclean places.
Jer 31:40 In Jer 31:40, without any change of construction, the southern border is described. “The whole valley of the corpses and of the ashes…shall be holy to Jahveh,” i.e., be included within the space occupied by the new city. By “the valley of the corpses and of the ashes” expositors generally and rightly understand the valley of Ben-hinnom ( are the carcases of animals that have been killed, and of men who have been slain through some judgment of God and been left unburied). Jeremiah applies this name to the valley, because, in consequence of the pollution by Josiah of the place where the abominations had been offered to Moloch (2Ki 23:10), it had become a sort of slaughtering-place or tan-yard for the city. According to Lev 6:3, means the ashes of the burnt-offerings consumed on the altar. According to Lev 4:12 and Lev 6:4, these were to be carried from the ash-heap near the altar, out of the city, to a clean place; but they might also be considered as the gross deposit of the sacrifices, and thus as unclean. Hence also it came to pass that all the sweepings of the temple were probably brought to this place where the ashes were, which thus became still more unclean. Instead of , the Qeri requires , and, in fact, the former word may not be very different from , 2Ki 23:4, whither Josiah caused all the instruments used in idolatrous worship to be brought and burned. But it is improbable that is a mere error in transcription for . The former word is found nowhere else; not even does the verb occur. The latter noun, which is quite well known, could not readily be written by mistake for the former; and even if such an error had been committed, it would not have gained admission into all the MSS, so that even the lxx should have that reading, and give the word as , in Greek characters. We must, then, consider as the correct reading, and derive the word from Arab. srm, or s]rm, or s[rm, “to cut off, cut to pieces,” in the sense of “ravines, hollows” (Arab. s]arm), or loca abscissa , places cut off or shut out from the holy city. “Unto the brook of Kidron,” into which the valley of Ben-hinnom opens towards the east, “unto the corner of the horse-gate towards the east.” The horse-gate stood on the site of the modern “Dung-gate” ( Ba=b el Mogha=riebh), in the wall which ran along from the south-east end of Zion to the western border of Ophel (see on Neh 3:28), so that, in this verse before us, it is the south and south-eastern boundaries of the city that are given; and only the length of the eastern side, which enclosed the temple area, on to the north-eastern corner, has been left without mention, because the valley of the Kidron here formed a strong boundary.
The extent of the new city, as here given, does not much surpass that of old Jerusalem. Only in the west and south are tracts to be included within the city, and such tracts, too, as had formerly been excluded from the old city, as unclean places. Jeremiah accordingly announces, not merely that there will be a considerable increase in the size of Jerusalem, but that the whole city shall be holy to the Lord, the unclean places in its vicinity shall disappear, and be transformed into hallowed places of the new city. As being sacred to the Lord, the city shall no more be destroyed.
From this description of Jerusalem which is to be built anew, so that the whole city, including the unclean places now outside of it, shall be holy, or a sanctuary of the Lord, it is very evident that this prophecy does not refer to the rebuilding of Jerusalem after the exile, but, under the figure of Jerusalem, as the centre of the kingdom of God under the Old Testament, announces the erection of a more spiritual kingdom of God in the Messianic age. The earthly Jerusalem was a holy city only in so far as the sanctuary of the Lord, the temple, had been built in it. Jeremiah makes no mention of the rebuilding of the temple, although he had prophesied the destruction, not only of the city, but also of the temple. But he represents the new city as being, in its whole extent, the sanctuary of the Lord, which the temple only had been, in ancient Jerusalem. Cf. as a substantial parallel, Zec 14:10-11. – The erection of Jerusalem into a city, within whose walls there shall be nothing unholy, implies the vanquishment of sin, from which all impurity proceeds; it is also the ripe fruit of the forgiveness of sins, in which the new covenant, which the Lord will make with His people in the days to come, consists and culminates. This prophecy, then, reaches on to the time when the kingdom of God shall have been perfected: it contains, under an old Testament dress, the outlines of the image of the heavenly Jerusalem, which the seer perceives at Patmos in its full glory. This image of the new Jerusalem thus forms a very suitable conclusion to this prophecy regarding the restoration of Israel, which, although it begins with the deliverance of the covenant people from their exile, is yet thoroughly Messianic. Though clothed in an Old Testament dress, it does not implicitly declare that Israel shall be brought back to their native land during the period extending from the time of Cyrus to that of Christ; but, taking this interval as its stand-point, it combines in one view both the deliverance from the exile and the redemption by the Messiah, and not merely announces the formation of the new covenant in its beginnings, when the Christian Church was founded, but at the same time points to the completion of the kingdom of God under the new covenant, in order to show the whole extent of the salvation which the Lord will prepare for His people who return to Him. If these last verses have not made the impression on Graf’s mind, that they could well have formed the original conclusion to the prophecy which precedes, the reason lies simply in the theological inability of their expositor to get to the bottom of the sacred writings.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
Vs. 31-34: THE PROMISE OF A NEW COVENANT
1.The day is coming when the Lord will initiate New Covenant with Israel and Judah – redeemed, reunited and restored to their own land, (vs. 31-32; Isa 27:6).
a. For centuries they have been pillaged, plucked up, scattered and afflicted, (Jdg 3:8; Jdg 3:12-14; Jdg 4:1-3; Jdg 6:1-6; Jdg 10:6-8; Jdg 13:1).
b. Since the fulfillment of this covenant requires a restoration to something previously forfeited, it necessarily involves a literal and united nation, (Eze 36:8-11; Eze 37:21-22; comp. Isa 11:13-14).
Fulfillment will involve:
1) Restoration to covenant fellowship.
2) Restoration to covenant land.
3) Restoration to covenant blessings.
c. There is actually nothing in this passage to suggest that the initial establishment of this covenant Would be with a NEW WITNESSING INSTITUTION (the Lord’s New Testament church) -including Gentile participants, through a spiritual engrafting, (Rom 11:16-27; comp. Rom 2:28-29); but one cannot always foresee just HOW God is going to fulfill His word! (For a study on the New Covenant and the Lord’s Church, see my work entitled: “Outline Studies in the Covenants”.)
d. So far as the nation is concerned, the establishment of this covenant is yet future, and there are definite conditions that she must first meet.
1) She must recognize and confess her sin against the covenant God, (Contr. Mal 1:2; Mal 1:6-7; Mal 2:17; Mal 3:7).
2) She must change her mind, and heart-attitude, toward Jesus, the true Messiah – Son of David, Son of man and Son of God! (Mat 23:39).
3) She must be brought to a condition of “mourning” over the awfullness of her sin – especially in rejecting and crucifying her Divine Lover, Redeemer and Friend! (Zec 12:10 to Zec 13:1; Rev 1:7).
e. Though the nation persists in stubborn revolt against the true Messiah, God has pledged to bring about such repentance as will permit Him, in righteousness, to restore the forfeited blessings -to the eternal praise and glory of His grace! (Zec 10:9-12).
2. This covenant will not be established on the same order as that made with their ancient fathers.
a. Under that covenant God never swerved from His faithfulness in dealing with His people: taking them by the hand, He led them out of their bondage and servitude in Egypt (Deu 1:31; Isa 63:12), and His dealings were those of a faithful husband, (Isa 63:7-9).
b. The nation, however, revolted against the authority of her true husband, (Isa 63:10; Jer 3:11-18; Jer 3:20-25; Hos 2:14-20); she broke the covenant-bond on which the blessings of Jehovah were conditioned, (Jer 11:7-8; Isa 59:1-2); without the obedient walk to which she was pledged, she forfeited the privileges and blessings that she had come to regard as her exclusive, inalienable rights! (Isa 50:1; Isa 54:6-8).
c. The covenant from Mt Sinai made clear demands upon the nation, but provided no enabling dynamic; instead of bestowing life, it condemned to death – emphasizing the vanity and total bankruptcy of human merit before God.
1) Though the law was good and holy, it demanded a righteousness that it could not produce, (Gal 2:21).
2) It demanded duties FROM WITHOUT which could only be produced from a POWER WITHIN – and the law provided no such power, (Rom 8:2-4).
3) Moses clearly commanded that their hearts be, circumcised to love the Lord their God, but this never became the ruling motivation of their individual or corporate lives, (Deu 30:6); without it all else was vain! (1Co 13:1-3; Gal 5:6).
3. Jeremiah is brief in stating the basic provisions of the New Covenant, (vs. 33-34).
a. It involves a FORGIVENESS that is gracious, compassionate, full and free, (Jer 50:20).
1) Nothing in the life of Israel, or of anyone, merits such gracious forgiveness.
2) Divine compassion alone, rooted in divine love, makes forgiveness possible, (Mic 7:18-19; Exo 34:7).
3) Nothing is held back; God FORGIVES and FORGETS! (Isa 43:25; Isa 44:22; Isa 38:17). He forgets in the sense that he does not hold any fully confessed sin against any.
4) On the part of men it is “without money and without price”; it cost God the SON OF HIS LOVE! (Rom 3:21-26; Heb 10:14 -18).
b. It involves a provision of spiritual discernment and power, (1Co 2:9-14; Rom 2:14-16; 2Co 3:3; Isa 30:19; Isa 30:21).
1) Centuries of participation in religious rituals had brought no satisfaction or deliverance – only frustration and failure, (contrast Jer 32:37-42).
2) Never before had they been ready for such an outpouring of the Divine Spirit; their hearts had not been right before God, (Jer 24:7; Jer 32:40; Isa 32:10-18).
3) Willingness to recognize Jesus Christ as Lord will ultimately bring them spiritual benefits that Gentiles – walking in the steps of Abraham’s faith – have long enjoyed.
4) This does not mean that there will be no further progress of knowledge; only that all will have immediate access to God, (1Th 4:9; 1Jn 2:27).
c. It will also involve, for Israel, a restoration to the intimacy of divine fellowship.
1) Though God was longsuffering – patiently bearing with them in their idolatry, apostasy and presumption – He eventually cast them off and withheld the blessings reserved for those who would walk obediently in the sphere of covenant fellowship, (Jer 2:2-20).
2) After millenniums of dreadful darkness, desolation and wanderings, God will take the initiative in bringing home again the one whom He so dearly loved, wooed and comforted in her youth, (Eze 16:60-63).
3) She will again be cleansed and given opportunity to reciprocate the love that has so miraculously preserved her (though she was ignorant of it, Hos 2:8) through the painful years of her rebellion and infidelity, (Eze 36:22-31; Eze 37:22-24).
4) The word “know”, as used here, suggests far more than intellectual attainment; it bespeaks a PERSONAL INTIMACY that is possible only in a relationship of mutual love, (Isa 11:9; Isa 54:13; Hab 2:14; Joh 17:3; Php_3:10; Eph 4:13; Eph 1:18; 2Pe 1:3; 1Jn 4:7; 1Jn 5:20).
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
Jeremiah proceeds with the same subject, but shews more clearly how much more abundant and richer the favor of God would be towards his people than formerly, he then does not simply promise the restoration of that dignity and greatness which they had lost, but something better and more excellent. We hence see that this passage necessarily refers to the kingdom of Christ, for without Christ nothing could or ought to have been hoped for by the people, superior to the Law; for the Law was a rule of the most perfect doctrine. If then Christ be taken away, it is certain that we must abide in the Law.
We hence then conclude, that the Prophet predicts of the kingdom of Christ; and this passage is also quoted by the Apostles, as being remarkable and worthy of notice. (Rom 11:27; Heb 8:8; Heb 10:16)
But we must observe the order and manner of teaching here pursued. The Prophet confirms what I have before said, that what we have been considering was incredible to the Jews. Having then already spoken of the benefits of God, which could have been hardly recognised by the senses of men, in order to obviate the want of fifith, he adds, that the Lord would manifest his mercy towards them in a new and unusual manner. We hence see why the Prophet added this passage to his former doctrine. For had he not spoken of a new covenant, those miserable men, whom he sought to inspire with the hope of salvation, would have ever vacillated; nay, as the greater part were already overwhelmed with despair, he would have effected nothing. Here then he sees before them a new covenant, as though he had said, that they ought not to look farther or higher, nor to measure the benefit of God, of which he had spoken, by the appearance of the state of things at that time, for God would make a new covenant.
There is yet no doubt but that he commends the favor of God, which was afterwards to be manifested in the fullness of time. Besides, we must ever bear in mind, that from the time the people returned to their own country, the faith of those who had embraced the favor of deliverance was assailed by the most grievous trials, for it would have been better for them to continue in perpetual exile than to be cruelly harassed by all their neighbors, and to be exposed to so many troubles. If, then, the people had been only restored from their exile in Babylon, it was a matter of small moment; but it behoved the godly to direct their minds to Christ. And hence we see that the Prophets, who performed the office of teaching after the restoration, dwelt on this point, — that they were to hope for something better than what then appeared, and that they were not to despond, because they saw that they did not enjoy rest, and were drawn into weary and grievous contests rather than freed from tyranny. We indeed know what Hagggai says of the future temple, and what Zechariah says, and also Malachi. And the same was the object of our Prophet in speaking of the new covenant, even that the faithful, after having enjoyed again their own country, might not clamor against God, because he did not bestow on them that happiness which he had promised. This was the second reason why the Prophet spoke of the new covenant.
As before, he now repeats the words, that the days would come, in which God would make a covenant with Israel as well as with Judah. For the ten tribes, as it is well known, had been driven into exile while the kingdom of Judah was still standing. Besides, when they revolted from the family of David, they became as it were another nation. God indeed did not cease to acknowledge them as his people; but they had alienated themselves as far as they could from the Church. God then promises that there would be again one body, for he would gather them that they might unite together, and not be like two houses.
Now, as to the new covenant, it is not so called, because it is contrary to the first covenant; for God is never inconsistent with himself, nor is he unlike himself, he then who once made a covenant with his chosen people, had not changed his purpose, as though he had forgotten his faithfulness. It then follows, that the first covenant was inviolable; besides, he had already made his covenant with Abraham, and the Law was a confirmation of that covenant. As then the Law depended on that covenant which God made with his servant Abraham, it follows that God could never have made a new, that is, a contrary or a different covenant. For whence do we derive our hope of salvation, except from that blessed seed promised to Abraham? Further, why are we called the children of Abraham, except on account of the common bond of faith? Why are the faithful said to be gathered into the bosom of Abraham? Why does Christ say, that some will come from the east and the west, and sit down in the kingdom of heaven with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob? (Luk 16:22; Mat 8:11) These things no doubt sufficiently shew that God has never made any other covenant than that which he made formerly with Abraham, and at length confirmed by the hand of Moses. This subject might be more fully handled; but it is enough briefly to shew, that the covenant which God made at first is perpetual.
Let us now see why he promises to the people a new covenant. It being new, no doubt refers to what they call the form; and the form, or manner, regards not words only, but first Christ, then the grace of the Holy Spirit, and the whole external way of teaching. But the substance remains the same. By substance I understand the doctrine; for God in the Gospel brings forward nothing but what the Law contains. We hence see that God has so spoken from the beginning, that he has not changed, no not a syllable, with regard to the substance of the doctrine. For he has included in the Law the rule of a perfect life, and has also shewn what is the way of salvation, and by types and figures led the people to Christ, so that the remission of sin is there clearly made manifest, and whatever is necessary to be known.
As then God has added nothing to the Law as to the substance of the doctrine, we must come, as I have already said, to the form, as Christ was not as yet manifested: God made a new covenant, when he accomplished through his Son whatever had been shadowed forth under the Law. For the sacrifices could not of themselves pacify God, as it is well known, and whatever the Law taught respecting expiation was of itself useless and of no importance. The new covenant then was made when Christ appeared with water and blood, and really fulfilled what God had exhibited under types, so that the faithful might have some taste of salvation. But the coming of Christ would not have been sufficient, had not regeneration by the Holy Spirit been added. It was, then, in some respects, a new thing, that God regenerated the faithful by his Spirit, so that it became not only a doctrine as to the letter, but also efficacious, which not only strikes the ear, but penetrates into the heart, and really forms us for the service of God. The outward mode of teaching was also new, as it is evident to all; for when we compare the Law with the Gospel, we find that God speaks to us now openly, as it were face to face, and not under a veil, as Paul teaches us, when speaking of Moses, who put on a veil when he went forth to address the people in God’s name. (2Co 3:13) It is not so, says Paul, under the Gospel, but the veil is removed, and God in the face of Christ presents himself to be seen by us. This, then, is the reason why the Prophet calls it a new covenant, as it will be shown more at large: for I touch only on things which cannot be treated apart, that the whole context of the Prophet may be better understood. Let us then proceed now with the words.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
E. A New Covenant Jer. 31:31-34
TRANSLATION
(31) Behold, days are coming (oracle of the LORD) when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. (32) It will not be like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out from the land of Egypt which covenant of mine they broke though I was lord over them (oracle of the LORD). (33) But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days (oracle of the LORD): I will place My law within them and I will write it upon their heart and I will be their God and they shall be My people. (34) No more will they teach each man his neighbor and his brother saying, Know the LORD, for all of them shall know Me from the least of them to the greatest (oracle of the LORD), for I will forgive their iniquity and I will remember their sin no more.
COMMENTS
The verses translated above are the four most important verses in the book of Jeremiah. Here Jeremiah envisions a time when the covenant between God and Israel instituted at Mt. Sinai will be replaced by a new and better covenant. After giving the promise of the new covenant (Jer. 31:31-32) Jeremiah then outlines some of the provisions of that covenant (Jer. 31:33-34).
1. The promise of the new covenant (Jer. 31:31-32)
The new covenant will be made with reunited Judah and Israel. In Old Testament prophecy the unification of Judah and Israel points to that day when there would be neither Jew nor Greek, bond nor free, male nor female but all the redeemed would be one in Christ Jesus. Both Peter (1Pe. 2:10) and Paul (Rom. 9:25 f.) so interpreted the earlier prophecies of Hosea (Hos. 1:10-11) with regard to the restoration of the northern kingdom and the unification of the two kingdoms. Those interpreters who regard the covenant promised by Jeremiah to be something yet futurea covenant between God and national Israelare proved to be dead wrong by such passages as Heb. 8:8-12 which quotes at length from Jeremiah 31 and applies it to the Christian dispensation. Paul again and again takes up the matter of the new covenant and emphasizes the distinction between it and the old Sinai covenant (e.g., 2Co. 3:6; 2Co. 3:14-16). Jesus alluded to this new covenant when he instituted the Lords Supper by saying This is my blood of the new testament (covenant) which is shed for many (Mat. 26:28; Mar. 14:24). In the prophetic view of the future the restoration of Israel reaches its climax with the institution of the new covenant.
Jer. 31:32 compares the old covenant to a marriage in which God was the lord or husband and Israel was the bride. God being the perfect Husband never gave His bride any cause for desiring the dissolution of the matrimonial connection. But Israel had again and again been unfaithful to the marriage vows, i.e. she had been disobedient to the covenant.[275] A new arrangement or agreement between God and His people was therefore necessary.
[275] Exodus 32; Num. 14:16; Psa. 95:8-11; Act. 7:51-60.
2. The provisions of the new covenant (Jer. 31:33-34)
It was not given Jeremiah to see all that the new covenant would involve. All that the Holy Spirit was concerned to do at this point in time was to reveal in broad outline the basic character of that future covenant. Four statements are made with regard to the promised covenant.
a) I will place My law within them, and write it on their heart (Jer. 31:33 a). Here is a new spiritual dimension. Heretofore the laws of God had been written on tablets of stone; now they are to be written on the heart. Under the new covenant men will respond to the divine will from inward motivation rather than outward compulsion. Every individual born in Israel was automatically under the law of God; he had no choice in the matter. But one can enter into the new covenant Israel, the church of Christ, only by willingly submitting himself to the command ments of God.
b) I will be their God and they shall be My people (Jer. 31:33 b). Here is a new relationship. Those who enter into the new covenant Israel through faith and obedience will come into a special relationship with God. Peter de scribes the Christian Church as a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a people of Gods own possession (1Pe. 2:9). only such as have today the law of God written upon their hearts have this unique relationship to God.
c) All will know Me from the least to the greatest (Jer. 31:34 a). Infants and small children were members of the old covenant Israel; but this would no longer be true under the new covenant. Every member of the new covenant Israel will know God. The word know in Hebrew has the connotation of knowledge derived from personal experience. It is not knowledge about, it is knowledge of. It is the kind of knowledge of which Jesus spoke when He said: And this is life eternal, that they might know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent (Joh. 17:3). To know the Lord is saving faith, that basic and indispensable prerequisite to membership in the new covenant Israel. A Christian will not need to go around to fellow Christians and exhort them to know the Lord. If they are Christians they already have come to a saving knowledge of the Lord. Thus the point of this statement is not that there shall be no longer any need of instruction in religion, but that here will be a directness of access to God for both Jew and Gentile, which did not exist under the old covenant.
d) I will forgive their sin and their iniquity will I remember no more (Jer. 31:34 b). It is not by self-acquired holiness or meritorious works that a man enters the new covenant Israel. It is through the perfect sacrifice of the Lamb without spot and blemish. The basic inadequacy of the old covenant was its failure to provide a perfect sacrifice for sin. The ever-repeated sacrifices of the Old Testament foreshadowed and typified that once-for-all perfect sacrifice that took place on the hill called Calvary. The Hebrew verbs in the present verse are in the imperfect state denoting that the forgiveness here predicted will take place again and again as men and women appropriate to themselves the benefits of the Saviours sacrifice.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(31) I will make a new covenant . . .Both in itself, and as the germ of the future of the spiritual history of mankind, the words are of immense significance. It was to this that the Lord Jesus directed the thoughts of His disciples, as the prophecy which, above all other prophecies, He had come to fulfil by the sacrifice of Himself. In that New Covenant in His blood, which He solemnly proclaimed at the Last Supper (Mat. 26:28), and which was commemorated whenever men met to partake of the Supper of the Lord (1Co. 11:25), there was latent the whole argument of the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Hebrews 8-10), the whole Gospel of justification by faith as proclaimed by St. Paul (Gal. 3:15-17). From it the Church took the title of the New Covenant, the New Testament, which it gave to the collected writings of the Apostolic age. This title in its turn gave the name of the Old Testament to the collected writings which recorded how in sundry times and divers manners God had spoken in time past to Israel.
The promise is too commonly dealt with as standing by itself, without reference to the sequence of thought in which we find it placed. That sequence, however, is not hard to trace. The common proverb about the sour grapes had set the prophet thinking on the laws of Gods dealings with men. He felt that something more was needed to restrain men from evil than the thought that they might be transmitting evil to their childrens childrensomething more even than the thought of direct personal responsibility, and of a perfectly righteous retribution. And that something was to be found in the idea of a lawnot written on tablets of stone, not threatening and condemning from without, and denouncing punishment on the transgressors and their descendants, but written on heart and spirit (2Co. 3:3-6). It is noticeable, as showing how like thoughts were working in the minds of the two prophets, that in Ezekiel also the promise of a new heart and new spirit comes in close sequence upon the protest against the adage about the childrens teeth being set on edge (Eze. 18:31). In the words for saith the Lord we have the more solemn word which carries with it the announcement as of an oracle from God.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
31. The days come Days of blessed promise a period marked as the exodus itself. The contrast between the slavery of Egypt and the freedom and prosperity of Palestine is to be followed by another contrast more notable and blessed.
A new covenant One spiritual rather than temporal and material; universal and not partial; permanent and not temporary; written on the heart instead of on the tables of stone; the down-beaming of God’s love rather than his law; a covenant of life and not of death. It was “new,” not as different from the old, but as more spiritual and more glorious.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
In Coming Days YHWH Will Make A New Covenant With His People, A Covenant Written In Their Hearts ( Jer 31:31-34 ).
A covenant is an agreement made between two or more parties which is binding on both. God’s covenant is an example of a covenant which is instituted by one party to the agreement as the result of the giving of a benefit, to which the other parties, who have received the benefit, are then bound to comply. But the state of Judah at this time was such that it was clear that the old covenant made at Sinai had failed. As the writer to the Hebrews points out, the assumption was being made here that the old covenant was insufficient for its purpose (Heb 8:7-8). It could show men how to live, but it could not enable them to live in accordance with its requirements. YHWH had made with them His first covenant as their Deliverer and Redeemer looking for a faithful response. But, it was an ‘outward covenant’ made with men whose hearts had not changed, and as a result, apart from at rare times, they had continually failed in that response and had demonstrated that no amount of gratitude or miracles would make them obedient to YHWH.
Now therefore the time was coming when YHWH would provide them with a new covenant. And He would write the covenant in their hearts in such a way that they would want to obey it and would desire to do His will. In the words of Php 2:13, He would ‘work in them to will and to do of His good pleasure’. And the result was to be that many would in that day come to know Him and respond to Him. And when would that day come? ‘The law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ’ (Joh 1:17).
The necessity for such a covenant brings out how central the covenant was in YHWH’s dealings with His people. Judgment had come on them because of their failure to observe the covenant. Murder, adultery, idolatry, blasphemy were all breaches of the covenant and were constantly cited as reasons for judgment. And each of these required the death penalty. Thus nothing in the covenant as it then was could save them. The covenant could not even provide offerings that would provide expiation and atonement for such offences, as it could in the case of lesser offences. (As David makes clear in Psalms 51, only the mercy of God could do that). Thus if His people were to be restored it had to be by means of a covenant that worked and lifted them above such things.
Jer 31:31-32
“Behold, the days are coming, the word of YHWH, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah, not according to the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, which my covenant they broke, although I was a husband to them, the word of YHWH.”
YHWH declares that in days to come, at the time determined by Him, He would make a new covenant, a new binding agreement, with Israel/Judah. It would not be like the old covenant because that had failed miserably, and it had failed even though He had not failed them, but had been like a true husband to them. He had redeemed them from Egypt, wooed them to Himself in the wilderness, and bound them to Himself by covenant (had ‘married’ them) at Sinai, and had from then on acted as a husband on their behalf. But in spite of that they had rejected Him and had preferred other lovers and had deserted Him (see Hosea 1-3). And although time and again they had come to renew that covenant, seemingly genuinely, it had never been with more than a transient response (see e.g. Deu 27:9 ff.; Joshua 24; 2Ch 23:4-7; 2Ch 34:29-32). Thus He had ‘recognised’ (humanly speaking) that that covenant was insufficient. What was needed was the miracle of the transformation of their hearts and lives. That alone could solve the problem.
Jer 31:33
“But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, the word of YHWH,
I will put my law in their inward parts,
And will I write it in their heart,
And I will be their God,
And they will be my people,
And they will no more teach every man his neighbour,
And every man his brother, saying, ‘Know YHWH,’
For they will all know me,
From the least of them to the greatest of them,
The word of YHWH,
For I will forgive their iniquity,
And I will remember no more their sin.”
YHWH describes the content of the new covenant that He will make with them (‘House of Israel’ is here clearly inclusive of Judah). It will consist of ‘instruction’ (torah – law) which He will put in their inward parts and write in their hearts. It will such that it will become a part of them. Using Pauline terminology it will be written on their hearts by the Spirit of the living God (2Co 3:3). And then He will again be their God, in a different sense from previously because He will be personally involved in their lives, and furthermore, as a result of the Spirit’s work within (compare Eze 36:26-27), they will in turn truly be His obedient people, fully responsive to Him. It is important to recognise here that ‘heart’ for the Israelite, like ‘inward parts’, signifies mind and will as well as emotion. The law will be written in their minds and wills and thoughts. To quote Paul again, they will have ‘the mind of the Spirit’ (Rom 8:7). They will be ‘minded’ to do His will by the Spirit. In Jesus’ own citation from Isa 54:13, ‘they will all be taught of God’ (Joh 6:45)
‘And I will be their God, and they will be my people.’ The same words were spoken in Lev 26:12, but the meaning was very different. There He would be dwelling among them in the Tabernacle and would be their God. Here He would be personally at work within their hearts, and therefore dwelling within them as His Temple (see 2Co 6:16-18), and would be their God. It is a totally different situation.
And the result will be that there will be no need of anyone to teach them to know Him, because they will all know Him, from the least to the greatest. They will be Spirit enlightened (compare Isa 54:13; Mat 11:25-27). If they were to ‘know God’ this would be essential for ‘no one comprehends the thoughts of God apart from the Spirit of God’ (1Co 2:11). It will be a part of what He has implanted within them (Isa 61:3). Indeed Jesus tells us that it will be His own work, for ‘no one knows the Father but the Son, and those to whom the Son pleases to reveal Him’ (Mat 11:27). Furthermore, to truly know God, is to be known by Him (Gal 4:9).
Such will be the new relationship that He will forgive their iniquity and no more remember their sin. There could be no such experience of God unless sin were truly dealt with. It is not that He will ‘forget’ their sin. It is that He will thrust it from His mind. He will deliberately and positively no more remember it. It will be for ever gone, not to be dredged up again. As far as they would be concerned this forgiveness would be on the basis of the necessary cult offerings and sacrifices, but as Isa 53:5-6; Isa 53:10 makes clear, it would finally be consequent on the Servant of YHWH, as representative of His people, offering Himself as a guilt offering (compare Mar 10:45).
In these words we have a clear outward revelation of what must always have been true in the hearts of true heart believers, otherwise they would not have persevered as believers. But this is the first time that it has been spelled out. It was, however, intrinsic in such prayers as ‘create in me a new heart, O God, and put a new and right Spirit within me’ (Psa 51:10) and ‘teach me to do your will, for you are my God. Let your good Spirit lead me on a level path’ (Psa 143:10). Compare also Psa 37:31; Psa 40:8; Isa 51:7 Without such an experience, known in the New Testament as ‘birth from above’ or ‘birth of the Spirit’ (Joh 3:3-6), there could have been no salvation for anyone, for no man could save himself or do this work within himself. It had to result from the ‘circumcision of the heart’ by YHWH (Jer 4:4; Deu 30:6; Rom 2:29). To put it in Paul’s words, ‘if any man be in Christ Jesus he is a new creation. Old things are passed away. Everything has become new’ (2Co 5:17).
The writer to the Hebrews makes clear that it is these very promises which are central to Christian experience (Heb 8:8-13). It is because Christ has, through the eternal Spirit, offered Himself without blemish to God, and has thereby become the Mediator of the new covenant, that we can enjoy such an experience (Heb 9:14) through the working of the Spirit of God. It is this which was lacking in the teaching of the Rabbis, and in the teaching of all who believe in salvation by doing good things.
There was, of course a sense in which ‘those days’ came at the time of the return from exile. Many of those who returned did so because of God’s working in their hearts, otherwise they would not have come. Much of their activity was ‘not by power, nor by might but by My Spirit, says YHWH’ (Zec 4:6). What happened at that time was earthshaking (Hag 2:21). But it did not result in a fully transformed nation. That awaited the coming of John the Baptist and Jesus Christ Himself, when large parts of the nation were stirred and a ‘new nation’ was formed which replaced the old (Mat 21:43), the Israel within Israel (Rom 9:6). And that nation went out to transform lives in all parts of the world. It was that that began the complete fulfilment of this prophecy. There is now no other true nation of Israel other than the one then formed, the body of believers who responded to the Messiah. This promise is not given to those who call themselves the nation of Israel in Palestine. For whilst, of course, many of them could partake in it by responding to Jesus Christ, there is no guarantee that they will do so (although we can hope that it will be so). The ‘all Israel’ who will be saved are the Israel within Israel, the elect, and they include all true believers.
And yet even this cannot be seen as the final fulfilment of these words, for I have been in many churches, and learned of many more, and have never found one where all the people (or even some of the people all the time) were fully like this. It is rather the ideal which is in process and is coming. Indeed we must ask, when will we be like this, living in such total obedience to His will? And when will we fully know God? And the answer can only be, ‘in the new heaven and the new earth’. Thus as always this is a prophecy which will be fulfilled in stages. (It will certainly not be fulfilled in any so-called Millennium which, if it ever were to exist (and Jesus, Paul and Peter clearly knew nothing of it), will according to its adherents end up with almost everyone following Satan).
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Jer 31:31-34. Behold, the days come, &c. The covenant here spoken of Jeremiah calls a new covenant; Jer 31:31 and what kind of covenant? Not such a one as was made with their fathers; Jer 31:32. This was declarative enough of its nature; yet, to prevent mistakes, he gives as well a positive as a negative description of it. This shall be the covenant,I will put my law in their inward parts, &c. Jer 31:33 that is to say, “This law shall be spiritual, as the other given to their fathers was comparatively carnal; for the ceremonial law did not so scrutinize the heart, but rested chiefly, or in a great measure in external obedience and observances. But to crown the whole we may observe, that Jeremiah fixed the true nature of the dispensation: In those days they shall say no more, &c. Now, &c. For I will forgive, &c.” Jer 31:34. For it was part of the sanction of the Jewish law, that children should bear the iniquity of their fathers. If it be objected, that it was not possible that the Jews, who believed the covenant of the law to be eternal, should look for a new covenant by the Messiah; it may be replied, that they could not well doubt of a second covenant, when a new covenant was plainly promised them in this passage of Jeremiah, different from that made with their fathers on their coming out of Egypt. In that he said a new covenant, he hath made the first old: see Heb 8:13. Their ancient Targum, and their Peruschim, or literal expositions, refer the fulfilling of this promise in Jeremiah to the days of the Messiah; and their old traditions to be read still in the Talmud, and in the books of Midrash, are the best comment upon it. Such as these: “The law of Moses shall last no longer than the coming of the Messiah; the week the Son of David comes, the law shall be made anew:” and they declare that most of their festivals, oblations, and distinctions of meats, obliged but for a time, and shall cease under the Messiah. See Bishop Chandler’s Defence, p. 272 and Peters on Job, p. 283. Instead of, Although I was unto them; Jer 31:32. Houbigant reads and I disregarded them, or regarded them not. We shall enlarge farther on this subject when we come to the eighth chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
2. THE NEW COVENANT
Jer 31:31-40
31Behold, the days are coining, saith Jehovah,
When I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah:
32Not like the covenant which I made with their fathers
In the day that I took them by their hand,24
To lead them forth out of the land of Egypt;
Which my covenant they broke;
And yet I was their husband, saith Jehovah.
33But this is the covenant which I will make
With the house of Israel after those days, saith Jehovah:
I will put my law within them, and write it on their heart,
And I will be their God and they shall be my people.
34And a man will no more teach his neighbor,
Nor a man his brother, saying, Know Jehovah!
For all will know me from25 the least to the greatest, saith Jehovah:
For I will forgive their sin,
And their iniquity I will remember no more.
35Thus saith Jehovah, who giveth the sun for light by day,
And the laws of the moon and stars for light by night,
Who exciteth the sea so that its waves roar,
Jehovah Zebaoth is his name:
36If these laws perish before me, saith Jehovah,
The seed of Israel will also cease to be a nation before me forever.
37Thus saith Jehovah, When the heavens above are measured,
And the foundations of the earth searched out beneath,
Then will I also reject the whole seed of Israel
For all that they have done, saith Jehovah.
38Behold, the days are coming,26 saith Jehovah,
When the city shall be built for Jehovah,
From the tower of Hananeel to the corner-gate.
39And the measuring-line27 shall go forth further,
Straight out to the hill Gareb and turn towards Goath.
40And the whole valley of the dead bodies and of the ashes,
And all the land28 to the brook Kedron,
To the corner of the horse-gate towards the east,
Shall be holy unto Jehovah,
And shall no more be devastated nor destroyed forever.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
This prophecy reaches its acme in the promise of a new covenant (Jer 31:31). This new covenant is the foundation of the moral condition set before us in Jer 31:29-30. For the essence of the new covenant, in distinction from the old, which was broken (Jer 31:32), will be an inward central union with God (Jer 31:33), the consequence of Which will be, that on the part of men, outward instruction will be superfluous, the ground of which, on the part of God, is His forgiving love (Jer 31:34). This covenant has two further characteristics: 1. it will be eternal, as the eternal ordinances of nature (Jer 31:35-37); 2. it will also have in its train the penetration of the natural sphere with the elements of holy life. Jerusalem will be inwardly so holy to the Lord that even the unholy places, which the city has hitherto had, like all other cities, in its suburbs, will now, as being sanctified, be reckoned to the city itself (Jer 31:38-40).
Jer 31:31-32. Behold Jehovah. Here also the prophets discourse extends to both halves of the nation. The Lord will conclude a new covenant with the whole of Israel (Jer 32:40; Jer 50:5; Isa 55:3). This new covenant stands in contrast to the old, which the Lord made with the fathers of the Israelites in the day when He took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt. Wrong as it would be to understand by this day the stay at Sinai, equally so would it be to restrict it to the day of the exodus (Exo 12:51; Exo 13:3-4). Two things pertain to the conclusion of a covenant, a performance and a condition or requirement; the concluding of the covenant between Jehovah and the people Israel then lasted through the whole period of the Mosaic legislation, just as long as the bringing forth out of Egypt lasted. The manuduction ends only with the promised land, and from the day of the exodus to the day of his death Moses did not cease to give laws to the people (Exodus 12 to Deuteronomy 32). Since now there is no grammatical necessity of taking day in a literal sense (comp. Isa 11:16; 2Sa 21:12; 2Sa 22:1), we are justified in understanding by the covenant of Jer 31:32 that covenant which Jehovah concluded through the mediation of Moses in different acts (Deu 29:1; comp. Kurtz, Gerch. d. A. B. II., S. 522 [History of the Old Covenant] with the people Israel, and required as its condition the keeping of the Torah (comp. Deu 29:24; Deu 28:1 sqq.; 13 sqq.).Which my covenant. Which is at any rate to be referred to my covenant, since this is also the main conception in the previous clause of the sentence.They is emphatic: they broke the covenant, not I. It was the weak side of this covenant that it could be broken, and had God made this only, there might have been a doubt either as to His omniscience or His holy love. The first covenant, however, was only preliminary, preparatory and typical.And yet I was their husband. The LXX., which translates Jer 3:14 , here has . So likewise in Heb 8:9. From the context we should certainly expect an idea corresponding to broke, i. e. a word by which Jehovahs relation to the covenant-breakers would be designated. Meanwhile grammatical considerations require us to take in the meaning, which it has everywhere else, namely=to possess, and indeed (predominantly) as spouse. But we cannot, with Hengstenberg, take the sentence and yet I, etc., as a promise (I will marry them), for that would be an anticipation of the turn of thought beginning with But, in Jer 31:33; we must rather, with Ewald, regard it as an antithetical statement of a fact: and yet I was (or: while I was their husband). Thus the emphasis rests on the idea of husband, and the sense is: it is not a covenant concluded inter pares, which each of the contracting parties may renounce, which they have broken, but a marriage alliance in which they represent the woman, who is never justified in desiring the dissolution of the matrimonial connection, or in effecting it. [Probably the true rendering is, and therefore I rejected them (from bal, to refuse, to loathe). See the Syriac, Pococke (Port. Mosis, pp. 510, Gesenius, 130, and Mr. Turpies valuable work, The Old Testament in the New, pp. 251, 252). Wordsworth.S. R. A.].
Jer 31:33-34. But this is remember no more. is for, but in the sense of but, because it corresponds to not, in Jer 31:32. Comp. Naegelsb. Gr., 110, 4.Those days. It is not said these, for this would be the days of the present, while the word used refers to more distant days, to those namely, which will precede the turn to good, the (Jer 31:16 sqq.).I will put, etc. The prophet evidently has in view the stone tables of the Law, on which the ten words, the kernel of the Torah, were written. This law of commandments (Eph 2:15; Col 2:14) externally imposed on men by a subordinate mediator (Gal 3:19), was (Heb 7:19), wherefore it is also said of it (Heb 7:19). It was only to render men conscious how far the human subject in and of himself was in a condition to satisfy the demands of a holy God, i. e the law was to produce conviction of sin (Rom 3:20). Only a heart in which the law has been livingly written and in which it dwells, i. e. only a human will, which has become one with the divine will, and thus free, can continue in covenant with God (Jer 32:40; Jer 24:7; Eze 11:19; 2Co 3:3). Only where this takes place is God truly the mans God, and the people Gods people. To be God is to be the most exalted being, therefore the highest good, the source and end of life. Only where God is thus for man, is He truly his God. And a people only which stands in this relation to God, is truly Gods people (comp. Jer 7:23).Hengstenberg is of opinion that between the old and new covenants there is only a quantitative not a qualitative difference. Parallel to the passage under consideration is the promise of God of the pouring out of the Spirit, Joe 3:1-2 (Jer 2:28-29), so that what we remarked on that passage is applicable here also As under the New Covenant generally in its relation to the Old there is nowhere an absolutely new beginning but always a completion only so in reference to the communication of the Spirit, Joel puts only abundance in the place of scarcity, many in the place of few [Christology, Eng. Tr. II., p. 439]. It is true no legal enactment of the Old Covenant is declared false in the New (Mat 5:17-19); it is true that men knew even under the Old Covenant that the law, in order to be fulfilled must not be merely externally before the eyes, or merely in the head, but that it must be in the heart (Deu 30:6; Psa 40:9; Pro 3:1-3). But this Old Testament having-in-the-heart, which is spoken of in the passages cited, is quite a different thing from that which Jeremiah means in this passage. There were many God-fearing Jews who had the law at heart, and in their heart, and who loved the Lord with all their strength, but was one of them justified by this observance of the law? We shall recur to this again directly.
Jer 31:34. No more teach, etc. Theodoret says, . We have however no intimation that the prophecy of Jer 31:34 will be fulfilled at another time than that which is spoken of before and afterwards. No passage can be shown in which the Old Testament prophets make predictions concerning the heavenly state. The prophet therefore sets before his hearers a period of terrestrial development in which the illumination of the Spirit (Joe 3:1-2; Joh 6:45) will lead each of himself to the essentially correct knowledge of God. Reciprocal furtherance is certainly not thus denied.For all will, etc. In these words the prophet indicates the proper basis of the gifts of grace previously named. So also the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews understands the passage, quoting Jer 10:16 sqq. (in distinction from Jer 8:7 sqq.) so that after he directly adds the concluding words of Jer 31:34, . Only where the real (not merely ideal and hypothetical) forgiveness of sins conditioned by the true atoning sacrifice is imparted (comp. Heb 10:1-4), can there be the communication of the spirit of adoption (Gal 3:2; Gal 3:6), and thus true knowledge, and the true walk according to Gods will. And herein also consists the most radical objective difference between the Old Covenant and the New, in the former all is shadow and type, the latter only has the essence of the good things itself (Heb 10:1). Not till the sacrifice was offered on the cross was the veil of the temple rent, and the way of access to God actually opened. Now even if Moses and Elias be pointed to (Mat 17:3), it is certain that no one received the knowledge of the mystery of godliness (1Ti 3:16) before the death and resurrection of our Lord. John was more than a prophet, and yet the least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he (Mat 11:9 sqq.) The for before I will forgive is therefore to be well observed. Here also we learn the meaning of . It is without doubt incorrect to take it in the sense of constituere, to establish, make arrangements, for everywhere else it signifies to conclude a covenant. But where God concludes a covenant it is always at the same time He who works the will and the execution, whence also in this passage gifts of God only are mentioned. At the same time we are neither justified nor in a condition to give a definite historical date for the conclusion of the New Covenant. If we should designate the day of the crucifixion as on the part of God the moment when He entered into the New Covenant relation, yet on the part, of mankind there would then be no corresponding date of acceptance. In the fact that the Covenant is in the most exalted sense granted, lies also the necessity of its acceptance. God does not give His Son for an uncertainty. The taking is included in the giving. In fact the measure of the covenant members becomes full by the successive accession of individual believers.
Jer 31:35-37. Thus saith Jehovah. Not only by its inwardness, but, also, closely connected with this by its eternal duration, is the New Covenant distinguished from the Old. The Old was broken by Israel and the nation therefore rejected by Jehovah. This will no more take place under the New Covenant. This will be as it were a second ordinance of nature. It will be as immovable as the great laws of nature.Who giveth the sun, etc. The prophet has Gen 1:14 in view. Comp. Psa 136:8. The expression and the laws, etc., seems to be a reminiscence of Job 38:33, which comes out more plainly in Jer 33:25.Who exciteth the sea, etc., is taken from Isa 51:15. There the might of the Lord, as it has been displayed in the wonders of history and of nature in general, is set forth for the comfort of Israel. Here all the emphasis lies on the idea of the fixedness and stability of the ordinances of nature, which God has created. That God can excite the mighty ocean is rather a proof of His power than-an instance of the inviolate order of nature, and it is hence probable that the expression originated with Isaiah.
Jer 31:36. If these laws, etc. As certainly as the laws of nature are inviolable, so certainly shall Israel everlastingly continue as a nation before the Lord (Jer 33:20-26; Psa 89:37-38). The question is natural here: why then has Jehovah raised the eternal continuance of the people of Israel as it were to the rank of a law of nature? The answer is given in Jer 31:37, (which does not feebly hobble after, as Graf supposes), not however with a solution of the problem, but with the declaration that the ground of the historical fact is as secret as the heavens above us are immeasurable, and the earth beneath us in its profoundest depths is unsearchable. Comp. Jer 33:22; Jer 33:26.
Jer 31:38-40. Behold the days forever.Tower of Hananeel. This tower designates, as is acknowledged, the North-East corner of Jerusalem. It is also mentioned in Zec 14:10; Neh 3:1; Neh 12:39. The corner-gate (comp. 2Ki 14:13; 2Ch 26:9, and also Zec 14:10) designates the North-West corner. Vid. Raumer, Palst. S. 290. By these two points then the northern limit of the city is defined. As the tower of Hananeel and the corner tower were part or the fortifications of the city, there seems to be no further extension on this sideStraight out, accus. of motion to the question whither? To its opposite, i. e., straight out. Comp. Amo 4:3; Jos 6:5; Jos 6:20.Gareb occurs here only as the name of a place, as the name of a person in 2Sa 23:38; 1Ch 11:40. The meaning of the word must according to scabies, (Lev 21:20; Lev 22:22) be scabby, leprous. In accordance with the other localizations, this must mean, as Graf has shown, the South-West corner. What Goath () is, is quite uncertain. The word occurs were only. The Chald. has (cowpond) the Syr. lormeto, i.e., rocky hill, by which it seems to have understood the projecting rock of the castle Antonia (Hitzig, Fuerst). Vitringa and Hengstenberg take it as = , i. e., Golgotha. But both the etymology and topography are very uncertain. The valley of corpses and ashes is without doubt the vale of Hinnom in the South, for that was the place where all the refuse of the city ran or was carried. (Comp. Comm. on Jer 19:2). is the unburied cadaver of men and beasts (Jer 41:9; Gen 15:11), is especially the ashes of burnt fat (Lev 1:16; Lev 4:1). It is better to regard it as the ashes of the offal, burned without the camp, than of the sacrifices burned on the altar (flesh, skin, dung, Lev 4:11-12; Lev 7:17; Lev 7:19; Lev 8:17; Lev 8:32; Lev 9:11; Lev 16:27; Lev 19:6) and clothing (Lev 13:52; Lev 13:55; Lev 13:57). The horse-gate was on the East of the city by the temple (Neh 3:18; Neh 12:39-40). So far as we can perceive in general from these local determinations, the subject is not primarily, as in Eze 48:15 sqq. an extension of the city. For the gain in space according to the boundaries mentioned is relatively insignificant. Only in the South-West, South, and at any rate in the South-East, are some small portions added to the city. The main point is that by this extension the places which were unholy will be rendered holy. They were the purlieus of the city. If even these places are added to the city, it shows that the city no longer needs such places. It is in itself so thoroughly holy to the Lord that it will have nothing unholy to cast out. Nothing unclean will enter (Rev 21:27), therefore nothing unclean will proceed from it. It will be thoroughly sanctified and enlightened, therefore safe from destruction to all eternity.
Footnotes:
[24]Jer 31:32.On the punctuation of comp. Olshausen, 192 f.
[25]Jer 31:34.On comp. rems. on Jer 7:7; Jer 7:25.
[26]Jer 31:38., which is wanting in the Chethibh, but is supplied by the Keri, is nowhere else lacking in the formula, so frequent in Jeremiah. There is probably then a scriptural error.
[27]Jer 31:39.Instead of the Masoretes would read (here as in 1Ki 7:23; Zec 1:16). Although is the usual form, the form (comp. ) is however not to be discredited.
[28]Jer 31:40.A word does not occur, nor is a root to be found. We are therefore obliged to read with the Masoretes . (Comp. Isa 37:27; Isa 16:8; Hab 3:17; Deu 32:32; 2Ki 23:4).
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
1. Joh. Conr. Schaller, pastor at Cautendorf, says in his Gospel Sermons, (Hof. 1742, S. 628), These chapters are like a sky in which sparkle many brilliant stars of strong and consolatory declarations, a paradise and pleasure-garden in which a believing soul is refreshed with delightsome flowers of instruction, and solaced with sweetly flavored apples of gracious promise.
2. On Jer 30:1-3. The people of Israel were not then capable of bearing such a prophecy, brimming over with happiness and glory. They would have misused it, hearing to the end what was promised them, and then only the more certainly postponing what was the only thing then necessarysincere repentance. Hence they are not yet to hear this gloriously consolatory address. It is to be written, that it may in due time be perceived that the Lord, even at the time when He was obliged to threaten most severely, had thoughts of peace concerning the people, and that thus the period of prosperity has not come by chance, nor in consequence of a change of mind, but in consequence of a plan conceived from the beginning and executed accordingly.
3. On Jer 30:7. The great and terrible day of the Lord (Joe 3:4) has not the dimensions of a human day. It has long sent out its heralds in advance. Yea, it has itself already dawned. For since by the total destruction of the external theocracy judgment is begun at the house of God (1Pe 4:17), we stand in the midst of the day of God in the midst of the judgment of the world. Then the time of trouble for Jacob has begun (Jer 30:7), from which he is to be delivered, when the fulness of the Gentiles is come in (Romans 11.)
4. On Jer 30:9. Christ is David in his highest potency, and He is also still more. For if we represent all the typical points in Davids life as a circle, and draw a line from each of these points, the great circle thus formed would comprise only a part of the given in Christ. Nevertheless Christ is the true David, who was not chosen like Saul for his bodily stature, but only for his inward relation to God (comp. Psa 2:7), whose kingdom also does not cease after a short period of glory, but endures forever; who will not like Saul succumb to his enemies, but will conquer them all, and will give to his kingdom the widest extent promised; all this however not without, like David, having gone through the bitterest trials.
5. On Jer 30:11. Modus patern castigationis accommodatus et quasi appensus ad stateram judicii Dei adeoque non immensus sed dimensus. Christus ecclesiam crucis su hredem constituit. Gregor. M. Frster.
6. On Jer 30:14. Cum virlutem patienti nostr flagella transeunt, valde metuendum est, ne peccatis nostris exigentibus non jam quasi filii a patre, sed quasi hostes a Domino feriamur. Gregor. M. Moral. XIV. 20, on Job 19:11. Ghisler.
7. On Jer 30:17. Providentia Dei mortalibus salutifera, antequam percutiat, pharmaca medendi grati componit, et gladium ir su acuit. Evagr. Hist. Ecc 4:6.Quando incidis in tentationem, crede, quod nisi cognovisset te posse illam evadere, non permisisset te in illam incidere. Theophyl. in cap. 18 Joh. Frster.Feriam prius et sanabo melius. Theophyl. in Hosea 11. Ghisler.
8. On Jer 30:21. This church of God will own a, Prince from its midstJesus, of our flesh and blood through the virgin Mary, and He approaches God, as no other can, for He is Gods image, Gods Son, and at the same time the perfect, holy in all His sufferings, only obedient son of man. This king is mediator and reconciler with God; He is also high-priest and fulfilled all righteousness, as was necessary for our propitiation. What glory to have such a king, who brings us nigh unto God, and this is our glory! Diedrich.
9. On Jer 31:1. There is no greater promise than this: I will be thy God. For if He is our God we are His creatures, His redeemed, His sanctified, according to all the three articles of the Christian faith. Cramer.
10. On Jer 31:2. The rough heap had to be sifted by the sword, but those who survived, though afflicted in the desert of this life, found favor with God, and these, the true Israel, God leads into His rest. Diedrich.
11. On Jer 31:3. The love of God towards us comes from love and has no other cause above or beside itself, but, is in God and remains in God, so that Christ who is in God is its centre. For herein is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us (1Jn 4:10). Cramer. Totum grati imputatur, non nostris meritis. Augustine in Psalms 31. Frster. Before I had done anything good Thou hadst already moved towards me. Let these words be written on your hearts with the pen of the living God, that they may light you like flames of fire on the day of the marriage. It is your certificate of birth, your testimonial. Let me never lose sight of how much it has cost Thee to redeem me. Zinzendorf. God says: My chastisement even was pure love, though then you did not understand it; you shall learn it afterwards. Diedrich. [I incline to the construction given in the English version, both because the suffix to the verb is more naturally, I have drawn thee, than I have drawn out toward thee, and because there seems to be a tacit allusion to Hos 11:4, With loving kindness have I drawn thee.-A great moral truth lies in this passage so construed, viz., that the main power which humbles mans pride, softens his hard heart and makes him recoil in shame and sorrow from sinning, comes through his apprehension of Gods love as manifested in Christ and His cross. It is love that, draws the fearful or stubborn soul to the feet of divine mercy. Cowles.S. R. A.]
12. On Jer 31:6. It is well: the watchmen on Mount Ephraim had to go to Zion. They received however another visit from the Jewish priests, which they could not have expected at the great reformation, introduced by John, and which had its seat among other places on Mount Ephraim. The Samaritans were not far distant, and Mount Ephraim had even this honor that when the Lord came to His temple He took His Seat as a teacher there. Zinzendorf. [Gods grace loves to triumph over the most inveterate prejudices No words could represent a greater and more benign change in national feeling than these: Samaria saying through her spiritual watchmen, Let us go up to Zion to worship, for our God is there. Cowles. Ascendamus in Sion, hoc est in Ecclesiam says S. Jerome. According to this view, the watchmen here mentioned are the Preachers of the Gospel. Wordsworth.S. R. A.]
13. On Jer 31:9. I will lead them. It is an old sighing couplet, but full of wisdom and solid truth:
Lord Jesus, while I live on earth, O guide me,
Let me not, self-led, wander from beside Thee.
Zinzendorf.
14. On Jer 31:10. He who has scattered Israel will also collect it. Why? lie is the Shepherd. It is no wolf-scattering. He interposes His hand, then they go asunder, and directly come together again more orderly. Zinzendorf.
15. On Jer 31:12-14. Gaudebunt electi, quando videbunt supra se, intra se, juxta se, infra se. Augustine.Prmia clestia erunt tam magna, ut non possint mensurari, tam multa, ut non possint numerari, tam copiosa, ut non possint terminari, tam pretiosa, ut non possint stimari. Bernhard. Frster.
16. On Jer 31:15. Because at all times there is a similar state of things in the church of God, the lament of Rachel is a common one. For as this lament is over the carrying away captive and oppressions of Babylon, so is it also a lament over the tyranny of Herod in slaughtering the innocent children (Mat 2:1-7.)Cramer. Premuntur justi in ecclesia ut clament, clamantes exaudiuntur, exauditi glorificent Deum. Augustin. Frster.With respect to this, that Rachels lament may be regarded as a type of maternal lamentation over lost children, Frster quotes this sentence of Cyprian: non amisimus, sed prmisimus (2Sa 12:23). [On the application of this verse to the murder of the innocents consult W. L. Alexander, Connexion of the Old and New. Testament, p. 54, and W. H. Mill in Wordsworths Note in loc.S. R. A.]
17. On Jer 31:18. The conversion of man must always be a product of two factors. A conversion which man alone should bring about, without God, would be an empty pretence of conversion; a conversion, which God should produce, without man, would be a compulsory, manufactured affair, without any moral value. The merit and the praise is, however, always on Gods side. He gives the will and the execution. Did He not discipline us, we should never learn discipline. Did He not lead back our thoughts to our Fathers house which we have left (Luke 15) we should never think of returning.
18. On Jer 31:19. The children of God are ashamed their life long, they cannot raise their heads for humiliation. For their sins always seem great to them, and the grace of God always remains something incomprehensible to them.Zinzendorf. The farther the Christian advances in his consciousness of sonship and in sanctification, the more brilliantly rises the light of grace, the more distinctly does he perceive in this light, how black is the night of his sins from which God has delivered him. [It is the ripest and fullest ears of grain which hang their heads the lowest.S. R. A.]
19. On Jer 31:19. The use of the dear cross is to make us blush (Dan 9:8) and not regard ourselves as innocent (Jer 30:11). And as it pleases a father when a child soon blushes, so also is this tincture a flower of virtue well-pleasing to God. Cramer. Deus oleum miserationis su non nisi in vas contritum et contribulatum infundit. Bernhard.Frster.
20. On Jer 31:19. The reproach of my youth. The sins of youth are not easily to be forgotten (Psa 25:7; Job 31:18). Therefore we ought to be careful so to act in our youth as not to have to chew the cud of bitter reflection in our old age. It is a comfort that past sins of youth will not injure the truly penitent. Non nocent peccata prterita, cum non placent prsentia. Augustine. To transgress no more is the best sign of repentance. Cramer.
21. On Jer 31:20. Comforting and weighty words, which each one should lay to heart. God loves and caresses us as a mother her good child. He remembers His promise. His heart yearns and breaks, and it is His pleasure to do us good. Cramer. lpsius proprium est, misereri semper et parcere. Augustine.Major est Dei misericordia quam omnium hominum miseria. Idem.
22. On Jer 31:23. The Lord bless thee, thou dwelling-place of righteousness, thou holy mountain. Certainly no greater honor was ever done to the Jewish mountains than that the womans seed prayed and wept on them, was transfigured, killed and ascended above all heaven. Zinzendorf. It cannot be denied that a church sanctifies a whole place . Members of Jesus are real guardian angels, who do not exist in the imagination, but are founded on Gods promise (Mat 25:40). Idem.
23. On Jer 31:29-30. The so-called family curse has no influence on the servants of God; one may sleep calmly nevertheless. This does not mean that we should continue in the track of our predecessors, ex. gr., when our ancestors have gained much wealth by sinful trade, that we should continue this trade with this wealth with the hope of the divine blessing. If this or that property, house, right, condition be afflicted with a curse, the children of God may soon by prudent separation deliver themselves from these unsafe circumstances. For nothing attaches to their persons, when they have been baptized with the blood of Jesus and are blessed by Him. Zinzendorf.
24. On Jer 31:29-30. In testamento novo per sarguinem mediatoris deleto paterno chirographo incipit homo paternis debitis non esse obnoxius renascendo, quibus nascendo fuerat obligatus, ipso Mediatore di cente: Ne vobis patrem dicis in terra (Mat 23:9). Secundum hoc utique, quod alios natales, quibus non patri succederemus, sed cum patre semper viveremus, invenimus. Augustine, contra Julian, VI. 12, in Ghisler.
25. On Jer 31:31. In veteribus libris aut nusquam aut difficile prter hunc propheticum locum legitur facta commemoratio testamenti novi, ut omnino ipso nomine appellaretur. Nam multis locis hoc significalur et prnuntiatur futurum, sed non ita ut etiam nomen lega ur expressum. Augustine, de Spir. et Lit. ad Marcellin, Cap. 19 (where to Cap. 29 there is a detailed discussion of this passage) in Ghisler.In the whole of the Old Testament there is no passage, in which the view is so clearly and distinctly expressed as here that the law is only . And though some commentators have supposed that the passage contains only a censure of the Israelites and not of the Old Covenant, they only show thus that they have not understood the simple meaning of the words. Ebrard. Comm. zum Hebrerbr. S. 275.
26. On Jer 31:31, sqq. Propter veteris hominis noxam, qu per literam jubentem et minantem minime sanabatur, dicitur illud testamentum vetus; hoc antem novum propter novitatem spiritus, qu hominem novum sanat a vitio vetustatis. Augustine, c. Lit. Cap. 19.
27. On Jer 31:33. Quid sunt ergo leges Dei ab ipso Deo script in cordibus, nisi ipsa prsentia Spiritus sancti, qui est digitus Dei, quo prsente diffunditur charitas in cordibus nostrio, qu plenitudo legis est et prcepti finis? Augustine, l. c. Cap. 20.
28. On Jer 31:34. Quomodo tempus est novi testamenti, de quo propheta dixit: et non docebit unusquisque civem suum, etc. nisi quia rjusdem testamenti novi ternam mercedem, id est ipsius Dei beatissimam contemplationem promittendo conjunxit? Augustine, l. c. Cap. 24.
29. On Jer 31:33-34. This is the blessed difference between law and Gospel, between form and substance. Therefore are the great and small alike, and the youths like the elders, the pupils more learned than their teachers, and the young wiser than the ancients (1Jn 2:20 sqq.). Here is the cause:For I will forgive their iniquities. This is the occasion of the above; no one can effect this without it. Forgiveness of sins makes the scales fall from peoples eyes, and gives them a cheerful temper, clear conceptions, a clear head.Zinzendorf.
30. On Jer 31:35-37. Etsi particulares ecclesi intotum deficere possunt, ecclesia tamen catholica nunquam defecit aut deficiet. Obstant enim Dei amplissim promissiones, inter quas non ultimum locum sibi vindicut qu hic habetur Jer 31:37. Frster.
31. On Jer 31:38-40. Jerusalem will one day be much greater than it has ever been. This is not to be understood literally but spiritually. Jerusalem will be wherever there are believing souls, its circle will be without end and comprise all that has been hitherto impure and lost. This it is of which the prophet is teaching, and which he presents in figures, which were intelligible to the people in his time. The hill Gareb, probably the residence of the lepers, the emblem of the sinner unmasked and smitten by God, and the cursed valley of Ben-Hinnom will be taken up into the holy city. Gods grace will one day effect all this, and Israel will thus be manifested as much more glorious than ever before. Diedrich.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
1. On Jer 30:5-9. Sermon on one of the last Sundays after Trinity or the second in Advent. The day of the judgment of the world a great day. For it is, (1) a day of anxiety and terror for all the world; (2) a day of deliverance from all distress for the church of the Lord; (3) a day of realization of all the happiness set in prospect before it.
2. On Jer 30:10-12. Consolation of the church in great trial. 1. It has well deserved the trial (Jer 30:12); 2. it is therefore chastised, but with moderation; 3. it will not perish but again enjoy peace.
3. On Jer 30:17. [The Restorer of mankind. 1. Faith in the Christian Sacrament and its attendant revelation of divine character alone answer the demand of the heart and reason of man for a higher state of moral perfection. 2. Christianity offers to maintain a communication between this world and that eternal world of holiness and truth. 3. It commends itself to our wants in the confirmation and direction of that principle of hope, which even in our daily and worldly life, we are perpetually forced to substitute for happiness, and 4. By the adorable object, which it presents to our affections. Archer ButlerS. R. A.]
4. On Jer 31:1-2. Gesetz and Zeugniss (Law and Testimony) 1864, Heft. 1. Funeral sermon of Ahlfeld.
5. On Jer 31:2-4. lb. 1865. Heft 1. Funeral sermon of Besser, S. 32 ff.
6. On Jer 31:3. C. Fr. Hartmann (Wedding, School, Catechism and Birth-day sermons, ed. C. Chr. Eberh. Ehemann. Tb. 1865). Wedding sermon. 1. A grateful revival in the love of God already received. 2. Earnest endeavor after a daily enjoyment of this love. 3. Daily nourishment of hope.
7. On Jer 31:3. Florey. Comfort and warning at graves. I. Bndchen, S. 253. On the attractions of Gods love towards His own children. They are, 1. innumerable and yet so frequently overlooked; 2. powerful and yet so frequently resisted; 3. rich in blessing and yet so frequently; unemployed. [For practical remarks on this text see also Tholuck, Stunden der Andacht, No. 11.S. R. A.]
8. On Jer 31:9. Confessional sermon by Dekan V. Biarowsky in Erlangen (in Palmers Evang. Casual-Reden, 2 te Folge, 1 Band. Stuttgart, 1850.) Every partaking of the Lords supper is a return to the Lord in the promised land, and every one who is a guest at the supper rises and comes. 1. How are we to come? (weeping and praying). 2. What shall we find? (Salvation and blessing, power and life, grace and help).
9. On Jer 31:18-20. Comparison of conversion with the course of the earth and the sun. 1. The man who has fallen away is like the planet in its distance from the sun; he flees from God as far as he Song of Solomon 2. Love however does not release him: a. he is chastened (winter, cold, long nights, short days); b. he accepts the chastening and returns to proximity to the sun (summer, warmth, light, life). Comp. Brandt, Altes und Neues in i extemporirbaren Entwrfen. Nremberg, 1829, II. 5. [The stubborn sinner submitting himself to God. I. A description of the feelings and conduct of an obstinate, impenitent sinner, while smarting under the rod of affliction: He is rebellioustill subdued. II. The new views and feelings produced by affliction through divine grace: (a) convinced of guilt and sinfulness; (b) praying; (c) reflecting on the effects of divine grace in his conversion. III. A correcting but compassionate God, watching the result, etc., (a) as a tender father mindful of his penitent child; (b) listening to his complaints, confessions and petitions; (c) declaring His determination to pardon. Payson.S. R. A.]
10. On Jer 31:31-34. Sermon on 1 Sunday in Advent by Pastor Diechert in Grningen, S. Stern aus Jakob. I. Stuttg. 1867.
11. On Jer 31:33-34. Do we belong to the people of God? 1. Have we holiness? 2. Have we knowledge? 3. Have we the peace promised to this people? (Caspari in Predigtbuch von Dittmar, Erlangen, 1845).
12. On Jer 31:33-34. By the new covenant in the bath of holy baptism all becomes new. 1. What was dead becomes alive 2. What was obscure becomes clear. 3. What was cold becomes warm. 4. What was bound becomes free (Florey, 1862).
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
DISCOURSE: 1074
THE NEW COVENANT
Jer 31:31-34. Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the Home of Israel, and with the house of Judah: not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; (which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord:) but this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
THOUGH there is among us a general idea that Christianity is founded on the Jewish religion, yet the specific difference between them is very little understood. It would be well for us to have clear views of this subject: for unless we know the comparative excellency of the new covenant above that which it superseded, we can never justly appreciate the great advantages we enjoy. In the passage before us, the Mosaic and Christian covenants are contrasted; and the abolition of the one, and the establishment of the other, are foretold. But before we enter on the comparison between the two, it will be necessary to observe, that there are, properly speaking, only two great covenants; under the one or other of which all the world are living: the one is the Adamic covenant, which was made with Adam in Paradise, and which is entirely a covenant of works; the other is the Christian covenant, which, though made with Christ, and ratified by his blood upon the cross, was more or less clearly revealed from the beginning of the world. It was first announced in that promise, The seed of the woman shall bruise the serpents head. It was afterwards more plainly opened to Abraham, and afterwards still more fully to Moses. The Mosaic covenant, properly speaking, was distinct from both of these: it was not altogether a covenant of works, or a covenant of grace; but it partook of the nature of both. As containing the moral law, it was a re-publication of the covenant of works: and as containing the ceremonial law, it was a dark and shadowy representation of the covenant of grace. It was a mixed covenant, designed for one particular nation; and given to them, in order to introduce the covenant under which we live. Of that the prophet says, that it should in due time be superseded by a new and better covenant; and the Apostle, quoting this whole passage, says, that it had then waxed old, and was vanishing away [Note: Heb 8:8-13.].
In order to give a clear view of this subject, we shall state,
I.
The blessings of the new covenant
These being specified by the prophet, and copied exactly by the Apostle, we shall adhere strictly to them, without attempting to reduce them to any other order than that which is here observed. In the new covenant then, God undertakes,
1.
To write his law in our hearts
[This is a work which none but God can effect. The kings were commanded to write a copy of their law, each one for himself: but, though they might write it on parchment, they could not inscribe it on their own hearts. This however God engages to do for all who embrace the new covenant. He will make all the laws which he has revealed, agreeable to us: he will discover to us the excellency of them; and cause us to delight in them after our inward man. He will make us to see, that the moral law is holy and just and good, even while it condemns us for our disobedience to its commands; and that the law of faith also (that is, the Gospel) is a marvellous exhibition of Gods mercy and grace, and exactly suited to the necessities of our souls. He will engage our wills to submit to his; and dispose our souls to put forth all their energies in obedience to his commands. This he has repeatedly promised [Note: Eze 36:26-27.]; and this he will fulfil to all who trust in him.]
2.
To establish a relation between himself and us
[By nature we are enemies to him, and he to us. But on our embracing of this covenant, he will give himself to us as our God, and take us for his people. In being our God, he will exercise all his perfections for our good; his wisdom to guide us, his power to protect us, his love and mercy to make us happy, his truth and faithfulness to preserve us to the end. In taking us for his people, he will incline us to employ all our faculties in his service. Our time, our wealth, our influence, yea, all the members of our bodies, and all the powers of our souls, will be used as his, for the accomplishment of his will, and the promotion of his glory. We may see this illustrated in the life of the Apostle Paul. God took as much care of him, as if there had been no other creature in the universe; and he devoted himself to God, as much as if his faculties had not been capable of any other use or application. The effects of this relation are not indeed equally visible in all the Lords people: but the difference is in the degree only, and not in the substance and reality.]
3.
To give us the knowledge of himself
[There is a knowledge of God which cannot be attained by human teaching; a spiritual experimental knowledge, a knowledge accompanied with suitable dispositions and affections. But this God will give to those who lay hold on his covenant: He will reveal himself to them, as he does not unto the world. He will put them into the cleft of the rock, and make all his glory to pass before their eyes; and proclaim to them his name, The Lord, the Lord God, merciful and gracious [Note: Exo 33:18-23; Exo 34:5-7.], &c. He has promised, that all his people shall be taught of him [Note: Isa 54:13. Joh 6:45.], the least as well as the greatest, yea, the least often in preference to the greatest [Note: Mat 11:25. 1Co 1:26-29.]. And in proof that this promise is really fulfilled to all who receive the Gospel, St. John declares it to be a known acknowledged fact: we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding to know him that is true [Note: 1Jn 5:20.].]
4.
To pardon all our iniquities
[Under this new covenant, we have access to the fountain opened for sin and for uncleanness; and by washing in it we are cleansed from all sin [Note: 1Jn 1:7.]. Whatever transgressions we may have committed in our unregenerate state, they are all put away; though they may have been as scarlet, they have become white as snow; though they have been red like crimson, they are as wool ]
Hitherto we have spoken only in a general way of the blessings of the new covenant: we proceed to notice them more particularly, while we state,
II.
The difference between the old and new covenants
We have already observed, that by the old covenant is meant the Mosaic covenant, made with the Jews on Mount Sinai. Between this and the Gospel covenant there is a wide difference. They differ,
1.
In the freeness of their grants
[The Mosaic covenant imposed certain conditions to be fulfilled on the part of the Jews; and on their fidelity to their engagements all the blessings of that covenant were suspended [Note: Exo 24:6-8.]. But we find no condition specified in the new covenant. Must we attain the knowledge of God, and become his people; and have his law written in our hearts? true: but these are not acts of ours, which God requires in order to the bestowing of other blessings upon us; but blessings which he himself undertakes to give. if any say, that repentance and faith are conditions which we are to perform, we will not dispute about a term; you may call them conditions, if you please; but that which we affirm respecting them is, that they constitute a part of Gods free grant in the Gospel covenant; so that they are not conditions, in the same sense that the obedience of the Jews was the condition upon which they held the promised land: they are, as we have just said, blessings freely given us by God; and not acts of ours, whereon to found our claim to other blessings.
It is worthy of observation, that the Apostle, mentioning this grant of the new covenant, particularly specifies, that God, finding fault with the Jews for their violations of the old covenant, says, I will make a new covenant [Note: Heb 8:8.]. Had he said, Commending them for their observation of the inferior covenant, God said, I will give you a better covenant, we might have supposed, that it was given as a reward for services performed: but when it was given in consequence of the hopeless state to which their violations of the former covenant had reduced them, the freeness of this covenant appears in the strongest light.]
2.
In the extent of their provisions
[We shall again notice the different blessings as they lie in our text. God wrote his law upon tables of stone, and put it into the hands of those with whom his old covenant was made: but, according to his new covenant, he undertakes to put it into our inward parts, and to write it on our hearts. What a glorious difference is this! and how beautifully and exultingly does the Apostle point it out to his Corinthian converts [Note: 2Co 3:3.]!
God established indeed a relation between himself and his people of old: but this relation, though nominally the same with ours, was by no means realized to the same extent. To true believers amongst them he was the same that he now is: but what was he to the people at large, with whom the covenant was made? He interposed for them doubtless, on many occasions, in an external way; and they externally acknowledged him: but his Communications to us are internal, and our devotion to him is real and spiritual.
Under the old covenant, God revealed himself to his people in types and shadows; and the ceremonies which he appointed were so dark and various, that they could not be known to the generality, unless the people carefully instructed each other. On this account it was commanded that the children should inquire into the reason of various institutions (as that of the passover, and the feast of unleavened bread, and the redemption of the first-born); and their parents were to explain them [Note: Exo 12:26-27; Exo 13:8; Exo 13:14-15.]. But with us, there are only two institutions, and those the plainest that can be imagined; and the great truths of our religion are so interwoven with our feelings, that a person whose desires are after God, needs no other teaching than that of Gods word and Spirit; and though the instructions of ministers, of masters, and of parents, are still extremely useful, yet may a person obtain the knowledge of God and of salvation without being indebted to any one of them: and it is a fact, that many persons remote from ordinances, and from instruction of every kind, except the blessed book of God, are often so richly taught by the Spirit of God, as to put to shame those who enjoy the greatest external advantages [Note: See 1Jn 2:27. where the Apostle manifestly refers to the expressions in our text.].
The forgiveness of sins which was vouchsafed under the old covenant, was not such as to bring peace into the conscience of the offender: (the sacrifices which he offered, could not make him perfect as pertaining to the conscience [Note: Heb 9:9.]:) nor indeed were any means appointed for the obtaining of pardon for some particular offences: but under the new covenant, all who believe are justified from all things, from which they could not be justified by the law of Moses [Note: Act 13:39.] and, being justified by faith, they have peace with God [Note: Rom 5:1.], a peace that passeth understanding, a joy unspeakable and glorified.
How glorious does the new covenant appear in this contrasted view! and what reason have we to adore our God for the rich provisions contained in it!]
3.
In the duration of their benefits
[The annual repetition of the same sacrifices under the old covenant was intended to intimate to the people, that their pardon was not final: had their guilt been perfectly removed by them, the Apostle observes very justly, that they would then have ceased to be offered; because the worshippers would have had no more conscience of sins: but, inasmuch as the sacrifices were annually renewed, they were, in fact, no more than a remembrance of sins made every year [Note: Heb 10:1-3.]. But under the new covenant God engages to remember our sins and iniquities no more: they are not only forgiven by him, but forgotten; not only cancelled, but blotted out as a morning cloud [Note: Isa 44:22.] not only removed from before his face, but cast behind his back into the depths of the sea [Note: Mic 7:19.]. His former people he put away, though he was an husband unto them: but to us his gifts and callings are without repentance [Note: Rom 11:29.]. This is particularly marked by the prophet, in the verses following our text [Note: ver. 3537.]; and by an inspired Apostle, in his comment on the very words we are considering. He is shewing the superiority of Christs priesthood to that appointed under the law: and he confirms his position from this circumstance; that the sacrifices offered by the Levitical priests could never take away sin, and therefore were continually repeated; whereas Christs sacrifice, once offered, would for ever take away sin, and perfect for ever all them that are sanctified. He then adduces the very words of our text; and says, that, in these words, the Holy Ghost is a witness to us; for that, in promising first, that the law should be written in our hearts, and then, that our sins and iniquities should be remembered no more, he had attested fully the sufficiency of Christs sacrifice, and given ample assurance, that those who relied upon it should never have their sins imputed to them [Note: Heb 10:11-18.].
It is needless to multiply words any further upon this subject; for the old covenant, with all its benefits, was to continue only for a limited period; whereas the new covenant is to continue to the end of the world; and its benefits to the remotest ages of eternity.]
Infer
1.
The folly of making self-righteous covenants of our own
[Why did God give us another covenant, but because the former was inadequate to our necessities? Shall we then be recurring to the old covenant, or forming new ones of our own upon the same principle? Take your own covenants, and examine them, and see what grounds of hope they afford you. We will give you have to dictate your own terms: say, if you please, You are to repent and amend your lives: and on those conditions God shall give you eternal life: Can you repent, can you amend your lives, by any power of your own? Have you agreed with God what shall be the precise measure of your repentance and amendment? Have you attained the measure which you yourselves think to be necessary, so that you can say, My conscience witnesses for me, that I am fully prepared to meet my God? If not, see to what a state you reduce yourselves: you need none other to condemn you: for God may say, Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee. O be not thus infatuated: cast not away the Lords covenant for such delusive projects of your own: but, instead of depending on your own weak endeavours, go and lay hold on that better covenant, which provides every thing for you, as the free gift of God in Christ Jesus.]
2.
The blessedness of those who obey the Gospel
[You have a covenant which is ordered in all things, and sure [Note: 2Sa 23:5.]: and you have a Mediator, who, having purchased for you all the blessings of this covenant, will infallibly secure them to you by his efficacious grace, and all-prevailing intercession. Place then your confidence in him. Employ him daily (if I may so speak) to maintain your interest in it; and give him the glory of every blessing you receive. Your enjoyment of its benefits must be progressive, as long as you continue in the word Let your desires after them be more and more enlarged: and in due time you shall enjoy them in all their fulness. It is in heaven alone that you will fully possess them: but there you shall perfectly comprehend the meaning of that promise, Ye shall be my people, and I will be your God [Note: Rev 21:3.].]
Fuente: Charles Simeon’s Horae Homileticae (Old and New Testaments)
The Holy Ghost hath himself given the comment of this passage, in Paul’s Epistle to the Hebrews, Chap. 8 which supersedes all that might be offered. I only beg to remind the Reader, while comparing both scriptures, and pondering well the subject, that he looks out for the fulfillment of it in himself in the evidences of divine teaching. If that promise be in your own instance completed: and as a child of God you are taught of God, then must the Lord have given you a new heart, and proved himself as your covenant God in Christ, and in you, as belonging to his people. Isa 54:13 ; Joh 6:45 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
Ver. 31. I will make a new covenant. ] The same for substance with the former made with Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and the Israelites in the wilderness; but new in respect of the form thereof, the manner of dispensing it – viz., more clearly, freely, effectually, and spiritually now under the gospel, than in those days of yore, when they saw the face of God only in that dark glass of the ceremonies; whereas we, with open face, &c. 2Co 3:18
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Jer 31:31-34
31Behold, days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, 32not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them, declares the LORD. 33But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the LORD, I will put My law within them and on their heart I will write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 34They will not teach again, each man his neighbor and each man his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for they will all know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, declares the LORD, for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.
Jer 31:31 Behold, days are coming Notice that the same introductory phrase begins three poems in this chapter (Jer 31:27; Jer 31:31; Jer 31:38),
The question has always been, When does this new day start?
1. the return under Cyrus in 538 B.C. (i.e., Ezra, Nehemiah, Sheshbazzar, Zerubbabel, Joshua)
2. the life of Christ (cf. Heb 8:8-12 which quotes this text)
3. the second coming of Christ
The post-exilic period embodied the hope of a new day of faith, but it did not materialize (cf. Malachi). The new internal nature of the covenant based on God’s grace and performance, not mankind’s, even covenant mankind (cf. Eze 36:22-38), was not manifested until the ministry and death/resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. The new covenant has been inaugurated with Jesus’ first coming and will be consummated at His second coming!
I will make a new covenant This is the only mention in the OT of a new covenant, although Isa 55:3 mentions an everlasting covenant (it is possible that Duet. Jer 18:15-19 implies the need of a new covenant with the coming of the new prophet). This would have been very shocking to the Jews. They thought God’s covenant with Moses was unconditional and eternal (cf. Gen 17:7; Gen 17:13; Gen 17:19; Lev 16:34; Lev 24:8; Num 25:13; 1Ch 16:17; Psa 105:10; see Special Topic: Forever [‘olam] ). Isa 24:5 says it was broken! Jesus calls His death the new covenant in My blood, which links to Moses’ words in Exo 24:8. For covenant see Special Topic: Covenant .
house of Israel. . .house of Judah The New Covenant would restore unity to the divided kingdom (cf. Jer 31:1-3; Jer 31:27; Jer 31:33). It will go far beyond that and restore the unity between God and humanity so obvious in Genesis 1-2 (cf. Rom 2:28-29; Rom 3:21-31; Rom 9:24-33; Rom 11:11-25; Rom 15:7-16; Galatians 2; Galatians 3; Eph 2:11 to Eph 3:13).
Jer 31:32 not like the covenant which I made with their Father There is both a continuity and discontinuity between the old covenant and the new covenant. First, it is important to list the different significant covenants.
1. Abraham
2. Moses
3. David
4. new covenant (i.e., Jesus, cf. Hebrews)
The first and third are still in effect, as far as the eternal redemptive plan. The fourth is the fulfillment of that plan. Here are some of the similarities.
1. God initiates it and sets its parameters
2. humans must respond in repentance, faith, obedience, and perseverance
3. the Spirit draws humans to respond appropriately (i.e., Joh 6:44; Joh 6:65)
The big difference is that the performance model is replaced by a grace model. God still wants a people to reflect and reveal His character to a lost world. However, because of the Fall, His covenant people, with all their privileges (cf. Rom 9:4-5), could not keep the Mosaic covenant. Therefore, God initiates a covenant of grace that uses the Messiah’s obedience and sacrifice (cf. Isaiah 53; Mar 10:45; 2Co 5:21) to fulfill the old covenant and begin a new age characterized by a new heart, a new mind, a new spirit (cf. Eze 36:22-38). Internal motivation will replace external laws. But remember the goal is still a Christlike people (i.e., covenant language, cf. Jer 31:33 d; Jer 24:7)! The eternal redemptive purpose continues (see Special Topic: YHWH’s Eternal Redemptive Plan ).
I took them by the hand The emphasis here is on God’s parenthood (cf. Hos 11:1-4; Hos 11:8-9).
My covenant which they broke This is a summary of the history of the Jewish nation (cf. Jer 25:4; Jer 33:8; Galatians 3; the book of Hebrews).
I was a husband to them God uses human relationships to describe His relationship with Israel (cf. Hosea 1-3). See Special Topic: God Described As Human (anthropomorphism) .
Jer 31:33 the house of Israel Notice that in Jer 31:27; Jer 31:31 Israel refers to the northern ten tribes after the split of the United Monarchy in 922 B.C. The northern ten tribes, led by Jeroboam I, were called
1. Israel (collective term)
2. Samaria (the capital)
3. Ephraim (the largest tribe)
However, here in Jer 31:33 it must refer to its original meaning of the descendants of Jacob, whose name was changed to Israel. See full note in Contextual Insights, B.
I will put My law within them This is analogous to the phrase circumcise your heart of Deu 30:6. It is parallel to the new heart, new mind, and new spirit of Eze 36:22-38. From the NT this refers to the indwelling Holy Spirit.
on their heart This refers to the entire person (cf. Deu 6:6; Deu 11:18; Deu 30:14). See Special Topic: Heart .
The Fall of Genesis 3 affected human’s spiritual orientation and worldview. They came to focus on self, not God. This fallenness was the reason that Abraham’s descendants could not keep/perform the Mosaic covenant (cf. Deu 31:29; Jos 24:19). Therefore, YHWH must give them a new heart (cf. Jer 24:7 and the circumcised heart, cf. Deu 30:6). Then the Scriptures of Deu 6:6; Deu 30:11; Deu 30:14 can be fulfilled. The clearest description of this new orientation and spiritual worldview is
1. OT – Eze 36:22-38
2. NT – Sermon on the Mount, Matthew 5-7
I will write it As YHWH wrote the Ten Commandments before Moses on Mt. Sinai (cf. Exo 31:18; Exo 32:15-16; Exo 34:1; Exo 34:28), He now writes on the human heart by His Spirit. The new covenant is a new internal code from a restored image of God! This faith relationship has always been the plan of God (cf. Lev 26:41; Deu 10:16; Deu 30:6; Jer 4:4; Jer 9:25-26).
Jer 31:34 for they will all know Me Notice the play between the IMPERATIVE (BDB 353, KB 390, Qal IMPERATIVE, which relates to the performance model, i.e., the Old Testament) and the IMPERFECT, which relates to the new age, new mind, new heart, new spirit (i.e., new covenant).
There will be an intimate, personal relationship between YHWH and all of His people. This intimacy is illustrated by the Hebrew concept of know in Gen 4:1 and Jer 1:5; Jer 9:24. See Special Topic: Know .
from the least of them to the greatest of them This inclusive, no respecter of persons language is parallel to Joe 2:28-29 (quoted in Act 2:17-18). It is used in a negative sense in Jer 6:13; Jer 8:10.
I will forgive When God forgives, God forgets (cf. Isa 1:18; Isa 38:17; Isa 43:25; Isa 44:22; Eze 18:22; Eze 33:16; Psa 103:10-14; Mic 7:19)! What a great truth!
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
Behold. Figure of speech Asterismos. Quoted in Heb 8:8-12; Heb 10:16, Heb 10:17.
I will make. See Mat 26:28.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Jer 31:31-33. Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD: but this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
The old covenant was written on tables of stone; but the Lord said, concerning the new covenant, I will put my law in their inward parts. The old law was hidden from sight when it was written a second time, and placed in the ark of the covenant; and God says of his new law, I will write it in their hearts. They were always rebelling against God, and wandering away from him; but in this new, gracious covenant, he says, I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Jer 31:34. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD:
God gives to all his people a knowledge of himself. Whatever else they know or do not know, saith the Lord, they shall all know me. Though they differ as to their growth in grace, yet they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord.
Jer 31:34. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
If God has pardoned your sins, you will be sure to know him; there will be no mistake about that point. Men shrink back, and hide away from an angry God punishing sin, for they do not care to know him; but when he comes forth, dressed in the silken robes of love, to bestow free pardons upon the chief of sinners, then they know him. God grant that all of us may have this blessed knowledge! Now kindly turn over the leaves of your Bibles until you come to then 36th chapter of the Book of Ezekiel, and the 25th verse, where you can read still further about this same gracious new covenant of Jehovah.
Fuente: Spurgeon’s Verse Expositions of the Bible
Jer 31:31-34
Jer 31:31
THE NEW COVENANT
Behold, the days come, saith Jehovah, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
There were several covenants that God made. (1) There was a covenant with Noah (Gen 6:18; Gen 9:9); (2) two covenants with Abraham (Gen 17:2; Gen 17:10; Gen 15:18 ff); (3) the covenant of salt (Num 18:19; Lev 2:13); and (4) the covenant of the everlasting priesthood (Num 25:13). However, in Heb 8:6-7, this “new covenant” is contrasted with what is called “the first covenant,” or “the old covenant,” indicating that the new covenant would replace not merely those lesser covenants, but it would take the place of that covenant which was so great and comprehensive, overshadowing all others, that God called it the “first covenant.” In short, it was designed to replace the entire religious system of the Jews, including the Decalogue, the priesthood, the sacrifices, the tabernacle ritual, the temple, and the temple services later developed, the statutes, judgments, and commandments, embracing the entire ceremonial and moral constitution of Judaism. Every student needs to identify which covenant was annulled and replaced by the new.
The old covenant identified:
(1) It was the one made with the “house of Israel and with the house of Judah.” The mention of the house of Judah is significant, because it distinguished the “old covenant” from the covenant of the priesthood which was made with the house of Levi. It also indicated that all Israel, both the Northern and Southern Israels, were included in the New Covenant.
(2) The old covenant was the one that had the Decalogue in it as a basic component (Deu 4:13; Heb 9:4).
(3) The old covenant was the one God made with Moses (Exo 34:2; Exo 34:28).
(4) It was the one God made at the time when Israel came out of Egypt, “in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of Egypt” (Jer 31:32).
The nature of the new covenant. It partakes of the nature of all covenants, concerning which Keil declared that, “Every covenant which God concludes with men consists, on the side of God, the assurance of God’s favors and blessings; and on the side of men, it binds them to the keeping of commandments laid upon them.”
Time when the new covenant was made. It was made upon the Cross of Jesus Christ when he became the “propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but for the sins of the whole world.” It was announced upon the Day of Pentecost, exactly fifty days after the resurrection of the Son of God, and it became effective upon that day when three thousand Jews became “the Virgin Israel” accepted the terms of the New Covenant, and by their baptism into Christ, became thereby Charter Members of the New Israel, the Israel of God, the Spiritual Israel, that Other Israel, which succeeded the Old Israel, and is today the Only Israel of God.
MISCONCEPTIONS OF THE NEW COVENANT
We regret that some scholars have missed the truth regarding that New Covenant. Graybill, for example, said that, “The new covenant will not be a new law, the old law was good enough!” The last clause here is a flat contradiction of Heb 8:6-7, which declares that if the old law had been faultless God would not have changed it. Furthermore, the notion that the New Covenant got rid of all law is a preposterous error. We have already noted that the “priesthood” was changed when Christ our High Priest was raised from the dead, eternally supplanting the Aaronic priesthood; and the author of Hebrews stated that, “The priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law” (Heb 7:12).
Furthermore, if there is no law of the gospel, or law of Christ, or law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, then there is no such thing as sin, because “sin is the transgression of the law” (1Jn 3:4).
Another gross error is the notion that the New Covenant was stated in the form of a question by Feinberg, “Does the New Covenant efface the distinction between Israel (racial Israel) and the Church (the New Israel)? The answer is a resounding no!” This, of course, is a flat contradiction of Rom 10:12, which declares that “there is no distinction,” not even between Gentiles and Jews; and, since Gentiles are in the Church, if one should suppose a distinction between Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians, it would mean that God has two classes of children in his Church, an utter impossibility.
In the New Covenant all special considerations and privileges of racial Israel were forever lost. Race, today, is totally unimportant, as regards salvation. No person whomsoever can be either saved or lost eternally, upon the basis of any racial consideration whatsoever.
Jer 31:32
not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was a husband unto them, saith Jehovah.
Which my covenant they brake…
(Jer 31:32). The significance of this is beyond all calculation. Israel did not merely strain the covenant, they broke it! Furthermore, there were not any of the promises of that covenant which were designed to be valid unless Israel refrained from breaking the covenant. Notice those tremendous ifs in Deu 28:1; Deu 28:15; Deu 28:58, etc.
“Salvation is possible only through the death of Christ; and this is the basis of the New Covenant; and all mankind is thus in view in this covenant.” All men of every race and nation are subject to it, with special privileges to none.
Tragically, racial Israel refused to accept this New Covenant and refused to obey it, which is a fact that is very hard for commentators to ignore. For many years, this writer believed that the sacred scriptures teach that, “Israel as a nation will ratify (and accept and obey) this new covenant, after ‘the full number of the Gentiles has come in’ (Rom 11:25-27).” We now deny that the scriptures teach this. The error was due to extensive tampering on the part of translators with Rom 11:15. It is true enough that the scriptures do not deny that such a conversion of racial Israel could occur, but there is absolutely no statement whatever that it will occur. See our extensive studies in this whole area in Vol. 6 (Romans) of the New Testament Series, especially at Romans 3 and Romans 11.
Jer 31:33
But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith Jehovah: I will put my law in their inward parts, and in their heart will I write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people:
Notice that God does not here state that he will cancel or no longer require his law to be observed, but that he will achieve the observance of his holy law by an utterly new method. That new method would be by the means of “the new birth” (Joh 1:3-7). A new heart would be created in obedient believers, and this would enable a more acceptable obedience to Divine Law. God never envisioned a time when his followers (even Christians) would be able to achieve perfect obedience; and therefore in the great injunction for Christians to pray, one finds the words, “Forgive us our sins, as we forgive those who transgress against us.”
Nevertheless, the requirement of holiness is nowhere eliminated or cancelled in the New Testament, but the Lord specifically declared that, “Without holiness, no man shall see God” (Heb 12:14).
Jer 31:34
and they shall teach no more every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, Know Jehovah; for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith Jehovah: for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin will I remember no more.
They shall teach no more every man his neighbor, etc….
(Jer 31:34), Keil and a number of others thought that the principle of men teaching other men the truth about God was here nullified, Because the sinner is placed in direct relationship with God through the Holy Spirit, but we know that Keil cannot possibly be correct in this, since Christ himself ordained that, They shall all be taught of God (Joh 6:45); and the Great Commission itself commanded that all nations, the whole creation, must be taught.
Of the dozens of scholars whose works we have been privileged to read, only George DeHoff gave the true explanation of what is meant here.
“Under the new covenant of Christ men are taught before they become Christians. Then they obey the gospel. Under the old covenant a child was a Jew as soon as he was born and had to be taught this fact after he was old enough to understand.”
The significance of this passage is very great. It means that no untaught person can be a Christian, hence no infants in the true sense are Christians. “Ye must be born again,” Jesus said; and all infants have been born only once. Infant membership allows many unregenerated people to grow up in various churches without regard either to their faith or obedience, opening the gate for many outright unbelievers to gain and exercise power in some so-called Christian communions.
Another tremendous untruth sometimes imported into the doctrine of the New Covenant was announced by Payne Smith, as follows: “The Gospel cannot be a formal code guaranteeing certain blessings to those who obey it; because it begins with an offer of unconditional pardon: and it is in the sense of this full unmerited love which so affects the heart as to make obedience henceforth an inner necessity.”
Variations of this colossal error are today found in the writings of hundreds of commentators, If indeed, as Smith said, the Gospel is not something which men must obey, why did the greatest of the apostles declare that, “Christ shall be revealed from heaven in flaming fire with tens of thousands of his holy angels taking vengeance upon them that know not God, and them that obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ?” (2Th 1:8). If, as Smith said, the human heart is so impressed by unmerited, unconditional forgiveness that it will automatically obey God, why are there so many backsliding Christians?
Furthermore, there is not a line in the whole Bible that even hints that God’s salvation is “unconditional.” Did not Jesus Christ say, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved?” (Mar 16:16); and even there, baptism is by no means the only condition, but it stands as a synecdoche for the full catalogue of Christian obligations. Why cannot men think? If salvation is unconditional, God alone is responsible for the loss or salvation of every man who ever lived; but again, an apostle declared, “That every man must give an account of the deeds done in the body” (2Co 5:10). Let God be true and every man a liar!
The forgiveness of sins is the grand hallmark of the New Covenant. Never before in the history of mankind was there anything like it. When angels sinned, there was no forgiveness; when any of God’s laws were ever violated, there was never any forgiveness; there is no forgiveness in nature; there was not even any forgiveness under the Mosaic Law. Why? Because, “It is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sin” (Heb 10:4). In all of those Old Testament passages where forgiveness of sins is promised, the reference is actually to the Messianic age.
Note also that God “remembers no more” the sins that are forgiven, an achievement that sinners themselves cannot accomplish.
A New Covenant Jer 31:31-34
The verses translated above are the four most important verses in the book of Jeremiah. Here Jeremiah envisions a time when the covenant between God and Israel instituted at Mt. Sinai will be replaced by a new and better covenant. After giving the promise of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-32) Jeremiah then outlines some of the provisions of that covenant (Jer 31:33-34).
1. The promise of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-32)
The new covenant will be made with reunited Judah and Israel. In Old Testament prophecy the unification of Judah and Israel points to that day when there would be neither Jew nor Greek, bond nor free, male nor female but all the redeemed would be one in Christ Jesus. Both Peter (1Pe 2:10) and Paul (Rom 9:25 f.) so interpreted the earlier prophecies of Hosea (Hos 1:10-11) with regard to the restoration of the northern kingdom and the unification of the two kingdoms. Those interpreters who regard the covenant promised by Jeremiah to be something yet future-a covenant between God and national Israel-are proved to be dead wrong by such passages as Heb 8:8-12 which quotes at length from Jeremiah 31 and applies it to the Christian dispensation. Paul again and again takes up the matter of the new covenant and emphasizes the distinction between it and the old Sinai covenant (e.g., 2Co 3:6; 2Co 3:14-16). Jesus alluded to this new covenant when he instituted the Lords Supper by saying This is my blood of the new testament (covenant) which is shed for many (Mat 26:28; Mar 14:24). In the prophetic view of the future the restoration of Israel reaches its climax with the institution of the new covenant.
Jer 31:32 compares the old covenant to a marriage in which God was the lord or husband and Israel was the bride. God being the perfect Husband never gave His bride any cause for desiring the dissolution of the matrimonial connection. But Israel had again and again been unfaithful to the marriage vows, i.e. she had been disobedient to the covenant. See Exodus 32; Num 14:16; Psa 95:8-11; Act 7:51-60. A new arrangement or agreement between God and His people was therefore necessary.
2. The provisions of the new covenant (Jer 31:33-34)
It was not given Jeremiah to see all that the new covenant would involve. All that the Holy Spirit was concerned to do at this point in time was to reveal in broad outline the basic character of that future covenant. Four statements are made with regard to the promised covenant.
a) I will place My law within them, and write it on their heart (Jer 31:33 a). Here is a new spiritual dimension. Heretofore the laws of God had been written on tablets of stone; now they are to be written on the heart. Under the new covenant men will respond to the divine will from inward motivation rather than outward compulsion. Every individual born in Israel was automatically under the law of God; he had no choice in the matter. But one can enter into the new covenant Israel, the church of Christ, only by willingly submitting himself to the command ments of God.
b) I will be their God and they shall be My people (Jer 31:33 b). Here is a new relationship. Those who enter into the new covenant Israel through faith and obedience will come into a special relationship with God. Peter de scribes the Christian Church as a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a people of Gods own possession (1Pe 2:9). only such as have today the law of God written upon their hearts have this unique relationship to God.
c) All will know Me from the least to the greatest (Jer 31:34 a). Infants and small children were members of the old covenant Israel; but this would no longer be true under the new covenant. Every member of the new covenant Israel will know God. The word know in Hebrew has the connotation of knowledge derived from personal experience. It is not knowledge about, it is knowledge of. It is the kind of knowledge of which Jesus spoke when He said: And this is life eternal, that they might know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent (Joh 17:3). To know the Lord is saving faith, that basic and indispensable prerequisite to membership in the new covenant Israel. A Christian will not need to go around to fellow Christians and exhort them to know the Lord. If they are Christians they already have come to a saving knowledge of the Lord. Thus the point of this statement is not that there shall be no longer any need of instruction in religion, but that here will be a directness of access to God for both Jew and Gentile, which did not exist under the old covenant.
d) I will forgive their sin and their iniquity will I remember no more (Jer 31:34 b). It is not by self-acquired holiness or meritorious works that a man enters the new covenant Israel. It is through the perfect sacrifice of the Lamb without spot and blemish. The basic inadequacy of the old covenant was its failure to provide a perfect sacrifice for sin. The ever-repeated sacrifices of the Old Testament foreshadowed and typified that once-for-all perfect sacrifice that took place on the hill called Calvary. The Hebrew verbs in the present verse are in the imperfect state denoting that the forgiveness here predicted will take place again and again as men and women appropriate to themselves the benefits of the Saviours sacrifice.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
The New Covenant
Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord. But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my law in their inward parts, and in their heart will I write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people: and they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin will I remember no more.Jer 31:31-34.
1. This is one of the greatest messages that the Old Testament contains. Were we to distinguish degrees of importance by difference of type, then these verses ought to be printed in the boldest lettering, so as to catch every eye. Here is a prophecy that foretells Christianity, that anticipates the New Testament. When the prophet delivers this oracle, he speaks as a Christian born long before the time. When we look on all that is best and most distinctive in the Christian faith, we are entitled to say, This day is this Scripture fulfilled in our ears. It was of these words our Lord was thinking when He instituted the sacrament of the Supper, and said, This cup is the new covenant in my blood. That New Covenant was neither more nor less than the New Covenant of which Jeremiah prophesied. And the whole Epistle to the Hebrews, which labours to show to half-converted Jews the vast superiority of Christianity to the religion of their fathers, may be called a sermon on this great text.
If we are to get at the heart of Jeremiahs meaning we had better change this word covenant into the word religion, and the full significance of the prophets startling teaching will begin to dawn upon us. That is a fair enough equivalent. The word religion does not occur in the Old Testament, but the word covenant is found some three hundred times; and when it is used to describe the relation of the people to God it really means religion. The core of the covenant is, I will be their God, and they shall be my people, but if you wanted to describe a true and living religion, could you come across better words than these to mark the relation to God in which it consists?1 [Note: A. Ramsay, Studies in Jeremiah, 263.]
2. The words were uttered at a time of national disaster. Jerusalem was captured by the Assyrians, and Jeremiah was taken prisoner to Ramah. During the time of his imprisonment he looked forward to the day when Israel should again be free. Before that could happen, however, he saw that a great change must come over the people. The Old Covenant had proved a failure, not by reason of its own defects, but by reason of the conception of it as an external and legal code, imposing its laws upon a people whose inward spiritual life it had long ceased to reflect. Now the glory of Jeremiah is that in that dark night his heart was filled with hope. The old order changeth, yielding place to new. Religion is not to die, although the forms in which of old it found expression are antiquated and ready to perish. A better religion is to rise out of the ashes. He is the prophet of a new religion. He cannot mourn. He cannot sorrow and be in continual heaviness. If he sees Simeon in the Temple tottering and on the brink of the grave, he sees that he holds the infant Christ in his arms. The new and the better age is about to be; the light of the morning is on his face; it is the shadows of the night that flee away. Here indeed is an inspiring optimism. The political order changes; the ecclesiastical order changes; the theological order changes; and through all, not only does religion not die, but it passes forward to a nobler, worthier life; it becomes purer, more spiritual, more personal.
Archdeacon Boutflower, who was Bishop Westcotts domestic chaplain throughout his episcopate, refers as follows to his Diocesans hopefulness and faith in the future of Christianity:Parallel to that freshness of powers and interest which the Bishop brought to his last day of work, and still more wonderful, was the freshness of hope and sympathy which he carried to the end. This, no doubt, was cultivated in contemplation, but it was a singular grace of temperament to start with. In mind he never grew old. Occasionally he would say, I am too old for such things now; but it was not really true, and only half-serious. To most men there comes a time when they grow tired of readaptation and of looking forward. They speak of the past with a touch of regret, and the young feel that they are out of sympathy. There were no signs of this about our dear Bishop to the last. He was more hopeful than the youngest of us. He welcomed every new development, if only he was persuaded it was true development, and he waited for more. The Divine Spirit he believed in was a living Spirit, speaking and moving in the Church to-day, and he trusted every fresh age to add to the glory of Gods revelation. And he expected God still to send messages through Samuel to Eli. You must see visions, he said to one of his younger clergyI despair of you if you dont. Visions belong to youth; when you are older you will only dream dreams. 1 [Note: Life and Letters of Brooke Foss Westcott, ii. 371.]
I
The Need of a New Covenant
1. There had been many covenantsall of them ineffectual. God is said to have made a covenant with Noah, when He promised that a judgment like the flood should not be repeated; and with Abraham, when He promised Canaan to his descendants for an everlasting possession, and imposed the condition of circumcision. But by the phrase, the Old Covenant, is meant especially the covenant which God made with Israel as a people on Mount Sinai. The writing called the Book of the Covenant comprised the Ten Commandments, and the body of laws which are recorded in the twenty-first and two following chapters of Exodus. These were the conditions imposed by God when He entered into covenant relations with Israel; and the solemn act by which this covenant was inaugurated is described in the twenty-fourth chapter of Exodus. Gathered at the base of the holy mountain, before an altar resting on twelve pillars, in honour of the twelve tribes, the people waited silent and awestruck, while twelve delegates (as yet there was no priesthood) offered such sacrifices as yet were possible, and while the lawgiver sprinkled the blood of the victims upon the assembled multitude. That ceremony had a latent meaning, unperceived at the time, which many centuries afterwards would be drawn out into the light under Apostolic direction; but the solemn character of the transaction was there and then profoundly felt. And at later periods of Israels history this covenant was again and again renewed; as by Joshua at Shechem, by King Asa at Jerusalem, by Jehoiada the priest in the Temple, and also by the priesthood and people under Hezekiah, and under the auspices of Ezra and Nehemiah in later days still, after the great Captivity. It was renewed because it was continually broken. It was a Divine work, and yet, through mans perverseness, it was a failure. Hence the words, Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord.
Jeremiah had played his part in establishing covenants between Israel and its God. He is not, indeed, even so much as mentioned in the account of Josiahs reformation; and it is not clear that he himself makes any express reference to it; so that some doubt must still be felt as to his share in that great movement. At the same time indirect evidence seems to afford proof of the common opinion that Jeremiah was active in the proceedings which resulted in the solemn engagement to observe the code of Deuteronomy. But yet another covenant occupies a chapter in the Book of Jeremiah, and in this case there is no doubt that the prophet was the prime mover in inducing the Jews to release their Hebrew slaves. This act of emancipation was adopted in obedience to an ordinance of Deuteronomy, so that Jeremiahs experience of former covenants was chiefly connected with the code of Deuteronomy and the older Book of the Covenant upon which it was based. The Restoration to which Jeremiah looked forward was to throw the Exodus into the shade, and to constitute a new epoch in the history of Israel more remarkable than the first settlement in Canaan. The nation was to be founded anew, and its regeneration would necessarily rest upon a New Covenant, which would supersede the Covenant of Sinai.1 [Note: W. H. Bennett.]
Oliver, we find, spoke much of the Covenants; which indeed are the grand axis of all, in that Puritan Universe of his. Two Covenants; one of Works, with fearful Judgment for our shortcomings therein; one of Grace and unspeakable mercy;gracious Engagements, Covenants, which the Eternal God has vouchsafed to make with His feeble creature, man. Two; and by Christs Death they have become One: there for Oliver is the divine solution of this our Mystery of Life. They were Two, he was heard ejaculating: Two, but put into One before the Foundation of the World! And again: It is holy and true, it is holy and true, it is holy and true!Who made it holy and true? The Mediator of the Covenant! And again: The Covenant is but One. Faith in the Covenant is my only support. And if I believe not, He abides faithful! When his Children and Wife stood weeping round him, he said: Love not this world. I say unto you, it is not good that you should love this world! No. Children, live like Christians:I leave you the Covenant to feed upon!1 [Note: Carlyle, Oliver Cromwells Letters and Speeches, v. 151.]
2. The Old Covenant had thus become, for practical purposes, an outworn safeguard. Israel in her successive generations had utterly failed to perform her part, and so had made it impossible for God to do what He had promised; until at length He loathed the people with whom He was in covenant, and rejected them, and cast them forth out of their land. What if all this should happen over again in the history of our children as it happened in the days of our fathers? Was such a result not all too likely? Such doubting thoughts were most natural to one in Jeremiahs position, and they constituted, we may be sure, one of his direst spiritual trials. But faiths trials are but the precursors of new triumphs. Job despairs of relief in the present life, and his very despair causes faith to reach out beyond the tomb in search of the deliverance which, in spite of all present appearances, it believes will surely come. Even so Jeremiah, justly despairing of permanent prosperity for Israel on the basis of the Old Covenant, by a sublime act of Heaveninspired faithdares to predict the advent of a time when the old discredited and bankrupt constitution or covenant shall be superseded by a new one furnished with conditions that shall insure it against failure.
There follows the beautiful passage [in The Ancient Sage] in which the hopeful and wistful upward gaze of faith is described. While melancholy and perplexity constantly attend on the exercises of the speculative intellect, we are to cling to faith:
She reels not in the storm of warring words,
She brightens at the clash of Yes and No,
She sees the Best that glimmers thro the Worst,
She feels the Sun is hid but for a night,
She spies the summer thro the winter bud,
She tastes the fruit before the blossom falls,
She hears the lark within the songless egg,
She finds the fountain where they waild Mirage!
These lines present to the reader the hopefulness of the spiritual mind, hopefulness not akin to the merely sanguine temperament, but based on a deep conviction of the reality of the spiritual world, and on unfailing certainty that there is in it a key to the perplexities of this universe of which we men understand so little. We know from experience that material Nature is working out her ends, however little we understand the process, and however unpromising portions of her work might appear without this knowledge. That an acorn should have within it forces which compel earth, air, and water to come to its assistance and become the oak tree would seem incredible were it not so habitually known as a fact; and the certainty which such experiences give in the material order, the eye of faith gives in the spiritual order. However perplexing the universe now seems to us, we have this deep trust that there is an explanation, and that when we are in a position to judge the whole, instead of looking on from this corner of time and space, the truth of the spiritual interpretation of its phenomena will be clearut iustificeris in sermonibus tuis et vincas cum iudicaris. This view runs through all the poem. The poet pleads for steadfast trust and hope in the face of difficulty, as we would trust a known and intimate friend in the face of ominous suspicions.1 [Note: Wilfrid Ward, in Tennyson and his Friends, 236.]
And is the Great Cause lost beyond recall?
Have all the hopes of ages come to nought?
Is Life no more with noble meaning fraught?
Is Life but Death, and Love its funeral pall?
Maybe. But still on bended knees I fall,
Filled with a faith no preacher ever taught.
O Godmy God, by no false prophet wrought,
I believe still, in despite of it all!
Let go the myths and creeds of groping men.
This clay knows noughtthe Potter understands.
I own that Power divine beyond my ken,
And still can leave me in His shaping hands.
But, O my God, that madest me to feel!
Forgive the anguish of the turning wheel.2 [Note: Ada Cambridge, The Hand in the Dark, 121.]
II
The Content of the New Covenant
The New Covenant has three notesSpirituality, Universality, and Finality. The formula of the Old Covenant was, Thou shalt not. These great words, like a flash of lightning, discovered to man what lies in the depth of his own beingmoral obligation along with a sense of utter impotence to meet it, darkness and despair as of chaos returning. The formula of the New Covenant is, I will; still greater words, which discover the heights above, as it were the body of heaven in its clearness, unruffled serenity and easy self-achievement of the grace of God. It would not be possible to represent what is characteristic in each dispensation more vividly than by these contrasted formulas. On the one side is a vain effort to attain, a strife between the law of the mind and the law of the members, a sense of hopeless duality that carries unrestnoble, if you will, but not less fatalto the centre of mans being. On the other side is the rest of faith, a great reserve of spiritual power, the reconciliation of Divine ideals with the practice of human lives achieved by grace. Moral obligation persists under the gospel, but only as it is resolved into the higher freedom of the new life. As Pascal says, The law demands what it cannot give; grace gives all it demands.
The fireguard serves a very necessary and beneficent purpose, but its real and ultimate worth lies in educating the child to do without it. So with the Mosaic law. It served its highest ends when it disciplined the soul to independence of it. The difference, therefore, between the Old Covenant and the New was not that one was ancient and the other modern; the mere newness was the least important thing about it. It was the difference between law and religion, between the letter of the one and the spirit of the other, between body and soul, between outward form and inward essence. The Old Covenant was imposed by an authority from without, whilst the New was established by an authority from within. One was graven on stone, and needed to be enforced by pains and penalties; the other was to be written in the heart as the glad, spontaneous expression of a free spirit.
1. The New Covenant will be spiritual.The Old Covenant was formal, working from without inward, telling men what to do. This must come first. Childhood, of the race as of the individual, must begin life under rules. But the aim of the Law was to make itself superseded, by opening the way to a religious force which should work from within outward. A religion of forms, like an educational system, can never be closely personal. It cannot keep adjusting itself to the individual. It is machine work, not hand work. It fits only the average, and misfits everybody else. Gods work is with the inner heart of each human being, where dwells his truest individuality, his real life. When this is gained, the whole is won. From it flow the upright conduct, the gentle manners, the broad benisons of regenerated society. Society is not a machine to which we may bring raw characters to make them virtuous, but the effluence and product of what individual characters bring to it. Nor will religion, or a church, or any clever society or institution within the church, turn out a new generation of new souls by its most perfect adjustments. The best of them is but a path, a hand, to bring men to God, an avenue by which God comes to them. Spirit with spirit is the method of salvation.
One cannot read the words, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts, without thinking of the tables of stone which occupy so prominent a place in the history of the Sinaitic covenant. And the writing on the heart suggests very forcibly the defects of the ancient covenant, in so far as it had the fundamental laws of life written on stone. Writing on stone may be very durable. The slabs on which the Ten Words are inscribed may abide as a lasting monument, proclaiming what God requires of man, saying to successive generations: Remember to do this and to avoid doing that. But while the stone slabs may avail to keep men in mind of their duty, they are utterly impotent to dispose them to perform it; in witness whereof we need only refer to Israels behaviour at the foot of the mount of lawgiving. At the very time the tables were being prepared, they danced around their golden calf; at the very moment Moses was descending with the two tables in his hand, with the Ten Words written on them, the first of which said, Thou shalt have none other God before me, they had chosen another God; insomuch that the legislator in disgust dashed the tables to pieces, as if to say, What is the use of making laws for such a people? Manifestly the writing on the heart is sorely wanted in order that the law may be kept, not merely in the ark, but in human conduct. And that, accordingly, is what Jeremiah puts in the forefront in his account of the New Covenant, on which restored Israel is to be constituted. How the mystic writing is to be achieved he does not say, perhaps he does not know; but he believes that God can and will achieve it somehow; and he understands full well its aim and its certain result in a holy life.
You may adjust your social relationships according to the most democratic principle; you may define, in terms of economic science, the relations of Capital and Labour; you may abolish slums and build garden cities; but until there is drawn up and ratified between God and man, and between man and man, a new covenant of the spirit, your scheme for a new heaven and a new earth will never be realized. It is here that religion is indispensable, for no covenant will endure which ignores the spiritual nature of man. It is here that the voice of Jesus Christ may be heard, saying to capitalist and to workmen, Apart from me ye can do nothing. It is here that the voice of the Redeemer may be heard saying to His Church, as He recalls it to a deeper appreciation of its character and mission: This cup is the new covenant in my blood; this do in remembrance of me. This, surely, is our supreme business as Christians, to make this new covenant of the Spirit possible, by writing it on our own hearts, and afterwards to write it on the life and soul of our day.
Till earth becomes a temple,
And every human heart
Shall join in one great service,
Each happy in his part.
And God shall be our Master,
And all His service own,
And men shall be as brothers,
And heaven on earth be won.1 [Note: E. J. Barson.]
2. Under the New Covenant knowledge of God will become universal.In ancient Israel as now, men learned what they could about God from human teachers. But the truths which they learned, though inculcated with great industry, were, in the great majority of cases, not really mastered, because there was no accompanying process of interpretation and adjustment within the soul. It was to be otherwise in the future. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them. In the New Covenant the Divine Teacher, without dispensing with such human instruments as were wanted, would do the most important part of His work Himself. He would make truth plain to the soul, and would enamour the soul of truth by such instruction as is beyond the reach of human argument and language, since it belongs to the world of spirit. Ye have an unction from the Holy One, said St. John to his readers, and ye know all things. Listen not, says St. Augustine, too eagerly to the outward words: the Master is within.
No polemic against the priesthood is intended here. The prophet does not mean, with a stroke of his pen, to abolish an ancient Order to which he himself belongs. A much profounder idea underlies his words. He will have us distinguish between that knowledge of God which is esoteric and technical, the possession of a class, and that which is the instinct of every renewed nature, i.e., between the ceremonial and the moral in religion. We shall never be in a position to claim independence of each other in our spiritual experience. It is with all saints, i.e., in the communion of the Catholic Church, that we come to know the love which passes knowledge. Moral sense must be trained; even conscience must be educated. But the education of conscience is one thing, and the imposition of creed or code is quite another. The one develops that individuality which the other tends to repress. The latter is excluded here. When he says, They shall all know me, it is probable that the prophet does not consciously overlook the limits of his age. By all men he means all Jews. But the relative Universalism he asserts prepared for the absolute Universalism which is characteristic of the gospel age. Christianity is aggressive and world-subduing, because it is the religion not of the letter but of the spirit. English customs and ideals can hardly cross the Channel. They can no more take root in Eastern lands than the Mosaic Law could domesticate itself in the West. But the law of Truth is nowhere from home; the thirst for God is part of the heritage of the race; and it is to these that the gospel makes its appeal. As a revelation of God to the soul of man, Christianity is the absolute Truth, the universal Faith.
The clearest mark of the new order of things, says Jeremiah, is that religion shall henceforth be taken at first hand. Jesus said, Have salt in yourselves; do not be dependent for what keeps life strong and wholesome on influences outside of you. The religion that is worth anything is not what is told you but what you know of yourself. This does not mean that there is no room for teaching. Pauls understanding of what is contained in Jesus Christ is rich and subtle, for Paul had a sure insight and a burning love. But if we know only what Paul says, and have no answering knowledge in ourselves, even Paul will help us little. A man may be a heretic in the truth, as Milton says; and if he believes only because his pastor says so, or because the assembly so determines, without knowing other reasons, though his belief be true, yet the very truth he holds becomes his heresy. It was proclaimed by Joel that God would one day pour out of His Spirit upon all flesh, even upon the servants and the handmaids; for it is Gods intention in the covenant that nothing in station or in lack of education or opportunity should hinder any man from knowing God for himself. The motto of all our faith is, With open face.
It must be possible for men to know more of God, because the knowledge of God by man involves two elements, the known and the knower, God and man; and however perfectly God may have revealed Himself, man is but half developed and has only half possession of his knowing powers. The faith has been once delivered to the saints, as Canaan was given to the Israelites. To go in and possess the land is still the duty of the Christian Israel. Who shall say how far it has been occupied in all these Christian centuries? We may be yet only at Jericho and Ai. Some most adventurous and earnest tribes may have pushed on to Bethel. Some very determined and aspiring souls may have climbed to the mountain-tops and even caught sight of the flashing sea which bounds the Promised Land upon the western side. However we may estimate the progress of the past, there still remains very much land to be possessed. Surely the strongest way to contend for the faith once delivered to the saints is to go forward reverently till the saints shall perfectly possess the land and know all that it is possible for them to know of God and of His Book and of His ways.1 [Note: Phillips Brooks, Essays and Addresses, 226.]
3. The New Covenant will be permanent and final.For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin will I remember no more. Under the Old Covenant, the provisions for the cancelling of sin were very unsatisfactory, and utterly unfit to perfect the worshipper as to conscience, by dealing thoroughly with the problem of guiltof which no better evidence could be desired than the institution of the great day of atonement, in which a remembrance of sin was made once a year, and by which nothing more than an annual and putative forgiveness was procured; under the New, on the contrary, God would grant to His people a real, absolute, and perennial forgiveness, so that the abiding relation between Him and them should be as if sin had never existed.
The trouble in every religious system that fails is that it does not bring men close enough to what God really is, and there is no regenerating virtue in bowing before a formless mystery. There must be revelation, and the revelation of a heart. Jeremiah, feeling after things to come, says, It must be God who is to bridge this gulf, and He will do so by showing what He is. The new order is to be inaugurated by a great act of forgiveness, in which all the heart of God will appear. In some public way He will treat as His friends the men who have refused Him, putting them all in His debt. Nothing short of that, as the prophet believed, will get at the obdurate hearts of men; but at the touch of an unmerited forgiveness, gratitude will spring up within them, and lovethe power by which men know God and the constraint under which they are drawn willingly to obey Him. Forgiveness brings to erring men new conceptions of what their God is likea God who does not deal with His creatures on terms of strict, legal precision, but who pardons at His own cost, and gives them what they have not worked for. And the very sight of such a God is a real new birth, clearing and deepening all the faculties, and making obedience easy.
Jeremiah hails here the coming of the religion of redemption. He dwells on what is the crowning glory of our faith. For what is it that is central in the New Testament? It is the cross of Jesus Christ. And why does that stand in the midst? It is because we have here the propitiation for the sins of the whole world. That death of the Son of God in our room and stead is the full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice for our sins. That indeed was only dimly and confusedly prefigured in the animal sacrifices of old. One is more struck with the difference than with the resemblance. A lamb led to the altar, unwillingly and unconsciously, is no adequate type of the Lamb of God offering Himself for us, taking upon Him our guilt, standing beneath the condemnation of our sins, and magnifying the justice of God in bowing His head beneath our sentence. The real precursors of Him who suffered on Calvary are to be found in those who gave themselves for their fellows, whose sacrifices did something to draw men nearer to God, and by whose stripes some of mankinds sorrows were healed. All stories, red with the blood of real life, that tell of the innocent suffering for the guilty, are a clearer foreshadowing of the old, old story of Jesus and His love than all animal sacrifices. The old religion had a temple in which sacrifices never ceased, but none of these atoned for sin with God. Christianity centres in the supreme self-sacrifice of the cross, by which we have been redeemed. We have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins. This great blessing of pardon becomes ours because Christ has died for us. The gospel can dwell on the forgiveness of sins. It vindicates and fulfils the great promise, I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin will I remember no more.
For the most part, we are, as it were, ready rather to steal forgiveness from God than to receive from him as one that gives it freely and largely. We take it up and lay it down as though we would be glad to have it, so God did not, as it were, see us take it; for we are afraid he is not willing we should have it indeed. We would steal this fire from heaven, and have a share in Gods treasures and riches almost without his consent: at least, we think that we have it from him gr, with much difficulty; that it is rarely given, and scarcely obtained; that he gives it out , with a kind of unwilling willingnessas we sometimes give alms without cheerfulness; and that he loseth so much by us as he giveth out in pardon. We are apt to think that we are very willing to have forgiveness, but that God is unwilling to bestow it, and that because he seems to be a loser by it, and to forego the glory of inflicting punishment for our sins; which of all things we suppose he is most loath to part withal. And this is the very nature of unbelief Reasons line is too short to fathom the depth of the Fathers love, of the blood of the Son, and the promises of the gospel built thereon, wherein forgiveness dwells.1 [Note: John Owen, An Exposition upon Psalms 130.]
Contrite to God I came in sore distress,
I know, I cried, that twas but yester-eve
This self-same fault I asked Thee to forgive,
And promised to renounce all sinfulness.
Yet I would even ask again Thy grace,
Save that I fear Ive drained forgiveness dry
And reached Thy mercys utmost boundary!
Then spake Gods mighty Voice, and filled the place:
With thy poor human tape, child, dost thou think
To measure My vast mercys outer bound?
With thy short plummet at Forgiveness brink,
Dost think that thou canst test its depth of ground?
Drop in thy weightiest sin, and bid it sink,
To strike the bottomthere comes back no sound.
The New Covenant
Literature
Bennett (W. H.), The Book of Jeremiah (Expositors Bible), 346.
Gillies (J. R.), Jeremiah: The Man and his Message, 247.
Hort (F. J. A.), Village Sermons in Outline, 68.
Liddon (H. P.), Christmastide in St. Pauls, 38.
Macgregor (W. M.), Jesus Christ the Son of God, 27.
Masterman (J. H. B.), The Challenge of Christ, 52.
Ramsay (A.), Studies in Jeremiah, 261.
Smellie (A.), In the Secret Place, 5.
Southgate (C. M.), in Sermons by the Monday Club, 17th Ser., 60.
Spurgeon (C. H.), New Park Street Pulpit, ii. (1856), No. 93; Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, xxviii. (1882), No. 1687.
Christian World Pulpit, xvi. 369 (H. P. Liddon); lxxx. 269 (E. J. Barson); lxxxiv. 387 (N. H. Marshall).
Expositor, 1st Ser., xi. 65 (A. B. Bruce).
Fuente: The Great Texts of the Bible
the days: Jer 31:27, Jer 23:5, Jer 30:3, Jer 33:14-16, Amo 9:13
I: Jer 32:40, Eze 37:26, Mat 26:28, Mar 14:24, Luk 22:20, 1Co 11:25, 2Co 3:6, Heb 8:6-13, Heb 9:15, Heb 10:16, Heb 10:17, Heb 12:24, Heb 13:20
with: Jer 50:4, Jer 50:5, Gal 6:16, Phi 3:3
Reciprocal: Gen 15:18 – made Exo 19:5 – keep Num 15:41 – General Deu 9:9 – the tables Deu 27:3 – thou shalt Deu 29:13 – he may be Deu 29:14 – General 2Ki 17:35 – With whom 1Ch 17:22 – thy people 2Ch 5:10 – the Lord 2Ch 34:30 – the book Psa 25:14 – he will Psa 81:10 – I am Isa 59:21 – this Jer 11:4 – ye be Jer 23:7 – General Eze 16:60 – I will establish Eze 16:61 – but not Eze 34:25 – I will make Dan 9:27 – confirm Hos 2:19 – for Zec 10:6 – I will save Zec 11:10 – that Joh 14:21 – that hath Act 2:36 – all Act 5:31 – to give Rom 11:26 – all Rom 11:27 – this 2Co 8:16 – thanks Eph 2:12 – the covenants Heb 7:12 – a change Heb 8:8 – he saith
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
A NEW COVENANT
I will make a new covenant.
Jer 31:31
The progress of Jewish history, as recorded in the Old Testament, was marked by a series of covenants, in which God declared His gracious purposes towards His people, with the conditions on which His favour was to be enjoyed, and the people, on their side, promised to do all that God commanded. Thus covenants were made with Noah after the Flood; with Abraham, when the land of Canaan was promised to his descendants; at Sinai, when Israel became a nation; and with Joshua after the conquest of the Promised Land.
Jeremiah recalls in particular the covenant at Sinai, which marked the formation of the Jewish people, and in which the pledges between God and Israel were sealed with sacrificial blood. It was indeed a memorable scene when, at the bidding of Moses, the Israelites vowed fidelity to Jehovah. But the vow so solemnly taken was broken. Year after year, generation after generation, the people sank into idolatry and all the sins that idolatry begets. And at last God permitted the overthrow and exile of the nation. The ancient covenant, so often broken, was dissolved.
It is at this point that Jeremiah speaks. Looking forward, the prophet perceives the gathering of a new Israel, and the granting of a new covenant. When was the new covenant established? At the moment when the great sacrifice was offered which consecrated the Israel of faith! On the betrayal night Jesus took the cup, saying, This cup is the new covenant in My blood. The old covenant was made at Sinai, the new at Calvary.
The new covenant is distinguished by Jeremiah in three ways.
I. It is a spiritual one.Its terms are written, not on stones, but on tables of the heart. The new rgime is not of outward regulations, but of inward principles. In the Sermon on the Mount, Christ demands a righteousness which shall exceed that of the old law; not merely abstinence from impure deeds, but purity of soul; not the refraining from murder only, but the cherishing of a spirit of love.
II. Another note of the new covenant is its universality.They shall all know Me. The old covenant recognised a priestly order, the new creates a kingdom of priests. The old required a line of prophets, the new calls every believer to be taught of the Lord. This feature of the new covenant was emphasised by the Reformers. Luther refused to recognise the priestly caste which came between the people and Christ. John Hooper, at St. Pauls Cross, declared to the citizens of London that, if spiritually enlightened, they might judge for themselves as to matters of faith and conscience, neither pope nor priest having the right to interfere.
III. The third characteristic of the new covenant is that it is a covenant of forgiveness.The note of the earlier covenant was obedience, that of the later is mercy. Moses stood for law, Christ stands for love. Hence our Saviour declares that His blood of the new covenant is shed for many unto remission of sins. We are under the covenant of grace. What we could never merit, God freely gives. And the faith that accepts the gift of God becomes the spring of the new life, out of it arising the gratitude and love which are the motive forces of Christian character.
It is well to ask ourselves sometimes whether we are living according to the new covenant. Are we really prompted by spiritual motives? Do we know God for ourselves? Have we the humble joy of those who love much because they have been forgiven much?
Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary
Jer 31:31. This and the three verses that follow should form a bracket which contains a very important prediction. The passage is cited almost verbatim in Hebrews 8; Hebrews 8-12. Israel and Judah are both named because those were tbe names that included the 12 tribes. However, in the fulfillment both Jews and Gentiles will have a part.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Jer 31:31-32. Behold, the days come, saith the Lord The latter days, or the times of the gospel, are here intended, as is evident from the apostles applying the following promises to those times, and quoting this whole passage as a summary of the covenant of grace, Heb 8:8-10. I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah The benefits of this covenant were first offered to the Jews, as being the completion of that covenant which God had made with their fathers, Act 3:26; Act 13:46; but those benefits were actually conferred only on the spiritual seed of Abraham, or the imitators of Abrahams faith, the true Israel of God, on whom peace is and shall be, Gal 6:16, and with whom only this new covenant is made. In other words, Israel and Judah stand here for the true people or church of God, especially the gospel church: and the covenant here promised to be made with them is said to be new, not because it was so as to the substance of it, for it was made with Abraham, Gen 17:7, and with the Israelites, Deu 26:17-18; but, upon many other accounts, especially the following: 1st, It was new, considered as a testament, confirmed by the actual death of the testator, which did not take place till gospel times. 2d, It was revealed after a new manner, more fully and particularly, plainly and clearly. 3d, It contained no such mixture of temporal promises as when first made with the Jews. 4th, The ceremonial law was no part of it, as it was to the Jews, who were obliged to approve themselves Gods people, by a strict observance thereof. 5th, The publication of it was extended to the Gentiles as well as the Jews, which was not the case with the Mosaic covenant. 6th, The influences of the Divine Spirit, attending the publication of it, are conferred more largely under this than under the old covenant, distributing to believers a greater measure and variety of gifts and graces, to enable them to comply with the terms, and fulfil the demands of it. Not according to the covenant made with their fathers Differing from it in the circumstances above mentioned, and in others declared afterward: in the day when I took them by the hand, &c. The covenant which God made with the Jews, when they came out of the land of Egypt, was on his part the law which he gave them from Sinai, with the promises annexed; on their part, (which made it a formal covenant,) their promise of obedience to it. This covenant God says he made with them when they were a weak and ignorant people, the care of whom he took upon himself, and led them as a parent leads his feeble child by the hand. Which my covenant they brake This covenant they are said to have broken, not because of every defect, or failure in their obedience, for in that sense, through the general depravity and weakness of human nature, they could not but break it; (see Rom 3:20; Gal 3:10-11;) but because of their gross and wilful sins often repeated and continued in without repentance, and more especially by their idolatry, compared to whoredom, which broke the marriage covenant between God and them, and caused him to divorce them, and to say, Lo Ammi, You are not my people: Although I was a husband to them This their covenant-breaking was aggravated by Gods kindness to them and care of them, who, as he stood, related to them in the character of a husband, so he had always manifested to them such love as is but faintly shadowed forth by that of the most affectionate husband to his wife, and had given them no temptation to go a whoring from him.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Jer 31:31-34. The prophecy of the New Covenant, contained in these verses, may have been written in 586, when the destruction of Jerusalem had suggested that the Old Covenant was cancelled. The Jeremianic authorship of this most important passage has been firmly established by Cornills arguments against the criticisms of Duhm and others. Yahweh is about to establish the national religion on a new basis. When He led the Israelites out of Egypt (Hos 11:1-4), He made with them a covenant (that of Sinai, involving the Decalogue, written on tables of stone, Exo 31:15, Deu 4:13), which they broke, though He was bound to them in marriage love. His new covenant He will write upon their hearts (instead of upon stone), and He will maintain (permanently) the bond between God and people (Jer 31:33). The common knowledge of God (Jer 22:16, Isa 54:13) resulting from this inward change will make the teaching of one by another to be unnecessary (i.e. the prophetic consciousness of a Jeremiah, with its direct relation to God, will become general); the barrier of (past) sin will be removed by an act of Divine forgiveness, to make this new covenant possible (Jer 31:34).The primary truths of this great passage are to be grasped only in the light of the personal history and inner experiences of its writer. They are in general (a) the moral inwardness of true religion, (b) its dependence on supernatural agencies, (c) its realisation of a direct personal fellowship with God. (See further, Introduction, 3.)
Jer 31:32. although I was an husband unto them: cf. Jer 3:14; but LXX, Syr. suggest that we should read and I abhorred them; cf. Jer 14:19.
Jer 31:33. Cf. Jer 4:4; Jer 24:7, and the dependent Isa 51:7; contrast Jer 17:1. For the supernatural influences upon which this new and more individualised relation to God is conceived to rest, see Isa 59:21, Eze 36:26 f.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a {h} new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
(h) Though the covenant of redemption made to the fathers and this which was given later seemed varied, yet they are all one and grounded on Jesus Christ, save that this is called new, because of the manifestation of Christ and the abundant graces of the Holy Spirit given to his Church under the gospel.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
The New Covenant 31:31-34
Many commentators believe that Jeremiah’s revelation of the New Covenant was his greatest theological contribution. They view it as the high point of the book, the climax of the prophet’s teaching.
"The prophecy of Jeremiah marks a watershed in Hebrew religious and cultic life. From this point onwards there is a significant divergence between what has obtained in the past and what will characterize the future religious observances of Israel." [Note: Harrison, Jeremiah and . . ., p. 138.]
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
In the future, the Lord will make a new covenant with all the Israelites, specifically the Israelites who had inhabited the Northern Kingdom and those who had inhabited the Southern Kingdom (cf. Jer 32:40; Isa 24:5; Isa 42:6; Isa 49:8; Isa 55:3; Isa 59:21; Isa 61:8; Eze 16:60; Eze 37:26; Hos 2:18-20; Luk 22:20; 1Co 11:25; 2Co 3:6; Heb 8:8 to Heb 9:28; Heb 12:24). This is the only place in the Old Testament where the term "new covenant" appears, though there are many references to this covenant elsewhere.
"The short passage which develops from the simple announcement in this verse is one of the most important in the book of Jeremiah. Indeed it represents one of the deepest insights in the whole OT." [Note: Thompson, pp. 579-80.]
"The heart of OT theology and of the message of Jeremiah was his teaching on the New covenant in Jer 31:31-34." [Note: Walter C. Kaiser Jr., Toward an Old Testament Theology, p. 231.]
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
CHAPTER XXXIII
RESTORATION IV
THE NEW COVENANT
Jer 31:31-38 : CF. Heb 8:1-13
“I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah.”- Jer 31:31
THE religious history of Israel in the Old Testament has for its epochs a series of covenants: Jehovah declared His gracious purposes towards His people, and made known the conditions upon which they were to enjoy His promised blessings; they, on their part, undertook to observe faithfully all that Jehovah commanded. We are told that covenants were made with Noah, after the Flood; with Abraham, when he was assured that his descendants should inherit the land of Canaan; at Sinai, when Israel first became a nation; with Joshua, after the Promised Land was conquered; and, at the close of Old Testament history, when Ezra and Nehemiah established the Pentateuch as the Code and Canon of Judaism.
One of the oldest sections of the Pentateuch, Exo 20:20 – Exo 23:33, is called the “Book of the Covenant,” {Exo 24:7} and Ewald named the Priestly Code the “Book of the Four Covenants.” Judges and Samuel record no covenants between Jehovah and Israel; but the promise of permanence to the Davidic dynasty is spoken of as an everlasting covenant. Isaiah, Amos, and Micah make no mention of the Divine covenants. Jeremiah, however, imitates Hosea {Hos 2:18; Hos 6:7; Hos 8:1} in emphasising this aspect of Jehovahs relation to Israel, and is followed in his turn by Eze 2:1-10 Isaiah.
Jeremiah had played his part in establishing covenants between Israel and its God. He is not, indeed, even so much as mentioned in the account of Josiahs reformation; and it is not clear that he himself makes any express reference to it; so that some doubt must still be felt as to his share in that great movement. At the same time indirect evidence seems to afford proof of the common opinion that Jeremiah was active in the proceedings which resulted in the solemn engagement to observe the code of Deuteronomy. But yet another covenant occupies a chapter (34) in the Book of Jeremiah, and in this case there is no doubt that the prophet was the prime mover in inducing the Jews to release their Hebrew slaves. This act of emancipation was adopted in obedience to an ordinance of Deuteronomy, {Cf. Deu 15:12 and Exo 21:2} so that Jeremiahs experience of former covenants was chiefly connected with the code of Deuteronomy and the older Book of the Covenant upon which it was based.
The Restoration to which Jeremiah looked forward was to throw the Exodus into the shade, and to constitute a new epoch in the history of Israel more remarkable than the first settlement in Canaan. The nation was to be founded anew, and its regeneration would necessarily rest upon a New Covenant, which would supersede the Covenant of Sinai.
“Behold, the days come-it is the utterance of Jehovah-when I will enter into a new covenant with the House of Israel and the House of Judah: not according to the covenant into which I entered with your fathers, when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt.”
The Book of the Covenant and Deuteronomy had both been editions of the Mosaic Covenant, and had neither been intended nor regarded as anything new. Whatever was fresh in them, either in form or substance, was merely the adaptation of existing ordinances to altered circumstances. But now the Mosaic Covenant was declared obsolete, the New Covenant was not to be, like Deuteronomy, merely a fresh edition of the earliest code. The Return from Babylon, like the primitive Migration from Ur and like the Exodus from Egypt, was to be the occasion of a new Revelation, placing the relations of Jehovah and His people on a new footing.
When Ezra and Nehemiah established, as the Covenant of the Restoration, yet another edition of the Mosaic ordinances, they were acting in the teeth of this prophecy-not because Jehovah had changed His purpose, but because the time of fulfilment had not yet come.
The rendering of the next clause is uncertain, and, in any case, the reason given for setting aside the old covenant is not quite what might have been expected. The Authorised and Revised Versions translate: “Which My covenant they brake, although I was an. husband unto them”; thus introducing that Old Testament figure of marriage between Jehovah and Israel which is transferred in Ephesians and the Apocalypse to Christ and the Church. The margin of the Revised Version has: “Forasmuch as they brake My covenant, although I was lord over them.” There is little difference between these two translations, both of which imply that in breaking the covenant Israel was setting aside Jehovahs legitimate claim to obedience. A third translation, on much the same lines, would be “although I was Baal unto or over them”; Baal or baal being found for lord, husband, in ancient times as a name of Jehovah, and in Jeremiahs time as a name of heathen gods. Jeremiah is fond of paronomasia, and frequently refers to Baal, so that he may have been here deliberately ambiguous. The phrase might suggest to the Hebrew reader that Jehovah was the true lord or husband of Israel, and the true Baal or God, but that Israel had come to regard Him as a mere Baal, like one of the Baals of the heathen. “Forasmuch as they, on their part, set at nought My covenant; so that I, their true Lord, became to them as a mere heathen Baal.” The covenant and the God who gave it were Mike treated with contempt.
The Septuagint, which is quoted in Heb 8:9, has another translation: “And I regarded them not.” Unless this represents a different reading, it is probably due to a feeling that the form of the Hebrew sentence required a close parallelism. Israel neglected to observe the covenant, and Jehovah ceased to feel any interest in Israel. But the idea of the latter clause seems alien to the context.
In any case, the new and better covenant is offered to Israel, after it has failed to observe the first covenant. This Divine procedure is not quite according to many of our theories. The law of ordinances is often spoken of as adapted to the childhood of the race. We set children easy tasks, and when these are successfully performed we require of them something more difficult. We grant them limited privileges, and if they make a good use of them the children are promoted to higher opportunities. We might perhaps have expected that when the Israelites failed to observe the Mosaic ordinances, they would have been placed under a narrower and harsher dispensation; yet their very failure leads to the promise of a better covenant still. Subsequent history, indeed, qualifies the strangeness of the Divine dealing. Only a remnant of Israel survived as the people of God. The Covenant of Ezra was very different from the New Covenant of Jeremiah; and the later Jews, as a community, did not accept that dispensation of grace which ultimately realised Jeremiahs prophecy. In a narrow and unspiritual fashion the Jews of the Restoration observed the covenant of external ordinances; so that, in a certain sense, the Law was fulfilled before the new Kingdom of God was inaugurated. But if Isaiah and Jeremiah had reviewed the history of the restored community, they would have declined to receive it as, in any sense, the fulfilling of a Divine covenant. The Law of Moses was not fulfilled, but made void, by the traditions of the Pharisees. The fact therefore remains, that failure in the lower forms, so to speak, of Gods school is still followed by promotion to higher privileges. However little we may be able to reconcile this truth with a priori views of Providence, it has analogies in nature, and reveals new depths of Divine love and greater resourcefulness of Divine grace. Boys whose early life is unsatisfactory nevertheless grow up into the responsibilities and privileges of manhood; and the wilful, disobedient child does not always make a bad man. We are apt to think that the highest form of development is steady, continuous, and serene, from good to better, from better to best. The real order is more awful and stupendous, combining good and evil, success and failure, victory and defeat, in its continuous advance through the ages. The wrath of man is not the only evil passion that praises God by its ultimate subservience to His purpose. We need not fear lest such Divine overruling of sin should prove any temptation to wrongdoing, seeing that it works, as in the exile of Israel, through the anguish and humiliation of the sinner.
The next verse explains the character of the New Covenant; once Jehovah wrote His law on tables of stone, but now:-
“This is the covenant which I will conclude
With the House of Israel after those days-it is the utterance of Jehovah-
I will put My law within them, and will write it upon their heart;
And I will be their God, and they shall be My people.”
These last words were an ancient formula for the immemorial relation of Jehovah and Israel, but they were to receive new fulness of meaning. The inner law, written on the heart, is in contrast to Mosaic ordinances. It has, therefore, two essential characteristics: first, it governs life, not by fixed external regulations, but by the continual control of heart and conscience by the Divine Spirit; secondly, obedience is rendered to the Divine Will, not from external compulsion, but because mans inmost nature is possessed by entire loyalty to God. The new law involves no alteration of the standards of morality or of theological doctrine, but it lays stress on the spiritual character of mans relation to God, and therefore on the fact that God is a spiritual and moral being. When mans obedience is claimed on the ground of Gods irresistible power, and appeal is made to material rewards and punishments, Gods personality is obscured and the way is opened for the deification of political or material Force: This doctrine of setting aside of ancient codes by the authority of the Inner Law is implied in many passages of our book. The superseding of the Mosaic Law is set forth by a most expressive symbol, “When ye are multiplied and increased in the land, The Ark of the Covenant of Jehovah shall no longer be the watchword of Israel: men shall neither think of the ark nor remember it; they shall neither miss the ark nor make another in its place.” The Ark and the Mosaic Torah were inseparably connected; if the Ark was to perish and be forgotten, the Law must also be annulled.
Jeremiah moreover discerned with Paul that there was a law in the members warring against the Law of Jehovah: “The sin of Judah is written with a pen of iron, and with the point of a diamond: it is graven upon the table of their heart, and upon the horns of their altars.” {Jer 17:1}
Hence the heart of the people had to he changed before they could enter into the blessings of the Restoration: “I will give them a heart to know Me, that I am Jehovah: and they shall be My people, and I will be their God: for they shall return unto Me with their whole heart.” {Jer 34:7} In the exposition of the symbolic purchase of Hanameels field, Jehovah promises to make an everlasting covenant with His people, that He will always do them good and never forsake them. Such continual blessings imply that Israel will always be faithful. Jehovah no longer seeks to ensure their fidelity by an external law, with its alternate threats and promises: He will rather control the inner life by His grace. “I will give them one heart and one way, that they may fear Me forever; I will put My fear in their hearts, that they may not depart from Me.” {Jer 32:39-40}
We must not, of course, suppose that these principles-of obedience from loyal enthusiasm, and of the guidance of heart and conscience by the Spirit of Jehovah-were new to the religion of Israel. They are implied in the idea of prophetic inspiration. When Saul went home to Gibeah, “there went with him a band of men, whose hearts God had touched,” {1Sa 10:26} In Deuteronomy, Israel is commanded to “love Jehovah thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart.” {Deu 6:5-6}
The novelty of Jeremiahs teaching is that these principles are made central in the New Covenant. Even Deuteronomy, which approaches so closely to the teaching of Jeremiah, was a new edition of the Covenant of the Exodus, an attempt to secure a righteous life by exhaustive rules and by external sanctions. Jeremiah had witnessed and probably assisted the effort to reform Judah by the enforcement of the Deuteronomic Code. But when Josiahs religious policy collapsed after his defeat and death at Megiddo, Jeremiah lost faith in elaborate codes, and turned from the letter to the spirit.
The next feature of the New Covenant naturally follows from its being written upon mens hearts by the finger of Jehovah:-
“Men shall no longer teach one another and teach each other,
Saying, Know ye Jehovah!
For all shall know Me, from the least to the greatest-
It is the utterance of Jehovah.”
In ancient times men could only “know Jehovah” and ascertain His will by resorting to some sanctuary, where the priests preserved and transmitted the sacred tradition and delivered the Divine oracles. Written codes scarcely altered the situation; copies would be few and far between, and still mostly in the custody of the priests. Whatever drawbacks arise from attaching supreme religious authority to a printed book were multiplied a thousandfold when codes could only be copied. But, in the New Israel, mens spiritual life would not be at the mercy of pen, ink, and paper, of scribe and priest. The man who had a book and could read would no longer be able, with the self-importance of exclusive knowledge, to bid his less fortunate brethren to know Jehovah. He Himself would be the one teacher, and His instruction would fall, like the sunshine and the rain, upon all hearts alike.
And yet again Israel is assured that past sin shall not hinder the fulfilment of this glorious vision:-
“For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin will I remember no more.”
Recurring to the general topic of the Restoration of Israel, the prophet affixes the double seal of two solemn Divine asseverations. Of old, Jehovah had promised Noah: “While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night, shall not cease.” {Gen 8:22} Now He promises that while sun and moon and stars and sea continue in their appointed order, Israel shall not cease from being a nation. And, again, Jehovah will not cast off Israel on account of its sin till the height of heaven can be measured and the foundations of the earth searched out.