Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Jeremiah 22:24
[As] I live, saith the LORD, though Coniah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah were the signet upon my right hand, yet would I pluck thee thence;
24. Coniah ] Cp. Jer 37:1; called also Jeconiah (both names meaning, Jehovah is firm, enduring) Jer 24:1, Jer 27:20, Jer 28:4, Jer 29:2 ; 1Ch 3:16; Est 2:6, and Jehoiachin (Jehovah appointeth) Jer 52:31; 2Ki 24:6, etc.; 2Ch 36:8. The change to Jehoiachin, as in the case of his uncle Jehoahaz (see on Jer 22:11), was probably made on his accession to the throne.
king of Judah ] shewing that he was still on the throne.
signet ] even though he were as dear to Jehovah as a precious stone, set by way of seal in a signet ring, is to the owner. See 2Ki 24:9; also Eze 19:5-9, where he is likened to a young lion that “devoured men” and “laid waste their cities.”
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
24 30. The judgement on Jehoiachin. This part of the sub-section may also be subdivided, inasmuch as in 24 27 he has yet to be taken to Babylon, while in 28 30 that event is spoken of as in the past. The verb in Jer 22:28 can be taken, however, as a prophetic perfect, implying certainty of fulfilment.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
The words king of Judah, belong to Coniah, and prove that he was king regnant when the prophet wrote. The prophet gives him the name by which he was known when in a private station 1Ch 3:16 as he had done previously with Jehoahaz. These two kings bore their royal names for so short a time that they probably never got into general use.
The signet – The badge of office. To part with it, was to part with the royal authority.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Jer 22:24
Though Coniah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah were the signet upon my right hand, yet would I pluck thee thence.
Punishment of the impenitent inevitable and justifiable
I. Mention some awful instances in which God has verified this declaration.
1. The apostate angels.
2. Our first parents.
3. The Flood.
4. The Jews.
5. The Saviour Himself.
It pleased the Lord to bruise Him. He spared not His own Son. And will He then, O impenitent sinner, who by refusing to believe in Jesus Christ crucifiest Him afresh, will God spare thee? No; though thou weft the signet on His right Hand; though thou wert dear to Him as the Son of His love, He would not spare thee, when His violated law and His insulted justice call for thy destruction.
II. State some of the reasons why God has formed and enacted such a declaration; or, in other words, why He will sooner give up all that is dear to Him than suffer sin to go unpunished.
1. It is needless to remark that, among these reasons, a disposition to give pain has no place. As God has sworn by Himself that the wicked shall die, so He has sworn by Himself that He has no pleasure in their death.
2. Nor has a desire to revenge the insults and injuries which sinners have offered to Himself any place among the motives which induce God to punish sin; for He inflicts punishment, not as an injured individual, but as the Sovereign and Judge of the universe, who is under the most sacred obligations to treat His subjects according to their deserts.
3. It is because the welfare of His great kingdom, the peace and happiness of the universe, require it. It is because a relaxation of His law, a departure from the rules of strict justice, would occasion more misery than will result from a rigid execution of His law. Were sin unrestrained, unpunished, it would soon scale heaven, as it has once done already in the case of the apostate angels; and there reign and rage with immortal strength through eternity, repeating in endless succession, and with increased aggravation, the enormities which it has already perpetrated on earth. We may add, that after God had once surrendered His truth, His justice, and holiness, and laid aside the reins of government, He could never more resume them. Nor could He ever give laws, or make promises to any other world, or any other race of creatures, which would he worthy of the least regard. (B. Payson, D. D.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 24. Though Coniah] Called Jeconiah, probably on ascending the throne. See Clarke on Jer 22:10.
The signet upon my right hand] The most precious seal, ring, or armlet. Though dearer to me than the most splendid gem to its possessor.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
By
Coniah he meaneth Jehoiachim, 2Ki 24:8, whose name was Jeconiah, 1Ch 3:16, (for all Josiahs sons had two names, and so had his grandchild Jeconiah,) here in contempt called Coniah. He saith, that though this Coniah were as dear to him as his signet, which every man keepeth safe, yet this should not secure him from Divine vengeance.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
24. As I liveGod’s mostsolemn formula of oath (Jer 46:18;Jer 4:2; Deu 32:40;1Sa 25:34).
ConiahJeconiah orJehoiachin. The contraction of the name is meant in contempt.
signetSuch ring sealswere often of the greatest value (Son 8:6;Hag 2:23). Jehoiachin’spopularity is probably here referred to.
right handthe handmost valued.
I would pluck theethence(Compare Ob 4); onaccount of thy father’s sins, as well as thine own (2Ch36:9). There is a change here, as often in Hebrew poetry,from the third to the second person, to bring the threat moredirectly home to him. After a three months’ and ten days’ reign, theChaldees deposed him. In Babylon, however, by God’s favor he wasultimately treated more kindly than other royal captives (Jer52:31-34). But none of his direct posterity ever came to thethrone.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
[As] I live, saith the Lord,…. The form of an oath, used to express the greater certainty of what is after delivered: swearing by his life is swearing by himself; see Heb 6:13;
though Coniah the son of Jehoiakim, king of Judah; the same with Jeconiah, so nicknamed by way of contempt; and it may be to denote the diminution of his glory and kingdom, and the shortness of his reign:
were the signet upon my right hand; ever so near to him, or ever so much valued by him, as he had been before, and so constantly cared for and regarded by him; as a ring, with anything respectable engraved on it, is constantly wore by persons, and greatly valued; especially such as had on them the image or picture of a person loved, as was usual in some countries, to which the allusion is by some thought to be: so the friends of Epicurus used to have his image engraved upon their rings, which they wore on their fingers in respect to him, and as an omen of good to themselves b; see So 8:6;
yet would I pluck thee thence: with great displeasure and indignation: it designs being removed from his throne and kingdom, and out of his native land, and carried into a far country, as follows.
b Vid. Alexand. ab Alex. Genial. Dier. l. 2. c. 19.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Against Jehoiachin or Jechoniah. – Jer 22:24. “As I live, saith Jahveh, though Conjahu, the son of Jehoiakim, the king of Judah, were a signet ring on my right hand, yet would I pluck him thence, Jer 22:25. And give thee into the hand of them that seek thy life, and into the hand of them of whom thou art afraid, and into the hand of Nebuchadrezzar the king of Babylon, and into the hand of the Chaldeans; Jer 22:26. And will cast thee and thy mother that bare thee into another land where ye were not born; and there shall ye die. Jer 22:27. And into the land whither they lift up their soul to return, thither shall they not return. Jer 22:28. Is this man Conjahu a vessel despised and to be broken, or an utensil wherein one has no pleasure? Jer 22:29. O land, land, land, hear the word of Jahveh! Jer 22:30. Thus hath Jahveh said: Write down this man as childless, as a man that hath no prosperity in his life; for no man of his seed shall prosper that sitteth upon the throne of David and ruleth widely over Judah.”
The son and successor of Jehoiakim is called in 2Ki 24:6., 2Ch 36:8., Jer 52:31, Jehojachin, and in Eze 1:2, Jojachin; here, Jer 22:24, Jer 22:28, and Jer 37:1, Conjahu; in Jer 24:1, Jeconjahu; and in Jer 27:20; Jer 28:4; Jer 29:2, Est 2:6; 1Ch 3:16, Jeconjah. The names Jeconjahu and abbreviated Jeconjah are equivalent to Jojachin and Jehojachin, i.e., Jahveh will establish. Jeconjah was doubtless his original name, and so stands in the family register, 1Ch 3:16, but was at his accession to the throne changed into Jehojachin or Jojachin, to make it liker his father’s name. The abbreviation of Jeconjahu into Conjahu is held by Hgstb. Christol. ii. p. 402, to be a change made by Jeremiah in order by cutting off the y ( will establish) to cut off the hope expressed by the name, to make “a Jeconiah without the J, a ‘God will establish’ without the will.” For two reasons we cannot adopt this as the true view: 1. The general reason, that if Jeremiah had wished to adumbrate the fate of the three kings (Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim, and Jehoiachin) by making changes in their names, he would then have changed the name of Jehoiakim in like manner as he did that of Jehoahaz into Shallum, and that of Jehoiachin into Conjahu. The argument by which Hgstb. seeks to justify the exception in the one case will not hold its own. Had Jeremiah thought it unseemly to practise a kind of conceit, for however solemn a purpose, on the name of the then reigning monarch, then neither could he have ventured on the like in the case of Jehoiachin; for the present prediction was not, as Hgstb. assumed, uttered before his accession, but, as may be seen from the title king of Judah, Jer 22:24, after he had ascended the throne, was actually king. Besides. 2. the name Conjahu occurs also at Jer 37:1, in a historical heading, as of equal dignity with Jeconjahu, Jer 29:2; Jer 28:4, etc., where a name proper only to prophetic discourse would not have been in place. The passages in which the prophets express the character and destiny of a person in a name specially formed for the purpose, are of another kind. There we have always: they shall call his name, or: his name shall be; cf. Jer 33:16; Isa 9:5; Isa 62:4; Eze 48:35. That the name Jeconjah has not merely the prophet’s authority, is vouched for by 1Ch 3:15; Est 2:6, and by the historical notices, Jer 24:1; Jer 27:20; Jer 28:4; Jer 29:2. And the occurrence of the name Jojachin only in 2 Kings 24; 2Ch 36:1; Jer 52:31, and Eze 1:2 is in consequence of the original documents used by the authors of these books, where, so to speak, the official names were made use of; whereas Jeremiah preferred the proper, original name which the man bore as the prince-royal and son of Jehoiakim, and which was therefore the current and best known one.
The utterance concerning Jechoniah is more distinct and decided than that concerning Jehoiakim. With a solemn oath the Lord not only causes to be made known to him that he is to be cast off and taken into exile, but further, that his descendants are debarred from the throne for ever. Nothing is said of his own conduct towards the Lord. In 2Ki 24:9 and 2Ch 36:9 it is said of him that he did that which was displeasing to the Lord, even as his father had done. Ezekiel confirms this sentence when in Eze 19:5-9 he portrays him as a young lion that devoured men, forced widows, and laid cities waste. The words of Jahveh: Although Conjahu were a signet ring on my right hand, convey no judgment as to his character, but simply mean: Although he were as precious a jewel in the Lord’s eyes as a signet ring (cf. Hag 2:23), the Lord would nevertheless cast him away. before introduces the body of the oath, as in Jer 22:5, and is for rhetorical effect repeated before the apodosis, as in 2Sa 3:9; 2Sa 2:27, etc. Although he were, sc. what he is not; not: although he is (Graf); for there is no proof for the remark: that as being the prince set by Jahveh over His people, he has really as close a connection with Him. Hitz.’s explanation is also erroneous: “even if, seeking help, he were to cling so closely to me as a ring does to the finger.” A most unnatural figure, not supported by reference to Son 8:6. As to , from with epenth., cf. Ew. 250, b. – From Jer 22:25 on, the discourse is addressed directly to Jechoniah, to make his rejection known to him. God will deliver him into the hand of his enemies, whom he fears, namely, into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar and the Chaldeans, and cast him with his mother into a strange land, where he shall die. The mother was called Nehushta, 2Ki 24:8, and is brought forward in 29:2 as . On the fulfilment of this threatening, see 2Ki 24:12, 2Ki 24:15; Jer 24:1; Jer 29:2. The construction is like that of , Jer 2:21; and the absence of the article from is no sufficient reason for holding it to be a gloss (Hitz.), or for taking the article in to be a slip caused by , Jer 22:27. To lift up their souls, i.e., to direct their longings, wishes, towards a thing, cf. Deu 24:15; Hos 4:8, etc. – The further sentence on Jechoniah was not pronounced after he had been carried captive, as Ng. infers from the perfects and . The perfects are prophetic. The question: Is this man a vessel despised and to be broken ( , vas fictile )? is an expression of sympathising regret on the part of the prophet for the unhappy fate of the king; but we may not hence conclude that Jeremiah regarded him as better than his father. The prophet’s sympathy for his fate regarded less the person of the unfortunate king than it did the fortunes of David’s royal seed, in that, of Jechoniah’s sons, none was to sit on the throne of David (Jer 22:30). Ew. has excellently paraphrased the sense: “Although there is many a sympathising heart in the land that bitterly laments the hard fate of the dear young king, who along with his infant children has been (? will be) dragged away, yet it is God’s unchangeable decree that neither he nor any of his sons shall ascend the throne of David.” , not: broken, but: that shall be broken (cf. Ew. 335, b). Wherefore are they – he and his seed – cast out? At his accession Jehoiachin was eighteen years old, not eight, as by an error stands in 2Ch 36:9, see on 2Ki 24:8; so that when taken captive, he might well enough have children, or at least one son, since his wives are expressly mentioned in the account of the captivity, 2Ki 24:15. That the sons mentioned in 1Ch 3:16 and 1Ch 3:17 were born to him in exile, cannot be inferred from that passage, rightly understood, see on that passage. The fact that no sons are mentioned in connection with the carrying captive is simply explained by the fact that they were still infants.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
Vs. 24-30: THE DOOM OF JEHOIACHIN
1. Upon the death of Jehoiakim (Dec. 598 B.C.) his son, Jeconiah ; Jer 24:1), Coniah (Jer 37:1) or Jehoiachin came to the throne (at the age of 8); he was allowed to reign for only three months, (2Ki 24:8-9).
2. The Lord declared, through Jeremiah, that though Jehoiachin were “the signet” upon His right hand, He would pluck him off (vs. 24); His authority was forfeited; there can be no fellowship with Jehovah without the obedience of faith! (Heb 10:36).
3. He will be handed over to those whom he most dreads – the Chaldeans, under Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, (vs. 25; 2Ki 25:27-30).
4. Both Jehoiachin and his mother (Nehushta, 2Ki 24:8) will be exiled to Babylon where they will die; he will not be permitted to return, (vs. 26-27; 2Ki 24:15).
a. Eliakim, a steward, was appointed to manage his estate in his absence.
b. Jehoiachin remained a prisoner, in Babylon, until released by Nebuchadnezzar’s successor (Evil-Meredach) in 561 B.C. – after which he was allowed to live there in the royal palace, (Jer 52:31-34).
5. The sarcastic references to Jehoiachin as an unwanted, cast off vessel of inferior quality, suggests something of his lack of character, (vs. 28; comp. Jer 48:38; Hos 8:8; Jer 15:1).
6. The threefold repetition of the word “earth” (land) is Jeremiah’s lament over the demise of the kingdom of Judah, (vs. 29; comp. Deu 4:26; Jer 6:19; Mic 1:2).
7. Though seven sons were born to Coniah (1Ch 3:17-18), he was “childless” so far as kingly succession was concerned; none of his offspring would sit on the Davidic throne (vs. 30) -though Zerubbabel, his grandson, was permitted to lead the exodus back to Jerusalem, (1Ch 3:19; Ezr 2:2; Ezr 3:2).
a. Were He dependent on His lineage through Joseph, Jesus Christ could never sit upon the throne of David; Joseph’s descent was from Coniah, (Mat 1:11; Mat 1:16).
b. But, since the physical descent of Jesus was THROUGH MARY, He is qualified to sit on the throne THROUGH NATHAN – David’s son, (Luk 3:23; Luk 3:31).
c. Thus, the supreme, sovereign, living God of Israel marvelously works out His own wise designs among men and nations!
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
God here makes an oath that he had resolved to punish Jeconiah, who was also called Jehoiachim. And he says, That though he sat on the throne of David, he would yet be a miserable exile. We have, indeed, seen elsewhere, that the Jews were so fascinated as to think that, God was bound to them; and at the same time they allowed themselves every liberty in sinning, under the pretense that God had promised that the kingdom of David would remain as long as the sun and moon continued in the heavens, (Psa 89:37) but they did not consider that there was a mutual compact in God’s covenant; for he required them to be faithful on their part: nor did they consider that many were Abraham’s children according to the flesh, who were not his lawful children before God. As to the king himself, he never thought it possible that he should be driven into exile, because he was David’s successor and ordained by God.
This, then, is the reason why God now declares, Even though that Coniah were as a sealing ring on my finger, I would yet pluck it off thence However exalted then was Jeconiah, God shews that his dignity would be only for a time, and would soon fade away; for he would be at length thrust from his throne, and his condition wholly changed. The word Coniah is, no doubt, in a mutilated form, instead of Jehoiachin. The Prophet then calls him Coniah by way of contempt, as though he did not think him worthy of the complete name, but expresses it in two instead of four syllables. So the Prophet, though Jeconiah was then the king, yet calls him Coniah. (65)
Now, this passage teaches us, that we ought not to be in such a way proud of God’s favors, as to forget what we are, but ever to remember that we are dependent on him, and that we ought diligently to pray to him at all times; for security breeds contempt; hence it is; that God strips us of the ornaments with which we have been clothed; and it is a just reward for our ingratitude. Let all, then, who excel others know, that what has been given may at any time be taken away, except good conscience be as it were the guard to preserve God’s gifts and benefits, so that they may not at any time fall away or be lost. It follows —
(65) The early Versions throughout this passage give his name as Jeconiah; but the Targ., Coniah, according to the Hebrew. The Rabbins give various reasons for the change, and others too, which are frivolous. The reason given by Calvin and adopted by Gataker, Lowth, and others, is confirmed by the contemptuous language used in the 28 verse. — Ed.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
3. The fate of Jehoiachin (Jer. 22:24-30)
TRANSLATION
(24) As I live (oracle of the LORD), even if Coniah son of Jehoiakim king of Judah was a signet upon My right hand, I would pull you off; (25) and I will place you in the hand of those who seek your life, and into the hand of those of whom you are afraid, even into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, and into the hand of the Chaldeans. (26) And I will cast you and the mother who bore you into another land where You were not born, and there you shall die. (27) But to the land where they long to return, they shall not return. (28) Is this man Coniah a despised and broken vessel? Is he a vessel in which there is no delight? For what reason were he and his seed hurled away, and cast into a land which they do not know? (29) O land, land, land! Hear the word of the LORD! (30) Thus says the LORD: Write this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days; for he shall not be successful in having one of his descendants sit on the throne of David or rule again over Judah.
COMMENTS
Having spoken of the future of Jehoahaz (Jer. 22:10-12) and the folly of Jehoiakim (Jer. 22:13-23) Jeremiah now adds an oracle dealing with the fate of Coniah whose throne name was Jehoiachin.[220] Jehoiachin apparently was a carbon copy of his father (2Ki. 24:9), For this reason God declares that even if Coniah were a signet upon His finger He would pull him off and cast him away. Because of its importance the signet ring in antiquity was highly valued and guarded against any possible 10SS. That ring impressed into a bit of warm wax on a document made the document legally binding. The signet was the equivalent of the modern day signature. The king of Judah was the earthly representative of the invisible King of Judah, the Lord of hosts. He exercised authority in the name of the Almighty and hence could be compared to a signet on the hand of the Lord. But God swears with an oath formula (as I live) that Jehoiachin will be removed from this royal dignity (Jer. 22:24).
[220] Jer. 52:31. This monarch is also designated as Jeconiah (Jer. 27:20), Jeconiahu (Jer. 24:1) and Joiakin (Eze. 1:2). The name in its various forms means The Lord will establish.
Not only will God remove Jehoiachin from the throne of Judah, but He will see to it that the king is delivered into the hands of the ruthless Nebuchadnezzar (Jer. 22:25). He along with the queen-mother, the influential Nehushta,[221] will be taken into the distant land of Babylon where they will die (Jer. 22:26). To die in a foreign land was considered one of the worst fates which could befall a man. The prophecy was fulfilled in 597, B.C. when Jehoiachin and the royal family were deported in chains to Babylon. Jehoiachin remained a captive of Babylon throughout the reign of Nebuchadnezzar. He was released after thirty-seven years of captivity by the son and successor of Nebuchadnezzar, Evil-merodach (2Ki. 25:27-30). Jehoiachin must have died in Babylon before the restoration of the Jews in 537 B.C. or else he surely would have been made the leader of the returnees at that time.
[221] See Jer. 29:2; 2Ki. 24:8. An oracle has already been delivered to this prominent woman in Jer. 13:18.
Jer. 22:24-26 speak of the exile of king Jehoiachin as something in the future. But Jer. 22:27-30 presuppose that the exile has already begun. Here, as so often in prophetic literature, the prophet has projected himself into the future beyond 597 B.C. when Jehoiachin would be taken into captivity. He describes what he knows the attitude of the captives will be. They will long to return to Palestine but will not be permitted to do so (Jer. 22:27).
Jeremiah finds it hard to believe the words of his own prophecy. By means of a favorite literary device, a series of questions,[222] he expresses his incredulity. In astonishment he asks, Is Coniah no better than a cracked piece of pottery which one might cast on the top of a trash pile? Why must Jehoiachin and his seed suffer the terrible fate of deportation to a foreign land? Jeremiah seems in Jer. 22:28 to be reflecting a great deal of sympathy toward the young king who was destined to reign only three months on the throne of Judah (2Ki. 24:8). Though Jehoiachin was but eighteen years old when taken captive he had wives (2Ki. 24:15) and apparently seed, i.e., children.
[222] Jeremiah elsewhere employs the repeated question to state an unnatural, incomprehensible fact. See Jer. 8:4 f.; Jer. 8:22; Jer. 14:19.
As Jeremiah reaches the climax of his pronouncement against Jehoiachin he dramatically calls the entire land to listen to the announcement of the tragic fate of this king. O land, land, land! Hear the word of the Lord! (Jer. 22:29). The three-fold repetition of land anticipates the solemnity of the message which follows. Write this man childless, i.e., enter Jehoiachin in the register of the citizens as one who has no heirs. The word childless is not to be taken here in the absolute sense since Jer. 22:28 already has mentioned the seed or children of Jehoiachin. Rather the meaning is that as far as the throne is concerned Jehoiachin would be childless. The rest of the verse makes this perfectly clear. No son of Jehoiachin would ever rule over Judah. It is interesting to note that Zerubbabel, the grandson of Jehoiachin, did serve as governor of the restored community once the exile in Babylon had ended.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(24) Coniah the son of Jehoiakim.The grammatical structure of the sentence fixes the original utterance of the message, now reproduced, at a time when Coniah was actually king, during his short three months reign. The name of this prince appears in three forms :(1) The abbreviated Coniah, as here and in Jer. 37:1 : this was probably the name by which he was known before he was proclaimed as king. (2) Jeconiah, with slight variations, in Jer. 24:1; Jer. 27:20, and elsewhere. (3) Jehoiachin, also with varied spellingprobably the regal title assumed on his accession (Jer. 52:31; Eze. 1:2). The meaning of the name Jehovah establishes is constant in all the forms. In 2Ki. 24:8 he is said to have been eighteen years old when he began to reign. In 2Ch. 36:9 the age is given as eight. The latter is obviously an error of transcription. His reign lasted for three months only. There is probably a touch of scorn, as in the case of Shallum, in the prophets use of the earlier name instead of that which he had assumed as king.
The signet upon my right hand.The seal-ring was, as in Hag. 2:23, the symbol of kingly power (Gen. 41:42; Est. 3:10; Est. 8:2), authenticating every edict, and was therefore the type of all that was most precious. (Comp. Son. 8:6.)
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
24. Coniah Abbreviated from Jeconiah, his personal, as Jehoiachim was his official, designation.
As I live Thus giving to his utterance concerning him special solemnity and emphasis.
Signet A precious and almost indispensable article of attire a ring or seal. See Hag 2:23. Not only had it intrinsic value, but it was a badge of official authority.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Jer 22:24. Though Coniah, &c. Houbigant reads Jeconiah instead of Coniah, See the note on Jer 22:11. The expression though he were the signet, &c. is proverbial, and signifies, “Though he were most dear and valuable to me, yet would I not spare him, on account of his iniquity.” See Hag 2:23. The ring was frequently worn in ancient days as a mark of sovereignty. When Alexander died, he gave his ring to Perdiccas, thus as it were marking him out for a successor.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
e. Prophecy relating to the person of Jehoiachin
. Before the Deportation
Jer 22:24-27
24As I live, saith Jehovah, though Coniah,15
The son of Jehoiakim, king of Judah,
Were the signet ring upon my right hand,
Yet would I pluck thee thence.16
25And I give thee into the hand of them that seek thy life,
And into the hand of those before whom thou fearest,
Even into the hand of Nebuchadrezzar, king of Babylon,
And into the hand of the Chaldeans.
26And I cast thee forth, and thy mother that bare thee,
Into another country, 17 where ye were not born;
And there ye shall die.
27But to the land whither their soul desires to return,18
Thither shall they not return.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
Jehovah swears by His life, that though Jehoiachin, the king of Judah, were the signet-ring on His right hand, yet He would tear it off (Jer 22:24), give him into the hands of Nebuchadnezzar (Jer 22:25), and hurl him forth, together with his mother, into a foreign land. There they shall die (Jer 22:26) and never return to the home for which they have so longing a desire (Jer 22:27). It is evident that this utterance is addressed to Jehoiachin during his reign. He is addressed as king; Nebuchadnezzar stands menacingly in the vicinity; the captivity is still future.
Jer 22:24. As I live thence. King Jehoiachin, Jehoiakims son and successor, who however reigned only three months (2Ki 24:8; three months and ten days, 2Ch 36:9), appears under the name of Jeconiah also in Jer 24:1; Jer 27:20; Jer 28:4; Jer 29:2; 1Ch 3:16-17 : comp. Est 3:6. I believe that the abbreviation here denotes a disparaging treatment of the royal name. Somewhat of the feeling expressed in Jer 22:28 may be traced in it: Is not this man Coniah a despised broken vessel?Since moreover Jeremiah never calls this king Jehoiachin (, he is so called only in Jer 52:31), it is possible that Jeconiah was his proper, original name, and Jehoiachin only supplementary, assumed during his brief reign. Although Jeremiah acknowledges him as king, he guards against using a name expressing a false arbitrary hope, as he also retains the original personal name Shallum, instead of the inappropriately chosen royal name of Jehoahaz (Jer 22:11).Though Coniah were, etc. If it were not for (imperfect) I should be disposed to render in the sense of although he is. But with the imperfect cannot possibly be taken otherwise than in the sense of a conditional sentence. I do not think that we can regard the signet-ring here as a symbol of power, i. e. as a sign of investiture with royal authority. (Comp. Gen 41:42; Est 3:10; Est 8:2). For in this sense Jeconiah was really a signet-ring. But the signet is here only a jewel, a costly valuable ornament (Son 8:6). The Lord would therefore say: As I would pluck away the dearest jewel from which I had never parted hitherto, were it become bad, useless, therefore unworthy of me, so must I reject Jeconiah, as one who is despicable, useless, unworthy, even though he were the signet-ring on my right hand, which he is. not. is here as in Psa 139:8-9; Amo 9:2-4; Isa 10:22; Oba 1:4.
Jer 22:25-27. And I give thee unto the hand they not return. Comp. Jer 19:7; Jer 21:7; Jer 34:20-21.And thy mother. She was Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan, 2Ki 24:8. Comp. Jer 13:18.
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
1. On Jer 21:2. King Zedekiah sends word to Jeremiah, that the Lord is to do according to all His miracles, that Nebuchadnezzar may withdraw. A demand rather cavalierly made in such evil circumstances. But the noble are so unfortunate! It is indeed as though it only depended on them to arrange matters with God; as if He were only waiting for them, as if it were a point of honor not to be over-hasty, but first to await a little extremity . It is a very necessary observance for a servant of the Lord, that he try his superiors, whether there is any trace remaining in them of having been once baptized, well brought up and instructed in the fear of the Lord. If he observe anything of this kind, he must insist upon it and especially not allow them to deal too familiarly with the Judge of all the earth, but plainly demonstrate to them their insufficiency and nothingness, if they measure themselves by Him. Though Zedekiah had spoken so superficially, Jeremiah answered him without hesitation, definitely and positively, and accustomed him to a different manner of dealing with the Lord. Zinzendorf. When the ungodly desire Gods help, they commonly appeal not to His saving power to heal them, but to His miraculous power to save them, while they persist in their impenitence. Starke.
2. On Jer 21:8. It is pure grace on the part of God, when He leaves to man the choice between the good and the evil; not that it is permitted him to choose the evil, but that he may choose freely the good, which he is under obligation to do, Deu 30:19. Starke. God lays before us the way of life and the way of death. The way of life is however always contrary to human reason, and that on which it sees merely death and shame. If thou wilt save thyself thou must leave the false Jerusalem, fallen under the judgment, and seek thy life where there seems to be only death. He who would save his life must lose it, and he who devotes it for the sake of the truth will save it. Diedrich.
3. On Jer 21:11-14. To be such a king is to be an abomination to the Lord, and severe judgment will follow. God appoints magistrates for His service and for the use of men; he who only seeks his own enjoyment in office, is lost. Jerusalem, situated on rocks in the midst of a plain, looks secure; but against God neither rocks avail nor aught else. The fire will break out even in them, and consume all around, together with the forest of cedar-houses in the city. The corruption is seated within, and therefore proceeds from within outwards, so that nothing of the former stock can remain. What shall a government do which no longer bears the sword of justice? What shall a church do which is no longer founded on Gods truth as its only power? Diedrich. Comp. moreover on the whole of Jeremiah 24. the extended moral reflections of Cyrillus Alex. . . Lib. I.
4. On Jer 22:1. Jeremiah is to deliver a sermon at court, in which he reminds the king of his office of magistrate, in which he is to administer justice to every man. Cramer.
It was no easy task for Jeremiah to go into the lions den and deliver such an uncourtly message to him. We are reminded of the prophet Jonah. But Jeremiah did not flee as he did.
5. On Jer 22:1-3. [But we ought the more carefully to notice this passage, that we may learn to strengthen ourselves against bad examples, lest the impiety of men should overturn our faith; when we see in Gods church things in such disorder, that those who glory in the name of God are become like robbers, we must beware lest we become on this account alienated from true religion. We must, indeed, desert such monsters, but we must take care lest Gods word, through mens wickedness, should lose its value in our esteem. We ought then to remember the admonition of Christ, to hear the Scribes and Pharisees who sat in Moses seat (Mat 23:2). Calvin.S. R. A.]
6. On Jer 22:10. [Dying saints may be justly envied, while living sinners are justly pitied. And so dismal perhaps the prospect of the times may be, that tears even for a Josiah, even for a Jesus, must be restrained, that they may be reserved for ourselves and our children (Luk 23:28). Henry.S. R. A.]
Nequaquam gentilis plangendus est atque Judus, qui in ecclesia non fuerunt et simul mortui sunt, de quibus Salvator dicit: dimitte mortuos sepelire mortuos suos (Mat 8:22). Sed eos plange, qui per scelera atque peccata egrediuntur de ecclesia et nolunt ultra reverti ad earn damnatione vitiorum. Hieron. Epist. 46 ad Rusticam. Nolite flere mortuum, sed plorate raptorem avarum, pecuni sitientem et inexplebilem auri cupidinem. Cur mortuos inutiliter ploramus? Eos ploremus, qui in melius mutari possunt. Basilius Seleucensis. Comp. Basil, Magn. Homil. 4 de Gratiarum actione post dimid.Ghislerus.
7. On Jer 22:6-9. God does not spare even the authorities. For though He has said that they are gods, when they do not rightly administer their office they must die like men (Psa 82:6) No cedars are too high for God, no splendor too mighty; He can destroy all at once, and overturn, and overturn, and overturn. Eze 21:27, Cramer.
Another passage from which it is seen how perverse and unjustifiable is the illusion that Gods election is a surety against His anger, and a permit to any wilfulness. The individual representatives of the objects of divine election should never forget that God can march over their carcases, and the ruins of their glory, to the fulfilment of His promise, and that He can rebuild on a higher stage, what He has destroyed on a lower. Comp. remarks on Jer 22:24.
8. On Jer 22:13-19. It is blasphemy to imagine that God will be frre et compagnon to all princes as such, and that He has a predilection for them as of His own kind. Does He not say to his majesty the king of Judah, with whom, in respect of the eminence of his dynasty and throne no other prince of earth could compare, that he should be buried like an ass, dragged and cast out before the gates of Jerusalem? This Jehoiakim was however an aristocrat, a heartless, selfish tyrant, who for his own pleasure trampled divine and human rights under foot. If such things were done in the green tree, what shall be done in the dry?
He who builds his house with other peoples property, collects stones for his grave. Cramer.
9. On Jer 22:14. [It was a proof of luxury when men began to indulge in superfluities. In old times the windows were small; for use only was regarded by frugal men; but afterwards a sort of madness possessed the minds of many, so that they sought to be suspended as it were in the air. And hence they began to have wider windows. The thing in itself, as I have said, is not what God condemns; but we must ever remember, that men never go to excesses in external things, except when their hearts are infected with pride, so that they do not regard what is useful, what is becoming, but are carried away by fondness for excess. Calvin.S. R. A.]
10. On Jer 22:15. God may grant the great lords a preference in eating and drinking and the splendor of royal courts, but it is not His will that these be regarded as the main things, but that true religion, right and justice must have the precedence;this is the Lords work. But cursed is he who does the Lords work remissly. Jer 48:10. Cramer.
11. On Jer 22:17. Description of haughty, proud, magnificent, merciless and tyrannical lords and rulers, who are accomplices of thieves. Cramer.
12. On Jer 22:19. [God would have burial a proof to distinguish us from brute animals even after death, as we in life excel them, and as our condition is much nobler than that of the brute creation. Burial is also a pledge as it were of immortality; for when mans body is laid hid in the earth, it is as it were a mirror of a future life. Since then burial is an evidence of Gods grace and favor towards mankind, it is on the other hand a sign of a curse, when burial is denied. Calvin.S. R. A.]
13. On Jer 22:24. Great lords often imagine that they not only sit in the bosom of God, but that they are a pearl in His crown; or as the prophet says here, Gods signet-ring. Therefore, it is impossible that they should not succeed in their designs. But God looks not on the person of the princes, and knows the magnificent no more than the poor. Job 34:19. Cramer.
14. On Jer 22:28. [What is idolized will, first or last, be despised and broken, what is unjustly honored will be justly contemned, and rivals with God will be the scorn of man. Whatever we idolize we shall be disappointed in, and then shall despise. Henry.S. R. A.]
The compliment is a very poor one for a king, who thinks somewhat of himself, and to whom it in a certain measure pertains that he be honored.But here it is the word of the Lord, and in consideration of these words it is declared in 2Ch 36:12, to be evil on the part of Zedekiah, that he did not humble himself before Jeremiah. Teachers must be much on their guard against assuming such purely prophetic, that is, extraordinary acts. It cost the servants of the Lord many a death, who were obliged thus to employ themselves, and when it is easy for one to ape it without a divine calling he thus betrays his frivolity and incompetence, if not his pride and delusion. Zinzendorf.
15. On Jer 22:28-30. Irenus (Adv. Hr. 3:30) uses this passage to prove that the Lord could not have been Josephs natural son, for otherwise he would have fallen under the curse of this passage, and appear as one not entitled to dominion (qui eum dicunt ex Joseph generatum et in eo habere spem, abdicatos se faciunt a regno, sub maledictione et increpatione decidentes, qu erga Jechoniam et in semen ejus est). Basil the Great (Epist. ad Amphilochium) endeavors to show that this passage, with its declaration that none of Jeconiahs descendants should sit on Davids throne, is not in contradiction to the prophecy of Jacob (Gen 49:10), that a ruler should not be lacking from Judah, till He came for whom the nations were hoping. Basil distinguishes in this relation between dominion and royal dignity.The former continued, the latter ceased, and this period of, so to speak, latent royalty, was the bridge to the present, in which Christ rules in an invisible manner, but yet in real power and glory as royal priest, and at the same time represents Himself as the fulfilment of the hope of the nations. In like manner John of Damascus concludes that according to this passage there could be no prospect of the fulfilment of the promise in Gen 49:10, if Mary had not virgineo modo borne the scion of David, who however was not to occupy the visible throne of David. (Orat. II. in Nativ. B. Mari p. med.)Ambrose finally (Comment. in Ev. Luc. L. III. cap. ult.) raises the question how Jeremiah could say, that ex semine Jechoni neminem regnaturum esse, since Christ was of the seed of Jeconiah and reigned? He answers: Illic (Jer 22:30) futuros ex semine Jechoni posteros non negatur et ideo de semine ejus est Christus (comp. Mat 1:11), et quod regnavit Christus, non contra prophetiam est, non enim seculari honore regnavit, nee in Jechoni sedibus sedit, sed regnavit in sede David. Ghislerus.
16. On Jer 23:2. Nonnulli prsmles gregis quosdam pro peccato a communione ceiciunt, ut pniteant, sed quali sorte vivere debeant ad melius exhortando non visitant. Quibus congrue increpans sermo divinus comminatur: pastores, qui pascunt populum meum, vos dispersistis gregem meum, ejecistis et non visitastis eum. Isidor. Hisp. de summo bono she LL. sentt. Cap. 46. Ghislerus.
17. On Jer 23:5-6. Eusebius (Dem. Ev. VII. 9) remarks that Christ among all the descendants of David is the only one, who rules over the whole earth, and everywhere not only preaches justice and righteousness by His doctrine but is Himself also the author of the rising [of the Sun] of righteousness for all, according to Psa 72:7 : , (LXX.) Cyril of Alex. (Glaphyr. in Gen. I. p. 133) explains as justitia Dei, in so far as we are made righteous in Him, not for the sake of the works of righteousness that we have done, but according to His great mercy. Rom 3:24; Tit 3:5.
18. On Jer 23:6. [If we regard God in Himself, He is indeed righteous, but not our righteousness. If we desire to have God as our righteousness, we must seek Christ; for this cannot be found except in Him. Paul says that He has been given or made to us righteousness,for what end? that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him. (1Co 1:30). Since, then, Christ is made our righteousness, and we are counted the righteousness of God in Him, we hence learn how properly and fitly it has been said that He would be Jehovah, not only that the power of His divinity might defend us, but also that we might become righteous in Him, for He is not only righteous for Himself, but He is our righteousness. Calvin. See also a long note in Wordsworth, to show that Jehovah our Righteousness refers to Christ;S. R. A.]
The character of a true church is when the Lytrum, the ransom-money of Jesus Christ, is known and valued by all, and when they have written this secret, foolish and absolutely inscrutable to reason, in the heart with the finger of the living God: that Jesus by His blood has taken away the sins of the world. O let it neer escape my thought, at what a price my soul was bought. This is the evening and morning prayer of every church, which is a true sister from above. Zinzendorf.
19. On Jer 23:5-8. The return under Ezra was also a fulfilment of this promise, but inferior and preliminary: not all came, and those who did come brought their sins back with them. They were still under the Law and had to wait for Righteousness; still in their return they had a pledge that the Messiah was yet to come and prepare the true city of peace. Now, however, all has been long fulfilled and we can enjoy it perfectly, if we have the mind for it. We have now a country of which no tyrant can rob us; our walk and citizenship is in heaven. We have been delivered from all our suffering, when we sit down at the feet of Jesus to hear His word. Then there is a power of resurrection within us, So that we can fly with our souls beyond the world and laugh at all our foes. For Christ has made us righteous by His daily forgiveness, so that we may also bring ourselves daily into heaven. Yea verily, the kingdom of heaven is come very nigh unto us! Jeremiah then longed to see and hear this more nearly, and now we can have it. Diedrich.
20. On Jer 23:9. Great love renders Gods servant so ardent, that he deals powerful blows on the seducers. He does not think that he has struck a wasps nest and embittered his life here forever, for he has a higher life and gives the lower one willingly for love. Yet all the world will hold him for an incorrigible and mad enthusiast, who spares no one. He says himself that he is as it were drunk with God and His word, when he on the other hand contemplates the country. Diedrich.
21. On Jer 23:11. They are rogues. They know how to find subterfuges, and I would like to see him who accuses a false and unfaithful teacher, and manages his own case so that he does not himself come into the dilemma. Zinzendorf.
22. On Jer 23:13-14. In the prophets of Samaria I see folly. This is the character which the Lord gives to error, false religion, heterodoxy. But in the prophets of Jerusalem I find abomination. This is the description of the or thodox, when they apply their doctrine, so that either the wicked are strengthened or no one is converted. Zinzendorf.
23. On Jer 23:15. From the prophets of Jerusalem hypocrisy goes forth into all the land. This is the natural consequence of the superiority, which the consistories, academies, ministers, etc., have and in due measure ought to have, that when they become corrupt they communicate their corruption to the whole region, and it is apparent in the whole land what sort of theologians sit at the helm. Zinzendorf.
24. On Jer 23:16. Listen not to the words of the prophets, they deceive you. Luther says (Altenb. Tom. II. p. 330): But a Christian has so much power that he may and ought to come forward even among Christians and teach, where he sees that the teacher himself is wanting, etc.; and The hearers altogether have the right to judge and decide concerning all doctrine. Therefore the priests and liveried Christians have snatched this office to themselves; because, if this office remained in the church, the aforesaid could retain nothing for their own. (Altenb. Tom. II. p. 508).The exercise of this right on the part of members of the church has its difficulties. May not misunderstanding, ignorance, even wickedness cause this to be a heavy and unjust pressure on the ministers of the word, and thus mediately tend to the injury of the church? Certainly. Still it is better for the church to exercise this right than not to do so. The former is a sign of spiritual life, the latter of spiritual death. It will be easier to find a corrective for some extravagances than to save a church become religiously indifferent from the fate of Laodicea (Rev 3:16).
25. On Jer 23:16. [But here a question may be raised, How can the common people understand that some speak from Gods mouth, and that others propound their own glosses? I answer, That the doctrine of the Law was then sufficient to guide the minds of the people, provided they closed not their eyes; and if the Law was sufficient at that time, God does now most surely give us a clearer light by His prophets, and especially by His Gospel. CalvinS. R. A.]
26. On Jer 23:17. The pastors, who are welcome and gladly seen at a rich mans table, wish him in fact long life, good health, and all prosperity. What they wish they prophesy. This is not unnatural; but he who is softened by it is ill-advised. Zinzendorf.
27. On Jer 23:21. [There is a twofold call; one is internal, the other belongs to order, and may therefore be called external or ecclesiastical. But the external call is never legitimate, except it be preceded by the internal; for it does not belong to us to create prophets, or apostles, or pastors, as this is the special work of the Holy Spirit. But it often happens that the call of God is sufficient, especially for a time. For when there is no church, there is no remedy for the evil, except God raise up extraordinary teachers. Calvin.S. R. A.]
28. On Jer 23:22. If I knew that my teacher was a most abominable miscreant, personally, and in heart the worst enemy of God in his parish; so long as, for any reason, he preaches, expounds, develops, inculcates the word of God; even though he should betray here and there in his expressions, that this word was not dwelling in him; if only he does not ex professo at one time throw down what at another time he teaches of good and true quasi aliud agendo: I assure you before the Lord that I should fear to censure his preaching. Zinzendorf.
29. On Jer 23:23. Gods essential attribute is Omnipresence. For He is higher than heaven, what canst thou do? deeper than hell, what canst thou know? Longer than the earth and broader than the sea (Job 4:8). And He is not far from every one of us (Act 17:27). Cramer.We often think God is quite far from us, when He is yet near to us, has us in His arms, presses us to His heart and kisses us. Luther. When we think the Sun of righteousness, Jesus, is not risen, and is still behind the mountain, and will not come to us, He is yet nearest to us. The Lord is nigh unto them that are of a broken heart. (Psa 34:19) Deus et omni et nullo loco Cuncta Deus replens molem se fundit in omnem. MS. notes to my copy of Cramers Bibel. Si vis peccare, O homo, qure tibi locum, ubi Deus non videat. Augustine.
30. On Jer 23:28. [When any one rejects the wheat because it is covered with chaff, and who will pity him who says that he has indeed wheat on his floor, but that it is mixed with chaff, and therefore not fit for food? If we be negligent, and think that it is a sufficient excuse for despising the Word of God, because Satan brings in his fallacies, we shall perish in our sloth like him who neglects to cleanse his wheat that he might turn it to bread. Calvin.S. R. A.]
He who cannot restrain his mouth or his ink let him expectorate. But let him say openly and honestly that they are his own dreams, which he preaches. The false prophets certainly know that mere falsehood is empty straw. They therefore always mingle some of the genuine word of God amongst it. An unavailing mixture! It is in this mingling that Satans highest art is displayed, so that he at the same time furthers his own work and testifies against himself. Comp. Genesis 3
31. On Jer 23:29. Gods word is the highest reality, life and power, while the dreams of the false prophets are pretence, death and weakness. Gods word is therefore compared to a fire which burns, warms, and enlightens, so that it burns up the hardest flint, melts the thickest ice, illuminates the deepest obscurities. It is compared further to a hammer which crushes the hardest rocks into sand.He who mingles Gods wheat among his straw, will find that the wheat will become fire and burn up the straw (1Co 3:12-15). He Who handles the word of the Lord purely, let him not despair if he sees before him hearts of adamant (Zec 7:12). He who seeks peace is not ashamed to bow beneath the hammer of the word. For the destructive power of the word applies to that in us which is opposed to God, while the God-related elements are loosed and set free by those very crushing blows.He, however, to whom the peace of God is an object of derision, may feed on the straw of this world. But how will it be when finally the day comes that God will come upon him with fire and hammer? What then remains to him as the result of his straw-diet, which is in a condition to withstand the blows of the hammer and the fire?
Help, Lord, against Thy scornful foes,
Who seek our souls to lead astray;
Whose mockeries at mortal woes
Will end in terrible dismay!
Grant that Thy holy word may root
Deep in our hearts, and richer fruit
May ever bear to endless day.
Gods word converts, all other doctrine befools. Luther.
32. On Jer 23:29. Gods word in general is like a fire: the more it is urged the more widely and brightly it extends. God has caused His word to be proclaimed to the world as a matter, which they can dispense with as little as fire. Fire often smoulders long in secret before it breaks out, thus the power of the divine word operates in its time. Gods word can make people as warm as if glowing coals lay upon them; it shines as brightly upon them, as if a lamp were held under their eyes; it tells every one the truth and purifies from all vices. He who deals evilly with Gods word burns himself by it, he who opposes it is consumed by it. But the word of God is as little to blame as a lamp or a fire when an unskilful person is burned by it. Yet it happens that often it will not be suffered in the world, then there is fire in all the streets. That is the unhappy fire of persecution, which is kindled incidentally in the world by the preaching of the Gospel. Jos. Conr. Schaller, Pastor at Cautendorf, Sermons on the Gospels, 1742.
33. On Jer 23:30. Teachers and preachers are not to steal their sermons from other books, but take them from the Bible, and testify that which they speak from their inward experience (Joh 3:11). False teachers steal Gods word, inventing a foreign meaning for it, and using this for the palliation of their errors. StarkeHinc illi at auctions, who can obtain this or that good book, this or that manuscript? Here they are thus declared to be plagiarios; and they are necessarily so because they are not taught of God. But I would rather they would steal from true men of God than from each other.Zinzendorf.
34. On Jer 23:33-40. When the word of God becomes intolerable to men, then men in their turn become intolerable to our Lord God; yea, they are no more than inutile pondus terr, which the land can no more bear, therefore they must be winnowed out, Jer 15:17. Cramer.
35. On Jer 24:5-7. He who willingly and readily resigns himself to the will of God even to the cross, may escape misfortune. But he who opposes himself to the hand of God cannot escape. Cramer.The captives are dearest to God. By the first greater affliction He prepares their souls for repentance and radical conversion, so that He has in them again His people and inheritance. O the gracious God, that He allows even those who on account of sin must be so deeply degraded and rendered slaves, even in such humiliation to be His people! The captives are forgiven their opposition to God; they are separated from the number of nations existing in the world, politically they are dead and banished to the interior. Now, God will show them what His love can do; they shall return, and in true nearness to God be His true Israel. Diedrich.
36. On Jer 24:7. [Since He affirms that He would give them a heart to understand, we hence learn that men are by nature blind, and also that when they are blinded by the devil they cannot return to the right way, and that they cannot be otherwise capable of light than by having God to illuminate them by His Spirit. This passage also shows, that we cannot really turn to God until we acknowledge Him to be the Judge; for until the sinner sets himself before Gods tribunal he will never be touched with the feeling of true repentance. Though God rules the whole world. He yet declares that He is the God of the Church; and the faithful whom He has adopted He favors with this high distinction, that they are His people; and He does this that they may be persuaded that there is safety in Him, according to what is said by Habakkuk, Thou art our God, we shall not die (Hab 1:12). And of this sentence Christ Himself is the best interpreter, when He says, that He is not the God of the dead, but of the living (Luk 20:38). Calvin.S. R. A.]
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
1. On Jer 21:8. This text may be used on all occasions when an important decision is to be made or on the entrance on a new section of life, as, e. g., at synods, diets, New Years, beginning of the church-year, at confirmations, weddings, installations, etc. What the present day demands and promises: I. It demands from us an important choice. II. It promises us, according as we choose, life or death.
2. On Jer 22:2-9. In how far the divine election is conditional and unconditional. I. It is conditional with respect to individual elected men, places, things. For 1, these become partakers of the salvation promised by the election only by behaviour well-pleasing to God; 2, if they behave in a manner displeasing to God, the election does not protect them from destruction. II. The election is unconditional with respect to the eternal ideas lying at the foundation of the single appearances, and their absolute realizations.
3. On Jer 22:24. [Payson:The punishment of the impenitent inevitable and justifiable. I. To mention some awful instances in which God has verified this declaration: (a), the apostate angels; (b) our first parents; (c) destruction of mankind by the flood; (d) the children of Israel; (e) Moses, David, the disobedient prophet, Christ. II. Some of the reasons for such a declaration. Not a disposition to give pain or desire for revenge. It is the nature and tendency of sin to produce misery.S. R. A.]
4. On Jer 23:5-6. The Son of David. What the prophet declares of Him is fourfold: 1. He will Himself be righteous; 2. He will rule well as king and execute judgment and righteousness; 3. He will be our righteousness; 4. Under Him shall Judah be helped and Israel dwell safely.
5. On Jer 23:14. [Lathrop: The horrible guilt of those who strengthen the hands of the wicked. 1. All sin is horrible in its nature. 2. This is to oppose the government of the Almighty. 3. It directly tends to the misery of mankind. 4. It supports the cause of the Evil Spirit. 5. It is to become partakers of their sins. 6. It is horrible as directly contrary to the command of God, and marked with His peculiar abhorrence.S. R. A.]
6. On Jer 23:23-24. The Omnipresence of God. 1. What it means. God is everywhere present, (a). He fills heaven and earth; (b) there is no removal from Him in space; (c) nothing is hidden from Him. 2. There is in this for us (a) a glorious consolation, (b) an earnest admonition. [Charnock, Jortin, and Wesley have sermons on this text, all of very similar outline. The following are Jortins practical conclusions; This doctrine 1. Should lead us to seek to resemble Gods perfections 2. Should deter us from sin. 3. Should teach us humility. 4. Should encourage us to reliance and contentment, to faith and hope.S. R. A.]
7. On Jer 23:29-30. Gods Word and mans word. 1. The former is life and power (wheat, fire, hammer). The latter pretence and weakness (dream, straw). 2. The two are not to be mixed with each other. [Cecil: This shows 1. The vanity of all human imaginations in religion, (a). What do they afford to man? (b). How much do they hinder? 2. The energy of spiritual truth. Let us entreat God that our estimate may be practical.S. R. A.]
8. On Jer 24:1-10. The good and bad figs an emblem of humanity well-pleasing and displeasing to God. 1. The prisoners and broken-hearted are, like the good figs, well-pleasing to God. For (a) they know the Lord and turn to Him; (b) He is their God and they are His people. 2. Those who dwell proudly and securely are displeasing to God, like the bad figs. For (a) they live on in foolish blindness; (b) they challenge the judgment of God.
Footnotes:
[15]Jer 22:24.The abbreviation is found in Jeremiah here and in Jer 37:1 only. Hengstenberg is of opinion that by striking out the the word takes a future meaning. But this is contained not merely in the but in the vowel also: Perf. , Imperf. (Job 31:15) from which, in a double closed syllable and with the accent moved on, is formed . The meaning of the perfect (Jehovah stands fast) also would be no less comforting than that of the future: Jehovah will stand fast.
[16]Jer 22:24.On the form , comp. Olsh., 68 d. coll. 97, a; Ew. 250, b. [Gesen. Gr., 105, b.S. R. A.
[17]Jer 22:26.If the twice repeated (Jer 22:27-28) has not occasioned the article before , the case is analogous to the , which see. Comp. also Jer 16:13.
[18]Jer 22:27. . Comp. Jer 44:14; Deu 24:15.
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
Jer 22:24 [As] I live, saith the LORD, though Coniah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah were the signet upon my right hand, yet would I pluck thee thence;
Ver. 24. As I live, saith the Lord. ] An oath which none may lawfully take but God himself, who is life itself. It is therefore sinful for any one to say, As I live, such a thing is so or so. That is God’s oath. See Num 14:21 Psa 95:11 .
Though Coniah.
Were the signet on my right hand.
Yet would I pluck thee thence.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Jer 22:24-30
24As I live, declares the LORD, even though Coniah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah were a signet ring on My right hand, yet I would pull you off; 25and I will give you over into the hand of those who are seeking your life, yes, into the hand of those whom you dread, even into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon and into the hand of the Chaldeans. 26I will hurl you and your mother who bore you into another country where you were not born, and there you will die. 27But as for the land to which they desire to return, they will not return to it.
28Is this man Coniah a despised, shattered jar?
Or is he an undesirable vessel?
Why have he and his descendants been hurled out
And cast into a land that they had not known?
29O land, land, land,
Hear the word of the LORD!
30Thus says the LORD,
‘Write this man down childless,
A man who will not prosper in his days;
For no man of his descendants will prosper
Sitting on the throne of David
Or ruling again in Judah.’
Jer 22:24-30 This is specifically addressed to Coniah (i.e., Jeconiah, cf. Jer 24:1), also known by his throne name, Jehoiachin (cf. Jer 22:24). He was exiled in 597 B.C. to Babylon (cf. 2Ki 24:8-17; 2Ki 25:27-30). Jer 22:28-30 are poetry, while Jer 22:24-27 are prose.
Jer 22:24 As I live This is a recurrent oath formula where YHWH swears by Himself (cf. Jer 22:5; Jer 44:26; Jer 49:13; Jer 51:14; Gen 22:16; Deu 32:40; Isa 45:23; Amo 6:8). It is a word play on His covenant name, YHWH, from the Hebrew VERB to be. Covenant people were to swear by His name (cf. Jer 4:2; Jer 12:16; Deu 6:13; Deu 10:20).
Jer 22:24 signet ring on My right hand This is Hebrew imagery for the Davidic royal family, especially the current reigning descendant of David (cf. Hag 2:23).
Jer 22:25 Notice how specific and repetitive is the reference to Jehoiachin’s captors.
1. into the hand of those who are seeking your life
2. into the hand of those whom you dread
3. into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon
4. into the hand of the Chaldeans
For the idiom using hand see Special Topic: Hand .
Jer 22:27 they desire The UBS Handbook for Translators (p. 489) points out that this English phrase is a translation of a Hebrew idiom they will lift up their souls (cf. Jer 44:14).
Jer 22:28-30 The poem is addressed to Coniah/Jehoiachin (cf. 1Ch 3:16). He has become a vessel of dishonor (cf. Jer 25:34; Hos 8:8). The potter (YHWH) makes different vessels. Some are spoiled.
1. remade (unfired)
2. destroyed (fired)
The promises of 2 Samuel 7 are vacated/annulled. No more descendants on the throne (i.e., he had children but none ruled, cf. Jer 22:30)! This was absolutely shocking to Judeans. YHWH’s promise nullified! They forgot that the promises to individuals are always conditional! This opens the theological door for a new covenant (cf. Jer 31:31-34; Eze 36:22-38)!
It is very clear who is being described but it is not clear who is speaking.
1. the people of Judah/Jerusalem
2. the prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 22:29)
Jer 22:29 O land, land, land The threefold repetition was a Hebraic idiom of intensity (cf. Jer 7:4; Isa 6:3; Eze 21:27), although some grammarians think it was a liturgical chant. It is even possible that the land (see Special Topic: Land, Country, Earth ) was functioning as a legal witness in this court genre. The land of Palestine is experiencing the judgment of God because of the sin of God’s people. The curses of Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 27-28 have come in full force! After one reads this text, they are so grateful for Rom 8:18-25! The new covenant is wonderful!
Jer 22:30 Write this man down childless This command from YHWH seems to be unfulfilled because Jehoiachin had several children (cf. 1Ch 3:16-17). However, they never sat on David’s throne. A good discussion of the seeming contradiction is found in Hard Sayings of the Bible, p. 310. Another good source for interpreting prophetic literature is D. Brent Sandy, Plowshares and Pruning Hooks, especially pp. 151-154.
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
Coniah = (by Figure of speech Aphaeresis), by which the first syllable is cut off. He is called “Jeconiah” (1Ch 3:16), which means “Let Jehovah establish”; but the cutting off of the Divine name “Je” (for Jah or Jehovah) is meant to show the departure of Jehovah from Jeconiah, and that he himself would be cut off.
signet. Compare Hag 2:23.
right hand. Figure of speech Anthropopatheia.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Jer 22:24-30
Jer 22:24-30
As I live, saith Jehovah, though Coniah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah were the signet upon my right hand, yet would I pluck thee thence; and I will give thee into the hand of them that seek thy life, and into the hand of them of whom thou art afraid, even into the hand of Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon, and into the hand of the Chaldeans. And I will cast thee out, and thy mother that bare thee, into another country, where ye were not born; and there shall ye die. But to the land whereunto their soul longeth to return, thither shall they not return. Is this man Coniah a despised broken vessel? is he a vessel wherein none delighteth? wherefore are they cast out, he and his seed, and are cast into the land which they know not? O earth, earth, earth, hear the word of Jehovah. Thus saith Jehovah, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days; for no more shall a man of his seed prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling in Judah.
The prophecy here is that both Jeconiah (Coniah) and the queen mother shall go into Babylonian captivity and die in that land. This indeed came to pass; and Coniah lived thirty-seven years in captivity.
Coniah…
(Jer 22:24). This man was named Jeconiah (Jer 24:1) and Coniah (here and in Jer 37:1); and he came to the throne under the name of Jehoiachin. Keil cited two other variations of the name which correspond to two of the three names cited here.
Payne Smith stated that Coniah was king of Judah at the time Jeremiah wrote these words, basing his opinion upon the construction, “Coniah the son of Jehoiachim king of Judah.”
Thee and the mother that bare thee…
(Jer 22:26). The queen mother had some official status in Judah of that period and may have worn a crown and sat on a throne adjacent to that of the king … Jehoiachin was eventually released in Babylon by Evil-Merodach; but he was required to remain in Babylon.
They are cast out, he and his seed…
(Jer 22:28-30). Some find a problem here, because Jer 22:30 states that Jeconiah would die childless. The problem is solved either (1) by throwing out the last four words here as not belonging to the text (And this is supported by the LXX), or (2) by making Jer 22:30 the full explanation of what is meant by write Coniah childless. It meant merely that he would not have a successor on the throne of Judah. Either solution appears to be adequate.
Practically all present-day scholars accept solution (2), above. Some very learned men of an earlier generation insist that he died, literally, without any children. Payne Smith insisted that, “There is no proof that Jehoiachin ever had any children. None are mentioned in 2Ki 24:15; and the fact that when his father Jehoiachim died the harem of that ruler passed to Coniah, suggests that the “children” mentioned in 2Ch 3:17 might merely have been his adopted children through that inheritance.”
Matthew Henry also took the same view, offering as proof the fact, the oldest son of Jehoiachin was Shealtiel; but in the Lukan genealogy of Christ, Shealtiel is listed as the son of Neil, not Jehoiachin, indicating that Jehoiachin was only his adopted father.
We do not attach a great deal of importance to the question; but we prefer the views presented by the Dean of Canterbury and by Matthew Henry. There is nothing in their exegesis of this problem that is in any manner unreasonable.
Certainly, there is no Jehoiachin, Coniah, or Jeconiah in the Lukan account of the lineage of the Son of God which goes back to David, not through Solomon, but through Nathan.
Those who try to find Coniah in the ancestry of Christ will find it in Mat 1:12; but that is only the legal ancestry of Christ through his foster father Joseph, making him the legal heir to the throne that was once held by Jeconiah.
Yes, it states in Mat 1:12 that Jeconiah “begat Shealtiel”; but in genealogical tables distinctions such as real sons or adopted sons were not distinguished. In fact there are not even any distinctions between sons and grandsons, actual sons or Levirate sons, etc. Since Coniah was childless, Shealtiel an adopted son, inherited the non-existent throne of Judah; but Luke, unconcerned about legal rights to a throne traced Shealtiel’s ancestry through his actual father Neri.
Both Ezekiel and Jeremiah regarded Jeconiah (Coniah) as the last king of Judah; but some writers insist that Zedekiah was the last king. Of course, in a sense he was the last king; but in none of the eleven years that he reigned between 598 and 587 B.C. was he ever really “king of Judah,” but a vassal of the Babylonians who had deposed and deported Jeconiah (Coniah) and placed Zedekiah on the throne as a puppet. Besides that, Nebuchadnezzar captured Zedekiah and blinded him after killing his sons before his eyes; and he was outlived many years by Jeconiah, who lived some thirty-seven years in captivity until he was released by Evil-Merodach. The Jews of Jerusalem never recognized Zedekiah as king and continually longed for the return of Jehoiachin. Therefore we follow the position of Ezekiel and of Jeremiah in considering Coniah as the last of Israel’s kings.
It has been objected to Jeremiah’s prophecy here that no one descended from Coniah would ever sit upon the throne of David; because, as premillennial advocates insist, “This would exclude Christ from sitting on David’s throne.” Such an objection, however is worthless, since Luke’s genealogy makes no mention of any son of Jehoiachin in the ancestry of Christ. However, even if it was otherwise, the prohibition was not against such a descendant “sitting on David’s throne,” but against his doing so “in Jerusalem!” Also, the scriptures flatly declare that the reference to some Great One to sit on David’s throne was a reference to the resurrection of Jesus Christ (Act 2:31). The fulfillment of the Messianic promise was complete when Jesus Christ, “sat down at the right hand of the majesty On High.”
3. The fate of Jehoiachin (Jer 22:24-30)
Having spoken of the future of Jehoahaz (Jer 22:10-12) and the folly of Jehoiakim (Jer 22:13-23) Jeremiah now adds an oracle dealing with the fate of Coniah whose throne name was Jehoiachin. Jer 52:31. This monarch is also designated as Jeconiah (Jer 27:20), Jeconiahu (Jer 24:1) and Joiakin (Eze 1:2). The name in its various forms means The Lord will establish. Jehoiachin apparently was a carbon copy of his father (2Ki 24:9), For this reason God declares that even if Coniah were a signet upon His finger He would pull him off and cast him away. Because of its importance the signet ring in antiquity was highly valued and guarded against any possible loss. That ring impressed into a bit of warm wax on a document made the document legally binding. The signet was the equivalent of the modern day signature. The king of Judah was the earthly representative of the invisible King of Judah, the Lord of hosts. He exercised authority in the name of the Almighty and hence could be compared to a signet on the hand of the Lord. But God swears with an oath formula (as I live) that Jehoiachin will be removed from this royal dignity (Jer 22:24).
Not only will God remove Jehoiachin from the throne of Judah, but He will see to it that the king is delivered into the hands of the ruthless Nebuchadnezzar (Jer 22:25). He along with the queen-mother, the influential Nehushta, will be taken into the distant land of Babylon where they will die (Jer 22:26). See Jer 29:2; 2Ki 24:8. An oracle has already been delivered to this prominent woman in Jer 13:18. To die in a foreign land was considered one of the worst fates which could befall a man. The prophecy was fulfilled in 597, B.C. when Jehoiachin and the royal family were deported in chains to Babylon. Jehoiachin remained a captive of Babylon throughout the reign of Nebuchadnezzar. He was released after thirty-seven years of captivity by the son and successor of Nebuchadnezzar, Evil-merodach (2Ki 25:27-30). Jehoiachin must have died in Babylon before the restoration of the Jews in 537 B.C. or else he surely would have been made the leader of the returnees at that time.
Jer 22:24-26 speak of the exile of king Jehoiachin as something in the future. But Jer 22:27-30 presuppose that the exile has already begun. Here, as so often in prophetic literature, the prophet has projected himself into the future beyond 597 B.C. when Jehoiachin would be taken into captivity. He describes what he knows the attitude of the captives will be. They will long to return to Palestine but will not be permitted to do so (Jer 22:27).
Jeremiah finds it hard to believe the words of his own prophecy. By means of a favorite literary device, a series of questions, he expresses his incredulity. Jeremiah elsewhere employs the repeated question to state an unnatural, incomprehensible fact. See Jer 8:4 f.; Jer 8:22; Jer 14:19. In astonishment he asks, Is Coniah no better than a cracked piece of pottery which one might cast on the top of a trash pile? Why must Jehoiachin and his seed suffer the terrible fate of deportation to a foreign land? Jeremiah seems in Jer 22:28 to be reflecting a great deal of sympathy toward the young king who was destined to reign only three months on the throne of Judah (2Ki 24:8). Though Jehoiachin was but eighteen years old when taken captive he had wives (2Ki 24:15) and apparently seed, i.e., children.
As Jeremiah reaches the climax of his pronouncement against Jehoiachin he dramatically calls the entire land to listen to the announcement of the tragic fate of this king. O land, land, land! Hear the word of the Lord! (Jer 22:29). The three-fold repetition of land anticipates the solemnity of the message which follows. Write this man childless, i.e., enter Jehoiachin in the register of the citizens as one who has no heirs. The word childless is not to be taken here in the absolute sense since Jer 22:28 already has mentioned the seed or children of Jehoiachin. Rather the meaning is that as far as the throne is concerned Jehoiachin would be childless. The rest of the verse makes this perfectly clear. No son of Jehoiachin would ever rule over Judah. It is interesting to note that Zerubbabel, the grandson of Jehoiachin, did serve as governor of the restored community once the exile in Babylon had ended.
Judgment Against Evil Kings – Jer 22:1-30
Open It
1. In your opinion what are some of the best ways to teach children responsibility?
2 What do you consider the marks of greatness in a national leader?
Explore It
3. Where was Jeremiah told to proclaim Gods message? (Jer 22:1)
4. What principles of good government did God list as conditions for His blessing on Judah? (Jer 22:3-4)
5. What consequences were promised if the king did not obey God? (Jer 22:5)
6. Although Judah and Jerusalem had been special in Gods sight, what did He swear to do to them? (Jer 22:6-7)
7. What reason would be given for the disgrace and destruction of Judah? (Jer 22:8-9)
8. What arrogant and selfish behavior on the part of the king angered God? (Jer 22:13-14)
9. How did God feel about the notion that displays of wealth indicated greatness in a ruler? (Jer 22:15)
10. How was Josiah different from Jehoiakim, his son? (Jer 22:15-16)
11. How did God judge Jehoiakims heart? (Jer 22:17)
12. What did God say would become of Jehoiakims “greatness” at the end of his life? (Jer 22:18-19)
13. Before God allowed Judahs enemies to crush them, what had He done to try to save them? (Jer 22:20-21)
14. When did Jehoiakims rebellion against God begin? (Jer 22:21)
15. What was going to become of the king and his splendid buildings? (Jer 22:22-23)
16. To what did God compare Jehoiakims son, Jehoiachin? (Jer 22:28)
17. Why didnt it matter whether Jehoiachin continued Davids line by having children? (Jer 22:29-30)
Get It
18. In what sense can our godliness be measured by our treatment of fellow human beings?
19. Why is God so concerned about the poor and powerless?
20. How do human indicators of greatness differ from Gods?
21. What circumstances do we sometimes think would entitle us to Gods favor?
22. What conclusion can we draw from the case of Josiah and Jehoiakim about the certainty of godly people having godly children?
23. In what way do you need to copy the example of your parents more consciously?
Apply It
24. In what areas of your life can you act on the opportunity to do what is just and right for your fellow human beings?
25. What is one step you can take this week to learn from or copy something good that your parents did right?
Questions On Jeremiah Chapter Twenty-Two
By Brent Kercheville
1 What is the message to the king of Judah (Jer 22:1-4)?
2 What will happen is the king does not obey Gods message (Jer 22:5-10)? What will the people teach the nations about this event?
3 What is the message concerning Shallum (Jehoahaz) (Jer 22:11-12)?
4 What is the message to Gods kings (Jer 22:13-17)?
5 What is the message to Jehoakim (Jer 22:18-23)?
6 What is the message to Coniah (Jehoiachin) (Jer 22:24-30)?
TRANSFORMATION:
How does this relationship change your relationship with God?
What did you learn about him?
What will you do differently in your life?
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Coniah
Contracted from Jeconiah, 1Ch 3:16.
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
Coniah: Jer 22:28, Jer 37:1, 2Ki 24:6-8, Jehoiachin, 1Ch 3:16, Jeconiah, Mat 1:11, Mat 1:12
the signet: Jer 22:6, Son 8:6, Hag 2:23
Reciprocal: Gen 38:18 – Thy signet Exo 13:9 – a sign Exo 28:11 – engravings of a signet Num 14:21 – as truly Deu 28:36 – bring thee 2Ki 24:8 – Jehoiachin 2Ki 24:15 – he carried 2Ch 36:8 – Jehoiachin Est 2:6 – Jeconiah Isa 49:16 – I have Jer 24:1 – after Jer 28:4 – Jeconiah Jer 29:2 – Jeconiah Eze 17:12 – Behold Eze 33:11 – As I live Zep 1:8 – the princes Rom 14:11 – As
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Jer 22:24. The last three kings who sat on the throne of Judah were wicked men and all have been given attention by the prophet. They have not always been mentioned in the order of their reign for Zedekiah has been named already and he was the last one. The one who reigned last before him is the one named in this verse. This man had three names or at least that many forms of spelling it. To avoid confusion I will state them which are, Coniah, Jeconiah and Jehoiachin. This man was not allowed to reign but three months when he was taken off by the king of Babylon, However, he submitted to the invader according to the advice of ch, 15: 2; 21: 9. and was taken unharmed to Babylon. Though . . . were the signet upon my right hand means that even the most valuable possession of the Lord would be discarded if it became corrupt. This man had to suffer the humiliation of captivity, also be destined to some other personal misfortunes, yet some exceptions were made in his ease as we shall see later.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Jer 22:24-28. As I live, saith the Lord, though Coniah were the signet, or, rather, the ring, upon my right hand By Coniah he means Jehoiachin, whose name was Jeconiah, 1Ch 3:16, (for all Josiahs sons had two names, and so had his grandchild Jeconiah,) here, in contempt, called Coniah; yet would I pluck thee thence Though he were never so near and dear to me, as dear as a signet, or ring, which every man keeps safe, yet his wickedness would make him forfeit all my favour toward him. The ring was anciently worn as a mark of sovereignty. When Alexander was dying, he gave his ring to Perdiccas, thus, as it were, marking him out for his successor. And I will cast thee out, and thy mother that bare thee We are informed, (2Ki 24:15,) that Nebuchadnezzar carried away Jehoiachin, that is, Jeconiah or Coniah, to Babylon, and his mother, and his wives, &c. Is this man Coniah a despised broken idol, &c. Blaney renders the verse more literally, thus: A contemptible, broken idol is this man Coniah? Or a vessel in which none delighteth? Wherefore are they cast forth, he and his seed, and thrown upon a land which they knew not? As if he had said, Would any one have thought that this man, who was invested with royal dignity, should be rendered no better than a broken image of royalty, a mere potsherd, utterly contemptible and useless?
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
22:24 [As] I live, saith the LORD, though {r} Coniah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah were the signet upon my right hand, yet would I pluck thee from there;
(r) Who was called Jehoiachin or Jeconiah, whom he calls here Coniah in contempt who thought his kingdom could never depart from him, because he came of the stock of David, and therefore for the promise sake could not be taken from his house, but he abused God’s promise and therefore was justly deprived of the kingdom.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Prophecies about King Jehoiachin (Coniah) 22:24-30
This section contains two prophecies about this king (Jer 22:24-30). The historical setting is the three-month reign of eighteen-year-old Jehoiachin in 598-597 B.C. (cf. 2Ki 24:8-17). Coniah was a shortened form of Jeconiah (cf. Jer 24:1; Jer 27:20; Jer 28:4; Jer 29:2), the same man.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
The Lord affirmed that even if Coniah (Jehoiachin) was the signet ring on His hand, He would still remove him. The signet ring of a king was something a king did not part with, because it was the instrument with which he conducted business and manifested his authority.