Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Jeremiah 26:1

In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of Judah came this word from the LORD, saying,

1 6. For a discussion as to the relation of these vv. to chs. 7 10 see introductory note there.

Gi. points out that the use of the 3rd person with reference to Jeremiah as well as other features of the ch. indicate the probability that it is a compilation made by Baruch, upon which the following chs. also to 45 evidently draw considerably. We may note that owing to Baruch’s habit of dating the events which he mentions, a light is thrown upon them which is often lacking in regard to the prophet’s discourses.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Jer. 26 is a narrative of the danger to which Jeremiah was exposed by reason of the prophecy contained in Jer. 7 and should be read in connection with it. Jer 26:4-6 contain a summary of the prediction contained in Jer. 7, and that again is but an outline of what was a long address.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Jer 26:1-24

In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim son of Josiah king of Judah.

Afflictions, distresses, tumults

Jehoiakim was, perhaps, the most despicable of the kings of Judah. Josephus says that he was unjust in disposition, an evil-doer; neither pious towards God nor just towards men. Something of this may have been due to the influence of his wife, Nehushta, whose father, Elnathan, was an accomplice in the royal murder of Urijah. Jeremiah appears to have been constantly in conflict with this king; and probably the earliest manifestation of the antagonism that could not but subsist between two such men occurred in connection with the building of Jehoiakims palace. Though his kingdom was greatly impoverished with the heavy fine of between forty and fifty thousand pounds, imposed by Pharaoh-Necho afar the defeat and death of Josiah, and though the times were dark with portents of approaching disaster, yet he began to rear a splendid palace for himself, with spacious chambers and large windows, floors of cedar, and decorations of vermilion. Clearly, such a monarch must have entertained a mortal hatred towards the man who dared to raise his voice in denunciation of his crimes; and, like Herod with John the Baptist, he would not have scrupled to quench in blood the light that cast such strong condemnation upon his oppressive and cruel actions. An example of this had been recently afforded in the death of Urijah, who had uttered solemn words against Jerusalem and its inhabitants in the same way that Jeremiah had done. But it would appear that this time, at least, his safety was secured by the interposition of influential friends amongst the aristocracy, one of whom was Ahikam, the son of Shaphan (Jer 26:20-24).

I. The divine commission. Beneath the Divine impulse, Jeremiah went up to the court of the Lords house, and took his place on some great occasion when all the cities of Judah had poured their populations to worship there. Not one word was to be kept back. We are all more or less conscious of these inward impulses; and it often becomes a matter of considerable difficulty to distinguish whether they originate in the energy of our own nature or are the genuine outcome of the Spirit of Christ. It is only in the latter ease that such service can be fruitful. There is no greater enemy of the highest usefulness than the presence of the flesh in our activities. There is no department of life or service into which its subtle, deadly influence does not penetrate. We meet it after we have entered upon the new life, striving against the Spirit, and restraining His gracious energy. We are most baffled when we find it prompting to holy resolutions and efforts after a consecrated life. And lastly, it confronts us in Christian work, because there is so much of it that in our quiet moments we are bound to trace to a desire for notoriety, to a passion to excel, and to the restlessness of a nature which evades questions in the deeper life, by flinging itself into every avenue through which it may exert its activities. There is only one solution to these difficulties. By the way of the cross and the grave we can alone become disentangled and discharged from the insidious domination of this evil principle, which is accursed by God, and hurtful to holy living, as blight to the tender fruit.

II. The message and its reception. On the one side, by his lips, God entreated His people to repent and turn from their evil ways; on the other, He bade them know that their obduracy would compel Him to make their great national shrine as complete a desolation as the site of Shiloh, which for five hundred years had been in ruins. It is impossible to realise the intensity of passion which such words evoked. They seemed to insinuate that Jehovah could not defend His own, or that their religion had become so heartless that He would not. So it came to pass, when Jeremiah had made, an end of speaking all that the Lord commanded him to speak unto all the people, that he found himself suddenly in the vortex of a whirlpool of popular excitement. There is little doubt that Jeremiah would have met his death had it not been for the prompt interposition of the princes. Such is always the reception given on the part of man to the words of God. We may gravely question how far our words are Gods, when people accept them quietly and as a matter of course. That which men approve and applaud may lack the Kings seal, and be the substitution on the part of the messenger of tidings which he deems more palatable, and therefore more likely to secure for himself a larger welcome.

III. Welcome interposition. The princes were seated in the palace, and instantly on receiving tidings of the outbreak came up to the temple. Their presence stilled the excitement, and prevented the infuriated people from carrying out their designs upon the life of the defenceless prophet. They hastily constituted themselves into a court of appeal, before which prophet and people were summoned. Then Jeremiah stood on his defence. His plea was that he could not but utter the words with which the Lord had sent him, and that he was only re-affirming the predictions of Micah in the darts of Hezekiah. He acknowledged that he was in their hands, but he warned them that innocent blood would bring its own Nemesis upon them all; and at the close of his address he re-affirmed his certain embassage from Jehovah. This bold and ingenuous defence seems to have turned the scale in hie favour. The princes gave their verdict: This man is not worthy of death, for he hath spoken to us in the name of the Lord our God. And the fickle populace, swept hither and thither by the wind, appear to have passed over en masse to the same conclusion; so that princes and people stood confederate against the false prophets and priests. Thus does God hide His faithful servants in the hollow of His hand. No weapon that is formed against them prospers. They are hidden in the secret of His pavilion from the strife of tongues. (F. B. Meyer, B. A.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

CHAPTER XXVI

Jeremiah, by the commend of God, goes into the court of the

Lord’s house; and foretells the destruction of the temple and

city, if not prevented by the speedy repentance of the people,

1-7.

By this unwelcome prophecy his life was in great danger;

although saved by the influence of Ahikam, the son of Shaphan,

who makes a masterly defense for the prophet, 8-18.

Urijah is condemned, but escapes to Egypt; whence he is brought

back by Jehoiakim, and slain, 20-23.

Ahikam befriends Jeremiah, 24.

NOTES ON CHAP. XXVI

Verse 1. In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim] As this prophecy must have been delivered in the first or second year of the reign of Jehoiakim, it is totally out of its place here. Dr. Blayney puts it before chap. xxxvi. (Jer 36); and Dr. Dahler immediately after chap. ix. (Jer 9), and before chap. xlvi. (Jer 46)

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

The prophecy, Jer 25, is said to have been revealed in the fourth year of Jehoiakim, this in the beginning of his reign, which makes learned men think it ought to have been placed before that. The affairs of the Jews were then in a very desperate condition; Pharaoh-nechoh king of Egypt had overcome Josiah, and killed him in battle, Jehoahaz or Shallum being made king in his stead, 2Ki 23:30; he had reigned but three months, and Pharaoh-nechoh taketh him, and imprisoned him, and lays a tribute upon the land of three hundred talents of silver, and a talent of gold, and makes Eliakim king, changing his name to Jehoiakim, 2Ki 23:33,34. Now in the beginning of this kings reign cometh this word of God to Jeremiah, the people being still hardened and going on in their sinful practices.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of Judah,…. So that the prophecy of this chapter, and the facts and events connected with it, were before the prophecy of the preceding chapter, though here related; that being in the fourth year, this in the beginning of Jehoiakim’s reign. Josiah was lately dead; Jehoahaz his son reigned but three months, and then was deposed by Pharaohnecho king of Egypt; and this Jehoiakim, another son of Josiah, who before was called Eliakim, was set on the throne; and quickly after his coming to it

came this word from the Lord, saying; as follows, to the prophet. This was in the year of the world 3394, and before Christ 610, according to Bishop Usher a; with whom agree Mr, Whiston b, and the authors of the Universal History c.

a Annales Vet. Test. p. 118. b Chronological Tables, cent. 9. c Vol. 21. p. 58.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Accusation and Acquittal of Jeremiah. – Jer 26:1-7. His prophecy that temple and city would be destroyed gave occasion to the accusation of the prophet. – Jer 26:1. “In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim, the son of Josiah king of Judah, came this word from Jahveh, saying: Jer 26:2. Thus said Jahveh: Stand in the court of the house of Jahveh, and speak to all the cities of Judah which come to worship in Jahveh’s house, all the words that I have commanded thee to speak to them; take not a word therefrom. Jer 26:3. Perchance they will hearken and turn each from his evil way, that I may repent me of the evil which I purpose to do unto them for the evil of their doings. Jer 26:4. And say unto them: Thus saith Jahveh: If ye hearken not to me, to walk in my law which I have set before you, Jer 26:5. To hearken to the words of my servants the prophets whom I sent unto you, from early morning on sending, but ye have not hearkened. Jer 26:6. Then I make this house like Shiloh, and this city a curse to all the peoples of the earth. Jer 26:7. And the priests and the prophets and all the people heard Jeremiah speaking these words in the house of Jahveh.”

In the discourse of Jer 7, where he was combating the people’s false reliance upon the temple, Jeremiah had already threatened that the temple should share the fate of Shiloh, unless the people turned from its evil ways. Now, since that discourse was also delivered in the temple, and since Jer 26:2-6 of the present chapter manifestly communicate only the substance of what the prophet said, several comm. have held these discourses to be identical, and have taken it for granted that the discourse here referred to, belonging to the beginning of Jehoiakim’s reign, was given in full in Jer 7, while the history of it has been given in the present chapter by way of supplement (cf. the introductory remarks to Jer 7). But considering that it is a peculiarity of Jeremiah frequently to repeat certain of the main thoughts of his message, the saying of God, that He will do to the temple as He has done to Shiloh, is not sufficient to warrant this assumption. Jeremiah frequently held discourses in the temple, and more than once foretold the destruction of Jerusalem; so that it need not be surprising if on more than one occasion he threatened the temple with the fate of Shiloh. Between the two discourses there is further this distinction: Whereas in Jer 7 the prophet speaks chiefly of the spoliation or destruction of the temple and the expulsion of the people into exile, here in brief incisive words he intimates the destruction of the city of Jerusalem as well; and the present chapter throughout gives the impression that by this, so to speak, peremptory declaration, the prophet sought to move the people finally to decide for Jahveh its God, and that he thus so exasperated the priests and prophets present, that they seized him and pronounced him worthy of death. – According to the heading, this took place in the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim. The like specification in the heading of Jer 27 does not warrant us to refer the date to the fourth year of this king. “The beginning” intimates simply that the discourse belongs to the earlier period of Jehoiakim’s reign, without minuter information as to year and day. “To Jeremiah” seems to have been dropped out after “came this word,” Jer 26:1. The court of the house of God is not necessarily the inner or priests’ court of the temple; it may have been the outer one where the people assembled; cf. Jer 19:14. All the “cities of Judah” for their inhabitants, as in Jer 11:12. The addition: “take not a word therefrom,” cf. Deu 4:2; Deu 13:1, indicates the peremptory character of the discourse. In full, without softening the threat by the omission of anything the Lord commanded him, i.e., he is to proclaim the word of the Lord in its full unconditional severity, to move the people, if possible, to repentance, acc. to Jer 26:3. With Jer 26:3, cf. Jer 18:8, etc. – In Jer 26:4-6 we have the contents of the discourse. If they hearken not to the words of the prophet, as has hitherto been the case, the Lord will make the temple as Shiloh, and this city, i.e., Jerusalem, a curse, i.e., an object of curses (cf. Jer 24:9), for all peoples. On this cf. Jer 7:12. But ye have not hearkened. The Chet. Hitz. holds to be an error of transcription; Ew. 173, g, and Olsh. Gramm. 101, c, and 133, a paragogically lengthened form; Bttcher, Lehrb. 665. iii. and 897, 3, a toneless appended suffix, strengthening the demonstrative force: this (city) here.

Jer 26:8-9

The behaviour of the priests, prophets, and princes of the people towards Jeremiah on account of this discourse. – Jer 26:7-9. When the priests and prophets and all the people present in the temple had heard this discourse, they laid hold of Jeremiah, saying, “Thou must die. Wherefore prophesiest thou in the name of Jahveh, saying, Like Shiloh shall this house become, and this city shall be desolate, without inhabitant? And all the people gathered to Jeremiah in the house of Jahveh.” This last remark is not so to be understood, when compared with Jer 26:7 and Jer 26:8, as that all the people who, according to Jer 26:7, had been hearing the discourse, and, according to Jer 26:8, had with the priests and prophets laid hold on Jeremiah, gathered themselves to him now. It means, that after one part of the people present had, along with the priests and prophets, laid hold on him, the whole people gathered around him. “All the people,” Jer 26:9, is accordingly to be distinguished from “all the people,” Jer 26:8; and the word , all, must not be pressed, in both cases meaning simply a great many. When it is thus taken, there is no reason for following Hitz., and deleting “all the people” in Jer 26:8 as a gloss. Jeremiah’s special opponents were the priests and prophets after their own hearts. But to them there adhered many from among the people; and these it is that are meant by “all the people,” Jer 26:8. But since these partisans of the priests and pseudo-prophets had no independent power of their own to pass judgment, and since, after Jeremiah was laid hold of, all the rest of the people then in the temple gathered around him, it happens that in Jer 26:11 the priests and prophets are opposed to “all the people,” and are mentioned as being alone the accusers of Jeremiah. – When the princes of Judah heard what had occurred, they repaired from the king’s house (the palace) to the temple, and seated themselves in the entry of the new gate of Jahve, sc. to investigate and decide the case. The new gate was, according to Jer 36:10, by the upper, i.e., inner court, and is doubtless the same that Jotham caused to be built (2Ki 15:35); but whether it was identical with the upper gate of Benjamin, Jer 20:2, cannot be decided. The princes of Judah, since they came up into the temple from the palace, are the judicial officers who were at that time about the palace. the judges were chosen from among the heads of the people; cf. my Bibl. Archol. ii. 149.

Jer 26:10-16

Before these princes, about whom all the people gathered, Jeremiah is accused by the priests and prophets: “ This man is worthy of death;” literally: a sentence of death (cf. Deu 19:6), condemnation to death, is due to this man; “ for he hath prophesied against this city, as ye have heard with your ears.” With these last words they appeal to the people standing round who had heard the prophecy, for the princes had not reached the temple till after Jeremiah had been apprehended. Jer 26:12. To this Jeremiah answered in his own defence before the princes and all the people: “ Jahveh hath sent me to prophesy against ( for ) this house and against this city all the words which ye have heard. Jer 26:13. And now make your ways good and your doings, and hearken to the voice of Jahveh your God, and Jahveh will repent Him of the evil that He hath spoken against you. Jer 26:14. But I, behold, I am in your hand; do with me as seemeth to you good and right. Jer 26:15. Only ye must know, that if ye put me to death, ye bring innocent blood upon you, and upon this city, and upon her inhabitants; for of a truth Jahveh hath sent me to you to speak in your ears all these words. ” – As to “make your ways good,” cf. Jer 7:3. This defence made an impression on the princes and on all the people. From the intimation that by reform it was possible to avert the threatened calamity, and from the appeal to the fact that in truth Jahveh had sent him and commanded him so to speak, they see that he is a true prophet, whose violent death would bring blood-guiltiness upon the city and its inhabitants. They therefore declare to the accusers, Jer 26:16: “This man is not worthy of death, for in the name of Jahveh our God hath he spoken unto us.”

Jer 26:17-19

To justify and confirm this sentence, certain of the elders of the land rise and point to the like sentence passed on the prophet Micah of Moresheth-Gath, who had foretold the destruction of the city and temple under King Hezekiah, but had not been put to death by the king; Hezekiah, on the contrary, turning to prayer to the Lord, and thus succeeding in averting the catastrophe. The “men of the elders of the land” are different from “all the princes,” and are not to be taken, as by Graf, for representatives of the people in the capacity of assessors at judicial decisions, who had to give their voice as to guilt or innocence; nor are they necessarily to be regarded as local authorities of the land. They come before us here solely in their character as elders of the people, who possessed a high authority in the eyes of the people. The saying of the Morasthite Micah which they cite in Jer 26:18 is found in Mic 3:12, verbally agreeing with Jer 26:18; see the exposition of that passage. The stress of what they say lies in the conclusion drawn by them from Micah’s prophesy, taken in connection with Hezekiah’s attitude towards the Lord, Jer 26:19: “Did Hezekiah king of Judah and all Judah put him to death? Did he not fear Jahveh and entreat Jahveh, and did not Jahveh repent Him of the evil which He had spoken concerning them? and we would commit a great evil against our souls?” Neither in the book of Micah, nor in the accounts of the books of Kings, nor in the chronicle of Hezekiah’s reign are we told that, in consequence of that prophecy of Micah, Hezekiah entreated the Lord and so averted judgment from Jerusalem. There we find only that during the siege of Jerusalem by the Assyrians, Hezekiah besought the help of the Lord and protection from that mighty enemy. The elders have combined this fact with Micah’s prophecy, and thence drawn the conclusion that the godly king succeeded by his prayer in averting the mischief. Cf. the remarks on this passage at Mic 4:10. ‘ , lit., stroke the face of Jahveh, i.e., entreat Him, cf. Exo 32:11. “And we would commit,” are thinking of doing, are on the point of doing a great evil against our souls; inasmuch as by putting the prophet to death they would bring blood-guiltiness upon themselves and hasten the judgment of God. – The acquittal of Jeremiah is not directly related; but it may be gathered from the decision of the princes: This man is not worthy of death.

Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Jeremiah’s Solemn Address.

B. C. 608.

      1 In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of Judah came this word from the LORD, saying,   2 Thus saith the LORD; Stand in the court of the LORD‘s house, and speak unto all the cities of Judah, which come to worship in the LORD‘s house, all the words that I command thee to speak unto them; diminish not a word:   3 If so be they will hearken, and turn every man from his evil way, that I may repent me of the evil, which I purpose to do unto them because of the evil of their doings.   4 And thou shalt say unto them, Thus saith the LORD; If ye will not hearken to me, to walk in my law, which I have set before you,   5 To hearken to the words of my servants the prophets, whom I sent unto you, both rising up early, and sending them, but ye have not hearkened;   6 Then will I make this house like Shiloh, and will make this city a curse to all the nations of the earth.

      We have here the sermon that Jeremiah preached, which gave such offence that he was in danger of losing his life for it. It is here left upon record, as it were, by way of appeal to the judgment of impartial men in all ages, whether Jeremiah was worthy to die for delivering such a message as this from God, and whether his persecutors were not very wicked and unreasonable men.

      I. God directed him where to preach this sermon, and when, and to what auditory, v. 2. Let not any censure Jeremiah as indiscreet in the choice of place and time, nor say that he might have delivered his message more privately, in a corner, among his friends that he could confide in, and that he deserved to smart for not acting more cautiously; for God gave him orders to preach in the court of the Lord’s house, which was within the peculiar jurisdiction of his sworn enemies the priests, and who would therefore take themselves to be in a particular manner affronted. He must preach this, as it should seem, at the time of one of the most solemn festivals, when persons had come from all the cities of Judah to worship in the Lord’s house. These worshippers, we may suppose, had a great veneration for their priests, would credit the character they gave of men, and be exasperated against those whom they defamed, and would, consequently, side with them and strengthen their hands against Jeremiah. But none of these things must move him or daunt him; in the face of all this danger he must preach this sermon, which, if it were not convincing, would be very provoking. And because the prophet might be in some temptation to palliate the matter, and make it better to his hearers than God had made it to him, to exchange an offensive expression for one more plausible, therefore God charges him particularly not to diminish a word, but to speak all the things, nay, all the words, that he had commanded him. Note, God’s ambassadors must keep closely to their instructions, and not in the least vary from them, either to please men or to save themselves from harm. They must neither add nor diminish, Deut. iv. 2.

      II. God directed him what to preach, and it is that which could not give offence to any but such as were resolved to go on still in their trespasses. 1. He must assure them that if they would repent of their sins, and turn from them, though they were in imminent danger of ruin and desolating judgments were just at the door, yet a stop should be put to them, and God would proceed no further in his controversy with them, v. 3. This was the main thing God intended in sending him to them, to try if they would return from their sins, that so God might turn from his anger and turn away the judgments that threatened them, which he was not only willing, but very desirous to do, as soon as he could do it without prejudice to the honour of his justice and holiness. See how God waits to be gracious, waits till we are duly qualified, till we are fit for him to be gracious to, and in the mean time tries a variety of methods to bring us to be so. 2. He must, on the other hand, assure them that if they continued obstinate to all the calls God gave them, and would persist in their disobedience, it would certainly end in the ruin of their city and temple, v. 4-6. (1.) That which God required of them was that they should be observant of what he had said to them, both by the written word and by his ministers, that they should walk in all his law which he set before them, the law of Moses and the ordinances and commandments of it, and that they should hearken to the words of his servants the prophets, who pressed nothing upon them but what was agreeable to the law of Moses, which was set before them as a touchstone to try the spirits by; and by this they were distinguished from the false prophets, who drew them from the law, instead of drawing them to it. The law was what God himself set before them. The prophets were his own servants, and were immediately sent by him to them, and sent with a great deal of care and concern, rising early to send them, lest they should come too late, when their prejudices had got possession and become invincible. They had hitherto been deaf both to the law and to the prophets: You have not hearkened. All he expects now is that at length they should heed what he said, and make his word their rule–a reasonable demand. (2.) That which is threatened in case of refusal is that this city, and the temple in it, shall fare as their predecessors did, Shiloh and the tabernacle there, for a like refusal to walk in God’s law and hearken to his prophets, then when the present dispensation of prophecy just began in Samuel. Now could a sentence be expressed more unexceptionably? Is it not a rule of justice ut parium par sit ratio–that those whose cases are the same be dealt with alike? If Jerusalem be like Shiloh in respect of sin, why should it not be like Shiloh in respect of punishment? Can any other be expected? This was not the first time he had given them warning to this effect; see ch. vii. 12-14. When the temple, which was the glory of Jerusalem, was destroyed, the city was thereby made a curse; for the temple was that which made it a blessing. If the salt lose that savour, it is thenceforth good for nothing. It shall be a curse, that is, it shall be the pattern of a curse; if a man would curse any city, he would say, God make it like Jerusalem! Note, Those that will not be subject to the commands of God make themselves subject to the curse of God.

Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary

PART II

A Mixture of Judgment and Hope

(Chapters 26-36)

JEREMIAH – CHAPTER 26

JEREMIAH INDICTED FOR TREASON

This chapter recalls an incident which took place in the early days of Jehoiakim’s reign in Jerusalem, (2Ch 36:4-5). The preaching of an unpopular message was no light matter in those days; the life of a faithful prophet was valued very cheaply, and was in constant jeopardy.

Vs. 1-7: FAITHFULLY PROCLAIMING GOD’S MESSAGE

1. Jeremiah was commanded by the Lord to stand in the court of the temple in Jerusalem, where people from all the cities of Judah came to worship, (vs. 2; comp. Jer 7:2; Jer 19:14; 2Ch 24:20-21; Luk 19:47-48).

a. There he was to proclaim “all the words” that the Lord commanded him to speak, (Jer 1:17; comp. Jer 42:4; Act 20:20-21).

b. Nothing was to be diminished, modified or softened, (Deu 4:2).

c. There is no compelling reason to consider this to be the same occasion as that described in chapter 7.

2. The Lord still had not abandoned Judah; perhaps, through the hearing of what He purposed toward their rebellion, they would so repent (Jer 36:3-7; Isa 1:16-19) that He could abandon the judgment that He now purposed to bring upon her, because of her sin, (vs. 3,13,19, Jer 18:7-8).

3. Jeremiah is to remind them of their persistent refusal to obey the words of the former prophets which the Lord had repeatedly sent to them, (Jer 25:4).

4. If they will not repent, and turn from their evil ways, (Jer 17:27; Jer 22:5; Lev 26:14-17; 1Ki 9:6-7); if they will not give heed to God’s law, and walk in His ways, (Jer 32:23; Jer 44:10; Jer 44:23); then He will surely judge them, (vs. 4-6).

a. He will make the temple at Jerusalem as desolate as the one at Shiloh, (vs. 6a; Jer 7:12-15; Psa 78:59-61).

b. And He will make Jerusalem a curse to all the nations of the earth, (vs. 6b; Jer 24:9; Jer 25:18; 2Ki 22:18-20; comp. Jer 7:12-15).

5. So fully did Jeremiah proclaim this word that it was heard by all the priests, false prophets and people who worshipped in the temple, (vs. 7; comp. Jer 5:30-31; Mic 3:11).

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

This chapter contains a remarkable history, to which a very useful doctrine is annexed, for Jeremiah speaks of repentance, which forms one of the main points of true religion, and he shews at the same time that the people were rejected by God, because they perversely despised all warnings, and could by no means be brought to a right mind. We shall find these two things in this chapter.

He says that this word came to him at the beginning of the reign, of Jehoiakim, of which king we have spoken in other places, where Jeremiah related other discourses delivered in his reign. We hence conclude that this book was not put together in a regular order, but that the chapters were collected, and from them the volume was formed.

The time, however, is not here repeated in vain, for we know that the miserable derive some hope from new events. When men have been long afflicted and well-nigh have rotted in their evils, they yet think, when a change takes place, that they shall be happy, and they promise themselves vain hopes. Such was probably the confidence of the people when Jehoiakim began to reign; for they might have thought that things would be restored by him to a better state. There is also another circumstance to be noticed; though their condition was nigh past hope, they yet hardened themselves against God, so that they obstinately resisted the prophets. It hence appears that the reprobate were become more and more exasperated by the scourges of God, and had never been truly and really humbled. This was the reason why Jeremiah, according to God’s command, spoke so sharply.

I pass by other things and come to the words, that the word of Jehovah came to him. He thus arrogated nothing to himself; but he testifies how necessary it was, especially among a people so refractory, that he should bring nothing of his own, but announce a truth that came from heaven. A general subject might be here handled, which is, that God alone is to be heard in the Church, and also that no one ought to assume to himself the name of a prophet or teacher, except he whom the Lord has formed and appointed, and to whom he has committed his message; but these things have been treated elsewhere and often and much at large; and I do not willingly dwell long on general subjects. It is then enough to bear in mind the purpose for which Jeremiah says that the word of Jehovah came to him, even that he might secure authority to himself; he does not boast of his own wisdom nor of anything human or earthly, but says only that he spoke what the Lord had commanded him.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL NOTES.1. Chronology of the Chapter. About three years earlier than the prophecy of preceding chapter. Cf. chapter 7 with this, and it is evident that they are synchronous. Evidently this narrative records the dangers to which Jeremiah exposed himself by the delivery of that faithful protest against his nations iniquity. Jehoiakim had just ascended the throne, and forthwith inaugurated a course of public apostasy which called forth from Jeremiah this pungent and fearless remonstrance. Naturally enough it greatly incensed the priests and the prophets (Jer. 26:8); though the princes spoke out boldly for his defence (Jer. 26:16); and through the interposition of Ahikam, Jeremiah escaped violence (Jer. 26:24). Cf. critical notes to chapter 7.

For2. Contemporary Scriptures; 3. National Affairs; and 4. Contemporaneous History, cf. chap. 7, in loc.

5. Geographical References.Jer. 26:6. Shiloh: cf. note, chap. Jer. 7:12, in loc. Jer. 26:10. The entry of the new gate: i.e., the gate originally erected by Jotham (2Ki. 15:35), the higher gate, and now recently restored. The Targum reads, the new gate. Jer. 26:20. Kirjath-jearim: cir. nine miles north west of Jerusalem, where the ark rested after the destruction of Shiloh, on its return from Philistia.

6. Personal Allusions.Jer. 26:18. Micah the Morasthite: cf. Mic. 1:1; Mic. 3:12. The text here is Michayah; the full form of his name meaning, Who is like Jah? But many MSS. omit the Yod, and read simply, , Micah. His native village, Moresheth [Heb. Morashti], near Elutheropolis, in Philistia (Jerome). He was contemporary with Isaiah in Judah, and with Amos and Hosea in Israel.

Jer. 26:20. Urijah the son of Shemaiah: nothing more is known of Urijah than is here recorded.

Jer. 26:22. Elnathan the son of Achbor: Achbor was one of the princes sent to Huldah by Josiah (2Ki. 22:12). Elnathan was father of Nehushta, the mother of King Jehoiachin, therefore Jehoiakims father-in-law.

Jer. 26:24. Ahikam the son of Shaphan: one of Josiahs messengers to Huldah after the discovery of the copy of the law in the Temple by Hilkiah the priest (2Ki. 22:12-14). Hilkiah made known the discovery to Shaphan the scribe, most probably this Shaphan. Ahikam was father to Gemariah, who lent Jeremiah his room for the public reading of the prophets roll; and of Gedaliah, whom Nebuchadnezzar afterwards made governor of the land (chap. Jer. 39:14), indicating that the attachment of the father, Ahikam, to Jeremiah was inherited by his sons.

7. Manners and Customs.Jer. 26:2. Stand in the gate of the Lords house: see Homiletic Outlines, preliminary note, p. 149. Unto all the cities of Judah which come to worship: at one of the three great yearly festivals, perhaps that of Tabernacles, which was the greatest.

Jer. 26:9. All the people were gathered together against Jeremiah: properly, unto Jeremiah, forming themselves into a court or congregation to take part in his trial. Jer. 26:23. Graves of the sons of the people: see chap. Jer. 17:19 : common people. Some have thought the Jews had a cemetery for the prophets separate from that of the people. The place of burial for the common people was in the Kidron valley.

8. Literary Criticisms.Jer. 26:19. Besought the Lord, lit., Soothed by prayer the face of the Lord. , Stroke the face [Keil]. Cf. Exo. 32:11.

General topic of the chapter: SO PERSECUTED THEY THE PROPHETS.

This present life is often one of severity and suffering to Gods servants. Yet it is astonishing to find earnest and holy men persecuted and slain for no offence other than that of calling the wicked to desert their sins and care for their spiritual good! We may well ask, Why, what evil hath he done? For a good work surely men should not rise in hostility to a man of God. Wrong may deserve punishment; but too often right is persecuted and wrong is condoned. So perverse is the human heart.

I. Prevalent sin called for faithful rebuke. There was enough wrongdoing and corruption in Zion to constrain a godly soul to vehement protestation. God sent the prophet to remonstrate.

1. The rebuke of a prophet, therefore, should be accepted as an appeal from God (Jer. 26:2-5).

2. Such faithful rebukes are designed to avert heavy and threatening judgments (Jer. 26:6; Jer. 26:12-13).

II. Faithful rebuke aroused violent resentment. In Jeremiahs protest there was no element of provocation. His message was delivered in no rancorous and vexing words, yet it awoke resentment.

1. Sinners love their sins too well to desire disturbance, even though such disturbance is essential to their salvation (Jer. 26:7-9).

2. Warnings of impending doom created violent hostility to Gods messenger (Jer. 26:10-11). Angry men must have a victim on whom to expend their hatred. Incensed at Gods message, they would avenge themselves on His innocent messenger! This explains persecution. Men cling to their sins, and hate the prophet, as Ahab did Elijah, whose faithful wordstrouble Israeldisturb them in their evil ways.

III. Violent resentment faced with courageous fidelity. The prophet did not quail before their violence. The righteous is bold as a lion. Yet withal there was no corresponding violence; rather in meekness he instructed those that opposed (2Ti. 2:25).

1. He used the hour of his arraignment for one more appeal to his erring persecutors (Jer. 26:12-13).

2. He resigned himself to the consequences of his fidelity, knowing that God would requite their deeds (Jer. 26:14-15).

Even so, when our Lord suffered, He threatened not; but committed Himself to Him who judgeth righteously. Vengeance is Mine.

IV. Godly fidelity incurring persecution and death. Jeremiahs renewed appeal proved effective with the princes (Jer. 26:16) and elders (Jer. 26:17), and won him their protection. Yet

1. Fidelity imperilled Jeremiahs life (Jer. 26:24); and he would have lost it but for Ahikams befriending. Faithful work is always done amid peril. Men become our enemies when we tell them the truth. So Jeremiah found it. Micah was a rare exception (Jer. 26:18-19).

2. Fidelity cost Urijah his life (Jer. 26:20-23). Such unrighteous and iniquitous deeds against Gods servants assuredly will be punished. The dead shall be raised; and then, confronted by those they have killed, the wicked shall be judged. There is a judgment to come. Men may silence Gods messengers in death now, but God will be heard in the day of judgment.

HOMILIES AND COMMENTS ON VERSES OF CHAPTER 26

Jer. 26:1-2. See Homily on chap. Jer. 7:1-2.

Jer. 26:2. Theme: PREACH THE WHOLE TRUTH. Diminish not a word,

Neither preacher nor prophet is the author of what he teaches. If his commands are his own, they should never be uttered; for he has no right to speak aught which God has not commanded, and no permission to silence aught which God has commanded. Speak all the words that I command thee to speak unto them; diminish not a word.

I. Inspired commands are the outcome of Divine Wisdom and human necessity. Much in Scripture we do not care to hear, or do not think wise to teach. Doctrines over which critics stumble. Some severe doctrines do not seem concordant with the gospel of love, &c. But

1. Gods wisdom frames the messages. That ought to check our solicitude for the integrity of Revelation. Critics should learn that the foolishness of God is wiser than men.

2. Mans necessity calls forth the message. God sees our case, our need, our sins, our perils, and sends the commands which are suitable.

Hence every word of God is important and imperative.

II. Preachers have no liberty of silence or selection. If any haste to preach without a Divine commission, God will put them to silence. But if God has sent a prophet or preacher, He must speak all, &c., and not diminish a word.

1. Gods messenger may not silence Divine commands.

2. Gods messenger may not select Divine commands. He has no liberty allowed to forbear speaking; neither has he liberty allowed to choose and discriminate between the commands, taking out one from among the rest, and speaking only such as he deems fit and right. He has to declare all the counsel of God.

III. Gods messages may not be minimised either in quantity or emphasis. Diminish not a word.

A preacher may indeed go through all the commands, and yet by frequent reiteration of a few may give them a prominence which overshadows the rest, and thus diminishing those he overshadows.

Or, he may preach some with more emphasis and eloquence than others, thereby diminishing the others.

1. This may be through prejudice or preference. Then he makes his own limited mental bias the test of the comparative value and importance of revealed truths!

2. He may do this through mistaken solicitude or sentimental charity. There are preachers who cannot allow themselves to speak the stern teachings of Scripture; because (in their poor fancy) they disagree with the tender love of God, and the sweet grace of the Gospel of Christ; because, also, they wound the gentle hearts of their hearers, and make appeal to fears in men rather than filial trust and love.

3. He may do this for fear or favour of men. Then he prostrates Gods truth before the time-serving spirit which seeks to please men. This is sacrilegious! But we may not suppress nor soften any teaching or command for fear of giving offence; neither may we set forth coldly and indirectly what can only by forcible statement do good.

God says: Speak all diminish not a word. Compare Deu. 4:2; Deu. 12:32; Pro. 30:6; Act. 20:27; 2Co. 2:17; 2Co. 4:2; Rev. 22:19.

See Addenda: PREACH THE WHOLE TRUTH.

Jer. 26:3-6. Compare Homily on chap. Jer. 18:7-10. Theme: CONDITIONAL COVENANTS.

Jer. 26:6. THIS HOUSE LIKE SHILOH. Comp. Homily on chap. Jer. 7:12-14. Violated sanctuaries doomed.

Jer. 26:8. THOU SHALT SURELY DIE. The charge against Jeremiah was that of uttering falsehood in Jehovahs name, an act punishable with death (Deu. 18:20). The tumult against him was raised by the priests and false prophets.

Jer. 26:11. SPAKE THE PRIESTS AND THE PROPHETS UNTO THE PRINCES. Jeremiah was both a priest and a prophet, and should therefore have received generous treatment at the hands of priests and prophets; but a mans foes are they of his own household, while jealousy is as cruel as the grave.

The princes were members of the kings household, and formed part of the Council of State. Jeremiah is careful to discriminate here, and to record that he received acts of kindness from the princes and also from the elders (Jer. 26:17), who were rulers of the whole land. In like manner Luke discriminates between the generous conduct of Gamaliel and the injustice of other members of the Sanhedrim (Act. 5:34).

Jer. 26:12-15. Theme: HOW TO ANSWER CAVILLERS AND ACCUSERS. The prophet was arraigned before the highest tribunal, charged with a political offencehe had prophesied against this city. Here it will be noticeable that our Lord was similarly indicted before Pilate. See how Jeremiah bore himself in this scene of great excitement and irritation.

I. His unfaltering assurance of a Divine commission. Cavil though they might against his message, and threaten him with death for delivering it, yet

1. He knew that God had sent him to them with this message. The Lord sent, &c. (Jer. 26:12); Of a truth the Lord hath sent me, &c. (Jer. 26:15).

2. He knew that his prophecy had been faithfully delivered. He had uttered nought in malice, nor suppressed aught through timidity; but all the words ye have heard (Jer. 26:12) were literally Gods words through him to them. Thus he was sustained by

(a.) Assured authority from Jehovah.

(b.) Conscious integrity in his work.

II. His importunate earnestness in pleading with his accusers. Having thus far vindicated himself, Jeremiah now

1. Seizes the opportunity to plead with his hearers (Jer. 26:13). It might be his final chance of a direct appeal to his sinning nation. What ardour of religious feeling! what godly patriotism is thus manifested!

2. Fearlessly exhorts his audience to repentance and reformation. He was arraigned because he had charged their sins upon them. Yet now even, before this angry assembly, he appeals again to them to desert their sins, and thus avert Gods displeasure. Reform your life, and hearken to the voice of the Lord, and it will be better for you. You do not wish me to thunder away at you; reform, then, and I can let it alone.(Zinzendorf.)

III. His grand resignation to the consequences of fidelity. His faithful pleading might incense them the more; yet

1. He is ready to die rather than keep silence (Jer. 26:14).

2. He dare not let any concern for self hinder him in his witness. As for meas if what became of him were wholly unimportant in the presence of his nations perils. It equals Pauls martyrlike spirit: I am ready to die also at Jerusalem; I could wish myself accursed for my brethren. Note

(a.) His splendid indifference to life and policy. It argues possession of highest religious assurance, conscious safety in God, and blessed hopes of a future world.

(b.) His all-absorbing eagerness for his people. Self cannot have a thought when his people are nearing destruction. Such all-consuming seal naturally impresses and conquers hearts. It did so here (Jer. 26:16).

IV. His solemn warnings against criminal conduct (Jer. 26:15).

1. Knowing God was with him in his work, he realised then that Jehovah would avenge any violence done to him.

2. Knowing that he was innocent of any crime, having only faithfully discharged a Divine commission, he reminded them that on them would fall the curse of his blood.

Note: Men do not escape the punishment of sin by silencing Gods preacher, or by getting rid of the obnoxious witness against their sins. They double the crime by such conduct.
There was a yearning pathos in Jeremiahs warning: no anger, no menacing; but knowing the terror of the Lord, he persuaded men. Thus may cavillers be silenced and adversaries won.

See Addenda: FEARLESSNESS.

On AMEND YOUR WAYS, see Homily on chap. Jer. 7:3.

Jer. 26:16. THIS MAN IS NOT WORTHY TO DIE. Jeremiahs address secured

(i.) THEIR CONVICTION: for they recognised that he had spoken to them in the name of the Lord. Instead of convicting Jeremiah. the princes and people unanimously convicted the priests and prophets of falsely charging him.
(ii.) HIS OWN ACQUITTAL. This man is not worthy of death. Instead of condemning Jeremiah, they sent him forth from the tribunal freed from all charges.

Matthew Henry here reflects thus

And are they willing to own that he did indeed speak to them in the name of the Lord, and that that Lord was their God? Why then did they not amend their ways and doings, and take the method he prescribed to prevent the ruin of their country? (Mat. 21:25.) Note: It is a pity that those who are so far convinced of the Divine original of gospel preaching as to protect it from the malice of others, do not submit to the power and influence of it themselves.

Jer. 26:17-19. Theme: A PRECEDENT JUSTIFYING THE PROPHETS ACQUITTAL. Certain elders arose and put the audience in mind of a former case, as is usual with us in going to judgment; for the wisdom of our predecessors is a direction to us.

(i.) Was it thought strange that Jeremiah prophesied against this city and the temple? Micah did so before him, even in the reign of Hezekiah, that reign of reformation. (See Mic. 3:12.)

By this it appears that a man may be, as Micah was, a true prophet of the Lord, and yet may prophesy the destruction of Zion. When we threaten secure sinners with the taking the Spirit of God and the kingdom of heaven away from them, and declining Churches with the removal of the candlestick, we say no more than what has many a time been said before, and what we have the warrant of Gods Word to say.

(ii.) Was it thought fit by the princes to justify Jeremiah in what he had done? It was what Hezekiah had done in like case.

(a.) Was Micah impeached for his prophecy? No; the king and nation took the warning he gave them.

(b.) Hezekiah got good by the preaching, and therefore certainly could do no harm to the preacher.

(c.) It is good to deter ourselves from sin, by the consideration of the mischief we shall incur thereby. Thus might we procure great evil against our souls. Comp. Matthew Henry.

Jer. 26:20-23. Theme: URIJAHS PERSECUTION AND DEATH. Doubtless this Urijah came some time after Jeremiah; this incident is added to the foregoing to show the ferocity of Jehoiakim against faithful prophets.

Note: Urijah re-uttered Jeremiahs words (Jer. 26:20); he prophesied, &c., according to the words of Jeremiah; and this repetition determined the king to silence the prophets at any cost.

I. Guilty men hate to hear Divine denunciations. Jehoiakim grew uncontrollably violent when Jeremiahs words were repeated (Jer. 26:20).

II. Earnest preachers of God fulfil their work amid dangers (Jer. 26:21). They expose their lives to the violence of those they denounce. He who proclaims against mens sins provokes their antagonism. Genuine ministers of God have no favour to expect from those who are His enemies.(Clark.)

III. The courage which defies perils is not always possessed by even faithful witnesses of God. Urijah fled to Egypt (Jer. 26:21). Jeremiah did not flee, and was spared; Urijah hastened to protect himself, and was slain. Our running and anxiety are of no use. It is better to act faithfully and fearlessly, risking the result.

IV. Angry men, incensed against Gods witness, will take great trouble to avenge themselves (Jer. 26:22). Comp. Ahabs efforts to find Elijah.

V. Death and degradation may prove the earthly penalty of godly work (Jer. 26:23). It was so with the Christian martyrs; and is now sometimes the penalty of missionary devotion. But such sufferers for truth and righteousness are canonised in Gods martyrology, and great is their reward in heaven.

See Addenda: PERSECUTION.

Jer. 26:24. Theme: HEROIC FRIENDSHIP. On Ahikam see Personal References at head of chapter.

Note 1. Since Ahikams son, Gedaliah, showed attention to the prophet, and another son of the same name was afterwards made governor of the land by the Chaldeans (chap. Jer. 39:14), we may suppose this family agreed with Jeremiahs political policy and counsels.

Note 2. The sons friendship for the prophet was the result of the fathers (Ahikams) attachment. Good parents hand down a patrimony of generous sympathy to their children, which provokes them to love and good works. Thus the good deeds of the father reappeared in his sons.

I. Valorous allegiance with a persecuted prophet. The hand of Ahikam was with Jeremiah. This friendship was

1. Open and avowed: it was well known in the land that Ahikam befriended Jeremiah. Obadiah (1 Kings 18) secreted his friendship.

2. Influential. For Ahikam had sufficient influence at court and in the country to counter-check Jehoiakims malicious designs against the prophet. Gods servants have not been without powerful friends.

3. Resolute. He resisted the clamour of the people. Thus he faced king and country fearlessly as Jeremiahs friend. All this showed(a) great heroism; (b) noble piety; (c) fearless fidelity. Such friendship is not frequent, but it is worthy highest praise.

II. Valuable attachment to Gods servant. Ahikams friendship proved specially helpful to Jeremiah.

1. It asserted itself in a perilous hour. He who flees in adversity is not a true friend.

2. It prevailed against popular clamour. It is not easy to become unpopular for our friends. But Christs servants have to face popular contumely for His sake; and many disciples have had to brave public scorn and hate for their attachment to Christs followers.

3. It preserved to the nation its truest benefactor. Had the people put Jeremiah to death, they would have slain the man who gave wisest counsels, and proved at last its noblest leader. We impoverish and harm ourselves by antagonism to Gods messengers. So, in withstanding the peoples clamour, Ahikam acted as the nations friend, as well as Jeremiahs champion.

Application.Matthew Henry suggests that God can raise up great men to protect good men; and this should encourage us amid the dangers incident to duty.

ADDENDA TO CHAPTER 26: ILLUSTRATIONS AND SUGGESTIVE EXTRACTS

Jer. 26:2. PREACH THE WHOLE TRUTH. Luther, of whom Richter has said that his words were half battles, when he first began to preach, suffered unheard agony. O Dr. Staupitz, Dr. Staupitz! said he to the Vicar General of his order, I cannot do it, I shall die in three months; indeed I cannot do it. Dr. Staupitz replied, Well, Sir Martin, if you must die, you must; preach, man, preach; and then live or die as it happens. So Luther preached, and lived; and he became one great whirlwind of energy to work without resting in this world.Spurgeon.

An iron key is better than one made of gold if it will better open the door, for that is all the use of a key.Augustine.

The words of a preacher ought purgere non palpare, to prick the heart, not smooth and coax.Jerome.

Somerfield, just before his death, speaking of his recovery, said, Oh, if I might be raised again! How I could preach! I could preach as I never preached before. I have taken a look into eternity!

Jer. 26:12-15. FEARLESSNESS. What can I fear? asked Chrysostom before the Pro-consul. Will it be death? but you know that Christ is my life, and that I shall gain by death. Will it be exile? but the earth with all its fulness is the Lords. Will it be the loss of wealth? but we brought nothing into this world, and we can carry nothing out. Thus, all the terrors of the world are contemptible in my eyes, and I smile at all its good things. Poverty I do not fear; riches I do not sigh for; from death I do not shrink; and life I do not desire except for the progress of your souls.

Jer. 26:20-23. PERSECUTION. Seeing a Christian woman go cheerfully to prison, an observer said to her, Oh, you have not yet tasted of the bitterness of death. She as cheerfully replied, No, nor ever shall; for Christ hath promised that those who keep His sayings shall not see death.

Jer. 26:24. NOBLE FRIENDSHIP.

Great souls by instinct to each other turn,
Demand allegiance, and in Friendship burn.

ADDISON.

Friendship hath a power

To soothe affliction in her darkest hour.

H. KIRKE WHITE.

Deliberate in all things with thy friend.
But, since friends grow not thick on every bough,
Nor every friend unrotten at the core,
First on thy friend deliberate with thyself;
Pause, ponder, sift; not eager in the choice,
Nor jealous of the chosen; fixing, fix;
Judge before friendship, then confide till death.
Well for thy friend, but nobler far for thee:
How gallant danger for earths highest prize!
A friend is worth all hazards we can run.

YOUNG.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

1. A divine directive (Jer. 26:1-3)

Four specific points relating to a divine directive which came to Jeremiah are brought out in Jer. 26:1-3. First, there is a word as to the time of the directive. The word of the Lord came to the prophet in the beginning of the reign of king Jehoiakim (Jer. 26:1). This probably refers to the year 608 B.C. Righteous Josiah had been slain the year before in the battle of Megiddo; Jehoahaz his son had been able to hold the throne only three months before being deposed and deported by Pharaoh Necho. Now wicked Jehoiakim was sitting on the throne of David. These were turbulous times. World supremacy was being contested on the banks of the Euphrates river. No doubt the inhabitants of Jerusalem were jittery. Would the combined force of the Assyrian and Egyptian armies be able to withstand the armies of the Chaldeans There were ominous implications for Judah no matter which force emerged as world conqueror.

The divine directive contains a specific word as the place Jeremiah is to preach (Jer. 26:2). He is to go to the court of Solomons Temple and preach to the masses of people who assembled there from all the cities of Judah to worship the Lord. On a previous occasion in the reign of Josiah, Jeremiah had stood in this same courtyard and preached the word (see Jer. 7:1 to Jer. 8:3). Many scholars, perhaps a majority, believe that chapter 26 contains a summary of that earlier message and relates the consequences of it. However the grounds for equating the Temple sermon of chapter 7 and the Temple sermon of chapter 26 are singularly and collectively weak.[234] There is not one hint of hostility to Jeremiahs first Temple sermon. The message no doubt received a sympathetic hearing in the days of good king Josiah. But now the climate has changed. The religious and civil authorities are in no mood to tolerate criticism.

[234] For a discussion of these arguments, see comments on chapter 7.

The divine directive to Jeremiah also contains a specific obligation (Jer. 26:2 b). The Lord commands Jeremiah not to diminish a single word from the message he had received from God. This commandment is reminiscent of the initial instruction given to Jeremiah at the time of his call when he was told, whatsoever I shall command you, you shall speak (Jer. 1:7). The Lord knew that Jeremiah needed to be reminded of this obligation at this point in his ministry. Even the most stalwart man of God might be tempted to omit or water down certain unpopular and unpleasant portions of his message when faced with the prospects of arrest, imprisonment and possibly death. No longer would Jeremiah enjoy the protection of the pious Josiah; he would feel for the first time the full impact of public hostility.

The divine directive also included a note as to the purpose for Jeremiahs preaching on this occasion. Jeremiahs message was harsh. It was a message of judgment. But the object of all that he said was the salvation of the nation. Perhaps they will hearken! This verse reveals the eagerness of God to turn away from His announced purpose to destroy the nations. If they would only repent! What fantastic possibilities can be set in motion through sincere repentance! If Judah would turn away from rebellion against God then He could repent or relent with regard to his intentions to destroy the land (cf. Jer. 18:8).

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

PART THREE
CHAPTER THIRTEEN

JEREMIAH FACES OPPOSITION

Jer. 26:1 to Jer. 29:32

The material in chapters 2629 is primarily biographical in character and written in the third person. Some autobiographical material is also included here (see Jer. 27:1 to Jer. 28:4). The most unique literary feature of this section is chapter 29. This chapter contains the complete text of a letter sent by Jeremiah to the captives in Babylon (Jer. 29:1-23) and also parts of two letters, one of which was sent to Shemaiah, and the other sent by him (Jer. 29:24-32). The materials in this section come from two different periods of the prophets ministry. The events in chapter 26 take place in the early days of Jehoiakim. Chapters 2729 cover events about fifteen years later, in the fourth year of king Zedekiah when there was general unrest throughout the Babylonian empire. False prophets in Judah and in Babylon were encouraging Jews to join in the rebellion against Nebuchadnezzar. In continuing to counsel submission to Babylon Jeremiah aroused the hostility of the civil as well as the religious authorities of the nation.

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

I. THE ARREST AND TRIAL OF THE PROPHET Jer. 26:1-24

The faithful proclamation of the word of God is dangerous business. Amos, the prophet from Tekoa, was openly rebuked by Amaziah the high priest of Bethel and was ordered to leave the country (Amo. 7:10 ff.). Zechariah the son of Jehoiada was stoned to death by the order of the pompous king Joash because he had the audacity to rebuke the king for apostasy (2Ch. 24:20 ff.). Legend has it that Isaiah was sawn asunder by wicked Manasseh. It was the faithful proclamation of the word that got Steven stoned, John beheaded and Peter imprisoned. The ministry is a hazardous vocation! It is no place for those with weak knees and faint hearts! In the present chapter Jeremiah is put on trial for his life because of his uncompromising and forthright presentation of the word of God.

A. The Arrest Jer. 26:1-10

TRANSLATION

(1) In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim son of Josiah, king of Judah, this word came from the LORD, saying, (2) Thus says the LORD: Stand in the court of the house of the LORD, and speak unto all the cities of Judah, which are coming to worship at the house of the LORD, all the words which I command you to speak unto them. Do not omit a word! (3) Perhaps they will hear and turn each man from his evil way, that I might relent concerning the calamity which I am planning to bring upon them because of their evil deeds. (4) Say unto them, Thus says the LORD: If you will not hearken unto Me, to walk in My law, which I have set before you, (5) to hearken unto the words of My servants the prophets whom with urgency and persistence I have been sending unto you (although you have not obeyed); (6) then I will make this house like Shiloh, and this city I will make a curse to all the nations of the earth. (7) And the priests and the prophets and all the people heard Jeremiah speaking these words in the house of the LORD. (8) And it came to pass when Jeremiah had finished speaking all which the LORD had commanded him to speak to all the people that the priests and the prophets and all the people seized him, saying, You shall surely die! (9) Why have you prophesied in the name of the LORD, saying, This house shall become like Shiloh and this city shall become desolate without inhabitant? And all the people had assembled against Jeremiah in the house of the LORD. (10) And hearing these things, the princes of Judah went up from the house of the king to the house of the LORD and sat down at the entrance of the New Gate of the LORD.

COMMENTS

Jeremiah was a soldier on a holy crusade, carrying out the instructions of his heavenly Superior. Acting under a divine directive (Jer. 26:1-3), Jeremiah preaches a stirring message (Jer. 26:4-6) which arouses the anger of those who heard him (Jer. 26:7-10) and nearly costs him his life.

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

XXVI.

(1) In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim.The section which follows is among the earlier fragments of the book, some three years before that of the preceding chapter. It will be noted that there is no mention of the Chaldaeans, and that Jehoiakim is on friendly terms with Egypt (Jer. 26:22). This points to the very earliest period of his reign. The chapter that follows, though referred to the same period in the present Hebrew text, really belongs to the reign of Zedekiah. (See Note on Jer. 27:1.) The common element that led the compiler of the book to bring the narratives together is the conflict of Jeremiah with the false prophets.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

DESTRUCTION THREATENED, Jer 26:1-7.

This chapter adds some historical details to the prophecies which are given more at length in chapters 7-9. It more definitely marks the time, gives the language, and narrates the circumstances. It is distinguished by a special heading which separates it from the prophecies preceding and following. But in subject-matter it is closely joined to what follows, and has the same note of time as the next chapter. Chapters 27-29 are closely related to chapter 25, being a fuller treatment of the subject of the captivity, and especially a counter assertion to Hananiah’s false prophecy, which promised a speedy release and return to their own land. Between these comes chapter 26 as an interesting historical interlude, bringing out the position of Jeremiah and his relations to the people, and also their temper at this time, immediately preceding their downfall.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

1. In the beginning, etc. This phrase clearly indicates a time before the memorable fourth year of this king, in which, took place the first deportation to Babylon.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

A). Jeremiah Declares In The Temple That If Judah Will Not Repent Their Sanctuary Will End Up like That at Shiloh, Which Was Destroyed By The Philistines, And Their City Will Be Subject To YHWH’s Curse. This Results In His Being Brought Before The Authorities For What Were Seen As Treasonable Utterances ( Jer 26:1-24 ).

The chapter commences with a statement of his source of authority, ‘the word of YHWH’. ‘In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim — came this word from YHWH saying –’ (Jer 26:1), and goes on to describe a speech made in the Temple which includes a call to repentance, followed by a warning that if they did not take heed their city would become a curse and their Temple would be made ‘like Shiloh’, which was where the original Temple/Tabernacle had been destroyed, presumably by the Philistines, in the days of Samuel. Subsequent attacks on Jeremiah by the priests and prophets are then described, although ameliorated by a counter-argument put forward by ‘the elders of the people of the land’ who cite the prophecies of Micah in Jeremiah’s defence. A reminder of what happened to another loyal prophet of YHWH named Uriah is then given.

Jer 26:1

‘In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, king of Judah, came this word from YHWH, saying,’

The prophecy is dated as ‘in the beginning’ of the reign of Jehoiakim. This may be a technical description indicating the initial period after Jehoiakim came to the throne prior to his ‘first (full) year’ which would commence at the new year. Alternately it may just be a general indicator. But we know that it must have been fairly early on in his reign because it is later made clear that relationships with Egypt were still prominent. Babylon had not yet come on the scene. The mention of Jehoiakim’s descent from Josiah is, in context, a reminder of the reforms of that good king, and brings out that what follows was a new state of affairs which Josiah would not have countenanced. It was already therefore an indicator that Judah’s downward slide had openly recommenced.

Jer 26:2

“Thus says YHWH, Stand in the court of YHWH’s house, and speak to all the cities of Judah, which come to worship in YHWH’s house, all the words that I command you to speak to them. Diminish not a word.”

The command came from YHWH that Jeremiah was to stand and proclaim His word in the outer court of YHWH’s house where a large number ‘from all the cities of Judah’ who had come up to the feast would be present. It is apparent that amidst all their idolatry, the regular worship of YHWH still continued, but the problem was that their hearts were not in it, with their loyalties being more directed towards the Baals on the high places.

Jeremiah was to speak what YHWH commanded, and not to hold back from declaring the whole truth, or to relax from declaring all His commandments. He must ‘diminish not a word’ (compare Deu 4:2; Deu 12:32). It is the sign of a true man of God that, while not being unwise (courting persecution is never godly), he holds nothing back of what God wants him to say.

Many see this Temple speech as paralleling the one in Jer 7:1 ff. with this being simply a summary of that speech. Certainly they contain a similar emphasis, and it is therefore something which can neither be proved nor disproved, in which case we may see the speech in Jer 7:1 ff. as filling in the details here. But as there is little doubt that it contained a message whose content would have been reproduced on a number of occasions (Jeremiah often repeats himself), this may well be a similar message proclaimed at a different time rather than the same one. This could be seen as supported by the fact that here it is the city’s fate which is the prime emphasis whereas in chapter 7 the concentration was on the Temple. Furthermore it will be noted that in Jer 7:1 ff. there is no indication of a violent reaction to his message.

‘Diminish not a word.’ Such a command was very necessary and a reminder of the difficulty and danger surrounding Jeremiah’s ministry. It would have been very tempting for him to take the sting out of some of what he was saying so as to make it more acceptable. But he must not do so. Jeremiah was well aware of the feelings and excitable nature of the people and he knew that he was demolishing what they saw as guaranteed truths, namely that:

1. They believed that the land was their inheritance given to them by YHWH for ever (whilst they had seen it taken away from northern Israel, their view was probably that that was precisely because, unlike Judah, they had not remained faithful to the Temple and to the son of David).

2. They believed that the Temple was the dwelling place of YHWH and therefore inviolate as long as they maintained the proper rituals (as in their view was proved by what had happened when Jerusalem was miraculously delivered under Hezekiah). They were probably even more confident in this fact because they were now tributaries of Egypt who ruled as far north as Carchemish, so that any other enemies would have appeared far away. After all what could the others do against mighty Egypt? (They were not to know at this point in time that within five years Egypt would have been defeated by Babylon, and that its power would then be limited to within its own borders)

3. They believed that the rule of the house of David over Judah was guaranteed for ever unconditionally.

These things being granted, they would have argued, why should they believe that the Temple would be destroyed or that they would be removed from the land? To declare such things was to go against their cherished beliefs, and to attack what they saw as their national and ‘rightful’ heritage.

Jer 26:3

“It may be they will listen, and turn every man from his evil way, that I may repent me of the evil which I purpose to do to them because of the evil of their doings.”

YHWH declares here what His real desire is. It is that they would listen and turn from their evil ways so that He Himself would not have to bring His severe judgment on them. We are reminded of Peter’s words, ‘The Lord — is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance’ (2Pe 3:9). It is a reminder that in His love and compassion God desires to give every man a fair opportunity, and that in His heart He longed for Judah’s repentance. This emphasises the fact that while it was true that Manasseh’s behaviour had sealed Judah’s doom (Jer 15:4), it was only so because it was his influence that had stirred up their latent sinfulness and had largely made them unwilling to repent. Had they genuinely repented and maintained that repentance, Manasseh’s sin would have counted for nothing.

We have here a reminder that man was created as a free will being who chooses his own way. It is only the fact that he always chooses the way of sin that makes the sovereign work of God in salvation necessary. For the truth is that while men and women may of themselves repent of particular sins, full repentance is something that is beyond them without God’s gracious working. That is why, at its foundation, ‘salvation is of the Lord’, and why all attempts to be saved apart from Him will fail.

Jer 26:4-6

“And you shall say to them,

Thus says YHWH,

If you will not listen to me,

To walk in my law, which I have set before you,

To listen to the words of my servants the prophets,

Whom I send to you,

Even rising up early and sending them,

But you have not listened,

Then will I make this house like Shiloh,

And will make this city a curse to all the nations of the earth.”

This abbreviated content of what must have been a larger speech sums up his message, which was that if they failed to walk in accordance with the covenant, and refused to listen to the genuine prophets, then in the end their Temple would be made like Shiloh (destroyed and non-existent) and their holy city would become a curse (subjected to the curses of Deuteronomy 28). In other words he was contradicting all that they firmly believed, and suggesting that they were not as secure as they had thought. Their city becoming a curse continued the thought in Jer 25:29; Jer 25:37.

‘If you will not listen to me, to walk in my law, which I have set before you.’ YHWH stresses that He had personally spoken to them from Mount Sinai and had made clear to them His requirements. Thus to fall short of obedience to His Instruction (Torah, Law) was to directly disobey Him.

‘To listen to the words of my servants the prophets, whom I send to you, even rising up early and sending them -.’ compare Jer 25:4. They had also refused to listen to Him subsequently when He had sent His servants, the prophets. We know of many of these prophets and ‘men of God’ from the early records (Joshua-Chronicles), and they would have been known to them from their tradition. And He stresses that He had not been backward in sending them. He had, as it were, risen up early in order to send them, demonstrating real effort and determination (a typical Jeremaic phrase).

‘But you have not listened.’ But they had not listened to them either. Their hearts had been set obstinately against obeying YHWH’s covenant requirements. This indeed was why they now came under the curses contained within that covenant (Leviticus 26; Deuteronomy 27-28).

‘Then will I make this house like Shiloh, and will make this city a curse to all the nations of the earth.’ And because of their failure to listen to Him and respond to His covenant He would ‘make their house like Shiloh’ and ‘make their city a curse’. What had happened at Shiloh was proof positive, for those who would listen, that God’s Sanctuary was never seen by Him as inviolable. So let them remember Shiloh where the Tabernacle had been erected after the Conquest, and which, as a result of additional outbuildings, had itself become a kind of Temple. But when His people had been disobedient in the time of Samuel that had been destroyed, and furthermore this fact that YHWH had forsaken His Sanctuary in this way was ironically something that they often sang about (Psa 78:60). It was precisely because YHWH had forsaken it that it was no more. And the same could therefore happen to their present Temple.

On top of this the covenant had been backed up by curses (Leviticus 26; Deuteronomy 27-28). Thus if they were disobedient to that covenant they should expect their holy city to be cursed in the eyes of all nations, and to suffer the doom described in the curses. That would in itself vindicate the covenant. It is a salutary reminder that in the end God’s truth is in the final analysis demonstrated by judgment.

But we can clearly see why, spoken to an excitable people, made more excitable by the festival atmosphere, these words could cause more than a stir. They had come to the feasts with such confidence that ‘they were doing right by YHWH’, and so full of self-satisfaction at being uniquely ‘the people of God’, that to be informed that that was not sufficient would have appeared to be almost blasphemy. They forgot the words of Samuel, Isaiah, Hosea, Amos and Micah that obedience counted for more than offerings, and to do YHWH’s will was more important than the fat of rams (e.g. 1Sa 15:22; Isa 1:11-18; Hos 6:6; Amo 5:21-24; Mic 6:7-8). Like we so often are, they were limited in their spiritual vision. They had eyes but they saw not.

Jer 26:7

‘And the priests and the prophets and all the people heard Jeremiah speaking these words in the house of YHWH.’

It is emphasised that Jeremiah’s words were heard by ‘the priest and the prophets and all the people’. Such was his impact that even the priest and the cult prophets had come to listen to his words, spoken in the outer court of the Temple to the festival crowds. It is a reminder that the same thing happened to our Lord, Jesus Christ, Who was also called to account for what He proclaimed and did in the Temple.

Jer 26:8

‘And it came about, when Jeremiah had made an end of speaking all that YHWH had commanded him to speak to all the people, that the priests and the prophets and all the people laid hold on him, saying, “You shall surely die.”

The whole of the populace who were present were at first aroused against him, ‘the priests, the prophets and all the people’, although excluding the civil authorities. It was a ‘popular’ movement. And when he had finished speaking he was by popular consent, and by the authority of the priests and prophets, arrested, it being declared that he was worthy of death. They were enflamed at the thought of what he had said, and no doubt considered his prophecy to be patently false, making him worthy of death (Deu 18:20).

Jer 26:9

“Why have you prophesied in the name of YHWH, saying, ‘This house will be like Shiloh, and this city will be desolate, without inhabitant?’

They demanded to know why he had dared to prophesy in the Name of YHWH that the Temple would be destroyed in the same way as Shiloh had been, and that the city would become a deserted city, a ghost town, a place where no one lived. It was the very opposite of what the priests and prophets were telling them They probably did not even think of what Micah had previously said (Jer 26:18), as they may well not have known about it. The ‘princes and elders’ would prove to be better informed.

Jer 26:9

‘And all the people were gathered to Jeremiah in the house of YHWH.’

Thus Jeremiah found himself surrounded by an enflamed people, encouraged on by the priests and the prophets, those who should have been most concerned for the truth of YHWH. What probably saved him from instant death was the sanctity of the Temple. They would not want to shed his blood in the Temple and thus defile it during the feast.

Jer 26:10

‘And when the princes of Judah heard these things, they came up from the king’s house to the house of YHWH, and they sat in the entry of the new gate of YHWH’s house.’

Meanwhile news of the disturbance had reached ‘the princes of Judah’, the tribal leaders and the royal court gathered at the king’s palace, and they came down to the house of YHWH to quell the disturbance and try the case. They consequently sat in session in the entry of ‘the new gate of YHWH’s house’. We do not know which gate this was. Possibly it was the high gate built by Jotham (2Ch 27:3). ‘The gate’ in each city was the place where the elders of the city would meet in order to hold trials. Jerusalem, of course, had a number of gates, but this was the one seemingly seen as the correct site in which to hold a trial

Jer 26:11

‘Then the priests and the prophets spoke to the princes and to all the people, saying, “This man is worthy of death, for he has prophesied against this city, as you have heard with your ears.”

It was the priests and prophets, who recognised that Jeremiah had spoken against them in what he had said, who put forward the case for the prosecution. (It was Jeremiah against those who professed to speak in YHWH’s name). They declared in open court that Jeremiah was worthy of death because he had prophesied the destruction of the city (including the Temple). Note the emphasis on the whole city (unlike in chapter 7). The safety of the city would be of more immediate concern to the secular authorities.

Jer 26:12

‘Then Jeremiah spoke to all the princes and to all the people, saying, “YHWH sent me to prophesy against this house and against this city all the words which you have heard.”

Jeremiah then provided his defence which was that it was YHWH Himself Who had sent him to prophesy against both the Temple and the city with the very words that they had heard. He as thus claiming that it was he who was YHWH’s messenger. Note the exclusion of the mention of the priest and the prophets. They were the main accusers, baying for his blood. There was little point in appealing to them. The very people who should have been supporting his words were the ones most bitterly opposed to him.

Jer 26:13

‘Now therefore amend your ways and your doings, and obey the voice of YHWH your God, and YHWH will repent him of the evil that he has pronounced against you.”

He then boldly called on them to amend their ways and their doings, their attitudes and their actions, and to start obeying the voice of YHWH. Then they could be assured that He would alter His purpose with regard to them and change His mind about the evil that He had pronounced against them. It will be noted that this change of mind by YHWH is not to be seen as describing an arbitrary ‘change of mind’, as though He had previously got it wrong, It was a change of mind based on the fact that they had first changed in their attitude towards Him and His covenant. It was an indication that God would respond to man’s change of heart.

Jer 26:14-15

“But as for me, see, I am in your hand. Do with me as is good and right in your eyes. Only know you for certain that, if you put me to death, you will bring innocent blood on yourselves, and on this city, and on its inhabitants, for of a truth YHWH has sent me to you to speak all these words in your ears.”

He then declares that as far as he was concerned, they could do what they liked with him. He was not important. What mattered was the truth of YHWH. But let them only remember that they would be judged for the choice that they made, so that if they shed his innocent blood, they would bring that blood on themselves, the blood of YHWH’s messenger, both on themselves, and on their city and on its inhabitants. And this was because it was YHWH Who had sent him to speak these words to them.

Jer 26:16

‘Then the princes and all the people said to the priests and to the prophets, “This man is not worthy of death, for he has spoken to us in the name of YHWH our God.”

How quickly the mood of a crowd can change. Shortly before ‘all the people’ had been clamouring for his blood. Now they were siding with the judges in recognising his innocence. His defence had impressed the hearers, and so much so that they turned on his accusers and declared that Jeremiah was not worthy of death because he had spoken to them ‘in the Name of YHWH our God’. In their view he was a true prophet. And Israel/Judah had a history of accepting such prophets (although usually too late for their own good).

Jer 26:17

‘Then certain of the elders of the land rose up, and spoke to all the assembly of the people, saying,’

The ‘elders of the land’ were probably the leaders of the people from around the country, in contrast with those who dwelt in Jerusalem. We can compare the phrase, ‘the people of the land’ which often meant the landed gentry who were not so caught up in high level politics. And it was some of them, visitors to Jerusalem for the festival, who now spoke up on Jeremiah’s behalf. We have here the memory of an eye-witness who remembered who said what. There is also here an indication that, unlike in Jerusalem (Jer 5:1), among the wider people were those who still feared YHWH, at least to a certain extent.

Jer 26:18

“Micah the Morashtite prophesied in the days of Hezekiah king of Judah, and he spoke to all the people of Judah, saying, ‘Thus says YHWH of hosts, Zion will be ploughed like a field, and Jerusalem will become heaps, and the mountain of the house as the high places of a forest’.”

Jeremiah’s sterling defence had brought to mind the words of previous prophets, and they consequently pointed back to the prophecy of Mic 3:12, an interesting indication that the writings of the early prophets were already available to them and were seen as carrying authority. They brought out that he too had prophesied the destruction of Jerusalem in the days of Hezekiah (and thus in the latter part of his ministry). Indeed he had declared that it would be so emptied that it came under the plough, with Jerusalem being turned into heaps of rubble and the Temple mount becoming overgrown. He had been no less emphatic than Jeremiah.

Jer 26:19

“Did Hezekiah king of Judah and all Judah put him to death? Did he not fear YHWH, and entreat the favour of YHWH, and YHWH repented him of the evil which he had pronounced against them? Thus would we commit great evil against our own souls.”

And what had the then king done with Micah? Had he and all Judah sought to put him to death? No, rather they had listened to what he had said and had ‘feared YHWH,’ responding to the covenant positively and reforming their lives. They had then called on YHWH’s mercy with the result that YHWH’s anger against them was stayed. He had changed His mind with regard to His judgment that he was bringing on them. (If only they had gone a stage further and had themselves truly repented, the history of Judah might have been different). The argument was important as indicating the decision of the house of David in regard to a similar situation. It suggested that the present king Jehoiakim, and his courtiers, should have the same attitude.

This may have in mind the special deliverance of Jerusalem mentioned in 2 Kings 18-19, or it may simply have in mind an earlier occasion in the early days of Hezekiah’s reign of which we are unaware. Or indeed both. It is a reminder that there were genuine ‘revivals’ of which we are not told elsewhere. But the main point was that a prophet of YHWH had been listened to by both king and people, even though he had warned of dire things, with no attempt being made to silence the prophet.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Section 2 Subsection 1 Commencing With A Speech In The Temple Jeremiah Warns Of What Is Coming And Repudiates The Promises Of The False Prophets, And While Opposed By The Hierarchy, Has His Own Status As A Prophet Recognised by Many Of The People ( Jer 26:1 to Jer 29:32 ).

The danger of dividing the prophecy up into sections and subsections, as we have done, is that we can lose something of the continuity of the prophecy. Thus while the divisions in this case are seemingly clear, the continuity must not be overlooked. What follows in Jer 26:1 to Jer 29:32 must be seen in fact as a subsequent explanation expanding on what Jeremiah has already said in chapter 25 concerning both the evil coming on Jerusalem and the seventy year period of Babylonian domination. And we now discover that this was in direct contrast with what was being currently declared by the cult prophets mentioned so prominently in chapter 23.

The whole subsection thus brings out the threat under which Judah was standing, and the direct rivalry existing between Jeremiah and his supporters, and the cult prophets, a rivalry which was caused by their deeply contrasting views about the future. It commences with the fact that the cult prophets combined with the priests in arraigning Jeremiah and seeking his death in chapter 26, something which is followed by examples of their activities and their continued opposition to Jeremiah, thus illustrating what was described in Jer 23:9-40. This section too could have been headed ‘concerning the prophets’, were it not that its tentacles reached out further.

The subsection is a unity. It commences at the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim bringing out the new situation that had arisen with the death of Josiah and the advent of a new king who ‘did what was evil in the eyes of YHWH’ (2Ki 23:37), continues by showing that from that time on Jeremiah wore a yoke about his neck as an indication that Judah was no longer an independent nation, something which goes on until things are brought to a head during the reign of Zedekiah when the yoke is broken from his neck by a prophet who prophesies falsely and dies as a result. Meanwhile Jeremiah has sent duplicates of his yoke to the kings of surrounding nations who are contemplating rebellion against Babylon, to warn them against such rebellion. And the subsection closes with a letter from him to the exiles in Babylonia warning them against expecting a swift return, resulting in a return letter from a prominent prophet calling for the arraignment of Jeremiah.

The subsection itself divides up as follows:

A) ‘In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim — came this word from YHWH saying –’ (Jer 26:1). The chapter commences in the Temple with a call to repentance, which is followed by a warning that their Temple would otherwise be made like Shiloh, (which was where the original Temple/Tabernacle was destroyed by the Philistines in the days of Samuel), and their city would become a curse among the nations (compareJer 25:29; Jer 25:37). The resulting persecution of Jeremiah, especially by the priests and the cult prophets, is then described, although ameliorated by a counter-argument put forward by ‘the elders of the people of the land’ who clearly accepted Jeremiah as a genuine prophet and cited the prophecies of Micah in his support.

B) ‘In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim — came this word to Jeremiah from YHWH saying –’ (Jer 27:1). This chapter commences with Jeremiah, at the command of YHWH, starting to wear symbolic instruments of restraint on his neck as an illustration of the bondage that has come on them from Egypt and is coming at the hands of Babylon. Then during the reign of Zedekiah he is commanded to send these same instruments of bondage among the surrounding nations because of a planned rebellion against Babylon, conveying a similar message to them, that they must accept being subject nations, and warning them against listening to those who say otherwise. Meanwhile Zedekiah and Judah are given the same message together with the assurance, contrary to the teaching of the cult prophets, that rather than experiencing deliverance, what remains of the vessels of YHWH in the Temple will also be carried off to Babylon.

C) ‘And it came about in the same year at the beginning of the reign of Zedekiah –’ (Jer 28:1). In this chapter the false prophets, and especially Hananiah, prophesy that within a short time subservience to Babylon will be over and Jehoiachin and his fellow exiles will return in triumph from Babylon together with all the vessels of the Temple. Jeremiah replies that it will not be so. Rather ‘all these nations’ will have to serve Babylon into the known future. He then prophesies the death of Hananiah because of his rebellion against the truth of YHWH, something which occurs within the year.

D) ‘Now these are the words of the letter that Jeremiah the Prophet sent from Jerusalem to the residue of the elders of the captivity, — etc. (Jer 29:1). In a letter sent to the exiles in Babylonia Jeremiah advises the exiles not to listen to false prophets but to settle down in Babylonia and make the best of a bad situation, because their exile is destined by YHWH to last for ‘seventy years’. Furthermore he emphasises the dark shadows of the future for those who are left behind, although promising that once His exiled people have been dealt with in judgment, YHWH will bring them back again to the land and cause them to acknowledge Him once again. He then prophesies against the false prophets, especially the prominent one who had put pressure on for him to be arrested.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

SECTION 2 ( Jer 26:1 to Jer 45:5 ).

Whilst the first twenty five chapters of Jeremiah have mainly been a record of his general prophecies, mostly given during the reigns of Josiah and Jehoiakim, and have been in the first person, this second section of Jeremiah (Jer 26:1 to Jer 45:5) is in the third person, includes a great deal of material about the problems that Jeremiah faced during his ministry and provides information about the opposition that he continually encountered. This use of the third person was a device regularly used by prophets so that it does not necessarily indicate that it was not directly the work of Jeremiah, although in his case we actually have good reason to think that much of it was recorded under his guidance by his amanuensis and friend, Baruch (Jer 36:4).

It can be divided up as follows:

1. Commencing With A Speech In The Temple Jeremiah Warns Of What Is Coming And Repudiates The Promises Of The False Prophets (Jer 26:1 to Jer 29:32).

2. Promises Are Given Of Eventual Restoration And Of A New Covenant Written In The Heart (Jer 30:1 to Jer 33:26).

3. YHWH’s Continuing Word of Judgment Is Given Through Jeremiah And Its Repercussions Leading Up To The Fall Of Jerusalem Are Revealed (Jer 34:1 to Jer 39:18).

4. Events Subsequent To The Fall Of Jerusalem (Jer 40:1 to Jer 45:5).

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Jer 26:18 Comments – In Jer 26:18 Jeremiah quotes Micah’s prophecy recorded in Mic 3:12, “Therefore shall Zion for your sake be plowed as a field, and Jerusalem shall become heaps, and the mountain of the house as the high places of the forest.”

Jer 26:19 Did Hezekiah king of Judah and all Judah put him at all to death? did he not fear the LORD, and besought the LORD, and the LORD repented him of the evil which he had pronounced against them? Thus might we procure great evil against our souls.

Jer 26:19 Comments – Micah’s prophecy was delivered to Judah and Hezekiah repented, thus turning away divine judgment and the utter destruction of Jerusalem (Jer 26:18-19). The Lord also repented at the prophetic destruction of Nineveh under Jonah’s ministry (Jon 3:10).

Jon 3:10, “And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.”

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

The First Prophecy and its Effect

v. 1. In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim, the son of Josiah, king of Judah, about 609 B. C. came this word from the Lord, saying,

v. 2. Thus saith the Lord, Stand in the court of the Lord’s house, the large outer court, where the people assembled for worship, and speak unto all the cities of Judah, the believers who still were found in the nation and those who made a pretense at serving the Lord, which come to worship in the Lord’s house, all the words that I command thee to speak unto them; diminish not a word, the threatening prophecy being proclaimed in all its ruthless severity,

v. 3. if so be they will hearken, His own goodness making another effort in their behalf and leaving them without excuse in the event of their refusing to listen, and turn every man from his evil way, for repentance on the part of the people was still the Lord’s object, that I may repent Me of the evil which I purpose to do unto them because of the evil of their doings.

v. 4. And thou shalt say unto them, Thus saith the Lord, If ye will not hearken to Me to walk in My Law, in complete agreement with its precepts, which I have set before you,

v. 5. to hearken to the words of My servants, the prophets, whom I sent unto you, both rising up early and sending them, thus showing the earnestness of His interest in them and their welfare but ye have not hearkened, this having been their regular attitude throughout the centuries,

v. 6. then will I make this house, the Temple of Solomon, like Shiloh, from which the Tabernacle had been removed and the city itself reduced to ruins, Cf. Jer 7:12-14, and will make this city, the rich and proud capital of Judah, a curse to all the nations of the earth, an object of execration.

v. 7. So the priests and the prophets and all the people heard Jeremiah speaking these words in the house of the Lord, for he brought his message to their attention in accordance with the command of the Lord.

v. 8. Now, it came to pass when Jeremiah had made an end of speaking all that the Lord had commanded him to speak unto all the people, that the priests, those whose division was on duty at that time, and the prophets, the men who assumed the dignity of this office without really being sent by the Lord or commissioned to act as His servants, and all the people, the assembly which was gathered in the Temple upon that occasion, took him, saying, Thou shalt surely die.

v. 9. Why hast thou prophesied in the name of the Lord, saying, This house shall be like Shiloh, and this city shall be desolate without an inhabitant? They not only regarded his message as an insult to their capital and country, but they charged him with uttering falsehoods in the name of Jehovah, which was an act punishable by death, Deu 18:20. And all the people were gathered against Jeremiah in the house of the Lord, an angry mob, carried away by its passions, ready to carry out the death sentence at once.

v. 10. When the princes of Judah, the rulers, the members of the Great Council, in whose hands alone was the authority to carry out sentences of death, heard these things, then they came up from the king’s house, the royal palace being situated at a lower level than the Temple court, unto the house of the Lord and sat down in the entry of the new gate of the Lord’s house, at the entrance to the inner court, 2Ki 15:35. Since they were members of the highest judicial tribunal in the nation, they proceeded to investigate the matter which was causing all the disturbance, to try the case.

v. 11. Then spake the priests and the prophets, whose, pride was injured by the message of Jeremiah, who were personally enraged against him, unto the princes and to all the people, saying, This man is worthy to die, literally, “A sentence of death upon this man”; for he hath prophesied against this city, as ye have heard with your ears. This expediency, that of appealing to a false patriotism, is resorted to by demagogs even in our day, when in reality they are merely trying to give vent to their own personal spite and grudge against the faithful citizens of a country.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

JEREMIAH‘S TRIAL AND DELIVERANCE.

EXPOSITION

The prophecy in Jer 26:2-6 is a summary of that contained in Jer 7:1-15; the narrative, which stands in no connection either with Jer 24:1-10 or Jer 27:1-22, relates the consequences of that bold declaration of the word of the Lord. The present position of the chapter is only surprising to those who assume that the works of the prophets were necessarily arranged chronologically. How many violations of chronological order meet us in other books, e.g. in Isaiah. It is only reasonable to expect similar phenomena in the Book of Jeremiah. To estimate the circumstances of the prophecy aright, we must remember that in Jehoiakim’s reign a Chaldean invasion was the danger by which all minds were constantly preoccupied.

Jer 26:2

Jeremiah is to take his stand in the court of the Lord’s house; i.e. the outer court, where the people assembled (comp. Jer 19:14), and preach unto all the cities of Judah; i.e. to the pilgrims who had come from the provincial towns (comp. Jer 11:12). His discourse is not to be an eloquent appeal to the feelings, but a strict and peremptory announcement; he is to diminish (or, subtract) not a word (comp. Deu 4:2; Deu 12:32; Rev 22:19).

Jer 26:3

That I may repent; literally, and I will repent; the idea or object is derived from the context. (On the Divine repentance, see note on Jer 18:8.)

Jer 26:4-6

The contents of the discourse (see especially on Jer 7:12-15). The priests and the prophets interfere, arrest Jeremiah, and accuse him of a capital crime. It would appear that some at least of the “false prophets” were priests; thus Pashur, we are told, was a priest (Jer 20:6).

Jer 26:7-11

To all devout Jews this prediction of the destruction of the temple must have been startling; but to those who placed their confidence in the mere exist-once of a consecrated building (Jer 7:4), it was like a blow aimed at their very life. Besides, were not the majority of the prophets of Jehovah of entirely another way of thinking? Did they not promise peace? And what could justify Jeremiah in announcing not merely war, but the downfall of the Divine habitation itself? Hence no sooner had the prophet concluded his discourse, than he was arrested, accused, and condemned to death.

Jer 26:8

Had made an end of speaking. They allowed Jeremiah to finish his discourse (of which we have here only the briefest summary), either from a lingering reverence for his person and office, or to obtain fuller materials for an accusation (comp. the trial of Stephen, Act 6:12-14). All the people. The “people” appear to have been always under some constraint. As long as the priests and prophets were alone, they dominated the unofficial classes, but when the princes appeared (verse 11), the new influence proved superior. In verse 16 princes and people together go over to the side of Jeremiah. Thou shalt surely die. Death was the legal penalty both for blasphemy (Le 24:16) and for presuming to prophesy without having received a prophetic revelation (Deu 18:20). Jeremiah’s declaration ran so entirely counter to the prejudices of his hearers that he may well have been accused of both these sins, or crimes. True, Isaiah and Amos had already predicted the destruction of Jerusalem (Isa 5:5, Isa 5:6; Isa 6:11; Amo 2:4, Amo 2:5; Amo 6:1, Amo 6:2); but it may have been contended that the timely repentance of Judah under Hezekiah and Josiah had effectually cancelled the threatened doom, and though Isa 64:10, Isa 64:11 evidently refers to a time later than Josiah, and represents the ruin of Jerusalem as practically certain, it would seem that the prophetic book (Isaiah 40-66.) to which this belongs (to say the least) was not generally known.

Jer 26:9

Were gathered against; rather, assembled themselves unto; i.e. constituted themselves into a legal qahal, or assembly (see on Jer 26:17).

Jer 26:10

The princes. The term will include the members of the various branches of the royal family, who acted as judges (see on Jer 21:12), and the “elders,” or heads of families (see Jer 26:17). Without the presence of the former, Jeremiah could only have had a mock-trial. Came up, etc. (see on Jer 22:1). Of the Lord’s house; better simply, of the Lord. The gate is the same which is referred at Jer 20:2.

Jer 26:11

This man is worthy to die; literally, a sentence of death (belongs) to this man.

Jer 26:12-15

Jeremiah’s defense. He is conscious that he has not spoken uncommissioned, and leaves the result. He urges the people to amendment of life, while there is time, and warns them that his own unmerited death will bring a curse upon themselves.

Jer 26:16-19

The truth makes an impression upon the princes and the people, who declare Jeremiah to be a true prophet, and therefore innocent.

Jer 26:17

The elders of the land add their voice in favor of Jeremiah, not, however, without first of all consulting the people whose representatives they are. The whole verse is thoroughly technical in its phraseology. The word (qahal) rendered “assembly” is the traditional legal term for the “congregation of Israel” (Deu 31:30); comp. verse 9, where the verb is the corresponding one to qahal. Thus, with all the faults of the government of Judah, which Jeremiah himself reveals to us, it was very far removed from the Oriental despotisms of our day. The “elders” are still an important element in the social system, and form a link with that earlier period in which the family was the leading power in the social organization. Originally the term denoted, strictly and in the full sense, heads of families; they have their analogue in the councils of the Aryan village communities. “References to their parliamentary status occur in Exo 3:16; 2Sa 19:11; 1Ki 8:1; 1Ki 20:7. The institution lingered on during and after the Babylonian Exile.” We find another reference to their quasi-judicial authority in Deu 21:2.

Jer 26:18, Jer 26:19

Micah the Morasthite, etc. The “elders” appeal for a precedent to the case of Micah (called after his native place, Moresheth-Gath, to distinguish him from other Micahs), who had been equally explicit in his declarations of woe to Jerusalem, without incurring the charge of blasphemy. The prediction referred to is in Mic 3:12, the form of which agrees verbally with our passage.

Jer 26:19

Thus might we procure, etc.; rather, and we are about to commit a great evil against our souls (not merely “against ourselves”). The blood of the slain would cry for vengeance against his murderers, who would come to an untimely end, their “souls” being sent down to lead a miserable parody of a life ( ) in Sheol or Hades.

Jer 26:20-23

The murder of the prophet Urijah. At first sight, these four verses appear to belong to the speech of the elders, but the appearance is delusive,

(1) because the issue of the affair of Urijah cannot possibly have taken place “in the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim” (Jer 26:1); and

(2) because the passage stands in no connection with what precedes, whereas it is related, and that very closely, to Jer 26:24 (see below). The case is similar to that of certain passages in St. John’s Gospel, where the reflections of the evangelist are put side by side with the sayings of our Lord. Jeremiah, writing down his experiences at a later time, introduces the story of Urijah to show the magnitude of the danger to which he had been exposed. The notice of Urijah has an additional importance, as it shows incidentally how isolated a spiritual prophet like Jeremiah was, and how completely the order of prophets had fallen below its high ideal. We have no further knowledge of the prophet Urijah.

Jer 26:20

Kirjath-jearim; a city in the territory of Judah, on the west frontier of Benjamin.

Jer 26:21

His mighty men. The “mighty men” (gibborim) are not mentioned again in Jeremiah, and the Septuagint omits the word. But it is clear from Isa 3:2 that the “mighty men” were recognized as an important part of the community. From 1Ch 10:10 it appears that the term indicates a position of high command in the army, which is in accordance with the notice in 2Ki 24:16. Went into Egypt. Egypt was the natural refuge for a native of Palestine, just as Palestine was for a native of Egypt. The latter, however, proved to be not a safe asylum for Urijah, as Pharaoh was the liege lord of Jehoiakim (2Ki 23:34), and the extradition of Urijah as a criminal naturally followed.

Jer 26:22

Elnathan. The name occurs again in Jer 36:12, Jer 36:25. Possibly this man was the “Elnathan of Jerusalem” mentioned in 2Ki 24:8 as the father-in-law of Jehoiakim.

Jer 26:23

Into the graves of the common people; literally, of the sons of the people (comp. Jer 17:19; 2Ki 23:6). “The graves” is equivalent to “the graveyard,” as Job 17:1.

Jer 26:24

Nevertheless the hand of Ahi-kant, etc.; i.e. in spite of the prepossession against prophets like Jeremiah which this incident reveals, Ahikam threw all his influence into the scale of toleration.’ The same Ahikam is mentioned in circumstances which reflect credit on his religion in 2Ki 22:12-14. One of his sons, Gemariah, lent Baruch his official room for the reading of the prophecies of Jeremiah (Jer 36:10); another was the well-known Gedaliah, who became governor of Judah after the fall of Jerusalem, and who was himself friendly to Jeremiah (Jer 39:14; Jer 40:5).

HOMILETICS

Jer 26:2

The duty of declaring the whole truth.

I. THE DUTY. Jeremiah is commanded to “diminish not a word” from the Divine message. A similar obligation rests upon every man who is called to speak for God to his fellow-men. The duty is urgent for two reasons:

1. Truth is a trust. Thus Timothy is admonished by St. Paul to keep that which is committed to his trust (1Ti 6:20); and the apostle speaks of the “gospel which was committed to my trust” (1Ti 1:11).

2. Truth is needed by the world, It is not a private monopoly; it belongs to mankind. The world is dying for lack of it. He who has possession of it and refuses to reveal it to others is like a man who has discovered a secret spring of abundant water and churlishly keeps his knowledge to himself though his companions are perishing of thirst. Divine truth is of practical moment. It is not a mere curiosity, to be exposed or hidden as its owner thinks fit, as though his treatment of it made little difference to other men. When the four lepers of Samaria found the Syrian camp deserted, their first impulse was to pillage it quietly and hide the treasures, keeping the great discovery secret; but wiser thoughts prevailed, and they hastened to acquaint the citizens with their unexpected deliverance (2Ki 7:3-11). So every one who has seen the redemption of Christ has no right to keep his knowledge to himself while the world is in sore need of it. The Church is entrusted with the gospel, not for her own enjoyment alone, but for the good of the world. The same duty applies also to the possession of darker truths. It is evident, indeed, that a certain liberty and discretion are left with us, It is for us to arrange and present truth as it seems best to us; to give relative prominence to its various parts according to our idea of their importance; to lead men up to the reception of it by degrees. It may he that there are truths which the teacher sees, but which the scholar is not yet fit to receive. If they were declared to him he would not understand them, and they would only injure him. A wise teacher will reserve these. We act in this way with children. It may be right sometimes to do the same with those who are babes in knowledge. But is not this a violation of the duty of the text? By no means. For:

(1) If we are sure the truth will be misunderstood we cannot really teach it; for to teach a thing is to make another understand and know it, not merely to speak out unintelligible words about it. We are not to cast our pearls before swine, though we are to remember that no human beings are to be regarded as hopelessly and forever swinish.

(2) Truth may be with-holder, for a time with the object, not of suppressing it, but of the better leading them up to the ripe reception of it.

(3) The vision of truth must be distinguished from the mission to declare it. No doubt the one directly leads to the other. But they may not be contemporaneous. Questions of method, order, seasonableness, come between. The duty is to diminish nothing of the prophet’s message.

II. THE TEMPTATION TO FAIL IN THIS DUTY.

1. Personal fear may tempt a man to “diminish” part of the Divine message. Jeremiah knew that the full utterance of his message would provoke violent opposition. He was warned not to shrink from declaring it on that account. In Christian lands and quiet times we do not feel the same terrible temptation to unfaithfulness. But it comes to us in another form. There are ideas which we believe to be true, but we fear they are unpopular; they will excite controversy, they will provoke ridicule, they will lead to neglect of the preacher. He is tempted to shun these truths that he may swim with the tide of popularity, but he is guilty of gross unfaithfulness if he thus shuns to declare the whole counsel of God.

2. It may appear that men will not receive the message. Of course, as has been remarked, we must use wisdom and discretion, seeking rather to convince men than to provoke them. But it may even be a duty to declare a truth as a testimony against men. In any case the responsibility for rejecting it will lie with them, as it should. But who can tell whether or no his work will be fruitless? The most unsympathetic hearers have sometimes been reached and affected and subdued by the truth which they came to mock or oppose. When the bow is drawn at a venture it may hit the most unlikely marks. It is certain that more good has been missed by our faithlessness in not” sowing beside all waters” than harm done by our rashness in blurting out truths in unseemly circumstances.

3. Certain truths may seem to be of no practical use. We are inclined to neglect these for those that are plainly profitable. Now, there can be no doubt that some truths are of more practical importance than others, and these should naturally receive our more earnest attention. Bat it is a mistake to neglect any truth on this account. Truth should be loved and taught for its own sake. It is degraded when it is regarded solely from a utilitarian standpoint. It is well that men should be true philosopherslovers of wisdom. Moreover, it is impossible to tell what will be the future practical influence of a truth. Some of the most abstruse scientific inventions have led to results of great, though unexpected, human advantage. If research were confined within the limits of the evidently practical, it is certain that many of the most important discoveriesdiscoveries of the greatest use to manwould never have been made. Thus, if electricity had not been studied for purely scientific purposes we should never have had the telegraph. We do not know all the effects of Divine truth. It may not affect others as it does us. It may have special effects in the future, not felt as yet. It is our duty to preserve and transmit it to the ages when it may bear most fruit.

4. Some truths may appear difficult and mysterious. Of course, if a truth is wholly unintelligible, it cannot be taught. We are only uttering words when we try to expound it. But without being unintelligible it may be mysterious, it may be inexplicable; it may come, so to speak, with trails of dark shadows. The temptation is to leave this and only touch what is clear throughout. But the very sense of mystery may be beneficial. So much of the truth as is clear may be useful. If we are convinced that a thing is true, we may accept it without explaining the whole rationale of it. The mystery may grow clearer as we practice what we know of the truth. In any case the Christian teacher is God’s ambassador, commissioned to declare his Master’s message entire, unmutilated, whatever opinions he may have of the utility of it.

Jer 26:8-19

A scene in a Jewish court of law.

We have here a graphic picture of the procedure under the Hebrew criminal law, for it would appear that Jeremiah was indicted and tried in accordance with correct legal order. The details of such a trial are not unimportant to the student of constitutional history. But they are also full of human interest. The law-court is a strange mirror of character. Many as are the objections to the publication of police news in the daily papers, it does at least serve to open our eyes to the eccentricities as well as the enormities of our variegated human world. Let us see what light this trial of Jeremiah throws upon the various persons concerned.

I. THE ACCUSERS. The leading accusers are priests and prophets. The priests, also, were foremost in the accusation of our Lord. Jeremiah had threatened the temple; it is not wonderful that temple officials should be enraged with him. Religious persecution is generally instigated by the professional clerical class, whose vested interests have been attacked by the reformer. The prophets were directly opposed by the teaching of Jeremiah. If orthodoxy is to be decided by the vote of the majority, they were the orthodox of their day. They were annoyed by the contradiction of the greatest man of their order. Unable to answer him, they tried to suppress him. The conduct of these men may suggest some general lessons, viz.

(1) fidelity to the ordinances of worship is no proof of fidelity to God;

(2) professional religiousness may be far removed from religiousness of character;

(3) they who claim to be regular teachers of religion may Be the last to recognize fresh truth;

(4) they who are interested in a controversy are bad judges of the merits of the case.

II. THE ACCUSED.

1. Jeremiah remains faithful to his message. He reiterates it with new emphatic warnings. His defense is that he is sent by God to speak as he has spoken. He rests on innocence, truth, Divine authority. With such a plea he dare not recant. The true servants of God will know that they ought to “obey God rather than men,” and therefore, like St. Peter and St. John, that they “cannot but speak the things which they have seen and heard” (Act 4:20).

2. Jeremiah showed indifference to his own life (verse 14). He was a brave man, though his enemies accused him of advocating a coward’s policy. It is noble thus to have strength to act on the conviction that truth is more precious than life.

3. Jeremiah warned the people of the consequences of injustice (verse 15). This he did more for their sakes than for his own. Nothing can be more fatal to a country than the corruption of justice.

III. THE JUDGES. The princes and elders seem to have the position of judges. They are cool and impartial. In the Jewish state the office of judge came with birth and rank. The most radical friend of the people may see that the superior culture and freedom from popular passions of these men may have fitted them in some measure for their work. Unhappily, Jeremiah has exposed another side of their character. It speaks well for them, however, after the severe castigation he had given “the shepherds” (e.g. Jer 25:34-38), that they had the magnanimity to lend the prophet an impartial hearing, in spite of the virulent opposition of the priests. But possibly these two classes of leading men were not on the friendliest of terms with one another. Even if this be the case it is well that, unlike Herod and Pontius Pilate, they did not come to an agreement through the sacrifice of an innocent victim. Some of the elders cited the precedent of Micah’s case. We see here the value of such an illustration. It serves to detach the principle under consideration from the prejudice of the passions of the hour.

IV. THE JURY. The assembly of the people seems to have acted as a jury. The priests and prophets present their accusation to them and the princes. The people and the princes pronounce the opinion that Jeremiah is innocent. The elders address themselves exclusively to the assembly of the people. This assembly shows the weakness of a popular concourse. The people are swayed from side to side. First they side with the priests, then with the rulers. It also shows its advantages. The people are open to impression; they do not care for formal consistency to a previous conviction; they like to see fair play. When their broad human instincts are appealed to they respond rightly.

Jer 26:20-23

The story of an obscure martyr.

I. UNORIGINAL MEN MAY DO GOOD SERVICE IF THEY FOLLOW GOOD LEADERS. Urijah had no new message; but he followed Jeremiah fully and firmly. Accordingly, though not especially inspired, he was able to prophesy “in the Name of the Lord.” It is more important to be true than to be original. It is the duty of the Christian teacher to speak in the Name of God, but only according to the teaching of prophets and apostles, and above all, Jesus Christ. If we do this we can speak “with authority.”

II. SMALL MEN MAY EXERT GREAT POWER WHEN THEY ARE ON THE SIDE OF RIGHT AND TRUTH. Urijah is an insignificant personage, yet all the court is in dismay at his preaching. There is irony in this fact, if not intended by the language with which it is described. We have “Jehoiakim the king, with all his mighty men, and all his princes,” alarmed and enraged at the preaching of one obscure man. What a testimony to the power of truth! Magna est veritas et prevalebit.

III. OBSCURE MEN MAY SUFFER WHEN GREATER MEN ARE SPARED. Urijah is killed; Jeremiah is acquitted. The Jews were overawed by Jeremiah; Urijah was an enemy small enough to be made a victim without danger. There is something terribly humiliating to human nature in this. How often do we see the same meanness choosing the underling rather than the leader for spiteful but safe revenge!

IV. IT IS SOMETIMES SAFER TO FACE DANGER THAN TO FLEE FROM IT. Jeremiah held his ground, and his life was spared; Urijah fled to Egypt, and he was dragged back to Jerusalem and ignominiously slain. The dauntless courage of the one man overpowered opposition; the cowardice of the other tempted it. It is always better even for ourselves to be brave and faithful. After his previous recantations Archbishop Cranmer could feel little of the triumph of a Ridley and a Latimer in the flames of his martyrdom.

Jer 26:24

A friend in need.

Ahikam proves himself to be a true friend to Jeremiah by standing by him in the hour of danger. He is not like Joseph of Arimathaea, who was unheard of till he came and begged the dead body of his Lord. When the danger was greatest, he first made himself known on the side of the prophet.

I. HE WAS JUST. Jeremiah had been maligned. But Ahikam knew him to be innocent. To have allowed him to perish would have involved complicity in the murder of the prophet. Yet how many would have washed their hands and contented themselves with taking no active part in a public crime! It is not enough to refrain from joining in an injustice; duty requires us to resist it,

II. HE WAS INDEPENDENT. Jeremiah was unpopular. Though the unanswerable truthfulness of his defense secured him a verdict of acquittal at the regular trial, there can be no doubt that his life was in imminent peril from unscrupulous conspirators, now that the general sentiment was against him. It is a proof of staunch fidelity to stand by a man when he is unpopular. There is little merit in showing friendship for men who are fawned upon by fashion.

III. HE WAS COURAGEOUS. He could only defend Jeremiah at the peril of his own life. By siding with the prophet he allowed his name to be associated with all that was disliked and feared in the persecuted man, and he must have known this. For a person in high station to come out in this way by himself and defend a solitary, persecuted man required no little boldness.

IV. HE WAS USEFUL. Ahikam could not prophesy; but he could save a prophet’s life. Possibly but for him Jeremiah’s mission would have been cut short. To him, therefore, we owe the possibility of all the remainder of the great prophet’s work. It is noteworthy that Ahikam had shown respect for the prophetic order before this, when, with his father and others, he went on an important mission from King Josiah to consult the prophetess Huldah (2Ki 22:12-14). Many a man who can do little directly may be the means of securing immense good by fostering and furthering the work of others. It would be happy for us to think less of our own prominence and more of the accomplishment of God’s will, no matter who may be the honored instrument. We may look beyond the human friend and see the hand of Providence in this deliverance of the prophet. God raises up helpers when we least look for them. Among all the blessings of life none should command more thankfulness to God than the gift of good friends.

HOMILIES BY A.F. MUIR

Jer 26:1-3

God’s mercy shown in his messages.

I. IN THEIR BEING REPEATED. It was substantially the same message as had been delivered before and been rejected. The question was not finally closed. Jehoiakim might show a disposition to repent and alter the policy of his father’s government. In any case a new chance is afforded him and his people. God is slow to anger (Rom 10:21). The invitations of his love are still extended to us, notwithstanding the sins of the fathers and our own repeated violations of his Law (Heb 4:6-9). Even the backslider is addressed with frequent warnings and appealsa proceeding which would have no meaning apart from God’s reserved purpose of grace.

II. IN THEIR TIMELINESS. It was not only at the middle or end of Jehoiakim’s reign, when he might have thought himself involved too deeply to retrace his steps, but at the very beginning. With a new king a fresh opportunity is offered for the nation also to return to its allegiance. Similarly does he stand at the threshold of every life and the opening of every career. He has “risen up early” and anticipated the transgressor in his evil way, or guided his faithful child into the paths of peace (cf. Joh 1:9).

III. IN THEIR FAITHFULNESS. “Stand in the court of the Lord’s house, and speak unto all the cities of Judah diminish not a word.” To declare “all the words of this life” is the commission of Christ’s servants, and to do this “in season and out of season.” The exact situation of men, and the relation into which sin has brought them with respect to God, must be plainly stated; there is no room for flattery. It is absurd to suppose that such a policy is clue to vindictiveness. It can only be explained on the hypothesis of an earnest and thorough-going scheme of salvation. Sinners require to be faithfully dealt with, in order to awaken their conscience and constrain them to take advantage of the means provided for their deliverance.

IV. IN THEIR REVELATION OF HIS WILLINGNESS TO SAVE. It might almost appear weakness, yet is not Jehovah ashamed of this long-suffering. The attribute of mercy does not detract from the dignity or authority of Divine character; rather is it its glory. This forbearance and hesitation to inflict punishment can be attributed to no base motives. It is in harmony with his behavior at all times. How important is it that the repentant sinner should know the merciful disposition of him with whom he has to do l It is essential in every preaching of the gospel that this impression should be produced. The failure of one generation, again, is no reason for another being condemned before probation. God is “not willing that any should perish” (2Pe 3:9)M.

Jer 26:1-17, Jer 26:24

The prophet of God arraigned by the nation.

Jeremiah’s position, as that of all prophets, was necessarily a public one; to every man is he sent with the message. It is inadmissible for him to soften or lessen what he has to speak, which is nothing else than an indictment of the entire people (verses 4-6). In default of their repentance his arraignment by them is, therefore, all but inevitable. Indifference could not well be feigned; words like his were certain to produce an effect.

I. HIS RECEPTION. It is tumultuous and threatening. He is treated as a criminal. The people, under the influence of his enemies, the priests and the prophets, said, “Thou shalt surely die,” and were “gathered together against” him (verses 8, 9). It was to be expected that the priests and the prophets should have been his accusers (verse 11), and they already anticipate an unfavorable verdict. It is the educated and influential amongst the laity who are his judges (verse 10)a fortunate thing for him, as the event showed. They seem to have been more open to conviction, as they were probably better acquainted with the moral condition of the court and the political situation. The opposition of men is to be expected by the follower and witness of truth, for “the carnal mind is enmity against God” (Rom 8:7). But some will ever be found, if not convinced by him, yet, through the work of the Spirit, open to conviction. There is nothing which true religion demands in these crises but a fair hearing and an impartial judgment.

II. HIS DEFENSE. He declares the reality of his mission”the Lord sent me” (verses 12, 15); his faithfulness to his instructions, and the merciful aim which he had in view (verse 13); his helplessness and indifference to personal consequences (verse 14); and his own innocence of any evil design against the nation. God’s servants, when thus arraigned, ought to be gentle and yet faithful to their message; the issue is to be left to him. The fear of man is to be forgotten in the fear of God and the enthusiasm of salvation.

III. HIS DELIVERANCE.

1. The verdict is sensible and wise (verse 16), and receives the adhesion of the people. It is the false prophets who are most obstinately opposed, who would probably have aroused the popular prejudices, had it not been for the interference of certain elders who recalled previous instances in point (verses 17-23); and the strong personal influence of Ahikam, son of Shaphan. We are reminded of our Savior’s experience at the bar of Pilate (Mat 27:19-25).

2. The most prominent feature of the judgment is its consequence. God’s children must frequently be disappointed in their appeals to men and their expectation of results from his Word. His ways are hidden, inscrutable, and hard to acquiesce in. A clear and intelligent verdict is not to be expected from those who are not prepared to yield themselves to God’s authority. The clearest and most faithful expositions of truth will frequently appear to fail of immediate effect. The servant of God is to care chiefly to deliver his soul; his personal safety may be left to God. God can raise up influential friends for his people in critical times, but he will work out his schemes in his own way.M.

Jer 26:6

Spiritual prerogative not inalienable.

The utterance of these words is the chief charge against the prophet; only, as in the case of Stephen (Act 6:13), the statement is mutilated in the accusation, the condition of the prophecy being entirely ignored (Jer 26:9, Jer 26:11). The principle of indestructible consecration is still clung to by many in the face of the plainest declarations of Scripture. It may be well, therefore, to discuss its bearings in the present instance.

I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF ITS BESTOWAL. It was Divine grace to which it was due; but for this Jerusalem would have been like other cities. This favor had to be continued from moment to moment, being indeed only secured by the continued indwelling of the Holy Spirit. What was due to grace could be freely withdrawn by its Donor. As a matter of history, the most sacred places of Israel were repeatedly ruined and profaned. This destruction is matter of ancient prophecy, as in the present instance.

II. THE TERMS OF ITS TENURE. The repeated warnings and injunctions given prove that the consecration of the sacred places depended upon their occupancy by God’s Spirit, and this in turn upon the faithfulness of his people. Either these had no meaning or the grace could be taken away. Jeremiah said, “If ye will not hearken to me, then will I make this house like Shiloh.” The testimony of 1Ki 9:6-8 is precisely similar (cf. Psa 78:60; Jer 7:12).

III. ITS OWN ESSENTIAL NATURE. Strictly speaking, all things made by God are good and holy, but they may be desecrated, in a secondary sense, by being misused, profaned, or defiled. Institutions, buildings, or material or mechanical structures of any sort, are at best but secondary receptacles of Divine grace. “God dwelleth not in temples made with hands.” It is the person occupying these who is the true temple, and when he is defiled by sin or unfaithfulness there can be no virtue inherent in the places which he frequents. Consecration is alone transmissible through the operation and presence of the Holy Spirit, and ceases with the withdrawal of the same. It consists primarily in the personal character through which it is expressed, and only secondarily in places and things, through the uses and practices carried on by holy men in connection with them. To the unholy, therefore, every place and thing will be unholy, and vice versa (Tit 1:15). Material edifices, organization, and official prerogative, are nothing apart from this personal consecration associated with them; and the loss of that involves the loss of usefulness, of peace, and of sacredness, even in connection with that with which they have been most identified.M.

Jer 26:8, Jer 26:9

The perils of prophesying.

I. THE PROPHET OF GOD MEETS WITH UNIVERSAL OPPOSITION.

II. HE IS IN PERSONAL DANGER.

1. The responsibility of the judgments predicted is attached to himself. This is due to a false principle of association, having its root in human ignorance and depravity. Not even God is responsible. The sinner must blame himself (Gal 4:16).

2. The worst consequences are threatened. Hatred to God expresses itself in hatred to his servant. It is, therefore, violent and in defiance of all justice. Transgressors think to escape judgment by denying it and destroying its witnesses.

III. CHARACTER IS JEOPARDIZED. The verdict was but a half-hearted one, and did not meet with general assent. The worst charges are brought against Christian men who are faithful to their convictions; and it is not always the case that their groundlessness is made clear. This is part of the “reproach of Christ.”M.

Jer 26:12-15

The defense of the witness for the truth.

I. AN APPEAL TO CONSCIENCE. The message repeated in its baldest form. Its genuineness insisted upon, and its reception earnestly urged upon men. A high moral standpoint is maintained, and there is no compromise or apology. He stands at the bar of human conscience.

II. OBEDIENCE TO LAWFUL AUTHORITY. He hands himself over to them to deal with him as they will; is careful to state his case as God gives him ability; and appeals to no unlawful means of deliverance.

III. REFERENCE OF THE WHOLE MATTER TO GOD. God sent himthat is sufficient. He has been faithful to his instructions; is really not to be judged by man, but leaves all with God.M.

Jer 26:24

Help raised up for God’s servants in times of peril.

I. OF WHAT SORT IT IS.

1. Unexpected.

2. Opportune.

3. Effective.

4. Not what man would choose.

II. WHAT IT TEACHES US.

1. The infinite resources of God.

2. The weakness of evil.

3. Those who will not willingly obey God are made to serve him unwillingly.

4. God chooses his own way of dealing with his servants and his truth.M.

HOMILIES BY D. YOUNG

Jer 26:11

Jeremiah reckoned worthy of death.

I. WHO THEY WERE THAT PRONOUNCED THIS JUDGMENT. There is already a statement in verse 8 that priests, prophets, and people had laid hold on Jeremiah with a threatening of death; but we must allow something for the feelings produced on the first reception of an exasperating and humiliating message. The case is worse when the priests and prophets, having had some time for consideration, however short, press upon the princes and people a demand for the death of Jeremiah. The lead the priests and prophets here take goes a long way in showing who were mostly responsible for the deplorable state of things in the land. If things were to be put right, these two classes of men must be conspicuous in repentance. Those who were so ready to sentence Jeremiah to death were really most of all deserving of death themselves. He had simply spoken words against the city and the temple, words which were not his own; those who condemned him had so lived that their life had been a sedulous undermining of all that constituted the prosperity and glory of their country.

II. WHAT IT WAS THAT PROVOKED THE JUDGMENT. Jeremiah had prophesied against the city. Observe, not simply that he had spoken blasphemous and contemptuous words against the city; but that he had prophesied against it. Thus did the priests and prophets show how little they understood the nature of true prophecy. They did not understand that when the Lord sends forth a man to speak, he puts a word in his mouth which shall commend itself to all who love truth and certainty. To the mind of these priests and prophets everything began with this postulate, that nothing must be said against Jerusalem and the temple. And to them it was no sort of answer that the sins of Jerusalem deserved and demanded that something should be said against it. The good name of Jerusalem, however lacking in any sort of correspondence with reality, had become a sort of point of honor. Thus we see how the pride of men goes before their destruction. A conventional sense of honor leads them into paths thickly strewn with stumbling-blocks. These men had become so stuffed with spurious patriotism that they could not bear to have Jerusalem spoken against. Hence they are logically compelled to imply that Jeremiah is a false prophet, and that God has not spoken at all. They were as those who shut their eyes, and then say there is nothing to be seen.

III. THE DOOM THEY INVOKED. The man who speaks against Jerusalem is reckoned worthy of death. We must not, of course, measure this judgment by our notions of what may require the death penalty. To speak against a parent was by the Law of Moses to incur the death penalty. As the Apostle James uses many forcible expressions to illustrate, great is the power of the tongue; and a bad man may do mischief with his tongue worthy of the severest punishment men can inflict. If Jeremiah had gone about among the people stirring them up to rebellion and national discord, there would have been nothing very astonishing in an attempt to put him to death. But he gave no exhortation to the people save what each one could carry into effect without the slightest injury to any one; nay, rather the obedience of each would be to the real and abiding advantage of all. He spoke not of anything he himself intended to bring about, but of what was going to happen altogether irrespective of him. His death, supposing he were slain, would make no difference; nay, it would only help to proclaim his message louder and more abidingly. Those who feel themselves attacked by the truth, strike out recklessly with the first instrument they can get hold of; but though they may seem thus to destroy God’s agencies, it is found in the end that they are efficiently promoting his work. They that were scattered abroad by the great persecution which arose at the time of Stephen s death, “went everywhere preaching the Word.”Y.

Jer 26:16

Jeremiah reckoned not worthy of death.

The contrast is very decided between verse 11 and verse 16. In verse 11 there is what appears an irresistible and deadly accusation, coming from men who hardly knew a check of any kind. In verse 16 there is the answer of those to whom they speak, refusing to ratify their demand. What has happened between? Only the appeal of one who was strong in the consciousness that he had been a faithful servant of God. If we consider his words carefully, we shall see that underneath them there are three considerations, of which the first is more important than the second, and the second more important than the third.

I. We may say that, first of all, HE IS THINKING OF THE GOD WHO HAD SENT HIM. That which threatened him at the same time insulted and tried to thwart Jehovah. Not that Jeremiah was careless about his own safety, but the glory of his God was paramount in his thoughts. He had in him the true spirit of apostleship; the claims he had to make were not his own claims; he was a sent man, and sent of God. Just in proportion as a man feels that God has sent him, must be his distress to find that others do not recognize the credentials of the messenger and the importance of the message. On one side the prophet was dealing with God, on the other with men. Every day deepened on him the impression of God’s intimate presence with him; and yet this same God who was so much to him was nothing to these people; the name that thrilled and subdued his susceptible heart, was perhaps the least potent of sounds in their ears. Hence the need of appealing to them again and again, if perchance there might be roused in them some sort of apprehension that they were dealing, not with a brother man, but with the almighty and holy God. While they were all absorbed in considerations of their own territorial dignity, God in his justice was comings, ever nearer. Whatever happens to the people or to the prophet himself, that prophet will at all events exalt God before them to the latest hour of his existence. If he has to die, the message of God shall live more gloriously in his closing hours.

II. HE IS THINKING OF THE INTERESTS OF THIS APPARENTLY OBDURATE PEOPLE. Though at the present moment it is he who seems to be in danger, he well knows that his peril is but a surface trifle when compared with that attaching to the scowling enemies who are crowded around him. He can be rescued, if so it please God; but who is to rescue those who are striding onwards, ever more swiftly, to a righteous doom? God can deliver the prophet from his enemies, for the prophet himself interposes no obstacle to his deliverance; but these people of Judah and Jerusalem interpose insurmountable obstacles, in that they will not amend their ways and doings and obey the voice of God. More than that, it seems as if they were about to add a fresh obstacle by shedding the innocent blood of God’s latest messenger. The persecutor is always in greater peril than the persecuted. Physical pain and physical death are transitory and unreturning ills, but the evildoer has to face the worm that dieth not. Compare with the words of the prophet here the words of Jesus as he was being led to crucifixion: “Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but weep for yourselves, and for your children” (Luk 23:28).

III. HE IS THINKING OF HIS OWN PRESENT POSITION. (See verse 14.) This verse reveals a calm, intermediate position between the reckless fanaticism that even courts death and the spirit that turns back the moment threatening is heard. “I am in your hands,” says the prophet. He admits their power to the fullest extent, and he does not in any way dare them to the exercise of it. He is neither anxious for life nor afraid of death. This surely is the spirit to be gained if one would be a true witness for God. Jeremiah seems to speak here as one who had gained, for the moment at least, something of the calm of eternity. And his very calmness must surely have been a considerable element in determining the rapid change of feeling among the multitude. Perfect presence of mind, when it comes from an all-sufficient Divine stay within, must have a wondrous power in checking those whose fury is roused by an attack on their base and selfish interests,Y.

Jer 26:17-23

An argument from history.

A prophet, a king, and a people belonging to a past generation are brought forward to justify the conclusion to which the princes and the people here had come. Here, then, is an eminent instance of what a practical study history may become. One must be so acquainted with the past as to seize just that completed event which will cast light on the duties and necessities of the present.

I. AN INSTANCE OF A PROPHET‘S UNPALATABLE MESSAGE. No word could have been more provocative of resentment than this. It threatened those to whom it was spoken in the closest possible way. It meant that they were to be subjected to their enemies, driven from their homes, and deprived of their most substantial possessions. The message being such, what comfort Jeremiah might obtain from recollecting that his predecessors treading his thorny path before him were now remembered in such an honorable way! Micah had been faithful to his God, his message, and his audience; and the impression of his faithfulness is still deep when something like a century has elapsed. These people now listening to Jeremiah were thus made responsible for Micah’s words as well as Jeremiah’s. What harmony there is in true prophecy! False prophets, from their very position, cannot be got to agree; but here Jeremiah’s words at once recall to mind Micah’s similar words, and help to drive them with a deeper impression into some at least of this subsequent generation. Thus also, reciprocally, Micah’s words help Jeremiah’s. And not only was there harmony between the prophecies; there was harmony between the characters of the prophets as well. All the prophets would have understood one another perfectly if they had been gathered together in one assembly.

II. AN INSTANCE OF HOW A PROPHET SHOULD EVER BE RECEIVED. Jeremiah is able to look back on a man of like spirit with himself in. the prophet Micah, but the present leaders of Israel have their thoughts turned to a very different king from Jehoiakim. We can guess how Hezekiah behaved toward Micah from the way in which he behaved toward Isaiah. The narrative here concerning the fate of Urijah seems to be introduced to show that, though Jeremiah escaped from peril at the hands of these priests and prophets, their nature and the nature of Jehoiakim remained the same. When Hezekiah heard the truth, bitter as it was, he humbled himself and averted doom. But Jehoiakim and his profligate and rapacious circle hated every one who spoke the truth. Hence it was not enough for them that Urijah fled; they followed him and brought him back to suffer their vengeance. Thus it is made evident how Jehoiakim was a man of very different spirit from Hezekiah.Y.

Jer 26:24

A friend in need.

I. THE EVIDENT PERIL OF JEREMIAH. A large Body of the people had been somehow influenced to take his side, but how long their favorable mood of mind might continue, who could tell? There was no Hezekiah on the throne to encourage such a feeling and make it permanent. Moreover, there is an ebullition of fury which is fatal to one who, as far as the record enables us to judge, occupied a far less prominent position than Jeremiah. If Urijah was slain, how could Jeremiah hope to escape? We must try to get a distinct impression of all the peril in which Jeremiah was in order to appreciate the services rendered to him by Ahikam.

II. THE TIMELY HELP OF AHIKAM. Nothing is told us save the bare fact of protection, We must not assume that Ahikam was fully in sympathy with Jeremiah. We have no means of judging as to his character and his motives, as to the risks that he ran, and the ultimate results to him. The one clear thing is that at this time he was a man of power, and was for some reason disposed to shield the prophet. It may be that, if we could lay bare and analyze his motives, they would be found very mixed as to their kind. But, whatever the motives, the practical service was the same. Jehovah could, of course, have protected his servant by supernatural means, but it is his principle of working not to employ the supernatural when the natural would serve the purpose. Hezekiah could do more than Ahikam, seeing that he turned to God and kept hack the dreadful visitations. But Ahikam did all that was necessary for the present occasion. Compare the position of Ahikam here with that of the Duke of Lancaster towards Wickliffe and the Lollards.Y.

Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary

Jer 26:1. In the beginning of the reign of Jehoakim This prophesy is prior in time to that in the preceding chapter. That was delivered in the fourth year of king Jehoiakim; and this at the beginning, or some time in the first year of his reign. See Calmet.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

B. The Three Historical Appendices

The Prophet Of The Lord And The False Prophets

Jeremiah 26-29

It has been already shown in the introduction to the ninth discourse that these chapters stand here together, because their common topic is the conflict of the true prophet with the false prophets. Their position just here, however, is occasioned by the close historical connection of chh. 27, 28, with Jeremiah 25. There is thus a double connection, (1) that of chh. 27, 28, with Jeremiah 25 (Cup of wrath and yoke); (2) that of chh. 2629 with each other (false prophets). Before Jeremiah 27, however, stands Jeremiah 26, and thus separates the connected passages, Jeremiah 25, and chh. 27, 28, because it is the oldest in time. It comes before the fourth year of Jehoiakim. Perhaps also the four chapters were found in this order, and transposed here as a whole. Chh. 27, 28 belong to the fourth year of Zedekiah (Comp. Comm. on Jer 27:1). Ch. 29 is somewhat earlier in date (Comp. the Introd. to this chapter). The arrangement of these four chapters is thus not consistently chronological. Perhaps first, the struggle of the prophet with the false prophets in their home (Jeremiah 26-28), then his struggle with those also who had emigrated to Babylon is represented. [Jeremiah goes back here from the mention of the fourth year of Jehoiakim to the beginning of that kings reign, in order to suggest to his readers an evidence, a fortiori, of Gods mercy and forbearance to Jerusalem. God gave solemn denunciations to Jehoiakim and Jerusalem in Jehoiakims fourth year. But He did more than this: He had sent a prophetic message of warning to him even at the beginning of his reign. Such considerations as these will suggest the reasons for which Jeremiahs prophecies are not placed in chronological order. Wordsworth.S. R. A.]

1. THE CONFLICT OF JEREMIAH WITH, THE FALSE PROPHETS BEFORE THE FOURTH YEAR OF JEHOIAKIM

Jer 26:1-24

1In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, king of Judah, 2came this word from the Lord [Jehovah] saying, Thus saith the Lord [Jehovah]: Stand in the court of the Lords [Jehovahs] house and speak unto all the cities of Judah, which come to worship in the Lords house, all the words that I command 3thee to speak unto them; diminish [omit] not a word. If so be [perhaps] they will hearken, and turn every man from his evil way, that I may repent me of the evil, 4which I purpose to do unto them because of the evil of their doings. And thou shalt say unto them: Thus saith the Lord [Jehovah]: If ye will not hearken to 5me, to walk in my law, which I have set before you, to hearken to the words of my servants the prophets, whom I sent unto you, both1 rising up early, and sending 6them, but ye have not hearkened: then will I make this house like Shiloh, and 7will make this2 city a curse to all the nations of the earth. So the priests and prophets and all the people heard Jeremiah speaking these words in the house of the 8Lord [Jehovah]. Now it came to pass, when Jeremiah had made an end of speaking all that the Lord had commanded him to speak unto all the people, that the priests and the prophets, and all the people took him, saying, Thou shalt surely die. 9Why hast thou prophesied in the name of the Lord [Jehovah] saying, This house shall be like Shiloh, and this city shall be desolate without an inhabitant? And all the people were gathered against Jeremiah in the house of the Lord [Jehovah]. 10When the princes of Judah heard those things, then they came up from the kings house into the house of the Lord [Jehovah] and sat down in the entry of the 11new gate3 of the Lords [Jehovahs] house. Then spake the priests and the prophets unto the princes and to all the people, saying, this man is worthy to die; for 12he hath prophesied against this city, as ye have heard with your ears. Then spake Jeremiah unto all the princes and to all the people, saying, The Lord [Jehovah] sent me to prophesy against this house and against this city all the words that ye 13have heard. Therefore now amend your ways and your doings, and obey the voice of the Lord [Jehovah] your God, and the Lord will repent him of the evil that 14he hath pronounced against you. As for me, behold, I am in your hand: do with 15me as seemeth good and meet unto you. But know ye for certain, that if ye put me to death, ye shall surely bring innocent blood upon yourselves, and upon this city and upon the inhabitants thereof: for of a truth the Lord hath sent me unto you to speak all these words in your ears.

16Then said the princes and all the people unto the priests and unto the prophets: This man is not worthy to die: for he hath spoken to us in the name of the Lord 17[Jehovah] our God Then rose up certain of the elders of the land, and spake to 18all the assembly of the people, saying, Micah 4 the Morasthite prophesied in the days of Hezekiah, king of Judah, and spake to all the people of Judah, saying,

Thus saith Jehovah Zebaoth:
Zion shall be plowed as a field,
Jerusalem shall become a heap of stones,
And the mountain of the house woody heights.

19Did Hezekiah, king of Judah, and all Judah put him at all to death? did he not fear the Lord [Jehovah] and besought [propitiated]5 the Lord [Jehovah] and the Lord [Jehovah] repented him of the evil which he had pronounced against them. Thus might we procure great evil [We however are about to commit great wickedness] 20against our [own] souls. And there was also a man that prophesied in the name of the Lord [Jehovah], Urijah the son of Shemaiah of Kirjath-jearim, who prophesied against the city and against the land, according to all the words of 21Jeremiah. And [when] Jehoiakim, the king, with all his mighty men [warriors] and all the princes, heard his words [and] the king sought to put him to death: but [when] Urijah heard of it [and] he was afraid and fled, and went into Egypt. 22And Jehoiakim, the king, sent men into Egypt, Elnathan, the son of Achhor, and 23certain men with him into Egypt. And they fetched forth Urijah out of Egypt, and brought him unto Jehoiakim the king; who slew him with the sword, and 24cast his dead body into the graves of the common [sons of the] people. Nevertheless [But] the hand of Ahikam the son of Shaphan was with Jeremiah, that they should [did] not give him into the hands of the people to put him to death.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

It has been shown above that this chapter is not immediately connected with chap. 25, but mediately through chh. 27, 28. The assertion of Graf that the narrative of this occurrence has no connection either with the preceding or with the following context is incomprehensible. For if we do not agree with Ewald that each of the three supplements concludes with a glance at those prophets, who either prophesied what was directly false or did not defend the truth with becoming steadfastness (Proph. d. A. B., II., S. 137), it is yet indisputable that all these four chapters treat of the conflict of the prophet with false prophets, that they follow each other in chronological order, and that chh. 2629 presuppose Jeremiah 25 as their basis. This explains the position of Jeremiah 26 here. I cannot accept the statement of Graf that as a record of personal experiences it ought to have stood before Jeremiah 34 : for here the narrative would stand quite isolated topically, and chh. 3444, are not the only place for the prophets personal experiences, for they are inserted elsewhere, according to the connection of facts. Comp. chh. 20 and 30. And this is the case with chh. 2629. We might rather expect that, on account of the relation of the facts, it would come after Jeremiah 23. But on the one hand it would disturb the plan of that group (against kings and prophets) by partial details, and on the other the principal matter of chh. 27 and 28 has too close an historical connection with Jeremiah 25 to be separated from it, or even only to be placed before it. The reason why this chapter does not stand after chh. 7 sqq., where it properly belongs in historical connection, is that the series of great discourses was not to be interrupted by a long historical section. As far as Jeremiah 18 are discourses only. From this point onwards the historical element is successively brought forward. Although thus separated in position, this Jeremiah 26 refers back to the great discourse in chh. 710, and describes the almost fatal consequences, which it had with respect to the person of the prophet (Jer 26:1-19). At the same time, however, the opportunity is afforded for the narrative concerning another prophet, Urijah, the son of Shemaiah, who had no such courageous patron as Ahikam, and really fell a sacrifice to his fidelity to his calling at the command of the ungodly king Jehoiakim.

Jer 26:1-6. In the beginning all the nations of the earth. In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim, at any rate before the battle of Carchemish, since there is no mention made of the Chaldeans, Jeremiah receives the command to stand in the fore-court of the temple (comp. Jer 19:4, and Exeg. on Jer 7:2), and proclaim a revelation he has received to all the Jews who have come up to the feast. What feast this was we know not (comp. Comm. on Jer 7:2). The introductory formula in Jer 7:1 is: Go into the gate and proclaim as follows. Here it is said: Stand in the fore-court and proclaim all that I have commanded thee, without omitting anything. There the command to go into the gate precedes the revelation. Here the order is reversed. For here the words which I command thee, and omit not a word, point back to the revelation as one previously received. The latter especially would have no sense, if what is to be delivered by the prophet had not been already communicated. Still, however, in Jer 26:4 sqq., the chief contents of the discourse follow in a brief and pregnant recapitulation. There is no contradiction in this. It may have been that the prophet received the revelation of the great discourse in chh. 710, at the same time with the command to deliver it in the temple, and that afterwards, when the moment of performance came, the command was repeated with a reference on the one hand to the revelation received (Jer 26:2), and on the other with a brief recapitulation of its main import (Jer 26:4-6).Omit not a word reminds us of Deu 4:2; Deu 13:1 coll. Rev 22:19.If so be they will hearken, Jer 26:3. It is apparent that the assembly to the feast must have appeared a specially favorable opportunity for a decisive attempt.Repent me of the evil. Comp. Jer 18:8; as in Jer 26:13; Jer 26:19; Jer 42:10; Jdg 21:6; 2Sa 24:16.rising early. Comp. Jer 7:13; Jer 7:25; Jer 25:3-4.But ye have not hearkened, retained as a reminiscence of the passage Jer 7:13, is to be regarded as a parenthesis; since the apodosis begins with Jer 26:6.Like Shiloh. In these words the prophet reproduces most distinctly the main threatening of the great discourse in chap. 7 (comp. Jer 26:12; Jer 26:14, and the rems. thereon).A curse. Comp. Jer 24:9; Jer 25:18.

Jer 26:7-11. So the priests have heard with your ears. The priests and prophets here appear as the real opponents of Jeremiah. Very probably most of the false prophets were themselves priests. Comp. Comm. on Jer 20:6.The people allow themselves to be carried away, though on the speech of the princes they are disposed to espouse the cause of Jeremiah against the priests and prophets (Jer 26:16), and in other circumstances would be ready to execute the sentence of death on him (Jer 26:24). The princes are not yet filled with that blood-thirsty hatred towards Jeremiah, which they afterwards manifest (Jeremiah 37 sqq.).In the words like Shiloh they allude to Jer 7:12; Jer 7:14, as in the following without an inheritance to Jer 9:10.On gate of the Lords house, comp. rems. on Jer 20:2.Worthy to die. This expression ( ) occurs also in Deu 19:6; Deu 21:22. As the first word in itself signifies judgment or condemnation, the phrase may from the connection denote judgment or condemnation to death. The expression in Jer 26:11 and Deu 19:6, may be taken in the first, in Jer 26:16 and Deu 21:22 in the second sense.

Jer 26:12-19. Then spake Jeremiah our souls. In the words amend your ways the prophet repeats the chief requisition of his discourse in Jer 7:3; Jer 7:5. It is thus to be seen that he is neither terrified nor evilly disposed towards his people. On this condition, but on this condition only, does he promise salvation. If they do not like this they may do with him as they will. They are, however, at the same time to know that in killing him they would bring upon themselves the guilt of shedding innocent blood. This answer of Jeremiahs, short and simple but firm and decided, appears to have made a deep impression on the judges and the people. For Jeremiah is acquitted. Some of the elders of the people ( , elders of the land, Jer 26:17, are distinguished from the , princes, Jer 26:10, who are in the kings house, at court and members of the government, while the former represent the local magistrates throughout the country, comp. Jer 37:15; Jer 38:5; Jer 38:25 sqq.) support this sentence by reference to a former occurrence. The prophet Micah, [of Moresheth near Eleutheropolis, in Philistia. Euseb., Jerome], had not been punished by Hezekiah on account of a similar utterance.On the point, that the passage Jer 3:12 forms the climax of the minatory prophecies of Micah, and that Jeremiah quotes the book of Micah especially in the discourse in chh. Jer 7:9. comp. Caspari, passim. From the last mentioned circumstance it follows that Jeremiah himself reminds his hearers of Micah, and institutes a comparison between himself and this prophet. Caspari however errs in attributing the discourse in chh. Jer 7:9. to the reign of Josiah. [On the fulfilment of the prophecy of Micah and Jeremiah, comp. Thomson, The Land and the Book, II., 475.S. R. A.]

Jer 26:20-24. And there was also a man to put him to death. That this narrative about Urijah does not continue the words of Jeremiahs friends, is clear from the circumstance that in this case a precedent would be referred to unfavorable to Jeremiah. It is evident that they are not the words of his opponents from the absence of any introductory formula. Others affirm that this story must have related to a later period than the commencement of Jehoiakims reign. This however depends on how far we extend the commencement. Apart then from the question, whether this occurred earlier or later, which it will be difficult to decide. I think, with Grotius, Schnurrer, Rosenmueller and others, that Jeremiah himself adds this story in order to show in how great danger he then was of his life. At all events the events narrated had happened when Jeremiah wrote his book, which he did the first time in the 4th and 5th years of Jehoiakim (Jer 36:1 sqq.; 9 sqq.), and the second time immediately after the destruction of the first book in the 9th month of the 5th year of Jehoiakim (Jer 36:28 sqq.) The events might have occurred up to this time; and even if they belong to a later period, the possibility is not excluded that they were inserted here by Jeremiah himself. Yet it is easier to explain the phrases this city and this land, in Jer 26:20, if we suppose that the prophet had these expressions, which strictly taken presuppose an oral address, still la remembrance from the preceding conversation. Nothing further is known either of Urijah, or his father Shemaiah.Elnathan the son of Achhor is also mentioned in Jer 36:12; Jer 36:25 among the princes favorable to Jeremiah. Jehoiakim appears to have been his son-in-law, for Nehushta, the mother of Jehoiachin was, according to 2Ki 24:8, a daughter of Elnathan. Achhor is mentioned in 2Ki 22:12 as one of the princes, who were in personal attendance on Josiah.The graves of the common people (Jer 26:23) appear elsewhere as an unhallowed place (2Ki 23:6). On the expression sons of the people comp. Comm. on Jer 17:19.

Jer 26:24. But the hand of Ahikam. The particle , only, but, presupposes a thought, which easily flows from the previous context, so would it have been with Jeremiah. From the mention of Ahikam alone it is plain that it was he who caused the decision to be favorable to Jeremiah, (Jer 26:16 sqq.) He is also mentioned in 2Ki 22:12-14, together with Achhor, and according to Jer 39:14; Jer 40:5, and other passages, he was the father of the governor Gedaliah.

Footnotes:

[1]Jer 26:5.The before =and, moreover, comp. Naegelsb. Gr., 111, 1.

[2]Jer 26:6.. This form is found here only in the Chethibh. It is not a scriptural error, the being the so-called paragogic. Comp. Olsh. 101, c, and 133, S. 254.

[3]Jer 26:10.[Targum: The east gate.]

[4]Jer 26:18.The Masoretes alter into , not because they regard the former as correct, but to bring out clearly the identity of this Micah with him whose book is included in the canon (comp. Caspari, Micha der Moraschtite, S.12).The passage quoted is found verbatim in Mic 3:12, except that there we read instead of . (Comp. Olsh., S. 207, 288.)

[5]Jer 26:19.[Literally: Soothed by prayer the face of the Lord.S. R. A.]

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

CONTENTS

The Prophet Jeremiah continuing still to prophesy, so irritated the carnal Jews, that they arose against him to put him to death; but the Lord delivered him. In this Chapter this history is related.

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

It is impossible to read the continued perseverance of the mournful Prophet, and to hear the sad subject of the peoples neglect of his preaching, but with much exercise and pain of the mind. Reader! is not the same part acted over again, against faithful ministers of the Lord, in the present hour? Are there not thousands who reject the counsel of God against their own souls, and both neglect and despise the Preacher, and his word, as much as those of old? What can be an higher proof of the fall of men? What afford a greater testimony of the ascendency of Satan in the human mind by nature?

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

VI

SERMONS ON THE TEMPLE WORSHIP

Jeremiah 7-10; Jer 26

These events occurred in the earliest half of the reign of Jehoiakim, about 607 or 606 B.C. Though the nation was going back to idolatry, the Temple ceremonies and sacrifices were carried on with great zeal and elaborateness. The people seemed to put their trust in the Temple rather than in God who dwelt therein. They believed that the sacrifices themselves availed much, and that their salvation was secure, if they performed these services. The relation of their conduct to their worship did not seem to trouble them. Jeremiah heard God’s call to preach to them in the very Temple itself, to preach to the multitude of worshipers that thronged these courts. He seized upon the occasion of a great feast, when the multitude was the greatest and addressed the throng on the necessity of a better life with their worship. Jeremiah was in the Temple that is called the house of Jehovah. There was unquestionably a large concourse of people gathered together. Some suggest that the purpose of that assembly may have been to consider means of defense in the face of impending disaster upon the nation. It may have occurred sometime when Jehoiakim had been compelled to pay tribute to a foreign king.

Jeremiah speaks to the people a message of warning: “Amend your ways and your doings, and I will cause you to dwell in this place.” Then he gives them some very suggestive advice, some very earnest words of warning: “Trust ye not in lying words, saying, The temple of Jehovah, the temple of Jehovah, the temple of Jehovah.” That is very suggestive. It is a warning to people who are trusting in the external, the ceremonial and the ritual; that these avail nothing where the spirit and the heart are lacking. They believed, because they had the Temple of Jehovah and kept up its ceremonies, that it would stand for ever and that God would protect them for the Temple’s sake. Jeremiah prophesied that the Temple would be destroyed. Less than twenty years afterward these words of the prophet were fulfilled. The Temple was destroyed. But these people said, “It is impossible that this temple should be destroyed, for it is the temple of Jehovah.” They were saying, “The temple of Jehovah, the temple of Jehovah, the temple of Jehovah!” This is a blow against all heathen religions, and also the Roman Catholic religion. The people were trusting in the ceremonies and externals: “The temple of Jehovah! The temple of Jehovah! The temple of Jehovah!” The prophet demanded that they change their life; that they turn from their wickedness, else the Temple would be no good to them.

The prophet here charged them with all kinds of sin: with falsehood, with lying, with deceit, with murder, and with idolatry of various kinds. They were like the Negro woman who was accused of a certain sin and when asked, “How can you do that?” she replied: “Well, I never lets that interfere with my religion.” These people divorced morals and religion. They never let their religion interfere with their conduct. Furthermore, the prophet charged them with making their beautiful Temple, in which they were trusting, a “den of robbers.” That is the same condition that Jesus found about 600 years later. He said, “Ye have made my Father’s house a den of thieves.” The people were saying, “It is impossible for the Temple to be destroyed; God will defend his house.” But the prophet reminds them that God did destroy his house: Remember the days of Eli and his sons, and Samuel yonder at Shiloh; that God destroyed Shiloh where the tabernacle was then. This is the only direct reference we have to the destruction of Shiloh. The ark of the covenant was captured, and the tabernacle is heard of later as stationed at Gibeon and later on was stored in the Temple. God destroyed their dwelling place at Shiloh and he can destroy it in Jerusalem. That is the lesson here.

The result of that sermon is recorded in Jer 26 . In that chapter Jeremiah or Baruch writes down what the prophet had said, not the same words exactly but the substance of it. The priests and the prophets and all the people heard Jeremiah speak these words in the house of Jehovah. Then they, the ecclesiastical leaders, began a persecution. They were the parties that were directly concerned, because they administered the Temple worship and services, and if the Temple were to be destroyed, they would be out of work, and thus they took offense at the words of Jeremiah. They did not enjoy his going around and threatening the destruction of their church house and thus put them out of business.

Now, it was the same in the days of Christ. It was the ecclesiastical leaders who began the persecution against him. It was the chief priests, the scribes and the rabbis that were aroused because he rebuked them for burying the law under their traditions. So it was here. These priests and prophets (false prophets) were enraged at this kind of preaching and they laid hold of Jeremiah and said, “Thou shalt surely die.” The persecution of Stephen is a parallel case. They attempted to prove against Stephen the charge that he had spoken against the Temple; that he had spoken blasphemous words against Moses and against “This holy place.” The Sanhedrin asked him, “Are these things so?” He admitted the statement and that was sufficient charge in their minds. But he went on to prove to them that God might be worshiped without a Temple; that he had been worshiped in many places besides Jerusalem. That was adding crime to crime, and so they killed him.

Jeremiah was in the hands of the priests and prophets, and was in imminent danger. They were about to kill him, but there was another class of men, not there at the time, but they heard of it. These were the princes of Judah who heard the confusion, hurried from the king’s house to the house of Jehovah, and heard these priests and prophets about their charges against Jeremiah, saying that he was worthy of death. Jeremiah made his defense (Jer 7:12 ). His defense was that Jehovah sent him to prophesy. He says that God commanded him to say to them that they must amend their ways. Then he went on to say that he had told them the truth and that he was in their hands; that they could do with him as they would, “Only know ye for certain that, if ye put me to death, ye will bring innocent blood upon this city and upon yourselves and the inhabitants of the land, for God hath sent me to say these things to you.” Jeremiah did not take back a word.

There is no doubt that if it had not been for the princes and the people who were on his side he would have immediately been put to death. Certain elders of the land rose up and spake to the people. They said, “No, don’t be rash. You remember that Micah, the prophet, prophesied that Zion should be destroyed, and although he prophesied thus, Hezekiah, the king, and the people did not put him to death.” These men remind us of Gamaliel. Then they tell the story of another occasion. He did not fare so well as Micah. There was a different king upon the throne. Jehoiakim was now at the helm. He it was who with wicked hands took the prophecy of Jeremiah, God’s holy message, and cut it to pieces and burned it. He did not stop till he put the prophet, Uriah, to death. He fled to Egypt but the king brought him back and executed him.

The outcome of this was that Jeremiah was saved. He eacaped these enraged priests and prophets through the influence of the princes. They were men of influence and power, and they took his part in the face of his enemies. He had a particular among the princes, Ahikam, the son of Shaphan, who was chiefly instrumental in rescuing him. Intercession for this people is now useless, Jer 7:16 : “Therefore pray not thou for this people, neither lift up cry nor prayer for them, neither make intercession to me.” Jeremiah could not save Judah and Jerusalem. No man could do it. Not even Jesus Christ could save the wicked land and city in his day. Savonarola could not save Florence. So the day of opportunity had passed for Jerusalem.

Their idolatry is described in Jer 7:17-20 : “Seest thou not what they do in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem?” This was in the reign of Jehoiakim. It could not have occurred in the reign of Josiah. “The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead the dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven,” probably Ashtoreth. They made cakes doubtless in the shape of that queen, as we, in our childhood, made cakes in the shape of men. So they made their cakes in honor of their heathen goddess. Jer 7:19-20 show the result of such conduct.

The import of Jer 7:21-26 is that the basis of the law is obedience, not ceremony. In Jer 7:21 is a touch of sarcasm: “Add your burnt offerings.” This is like Isaiah and Amos, who exhort the people to increase their religious efforts that were but dead forms. Amos says, “Come to Gilgal and transgress.”

Jer 7:22 says, “I spake not unto your fathers, when I brought them out of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices: this is the thing that I commanded them saying, Hearken unto my voice.” Now, the critics take that as one of their strong points. They maintain that it plainly says that ceremonial legislation of the Pentateuch was not given by Moses but that it was written later. They refer to this with great boldness saying, “Does not Jeremiah, the prophet, plainly say that God did not speak unto Moses or the fathers concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices down in Egypt or in the wilderness?” When Israel came out of Egypt, the nature of the covenant made between God and Israel was as follows: “If ye will obey my voice and keep my covenant, then indeed ye shall be mine own possession from among the peoples, and ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation” (Exo 19:5-6 ). And we are told in Jer 7:8 that the people promised, saying, “All the words of Jehovah we will do.” Now, the basis of that covenant on the part of Israel was obedience. The basis on God’s part was grace. “If ye will obey my voice,” is an expression of grace, an overture that is not deserved. It is free and voluntary on God’s part. “If ye will do what I tell you, I will be to you all that is needed.” The people said, “We will obey the covenant.”

So it was made, and Jeremiah was right when he said, “I spake not to your fathers in the wilderness concerning sacrifices and burnt offerings, but this I said, Obey my voice.” The Ten Commandments were given as a standard of obedience and faith. They showed the people wherein they might obey God’s voice. The condition is there laid down and their acceptance implies faith and love on their part. That is the foundation principle of Christianity itself. In this passage it is clear that Jeremiah makes a great contrast between ceremony and obedience.

Jeremiah (Jer 7:27-28 ) goes on to describe the unbroken disobedience of the people. They had continued in disobedience ever since they had been in the land of Canaan. Next we have the lament of Jeremiah over the destruction, Jer 7:29-34 : “Cut off thy hair, O Jerusalem, and cast it away, and take up a lamentation. The people have set their abominations in the house that is called by my name. They have burned their sons and their daughters in the fire, therefore behold the days shall come that it shall no more be called the valley of Topheth, nor the valley of Himom, but the valley of slaughter. The dead bodies of this people shall be food for the birds of the heavens and for the beasts of the earth. Then will I cause to cease from the cities of Judah and from the streets of Jerusalem, the voice of mirth and gladness, the bridegroom and the bride, for the land shall become a waste.”

In Jer 8:1-3 Jeremiah shows that these barbarians who were coming, were going to be so ruthless that they would not stop with the killing of the living, but they would break open the graves of the kings of Judah, the princes, the mighty men and the prophets and would tear their bodies out of their graves and desecrate them. Now, that was the highest indignity on an Oriental, for the grave of his dead is sacred. Yet these barbarians would go even to that extremity.

In Jer 8:4-9 the prophet again exposes the wickedness of the people and points to the exile that is not to be averted. Many similar passages we have already examined. There are repetitions in Jeremiah. They would not repent and obey the word of the Lord, therefore this punishment is coming. “How do ye say, We are wise, and the Law of Jehovah is with us?” “Our scribes have been reading the Law until they have mastered it.” That is just what they did in the days of Jesus. They had covered up the commandments of the Law by their traditions. They had added many things, too. In verse Jer 8:12 he asks, “Were they ashamed when they had committed abominations? Nay, they were not ashamed.” Then Jeremiah described the enemy approaching: “The snorting of the horses is at the gate,” and so he goes on with his description of the foe coming upon the land. In Jer 18:22 we have that lament which we have already studied before: “The harvest is past, the summer is ended, and we are not saved.” “Oh, that my head were a fountain of water that I might weep rivers of tears!”

We have a graphic picture in Jer 9:3-9 : “They bend their tongues as a bow is bent.” A bow is made to bend. That is the purpose for which it is made. The idea is that they use their tongues as if they were made for lying. They speak falsehood as if that was the main use of the tongue. The people are so corrupt that they lie as if that were the normal way of speaking.

The picture of Jer 9:10-16 is a picture of the impending devastation. Note the language of the prophet in Jer 9:11 ; Jer 9:13 , Jer 9:16 : “And I will make Jerusalem heaps, and a den of dragons; and I will make the cities of Judah desolate, without an inhabitant . . . And the Lord saith, Because they have forsaken my law which I set before them, and have not obeyed my voice, neither walked therein; . . . I will scatter them also among the heathen, whom neither they nor their fathers have known; and I will send a sword after them, till I have consumed them.” The call of Jer 9:17-22 is a call for the female mourners. They are called upon to mourn and lament because of the destruction: “Call for the mourning women that they may come, and for the skillful women. Let them take up a wailing for us.” There was soon an occasion for it.

The contrast of Jer 9:23-24 is a contrast between true and false glorying. Here is a marvelous text and a great subject: “Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory in his might, let not the rich man glory in his riches; but let him that glorieth glory in this, that he hath understanding, and knoweth me.” What is he to glory in? Not in human power and worth but in the knowledge of Jehovah who is powerful and loving. That is like the apostle Paul who said, “God forbid that I should glory save in the cross of Christ.” There was no cross of Christ in Jeremiah’s time, but the idea is much the same. The knowledge of God, such a God as Jehovah, is the summum bonum of life, the highest object of human glorying.

The prophecy of Jer 9:25-26 is a prophecy of the punishment of the nations. Some of the heathen nations were to be punished with Judah, and the prophecy of Jer 10:1-16 is a prophecy concerning idols, a distinct prophecy. It is a description of the idols of the heathen nations, a magnificent portrayal of the vanity of heathen worship, in contrast with the glorious worship of Jehovah. The critics claim that this passage was not written by Jeremiah, but long after him. It is very much like Isaiah 40-44, and they claim that it was not written till after those chapters were written, between 400 and 200 B.C. Now, that is a mere guess. Isaiah wrote chapters Isaiah 40-44 and Jeremiah wrote this later. He was probably writing to the exiles. Though God’s people were in Babylon, Jeremiah addressed this passage to them to exhort them to remain faithful to Jehovah in the midst of heathen worship.

Now, it is significant that Jer 10:11 is in Aramaic, not Hebrew. There are many explanations by critics and scholars of this phenomenon. Some say that it is a corruption of the text. Others that it is a marginal note crept into the text. Others say that it is an instruction given to the exiles in Babylon, which is highly probable. They spoke Aramaic and not Hebrew. So this passage would enable them to have a ready argument to meet the advocates of idol worship. In the Aramaic the people would understand it, and could readily use it in argument for their own worship.

We have a prophetic picture in Jer 10:17-25 . In this section he pictures the coming exiles. The people are bidden to gather together their wares and belongings, and prepare to go into exile. There was a time when their punishment might have been averted but it is too late now. The hour has come, the shepherds are worthless, the foe approaches from the North. Their heathen neighbors who have done great evil against the nation of Israel shall be punished. The prophet asks Jehovah to pour out his wrath upon them.

QUESTIONS

1. What is the date and occasion of these prophecies?

2. What warning did Jeremiah here announce, and what remedy did he prescribe?

3. What charge did the prophet prefer against them, what example in their history did he cite and what it-s lesson?

4. What is the result of this sermon as recorded in Jer 26 and what the final outcome? Discuss fully.

5. How is the doom of Jerusalem indicated in Jer 7:16 and what other similar cases?

6. How is their idolatry described in Jer 7:17-20 and what the result?

7. What the import of Jer 7:21-26 , what the critics’ contention with respect to it, and what the reply?

8. How is their disobedience described in Jer 7:27-28 , what the lamentation of Jeremiah and what the prophecy here of their doom?

9. What great indignity here prophesied against the people of Judah and Jerusalem?

10. What is the prophet’s message, warning and lamentation in Jer 8:4-9:2 ?

11. What is the picture of Jer 9:3-9 ?

12. What is the picture of Jer 9:10-16 ?

13. What is the call of Jer 9:17-22 ?

14. What is the contrast of Jer 9:23-24 ?

15. What is the prophecy of Jer 9:25-26 ?

16. What is the prophecy of Jer 10:1-16 , what say the entice of this passage and what the reply?

17. What is the prophetic picture in Jer 10:17-25 ?

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

Jer 26:1 In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of Judah came this word from the LORD, saying,

Ver. 1. In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim. ] What a sudden change was here, soon after the death of good Josiah! And was there not the like in England after the death of that English Josiah, Edward VI? Within a very few days of Queen Mary’s reign were various learned and godly men in various parts committed to prison for religion, and Mr Rogers, the proto-martyr, put to death, as was that holy prophet of God, Uriah the son of Shemaiah of Kirjathjearim, not many weeks before Jeremiah was apprehended and questioned for his life, as is here related, his adversaries being pricked on by pride and malice.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Jeremiah Chapter 26

The second half of this book consists of special circumstances. Here it is a question of the prophet’s call to fidelity in his office.

“Thus saith the Lord; Stand in the court of the Lord’s house, and speak unto all the cities of Judah, which come to worship in the Lord’s house, all the words that I command thee to speak unto them; diminish not a word: if so be they will hearken, and turn every man from his evil way, that 1 may repent me of the evil, which I purpose to do unto them because of the evil of their doings. And thou shalt say unto them, Thus saith the Lord; If ye will not hearken to me, to walk in my law, which I have set before you, to hearken to the words of my servants the prophets, whom 1 sent unto you, both rising up early, and sending them, but ye have not hearkened; then will 1 make this house like Shiloh, and will make this city a curse to all the nations of the earth.” Ver. 2-6.) It is unworthy of a servant to pare down the message of the Master. Only let him take care that he add not to His words nor to the tone in which they should be conveyed: for much depends on this, especially in intercourse with others. Hence the apostle wished to be enabled to change his voice, which of course is precluded by the written communication.

How unwearied too is the patience of the Lord, who guarantees His own repentance of the evil He could not but threaten, if they but hearkened and turned from their evil doings. But if they persisted in their rejection of His prophets whom He had sent (as He says, “rising up early and sending them”), let them prepare for the worst. No mercy should turn aside His profanation of His sanctuary which their sins had already profaned. The temple He should make as Shiloh, and the city a curse before all nations. It is an awful state of infatuation when men presume on God’s favour to His people, spite of their indifference to His will and glory, and predicate the necessary faithfulness of God at the expense of His character and let off those whom Satan has perverted into His worst enemies under the cover of His name, and law, and land.

In this state a bad conscience makes men implacable; and as they have no faith in God’s threatenings any more than in His promises, so the one desire is to extinguish the testimony which galls them. “So the priests and the prophets and all the people heard Jeremiah speaking these words in the house of the Lord. Now it came to pass, when Jeremiah had made an end of speaking all that the Lord had commanded him to speak unto all the people, that the priests and the prophets and all the people took him, saying, Thou shalt surely die. Why hast thou prophesied in the name of the Lord, saying, This house shall be like Shiloh, and this city shall be desolate without an inhabitant? And all the people were gathered against Jeremiah in the house of the Lord.” (Ver. 7-9.)

But when the enemy comes in thus, the Spirit of the lord, if He does not lift up a standard, knows how to sustain a witness till the work is complete. As usual it was the religious element which was most wounded by the word of God and most hostile to His servant. The priests and the prophets, with all the people easily excited and misled, determined on his death, and this in Jehovah’s house. “When the princes of Judah heard these things, then they came up from the king’s house unto the house of the Lord, and sat down in the entry of the new gate of the Lord’s house. Then spake the priests and the prophets unto the princes and to all the people, saying, This man is worthy to die; for he hath prophesied against this city, as ye have heard with your ears.” (Ver. 10, 11.)

But the princes were not so easily moved as the people, who, under those more used to calm and dispassionate deliberation, renounced for the moment their former counsels. “Then spake Jeremiah unto all the princes and to all the people, saying, The Lord sent me to prophesy against this house and against this city all the words that ye have heard. Therefore now amend your ways and your doings, and obey the voice of the Lord your God; and the Lord will repent him of the evil that he hath pronounced against you. As for me, behold, I am in you hand: do with me as seemeth good and meet unto you. But know ye for certain, that if ye put me to death, ye shall surely bring innocent blood upon yourselves, and upon this city, and upon the inhabitants thereof: for of a truth the Lord hath sent me unto you to speak all these words in your ears. Then said the princes and all the people unto the priests and to the prophets: This man is not worthy to die; he hath spoken to us in the name of the Lord our God.” (Ver. 12-16.)

The prophet pleads his commission from Jehovah, repeats the sum of His words without disguise, calls on them to repent of their sins that the Lord might repent of His judgments, but leaves himself in their hand, with a solemn warning to beware of shedding innocent blood. His murder would certainly neither disprove his commission from the Lord, nor turn aside the divine vengeance from themselves nor Jerusalem. The conscience of those addressed answered to his appeal.

“Then rose up certain of the elders of the land, and spake to all the assembly of the people, saying, Micah the Morasthite prophesied in the days of Hezekiah king of Judah, and spake to all the people of Judah, saying, Thus saith the Lord of hosts, Zion shall be plowed like a field, and Jerusalem shall become heaps, and the mountain of the house as the high places of a forest. Did Hezekiah king of Judah and all Judah put him at all to death? did he not fear the Lord, and besought the Lord, and the lord repented him of the evil which he had pronounced against them? Thus might we procure great evil against our souls.” (Ver. 17-19.)

A counter case, however, is added. If holy boldness was protected, prudence would be a feeble, short-lived, defence, even if the timid prophet took refuge in a foreign land. “And there was also a man that prophesied in the name of the Lord, Urijah the son of Shemaiah of Kirjath-jearim, who prophesied against this city and against this land according to all the words of Jeremiah: and when Jehoiakim the king, with all his mighty men and all the princes, heard his words, the king sought to put him to death: but when Urijah heard it, he was afraid, and fled, and went into Egypt; and Jehoiakim the king sent men into Egypt, namely, Elnathan the son of Achbor, and certain men with him into Egypt. And they fetched forth Urijah out of Egypt, and brought him to Jehoiakim the king; who slew him with the sword, and cast his dead body into the graves of the common people.” (Ver. 20-23.) Thus Micah and Urijah were each instructive, though from a different point; and “the hand of Ahikam the son of Shaphan was with Jeremiah that they should not give him into the hand of the people to put him to death.” Poor are the people that are in such a case; as hapless as inconstant are they, whose will leads them, and not the Lord.

Fuente: William Kelly Major Works (New Testament)

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Jer 26:1-6

1In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, king of Judah, this word came from the LORD, saying, 2Thus says the LORD, ‘Stand in the court of the LORD’s house, and speak to all the cities of Judah who have come to worship in the LORD’s house all the words that I have commanded you to speak to them. Do not omit a word! 3Perhaps they will listen and everyone will turn from his evil way, that I may repent of the calamity which I am planning to do to them because of the evil of their deeds.’ 4And you will say to them, ‘Thus says the LORD, If you will not listen to Me, to walk in My law which I have set before you, 5to listen to the words of My servants the prophets, whom I have been sending to you again and again, but you have not listened; 6then I will make this house like Shiloh, and this city I will make a curse to all the nations of the earth.’

Jer 26:1 In the beginning of the reign This CONSTRUCT (BDB 912 and 575) is a technical phrase for the ascension year of a new king. The reigns of kings were figured differently from country to country. Judah counted the first partial year as one year of a king’s reign, while Israel did not.

Jehoiakim He was a son of Josiah and reigned from 609-597 B.C. He was put on the throne by Pharaoh Necho II of Egypt. His original name was Eliakim. See Special Topic: Kings of the Divided Monarchy .

Jer 26:2 Stand in the court of the LORD’S house Jeremiah has been directed to share his revelations there several times (cf. Jer 7:2; Jer 17:19; Jer 19:1-6). From this locale he could address all the cities of Judah.

Do not omit a word This is literally diminish (BDB 175, KB 203, Qal IMPERFECT used in a JUSSIVE sense). It implies a very specific divine message (cf. Deu 4:2; Pro 30:6). See the Special Topics at Jer 23:21-22. This reminds me of

1. Samuel and Eli in 1 Samuel 3

2. two verses in Jer 1:17; Jer 42:4

3. Paul’s words in Act 20:20

4. Rev 22:18-19

In Jer 26:12-13 Jeremiah claims that his words are YHWH’s words.

Jer 26:3 This verse reflects the message of Jer 25:4-5 (repeated with the same VERBS in Jer 26:5). The problem is that Judah will not listen and respond (i.e., repent, lit. turn, BDB 996, KB 1427, Qal IMPERFECT, cf. Jer 26:13). YHWH will repent (lit. be sorry, BDB 636, KB 688, Niphal PERFECT) of His decrees of judgment (cf. Jer 26:4-6) and exile if Judah will turn back to Him. This is the desire of the covenant God! But Judah would not, could not, did not respond!

It is difficult for modern western people to comprehend God repenting or changing His mind or being sorry, however, this is an anthropomorphic way of showing His merciful character and His attention to His people’s prayers and covenant obedience. See Hard Sayings of the Bible, pp. 108-109.

Jer 26:4-5 Notice the covenant criteria YHWH lists as a prerequisite to changing His mind.

1. if you listen to Me

2. if you walk in My law

3. if you listen to the words of My servants, the prophets (cf. Deu 18:19)

Jer 26:6 like Shiloh This was the site of an ancient Jewish sanctuary which was destroyed by the Philistines in 1050 B.C., cf. Jer 7:12; Jer 7:14.

I will make this house. . .a curse to all the nations of the earth This hyperbolic language continues from Jer 24:9; Jer 25:18. God’s people were meant to be a blessing to the world (i.e., Gen 12:3), but because of their sin, the world (i.e., the nations) saw only the judgment of YHWH, not His grace and mercy (cf. Eze 36:22-38).

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

Jeremiah’s Seventeenth Prophecy (see book comments for Jeremiah).

In the beginning: i.e. before the siege, in the third year of Jehoiakim. See note on Jer 27:1.

The first edition of the Prophets (Naples, 1485-6), the first edition of the entire Hebrew Bible (Soncino 1488), and the second edition (Naples, 1491-3), introduce the word hazi = half, here, to indicate that the second half of Jeremiah commences here.

the LORD. Hebrew. Jehovah. App-4.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

Jer 26:1-24 through 30.

In the twenty-second chapter of Jeremiah the Lord had ordered Jeremiah to go to the king’s house, Zedekiah, and prophesy unto him. So these prophecies were those that Jeremiah gave to Zedekiah who was the last of the kings of Israel prior to the Babylonian captivity. And as he is speaking there in Zedekiah’s court, he is bringing up prophecies that the Lord had given him in previous years to other of the kings. And so as we get into chapter 26, as he is giving this message in the court of king Zedekiah, he tells him that,

In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of Judah that the word of the LORD came to him, saying, Thus saith the LORD; Stand in the court of the LORD’S house, and speak unto all the cities of Judah, which come to worship in the LORD’S house, all the words that I command thee to speak unto them; and diminish not a word ( Jer 26:1-2 ):

Many times I think that we have a tendency to diminish from the Word of God. There are a lot of people today who have taken issue with some of the subjects in the scriptures. And because they have taken issue with them and the subjects have become rather controversial, there is a tendency on many parts to seek to diminish from what God has said. But I think that it is a dangerous thing to diminish or seek to diminish the message of God because we oftentimes then give people a sense of false security.

Now, nobody really dislikes the subject of eternal punishment more than I. And yet, it would be absolutely derelict of me to diminish from what the Lord has said in the Word concerning the fate of the sinners. To give them a false hope, a false comfort.

And so God is saying to Jeremiah, “Now look, you say everything that I tell you to say and don’t soft-pedal it, Jeremiah. Don’t diminish from the Word.” Now there are two things we are really told not to do. We’re not to add to it, nor are we to take away from it. When God gave His law to Moses, He gave the warning, “Now be careful that you don’t add to it or that you don’t take away from the words of this book.” And, of course, when the final book of Revelation was written and God was sealing up His revelation, He said, “Any man who adds to the words of this book, to him shall be added the curses that are in the book. And if any man shall take away from the words of this book, his name shall be taken out of the book of life” ( Rev 22:18-19 ). So that is how firm God is in His desire that we speak His Word plainly as He has declared it. Not seeking to add to it. Not seeking to take away or to diminish from it. And so the Lord is warning Jeremiah, “Now look, don’t diminish a word.”

If so be they will hearken, and turn every man from his evil way, that I may repent me of the evil, which I purpose to do unto them because of the evil of their doings ( Jer 26:3 ).

Now God is saying, “Lay it on them. Don’t diminish it. It may be that they will hearken unto what I have said.” And always the purpose of God giving His message is that people might have the opportunity to respond. You say, “Well, doesn’t God know if they’re going to respond or not?” Yes, God does know if they’re going to respond or not. “Well, if God knows they’re not going to respond, then why does God speak to them?” Because God wants to be righteous when He judges. And no one will be able to stand before God and say, “Well, I didn’t know or I never heard or I didn’t have a chance.” So God says, “Don’t diminish a word in order that they might hearken.” If they will hearken, if at this point they would turn they would be saved. In order that, God said, “I might repent Me of the evil which I purpose to do.”

Now, we have to use human words to describe the actions of God. And so when we speak of God repenting, that’s because we have just the limitation of the choice of human language in order to describe divine actions. But even in this word itself in the original, the root of it is to sigh. And it is sort of a sigh of relief. If the people will turn to Me, then God can sigh in relief for not having to bring the judgment upon them. How many times I’ve sighed when I’ve seen the change in the attitude of my children. “Oh, dad, I’m sorry.” All right. You know you feel good. Now that they come with that attitude you can deal with them. You don’t have to spank them or you don’t have to punish them. They come with a repentant attitude asking forgiveness and it causes you to say, “Ahhh,” you love it. You’re thankful that you’re not going to have to bring punishment upon them. And so God is saying, “Don’t diminish your words. Speak the word that I tell you. Don’t diminish it in order that they might turn and repent in order that I can sigh for relief of not having to bring this punishment upon them.”

God said to the prophet Ezekiel, “Turn ye, turn ye, for why will ye die. For behold, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, saith the Lord” ( Eze 33:11 ). How it grieves the heart of God to see the wicked die. Gives them every opportunity to turn and to know Him and to love Him. Turn, turn, for why will you die? God is not willing that any should perish. God has extended His patience, His long-suffering, His grace to man. And so God sends the prophet, even after it’s really too late. “But still go and speak. If so be they will hearken and turn every man from his evil way that I may sigh for the evil which I’ve purposed to do unto them because of their evil doings.”

Now that evil that God has purposed, of course, is allowing the king of Babylon to come and to destroy them. It isn’t evil in the sense that God is doing an evil thing. Nor is it repentance and God’s pardon that God is repenting or that He has done something. For the Bible tells us that “God is not a man that He should repent nor the son of man that He should change. Hath he not spoken and shall He not do it?” ( 1Sa 15:29 ) God said through the prophet, “Behold, I am the Lord God, I change not” ( Mal 3:6 ). The immutability of God.

Yet the grace and the mercy of God. God said through Isaiah, “Did not I create evil?” And that is the evil judgments that come to pass against the people, but not evil in the sense that God is in any way in league or in harmony with evil.

And thou shalt say unto them, Thus saith the LORD; If you will not hearken to me, to walk in my law, which I have set before you, To hearken to the words of my servants the prophets, whom I sent unto you, both rising up early, and sending them, but you have not hearkened; Then will I make this house like Shiloh, and will make this city a curse to all the nations of the eaRuth ( Jer 26:4-6 ).

Now, Shiloh was the place where the tabernacle was first placed when they came into the land, but Shiloh now has become a desolate ruin. And Jeremiah the prophet is saying, “If you don’t hearken to God, He’s going to make this place, the temple here, just a desolate ruin like Shiloh is.” Well, the priests got very upset with Jeremiah at this point because he is talking now about their temple and he’s saying that the curse of God is going to be upon it. It’s going to be made a desolate area.

So the priests and the prophets and all the people heard Jeremiah speaking these words in the house of the LORD. Now it came to pass, when Jeremiah had made an end of his speaking all that the LORD had commanded him to speak unto all the people, that the priests and the prophets and all the people took him, saying, Thou shalt surely die ( Jer 26:7-8 ).

So the people following now the inspiration and the leading of the priests and the prophets grabbed Jeremiah and were determined to put him to death because he dared to speak against the house of God, declaring that the temple was going to be destroyed. And they said,

Why have you prophesied in the name of the LORD, saying, This house shall be like Shiloh, and this city shall be desolate without an inhabitant? ( Jer 26:9 )

So he’s accused of speaking against the temple and against the city as he pronounces the judgments that God is going to bring upon them.

And all the people were gathered against Jeremiah in the house of the LORD. Now when the princes of Judah ( Jer 26:9-10 )

Now you’ve got a third group. You see, you have the prophet and the priests and they’ve grabbed him and said, “We’re going to kill you.” And the people joining with the prophet and the priests, “Yes, let’s kill him. He has spoken against the temple and he has spoken against the city.”

So the princes of Judah,

heard these things, then they came up from the king’s house ( Jer 26:10 )

They heard that there’s a tumult going on down there in the temple. They’ve grabbed Jeremiah. Come. And these princes come rushing from the king’s palace.

unto the house of the LORD, and they sat down in the entry of the new gate of the LORD’S house. Then spake the priests and the prophets unto the princes and to all the people, saying, This man is worthy to die; for he hath prophesied against this city, as ye have heard with your ears. Then spake Jeremiah unto all the princes and to all the people, saying ( Jer 26:9-12 ),

And he’s ignoring now the prophet and priests, but he turns to the princes and the people. He said,

The LORD sent me to prophesy against this house and against this city all the words that you have heard. Therefore now amend your ways and your doings, and obey the voice of the LORD your God; and the LORD will repent him [or sigh] of the evil that he hath pronounced against you. As for me, behold, I am in your hands: do with me what seems right to do ( Jer 26:12-14 ).

God sent me to say these things. Now turn from your ways, your wickedness, in order that God might not have to bring this judgment on you. But I’m here as a messenger of God. God has sent me with this message. Now I’m in your hands, do what you want. You want to kill me, go ahead. Your business.

But know this for certain, that if you put me to death, you will surely bring innocent blood upon yourselves, and upon this city, and upon the inhabitants thereof: for of a truth the LORD hath sent me unto you to speak all these words in your ears. Then said the princes and all the people unto the priests and to the prophets; This man is not worthy to die: for he hath spoken to us in the name of the Jehovah our God ( Jer 26:15-16 ).

Now notice how fickle the people are. They’re ready to put him to death with the prophets and the priests because he has spoken against this house and against this city. There is that Latin phrase, “vocus populus est vocus Dios”-the voice of the people is the voice of God. That’s not true. The crowd many times makes terrible mistakes. And here the people are siding with the prophets and priests. “Let’s put him to death.” The princes come down, the people say with the princes, “Hey, no, he shouldn’t be put to death. He has spoken in the name of God.”

Then rose up certain of the elders of the land, and they spoke to all the assembly of the people, saying, Micah the Morasthite prophesied in the days of Hezekiah king of Judah, and he spoke to all the people of Judah, saying, Thus saith the LORD of hosts; Zion shall be plowed like a field, and Jerusalem shall become heaps, and the mountain of the house as the high places of a forest. Now did Hezekiah king of Judah and all of Judah put him to death? did he not fear the LORD, and besought the LORD, and the LORD repented him of the evil which he had pronounced against them? Thus might we procure great evil against our souls ( Jer 26:17-19 ).

So they’re saying, “Look, this has happened before in the time of Hezekiah. This guy Micah, remember, he came along and he spoke that God’s going to bring desolation on this city. And rather than killing Micah, they hearkened and they repented.” And then they said,

And there was also that man, Urijah from Kirjathjearim, who prophesied against this city and against this land according to all the words of Jeremiah ( Jer 26:20 ):

You remember Urijah did the same thing.

And when Jehoiakim the king, with all of his mighty men, and all the princes, heard his words, the king sought to put him to death: but when Urijah heard it, he was afraid, and he fled, and went into Egypt; And Jehoiakim the king sent unto Egypt, some men, Elnathan, and certain men that were with him and they got him out of Egypt. And brought him to Jehoiakim the king; who slew him with the sword, and cast his dead body into the graves of the common people. Nevertheless, the hand of Ahikam the son of Shaphan was with Jeremiah, that they should not give him into the hand of the people to put him to death ( Jer 26:21-24 ).

So some of the older men said, “Hey, this has happened before and Hezekiah didn’t put him to death.” They said, “Yeah, but it happened before and Jehoiakim did put him to death.” So there was this division. But the prince Ahikam sort of prevailed and Jeremiah was spared death from the hands of the false prophets, the priests and the people.

“

Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary

Jer 26:1-7

Jer 26:1-7

In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, king of Judah, came this word from Jehovah, saying, Thus saith Jehovah: Stand in the court of Jehovah’s house, and speak unto all the cities of Judah, which come to worship in Jehovah’s house, all the words that I command thee to speak unto them; diminish not a word. It may be they will hearken, and turn every man from his evil way; that I may repent me of the evil which I purpose to do unto them because of the evil of their doings. And thou shalt say unto them, Thus saith Jehovah: If ye will not hearken to me, to walk in my law, which I have set before you, to hearken to the words of my servants the prophets, whom I send unto you, even rising up early and sending them, but ye have not hearkened; then will I make this house like Shiloh, and will make this city a curse to all the nations of the earth. And the priests and the prophets and all the people heard Jeremiah speaking these words in the house of Jehovah.

Stand in the court of Jehovah’s house…

(Jer 26:4). This location enabled Jeremiah to preach to the greatest number of the throngs of people from all the cities of Judah, who were gathering upon some national feast-day.

And turn every man from his evil way…

(Jer 26:3). Feinberg stressed two things of singular importance in this passage: (1) The kind of repentance which God demands is always an individual matter; and (2) promises of divine judgment are always conditional.

Walk in my law. hearken to the words of my servants the prophets …..

(Jer 26:4-5). God’s condemnation did not result from their refusal to hearken to Jeremiah, merely; but it was the consequence of their rejection of all of God’s prophets, reaching all the way back to Moses and the sacred terms of the Old Sinaitic Covenant itself, all of this instruction being evident right here in this passage.

The great things that stand out in this paragraph are: (1) the necessity of obeying God’s law, if the forthcoming destruction is to be averted; (2) the terrible nature of the doom awaiting them if they did not repent; (3) Shiloh was cited as an example of the destruction that awaited Jerusalem and the temple.

The significance of the citation of Shiloh derived from the fact of its having been the very first place where the ark of the Lord rested after Israel’s entry into the promised land.

The Bible makes no specific reference to the occasion of Shiloh’s destruction, and critics once disputed it; but “The Danish expedition uncovered pottery and other evidence demonstrating that the destruction of Shiloh occurred, by the hands of the Philistines about 1050 B.C.” The mention of this fact here was intended to refute the arrogant confidence of those Israelites who supposed that the existence of a mere building was their guarantee of safety no matter what they did, a guarantee which they erroneously ascribed to the existence of the temple.

As this narrative proceeds, it will be evident that “all the people” were a very fickle and undependable element discernible in this shameful trial of Jeremiah.

The priests, and the prophets, and all the people…

(Jer 26:7). These were the enemies of Jeremiah. It should not be thought that the prophets were in any sense true prophets. These characters are mentioned in Jer 26:7-8; Jer 26:11; Jer 26:16; and the LXX designates them as pseudo-prophets. That irresponsible and fickle Jerusalem mob, designated here as all the people, that is, the majority, started yelling for the death of the holy Prophet. They were fit ancestors indeed of the mob in that same city centuries afterward who would cry, Crucify Him! Crucify Him!

JEREMIAH FACES OPPOSITION

Jer 26:1 to Jer 29:32

The material in chapters 26-29 is primarily biographical in character and written in the third person. Some autobiographical material is also included here (see Jer 27:1 to Jer 28:4). The most unique literary feature of this section is chapter 29. This chapter contains the complete text of a letter sent by Jeremiah to the captives in Babylon (Jer 29:1-23) and also parts of two letters, one of which was sent to Shemaiah, and the other sent by him (Jer 29:24-32). The materials in this section come from two different periods of the prophets ministry. The events in chapter 26 take place in the early days of Jehoiakim. Chapters 27-29 cover events about fifteen years later, in the fourth year of king Zedekiah when there was general unrest throughout the Babylonian empire. False prophets in Judah and in Babylon were encouraging Jews to join in the rebellion against Nebuchadnezzar. In continuing to counsel submission to Babylon Jeremiah aroused the hostility of the civil as well as the religious authorities of the nation.

THE ARREST AND TRIAL OF THE PROPHET Jer 26:1-24

The faithful proclamation of the word of God is dangerous business. Amos, the prophet from Tekoa, was openly rebuked by Amaziah the high priest of Bethel and was ordered to leave the country (Amo 7:10 ff.). Zechariah the son of Jehoiada was stoned to death by the order of the pompous king Joash because he had the audacity to rebuke the king for apostasy (2Ch 24:20 ff.). Legend has it that Isaiah was sawn asunder by wicked Manasseh. It was the faithful proclamation of the word that got Steven stoned, John beheaded and Peter imprisoned. The ministry is a hazardous vocation! It is no place for those with weak knees and faint hearts! In the present chapter Jeremiah is put on trial for his life because of his uncompromising and forthright presentation of the word of God.

The Arrest Jer 26:1-10

Jeremiah was a soldier on a holy crusade, carrying out the instructions of his heavenly Superior. Acting under a divine directive (Jer 26:1-3), Jeremiah preaches a stirring message (Jer 26:4-6) which arouses the anger of those who heard him (Jer 26:7-10) and nearly costs him his life.

1. A divine directive (Jer 26:1-3)

Four specific points relating to a divine directive which came to Jeremiah are brought out in Jer 26:1-3. First, there is a word as to the time of the directive. The word of the Lord came to the prophet in the beginning of the reign of king Jehoiakim (Jer 26:1). This probably refers to the year 608 B.C. Righteous Josiah had been slain the year before in the battle of Megiddo; Jehoahaz his son had been able to hold the throne only three months before being deposed and deported by Pharaoh Necho. Now wicked Jehoiakim was sitting on the throne of David. These were turbulous times. World supremacy was being contested on the banks of the Euphrates river. No doubt the inhabitants of Jerusalem were jittery. Would the combined force of the Assyrian and Egyptian armies be able to withstand the armies of the Chaldeans There were ominous implications for Judah no matter which force emerged as world conqueror.

The divine directive contains a specific word as the place Jeremiah is to preach (Jer 26:2). He is to go to the court of Solomons Temple and preach to the masses of people who assembled there from all the cities of Judah to worship the Lord. On a previous occasion in the reign of Josiah, Jeremiah had stood in this same courtyard and preached the word (see Jer 7:1 to Jer 8:3). Many scholars, perhaps a majority, believe that chapter 26 contains a summary of that earlier message and relates the consequences of it. However the grounds for equating the Temple sermon of chapter 7 and the Temple sermon of chapter 26 are singularly and collectively weak.[234] There is not one hint of hostility to Jeremiahs first Temple sermon. The message no doubt received a sympathetic hearing in the days of good king Josiah. But now the climate has changed. The religious and civil authorities are in no mood to tolerate criticism.

The divine directive to Jeremiah also contains a specific obligation (Jer 26:2 b). The Lord commands Jeremiah not to diminish a single word from the message he had received from God. This commandment is reminiscent of the initial instruction given to Jeremiah at the time of his call when he was told, whatsoever I shall command you, you shall speak (Jer 1:7). The Lord knew that Jeremiah needed to be reminded of this obligation at this point in his ministry. Even the most stalwart man of God might be tempted to omit or water down certain unpopular and unpleasant portions of his message when faced with the prospects of arrest, imprisonment and possibly death. No longer would Jeremiah enjoy the protection of the pious Josiah; he would feel for the first time the full impact of public hostility.

The divine directive also included a note as to the purpose for Jeremiahs preaching on this occasion. Jeremiahs message was harsh. It was a message of judgment. But the object of all that he said was the salvation of the nation. Perhaps they will hearken! This verse reveals the eagerness of God to turn away from His announced purpose to destroy the nations. If they would only repent! What fantastic possibilities can be set in motion through sincere repentance! If Judah would turn away from rebellion against God then He could repent or relent with regard to his intentions to destroy the land (cf. Jer 18:8).

2. A stirring message (Jer 26:4-6)

Jeremiahs sermon in the courtyard of the Temple must have been quite a bombshell! It stirred a hornets nest of opposition. Doubtlessly in Jer 26:4-6 only a brief summary of the sermon preached on this occasion has been preserved. Had the entire message been recorded it would probably have included a stinging indictment for injustice, hypocrisy and rebellion against God. No doubt it included threats of the enemy from the north which would devastate the land. The summary which has been preserved here contains two points of emphasis. First, there is an oblique call for repentance (Jer 26:4-5). Jeremiah is here threatening the people that if they do not do certain things they will be punished. This is tantamount to calling upon the people to act in certain ways. Basically Jeremiah is calling upon them to hearken to the Lord. This involves two distinct responses on the part of the people. First they must listen to the voice of God as it was recorded in the ancient law of Moses. While he frequently condemned formalism and ritualism Jeremiah never minimized the importance of obedience to the written law of God. Second, the people must listen to the contemporary spokesmen of God, the prophets. The people thus far had failed to give credence to the words of Gods servants even though He had persistently sent them unto the nation (Jer 26:5).

In no uncertain terms Jeremiah spells out the consequences of impenitence in this Temple sermon (Jer 26:6). Two distinct threats are contained here in the summary of his message. First, God threatens to make this house, i.e., the Temple, like Shiloh. The shrine at Shiloh had been destroyed centuries before, apparently by the Philistine invasion during the judgeship of Eli (1Sa 4:10-11). A persistent delusion in the days of Jeremiah was that God would never allow His sanctuary to be destroyed by any foreign enemy. The prophet here marshals the facts of history to support his contention that no spot was too sacred to be decimated when God pours out His wrath upon a sinful people. The second threat in Jer 26:6 concerns the city. God would make it a curse among the nations of the earth. That is to say, God would so destroy Jerusalem that when anyone wished a pronounce a curse on a city he would say, May such and such a city become like Jerusalem!

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

Once again Jeremiah repeated a previous message, one delivered yet earlier, “in the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim.” He had then been instructed to stand in the court of the Lord’s house, and deliver his message in order to give an opportunity to the people to turn. The message itself warned them against refusing to hearken, and told of their persistent refusal and of the consequent judgment decided against them.

The message excited the hostility of the priests, prophets, and people. Jeremiah then told the story of his trial, saying he had been seized and condemned to die. The princes of Judah however, interfered, and he was placed on trial before them. The priests and the prophets charged him with speaking against the city. He answered that he had but delivered the message of Jehovah. The interference of the princes, and the defense of Jeremiah won the people to his side, and, with the princes, they declared to priests and prophets that he was not worthy of death. Certain of the elders addressed the people, declaring that to slay the prophet of the Lord would be sin, and instanced the cases of Micaiah and Uriah. Jeremiah was preserved by Ahikam.

Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible

Ungrateful Forgetfulness

Jer 2:1-8; Jer 26:1-24; Jer 27:1-22; Jer 28:1-17; Jer 29:1-32; Jer 30:1-24; Jer 31:1-40; Jer 32:1-44

God regarded Israel as His bride, who had responded to His love, or as a vineyard and cornfield which were expected to yield their first fruits in response to the careful cultivation of the owner. Why had they failed to respond? For the answer let us question our own hearts. What marvels of perversity and disappointment we are! Who can understand or fathom the reason of our poor response to the yearning love of Christ! The heathen, in their punctilious devotion and lavish sacrifices at their idol-shrines, may well shame us. The root of the evil is disclosed in Jer 2:31. We like to be lords, to assume and hold the mastery of our lives. But God has been anything but a wilderness to us. He has given us ornaments, and we owe to His grace the garments of righteousness which He has put on us. In return we have forgotten Him days without number, Jer 2:32. Let us ask Him to call us back-nay more, to draw us by the chains of love.

Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary

CHAPTER THIRTEEN

DANGER AND DELIVERANCE

(Chap. 26)

Some time before making the proclamation in the name of the Lord which we have just been considering, Jeremiahs life had been placed in jeopardy for his faithfulness in showing the people their sins and setting before them the sure judgment about to fall. No exact date is given beyond the statement that it was “in the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim” (Jer 26:1).

He had been commanded by the Lord to stand in the temple courts, evidently on the occasion of some one of the yearly feasts; for he was to “speak unto all the cities of Judah, which come to worship in the Lord’s house.” (Jer 26:2)

He had no choice as to the matter of the discourse, for he was told to speak “all the words” (not merely the thoughts or ideas clothed in language of his own choosing, as the opponents of verbal inspiration would fain have us believe) that the Lord commanded him – diminishing nothing (Jer 26:2). See 1Co 2:13. Notice that the very words spoken by the apostle were, as in Jeremiah’s case, those which the Holy Ghost taught.

If the people of the cities of Judah would hearken, and turn from their evil way, the Lord might repent Him of the evil which He purposed to do unto them because of their iniquities. If they refused to heed the message, and persisted in their willful course, He would make His house desolate like Shiloh, where He had dwelt of old, and Jerusalem should become a curse to all the nations of the earth” (Jer 26:3-6).

Obedient to “the heavenly vision,” (Act 26:19) the prophet did as he had been commissioned to do, and all the people heard his words.

He had barely finished his address when the priests and the false prophets who were serving in the courts of the Lord’s house, joining with the rabble, placed him under arrest as a disturber of the peace of the holy place, and a traitor to his king and country.

The scene must have been a remarkable one. In large measure he was privileged to be a partaker of the sufferings and reproach of CHRIST, as yet unrevealed. Despised and rejected of men,” (Isa 53:3) he heard the multitude clamoring for his blood. They cried, Thou shalt surely die. Why hast thou prophesied in the name of the Lord, saying, This house shall be like Shiloh, and this city shall be desolate without an inhabitant?” (Jer 26:8-9) The pessimist from Anathoth was weakening the hands of the warriors and disheartening the people. They would put him out of the way, and thus silence his tongue of fire.” (Isa 30:27) In all that crowd he was left without so much as one human friend. A true earlier-day Antipas, he stood “against all.” For we are told that “all the people were gathered against Jeremiah in the house of the Lord” (Jer 26:7-9).

It is on such an occasion that one would naturally have expected so weak and fearful a man to be overwhelmed with gloom and even terror. On the contrary, he is neither crushed nor affrighted. Bold in his confidence in the word of the Lord which he had proclaimed, he confronts the raging populace undismayed.

The princes of Judah, learning of the disturbance, came up at once from the palace to the new gate of the temple, where inquiry is immediately instituted. The priests and the false prophets vehemently accuse Jeremiah, saying, “This man is worthy to die; for he hath prophesied against this city, as ye have heard with your ears” (Jer 26:10-11).

Jeremiah is permitted to speak for himself. Without the slightest hesitation, and with no apparent concern for the outcome as to himself, he boldly declares, “The Lord sent me to prophesy against this house and against this city all the words that ye have heard.” (Jer 26:12)

The message was not of the servant, but of the Lord, and the case is one of Judah versus the Lord, whom they hypocritically professed to serve. If they disliked to hear threatenings of judgment and desolation there was a sure way to avoid their fulfilment. “Therefore now amend your ways and your doings, and obey the voice of the Lord your God; and the Lord will repent Him of the evil that He hath pronounced against you” (Jer 26:13). Not by murdering the messenger, but by heeding the proclamation, could the wrath of the Lord be turned aside.

“As for me, behold, I am in your hand: do with me as seemeth good and meet unto you.” (Jer 26:14)

Without a quaver in his voice or a sign of pallor on his cheek, he gives himself up to die if they are determined upon it. Nevertheless he warns them of the result. “But know ye for certain, that if ye put me to death, ye shall surely bring innocent blood upon yourselves, and upon this city, and upon the inhabitants thereof: for of a truth the Lord hath sent me unto you to speak all these words in your ears” (Jer 26:15).

It is the courage of one conscious of his own integrity, relying upon the justice of the Holy One.

In a similar spirit did Robert Moffat of Kuruman bare his breast for the savages’ spears, and in like manner Paton of the New Hebrides fearlessly faced the enraged men of Tanna. So have thousands of devoted saints jeopardized their lives for the truth’s sake, concerned far more for the ungrateful people to whom they ministered than for their own safety.

The effect of Jeremiah’s words is most marked. The princes, and the fickle populace, who a few moments before clamored for his execution, now give their verdict in his favor.

“This man,” they say, “is not worthy to die: for he hath spoken unto us in the name of the Lord our God” (Jer 26:16). Alas, that acknowledging this they did not give heed to the exhortation! Then certain elders, Nicodemuses in their time, rose up to speak in his behalf. The case of Micah the Morasthite is first cited: how in the days of Hezekiah he had prophesied, saying, “Thus saith the Lord of hosts: Zion shall be plowed like a field, and Jerusalem shall become heaps, and the mountain of the house as the high places of a forest” (Jer 26:17-18; see also Mic 3:12).

Did Hezekiah put him to death for this solemn announcement? On the contrary, had it not been the means of leading him the more to fear the Lord, with the happy result that “the Lord repented Him of the evil which He had pronounced against them?” If they acted contrary to this precedent, might they not procure great evil against their souls? (Jer 26:19).

Urijah, another man of GOD, is next adduced. In his case the king had acted in the contrary manner. Whether evil would result remained to be seen; for it was in the reign of this same Jehoiakim who was now on the throne that Urijah had prophesied in the name of the Lord against the city and the land in terms similar to those employed by Jeremiah. The prophet, filled with fear, had fled to Egypt. Yet king Jehoiakim, bent on his destruction, had brought him out of the land of his refuge and “slain him with the sword, and cast his dead body into the graves of the common people” (Jer 26:20-23). Thus far the Lord indeed had not avenged this ignominious treatment of His servant; but it might be yet too early to judge of the consequences, and it is left without further comment.

Another man now rises, Ahikam the son of Shaphan, in behalf of Jeremiah, preventing his being given into the hand of the people to be put to death (Jer 26:24). Thus, once more GOD vindicated and protected His servant. Had Urijah been a man of similar faith and trust in GOD, who can say that he too might not have been safeguarded? “The name of the Lord is a strong tower: the righteous runneth into it, and is safe” (Pro 18:10).

~ end of chapter 13 ~

Fuente: Commentaries on the New Testament and Prophets

Jer 26:11

Why were the Jews so angry with Jeremiah for simply telling them the plain fact of what they did, and what they did not, disguise? Why this unreasonable hatred of the man of God because he pointed to proceedings which were quite open, and which they did not deny? Now, in the first place, when bold, bad men do wicked things which they do not disguise, they do not thereby give the servants of God any permission at all to remind them of them, and make them sensible of the reproach. They will thrust their misdeeds before other people’s eyes, but they think their doing this is the very reason why they should not be thrust before their own.

I. This, then, was one chief office which the old prophets had to execute. They had to break down the pride of bold and open vice, where man thought himself privileged to sin; to do what he pleased to defy God. They had to bring down the haughtiness of man’s heart and to make it feel the yoke.

II. Besides the great truth that no man was privileged to sin, there was another great truth the old prophets had to declare, and one opposed to as mischievous an error, viz. the truth that no sin was excused by its commonness. The Jews saw no discord between the true God and idols, but worshipped both together. And so people see no discord or contrariety between the Christian belief and a worldly practice, simply because they are accustomed to both. A worldly life justifies itself in their eyes because it is common; they take it and the Gospel together and interpret the Gospel accordingly. The old prophets were witnesses against this slavery of men to what is common and customary; they recalled them to the purity of truth, they reminded them of the holiness of God’s law, and they put before them Almighty God as a jealous God, who disdained to be half-obeyed, and abhorred to be served in common with idols.

J. B. Mozley, Sermons Parochial and Occasional, p. 233.

Reference: Jer 28:13.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xviii., No. 1032.

Fuente: The Sermon Bible

CHAPTER 26

Threatened with Death and His Deliverance

1. The temple like Shiloh, and Jerusalem to be a curse (Jer 26:1-7)

2. Threatened with death (Jer 26:8-11)

3. Jeremiahs defense (Jer 26:12-15)

4. History remembered and the prophets deliverance (Jer 26:16-24)

Jer 26:1-7. We are now taken back to the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim. (Compare with chapter 7.) The Lord still waits in patience for their repentance. With holy boldness the prophet stands in a place where the worshippers pass to enter the temple and announces the message. The temple is to be like Shiloh, that is forsaken Psa 78:60. Jerusalem is to be a curse.

Jer 26:8-11. Then he was arrested for his faithfulness and threatened with death, Thou shalt surely die. The priests and the prophets were his accusers before the princes. How often this has been repeated in the history of Gods true witnesses! During pagan Rome as well as papal Rome, the false priests and false prophets hated and despised Gods witnesses and persecuted them. It is so in our times.

Jer 26:12-15. He makes his defense in a few dignified words. He tells them he is Jehovahs messenger. He tells them that he is in their hands, but warns them if they kill him they shed innocent blood. This courage was born of faith. He knows that he is in His hands.

Jer 26:16-24. The princes and people were deeply impressed and declared that he was not worthy of death. This encouraged certain elders to speak, in whose heart some fear seems to have been left. They remembered the prophet Micah, the contemporary of Isaiah, who spoke similar words in the days of Hezekiah Mic 3:12. Hezekiah did not have Micah killed. They warned against so rash a deed. They also mentioned the case of the prophet Urijah, who had also prophesied, as Jeremiah did. He had fled to Egypt, but was brought back, then Jehoiakim killed him. We do not know why his case is mentioned in this connection, unless it is to show the difference between good Hezekiah and wicked Jehoiakim. Then Ahikam, the father of Gedaliah, who was governor under Nebuchadnezzar, stood by him, and he was delivered.

Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)

am 3394, bc 610, Jer 1:3, Jer 25:1, Jer 27:1, Jer 35:1, Jer 36:1, 2Ki 23:34-36, 2Ch 36:4, 2Ch 36:5

Reciprocal: 2Ki 24:5 – the rest Jer 45:1 – in the Eze 19:6 – he went

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

Jer 26:1. According to 2Ki 24:1 and Dan 1:1 the Babylonian captivity proper began just after the third year of Jehoiakim king in Judah. The present verse is dated at the first year of this reign and hence on the very eve of the captivity.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Jer 26:1. In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim, &c. The preceding chapter is dated in the fourth year of the reign of Jehoiakim, but ascribed, with probability, to the early part of that year. This chapter is dated in the beginning of the same reign. Hence it has been concluded, that this must have preceded the former in order of time. But the conclusion, says Blaney, will not hold, if we consider that, (Jer 28:1,) the beginning of Zedekiahs reign is expressly declared to mean the fourth year and the fifth month of it. The same therefore may be the case here, and this chapter may be allowed to speak of events subsequent to those of the foregoing one, though taking place immediately after them.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Jer 26:1. In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim. See the note on Jer 26:3.

Jer 26:2. Stand in the court of the Lords house. See the note on Jer 19:4. The great court was the place where both men and women generally worshipped when they brought no sacrifice, according to Dr. Lightfoot. When they offered a sacrifice they were to bring it into the inner court, otherwise called the court of Israel, or of the priests, as the same learned author has observed in his treatise concerning the temple service: chap. 8. sec. 1.

Jer 26:3. And turn every man from his evil way. The promises of grace which follow, are repeated finally in Jer 36:3, and are specially noticed there.

Jer 26:7. The priests and the prophetsheard Jeremiah. The Septuagint rightly understand the word of the false prophets, such as Hananiah, mentioned in Jer 28:1. Compare also Jer 39:1; Jer 27:19. So the word prophet is taken in Hos 9:8.

Jer 26:8. Thou shalt surely die. As a disturber of the government, and a discourager of the people, from defending their country against the enemy. Compare Jer 38:4, and see the note on Jer 26:14 of this chapter. These priests accused their brother of saying, that the temple should be burned like Shiloh, but they concealed the conditions, in case they repented not, as is fully stated in chap. 22, 23. Such is the factious wickedness of man: in the storm of passion he forgets the golden rule, of doing to another what he wishes another should do to him.

Jer 26:14. As for me, behold I am in your hand. Compare Jer 38:5. It was the proper business of the Sanhedrim to pass sentence upon prophets; and if they found them guilty of making false pretences to prophecy, to put them to death, the punishment which the law had provided in that case. Deu 18:20-22. In this sense those words of Christ are to be understood, Luk 13:33. It cannot be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem, where the Sanhedrim sat, whose office it was first to try and to condemn him.

Jer 26:16. Then said the princes; the Sanhedrim, or at least some considerable men among them, as in Jer 26:17; Jer 26:21. Compare also Jer 36:12; Jer 37:15; Jer 38:4.

And all the peoplethis man is not worthy to die. They who before were forward to condemn him, Jer 26:8, now, upon hearing his apology, were as ready to acquit him.

Jer 26:17. Then rose up certain elders of the land. See Jer 26:10; Jer 26:16. From the seventeenth verse to the end of the chapter are rehearsed the debates that passed in the Sanhedrim upon this subject, and the arguments offered on both sides. St. Luke gives an account of a like conference with relation to the apostles. Act 5:33-34.

Jer 26:18. Micah prophesied in the days of Hezekiah. They alleged this precedent, taken from the practice of a good king, in favour of Jeremiah. See Mic 3:12.

Zion shall be glowed like a field. The Jews suppose this prophecy to be fulfilled in the utter destruction of the second temple by Titus, when Terentius, or as some of the modern Jews call him, Turnus Rufus, rased the very foundations of the city and temple. Thus also was fulfilled the prediction of our Saviour, that there should not be left one stone upon another. See Joseph. Bell. Jud. lib. 7. chap. 7. When conquerors would signify their purpose that a city should never be rebuilt, they used to break up the ground where it stood. See Jdg 9:45. Horace alludes to this custom: Imprimeretque muris Hostile aratrum exercitus insolens. Lib. 1. od. 16.

Jer 26:19. Did Hezekiahand all Judah put him to death? Did the people come together in a body to accuse Micah, and demand sentence against him, as they had now done in the case of Jeremiah? Did he not fear the Lord? See 2Ch 32:25.

Jer 26:24. Nevertheless the hand of Ahikam the son of Shaphan was with Jeremiah. Both he and his father Shaphan were the chief ministers under Josiah. 2Ki 22:12-14. And the brothers of Ahikam, Gemariah, Elasah, and Joazoniah, were considerable men in those days with Ahikam, and members of the great council. Jer 29:3. Eze 8:11. So Ahikam made use of his interest with them, to deliver Jeremiah from the danger that threatened him.

REFLECTIONS.

We have here a festival sermon, which Jeremiah delivered in the court of the temple; a sermon of grace and justice, the very reverse of what the false prophets had preached. He opens his commission with the repetition of all the blessings of the covenant, in case they should repent, and turn to the Lord with their whole heart. But if, on the contrary, they should despise the Lord, and not seek him, as Josiah did, he showed them their city, and the temple of which they had made their boast, all in flames, as had been the case before at Shiloh, when the Philistines defeated their armies, captured the ark of God, and burned the cherubim. 1Sa 4:12.

The effect of this sermon was, a general uproar in the temple. The priests, the false prophets, and Pashur the priest and captain being at their head, with one voice they cried out for the blood of Jeremiah. The princes were summoned to take their seat in the gate, that the true prophet might instantly be put on trial for his life, and massacred as a sacrifice to their fury. The priests and the prophets seemed resolved neither to eat nor drink till Jeremiahs tongue could disturb them no more. Their impetuous passions allowed of no time for pause and reflection. But would not such a massacre have imprinted his sermon indelibly on the nation? Could all the waters of the Gihon, or of the Kedron have washed out the stains of his blood?

God turns the hearts of kings as he turned the flood of Jordan. The princes declare that Jeremiah had done nothing worthy of death. Elders from the country second the voice of the princes, that Jeremiah had said nothing against the temple but what the prophet Micah had said, that Zion for their sakes should be plowed like a field; that the prophet Urijah had said the same. These elders from the country were no doubt lawyers; they entered the vista left open by the accusers with a host of eloquence. They said that Jeremiah had threatened the burning of the temple with the noble motive of saving the sanctuary by converting the people, and by asking mercy for his country, as in the days of Samuel at Mizpeh. So the princes, inspired with equity to resist popular clamour, the brightest trait of a magistrate, drove away the wolves, and delivered the lamb out of their hands. Jeremiah retired with his bones unbroken!

But oh what sorrows must invade the prophets breasta country gone too far to be reclaimed. St. Augustines doctrine of a day of grace seems applicable in this case, as well as Christs lamentation over the same city. This doctrine I find repeated in our old sermons, by John Shower, by Robert Russel, and by Richard Baxter. A man may long sport on the precipice: ah, but one step more, and he is for ever gone. Oh Lord, take not thy Holy Spirit from us.

Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Jeremiah 26. Destruction of the Temple Foretold: Jeremiahs Peril (608 B.C.).Jeremiah is told to proclaim in the Temple (cf. Jer 19:14; probably at some festival) a perilous message (keep not back a word, Jer 26:2), in the hope that it may produce a change (Jer 18:8). Unless the people obey Yahweh, He will destroy the Temple, like that of Shiloh (Jer 7:14) and make the city (an example of) a curse (Jer 29:22). The priests and prophets declare that Jeremiah must die for this blasphemy (Deu 18:20); it is incredible to them that Yahweh can have given such a word as this (Jer 26:7-9). Accordingly, the case is referred to the secular authorities, who hear it in the new gate. Jeremiah reasserts the Divine origin of his message, and warns them of their guilt, if they slay him. The princes and people acquit him on the ground of his sincerity (Jer 26:10-16). This decision is confirmed by the century-old precedent of Micah of Moresheth, who also announced the destruction of Jerusalem and of the Temple (the mountain of the house, Jer 26:18), a fate averted by the repentance of Hezekiah (Jer 26:17-19). The writer of this narrative has added (Jer 26:20-23) an account of the similar charge brought against another prophet, Uriah of Kiriath-jearim (7 m. W. of Jerusalem), which issued, however, in his extradition from Egypt, his execution, and his exclusion from the family grave (cf. 2Ki 23:6). The closing reference to Ahikam (Jer 26:24) seems to refer back to an important influence contributory to Jeremiahs escape.

Jer 26:4. law: i.e., the oral teaching of the prophets; cf. Isa 1:10.

Jer 26:8. Omit and all the people, since they are friendly in Jer 26:11 ff.

Jer 26:10. the new gate: Jer 36:10; perhaps that of 2Ki 15:35; gates were usual courts of justice, cf. Thomson, p. 27.

Jer 26:15. innocent blood: Jon 1:14, Deu 21:8, 2Ki 21:16.

Jer 26:18. Hezekiah: 720693; this result of Micahs preaching is not otherwise known.

Jer 26:22. Elnathan: one of the princes, Jer 36:12; Jer 36:25.

Jer 26:24. Ahikam: 2Ki 22:12 ff.; cf. Jer 39:14; Jer 40:5 f. for the friendship of his son Gedaliah with Jeremiah.

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

Another message from Yahweh came to Jeremiah at the beginning of King Jehoiakim’s reign. Jehoiakim began reigning over Judah in 609 B.C. The terminology used to describe the date is technical, referring to the time between the king’s accession to the throne and the first full year of his reign. [Note: Thompson, p. 524.] This is the earliest date mentioned in the book, with the exception of Jeremiah’s call (Jer 1:2).

"Little more than three months had seen King Josiah killed in battle, his successor deported to Egypt, and this third king, a man of no scruples, imposed on the country. At such a moment, to give strong warnings of potentially worse things in store was to take one’s life in one’s hands, especially when these warnings touched the temple and the holy city, popularly thought to be inviolable." [Note: Kidner, p. 96.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Jer 8:1-22; Jer 9:1-26; Jer 10:1-25; Jer 26:1-24

In the four chapters which we are now to consider we have what is plainly a finished whole. The only possible exception {Jer 10:1-16} shall be considered in its place. The historical occasion of the introductory prophecy, {Jer 7:1-15} and the immediate effect of its delivery, are recorded at length in the twenty-sixth chapter of the book, so that in this instance we are happily not left to the uncertainties of conjecture. We are there told that it was in the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim son of Josiah, king of Judah,” that Jeremiah received the command to stand in the forecourt of Iahvahs house, and to declare “to all the cities of Judah that were come to worship” there, that unless they repented and gave ear to Iahvahs servants the prophets, He would make the temple like Shiloh, and Jerusalem itself a curse to all the nations of the earth. The substance of the oracle is there given in briefer form than here, as was natural, where the writers object was principally to relate the issue of it as it affected himself. In neither case is it probable that we have a verbatim report of what was actually said, though the leading thoughts of his address are, no doubt, faithfully recorded by the prophet in the more elaborate composition. {Jer 7:1-34} Trifling variations between the two accounts must not, therefore, be pressed.

Internal evidence suggests that this oracle was delivered at a time of grave public anxiety, such as marked the troubled period after the death of Josiah, and the early years of Jehoiakim. “All Judah,” or “all the cities of Judah,” {Jer 26:2} that is to say, the people of the country towns as well as the citizens of Jerusalem, were crowding into the temple to supplicate their God. {Jer 7:2} This indicates an extraordinary occasion, a national emergency affecting all alike. Probably a public fast and humiliation had been ordered by the authorities, on the reception of some threatening news of invasion. “The opening paragraphs of the address are marked by a tone of controlled earnestness, by an unadorned plainness of statement, without passion, without exclamation, apostrophe, or rhetorical device of any kind; which betokens the presence of a danger which spoke too audibly to the general ear to require artificial heightening in the statement of it. The position of affairs spoke for itself” (Hitzig). The very words with which the prophet opens his message, “Thus said Iahvah Sabaoth, the God of Israel, Make good your ways and your doings, that I may cause you to dwell (permanently) in this place!” (Jer 7:3, cf. Jer 7:7) prove that the anxiety which agitated the popular heart and drove it to seek consolation in religious observances, was an anxiety about their political stability, about the permanence of their possession of the fair land of promise. The use of the expression “Iahvah Sabaoth” Iahvah (the God) of Hosts is also significant, as indicating that war was what the nation feared; while the prophet reminds them thus that all earthly powers, even the armies of heathen invaders, are controlled and directed by the God of Israel for His own sovereign purposes. A particular crisis is further suggested by the warning: “Trust ye not to the lying words, The Temple of Iahvah, the Temple of Iahvah, the Temple of Iahvah, is this!” The fanatical confidence in the inviolability of the temple, which Jeremiah thus deprecates, implies a time of public danger. A hundred years before this time the temple and the city had really come through a period of the gravest peril, justifying in the most palpable and unexpected manner the assurances of the prophet Isaiah. This was remembered now, when another crisis seemed imminent, another trial of strength between the God of Israel and the gods of the heathen. Only part of the prophetic teachings of Isaiah had rooted itself in the popular mind-the part most agreeable to it. The sacrosanct inviolability of the temple, and of Jerusalem for its sake, was an idea readily appropriated and eagerly cherished. It was forgotten that all depended on the will and purposes of Iahvah himself; that the heathen might be the instruments with which He executed His designs, and that an invasion of Judah might mean, not an approaching trial of strength between His omnipotence and the impotency of the false gods, but the judicial outpouring of His righteous wrath upon His own rebellious people.

Jeremiah, therefore, affirms that the popular confidence is ill-founded; that his countrymen are lulled in a false security; and he enforces his point, by a plain exposure of the flagrant offences which render their worship a mockery of God.

Again, it may be supposed that the startling word, “Add your burnt offerings to your” (ordinary) “offerings, and eat the flesh (of them,)”{ Jer 7:21} implies a time of unusual activity in the matter of honouring the God of Israel with the more costly offerings of which the worshippers did not partake, but which were wholly consumed on the altar; which fact also might point to a season of special danger.

And, lastly, the references to taking refuge behind the walls of “defenced cities,” {Jer 8:14; Jer 10:17} as we know that the Rechabites and doubtless most of the rural populace took refuge in Jerusalem on the approach of the third and last Chaldean expedition, seem to prove that the occasion of the prophecy was the first Chaldean invasion, which ended in the submission of Jehoiakim to the yoke of Babylon. {2Ki 24:1} Already the northern frontier had experienced the destructive onslaught of the invaders, and rumour announced that they might soon be expected to arrive before the walls of Jerusalem. {Jer 8:16-17}

The only other historical occasion which can be suggested with any plausibility is the Scythian invasion of Syria-Palestine, to which the previous discourse was assigned. This would fix the date of the prophecy at some point between the thirteenth and the eighteenth years of Josiah (B.C. 629-624). But the arguments for this view do not seem to be very strong in themselves, and they certainly do not explain the essential identity of the oracle summarised in Jer 26:1-6, with that of Jer 7:1-15. The “undisguised references to the prevalence of idolatry in Jerusalem itself (Jer 7:17; Jer 7:30-31), and the unwillingness of the people to listen to the prophets teaching,” {Jer 7:27} are quite as well accounted for by supposing a religious or rather an irreligious reaction under Jehoiakim-which is every way probable considering the bad character of that king, {2Ki 23:37; Jer 22:13 sqq.} and the serious blow inflicted upon the reforming party by the death of Josiah; as by assuming that the prophecy belongs to the years before the extirpation of idolatry in the eighteenth year of the latter sovereign.

And now let us take a rapid glance at the salient points of this remarkable utterance. The people are standing in the outer court, with their faces turned toward the court of the priests, in which stood the holy house itself. {Psa 5:7} The prophetic speaker stands facing them, “in the gate of the Lords house,” the entry of the upper or inner court, the place whence Baruch was afterwards to read another of his oracles to the people. {Jer 36:10} Standing here, as it were between his audience and the throne of Iahvah, Jeremiah acts as visible mediator between them and their God. His message to the worshippers who throng the courts of Iahvahs sanctuary is not one of approval. He does not congratulate them upon their manifest devotion, upon the munificence of their offerings, upon their ungrudging and unstinted readiness to meet an unceasing drain upon their means. His message is a surprise, a shock to their self-satisfaction, an alarm to their slumbering consciences, a menace of wrath and destruction upon them and their holy place. His very first word is calculated to startle their self-righteousness, their misplaced faith in the merit of their worship and service. “Amend your ways and your doings!” Where was the need of amendment? they might ask. Were they not at that moment engaged in a function most grateful to Iahvah? Were they not keeping the law of the sacrifices, and were not the Levitical priesthood ministering in their order, and receiving their due share of the offerings which poured into the temple day by day? Was not all this honour enough to satisfy the most exacting of deities? Perhaps it was, had the deity in question been merely as one of the gods of Canaan. So much lip service, so many sacrifices and festivals, so much joyous revelling in the sanctuary, might be supposed to have sufficiently appeased one of the common Baals, those half-womanish phantoms of deity whose delight was imagined to be in feasting and debauchery. Nay, so much zeal might have propitiated the savage heart of a Molech. But the God of Israel was not as these, nor one of these; though His ancient people were too apt to conceive thus of Him, and certain modern critics have unconsciously followed in their wake.

Let us see what it was that called so loudly for amendment, and then we may become more fully aware of the gulf that divided the God of Israel from the idols of Canaan, and His service from all other service. It is important to keep this radical difference steadily before our minds, and to deepen the impression of it, in days when the effort is made by every means to confuse Iahvah with the gods of heathendom, and to rank the religion of Israel with the lower surrounding systems.

Jeremiah accuses his countrymen of flagrant transgression of the universal laws of morality. Theft, murder, adultery, perjury, fraud, and covetousness, slander and lying and treachery, {Jer 7:9; Jer 9:3-8} are charged upon these zealous worshippers by a man who lived amongst them, and knew them well, and could be contradicted at once if his charges were false.

He tells them plainly that, in virtue of their frequenting it, the temple is become a den of robbers.

And this trampling upon the common rights of man has its counterpart and its climax in treason against God, in “burning incense to the Baal, and walking after other gods whom they know not”; {Jer 7:9} in an open and shameless attempt to combine the worship of the God who had from the outset revealed Himself to their prophets as a “jealous,” i.e., an exclusive God, with the worship of shadows who had not revealed themselves at all, and could not be “known,” because devoid of all character and real existence. They thus ignored the ancient covenant which had constituted them a nation. {Jer 7:23}

In the cities of Judah, in the streets of the very capital, the cultus of Ashtoreth, the Queen of Heaven, the voluptuous Canaanite goddess of love and dalliance, was busily practised by whole families together, in deadly provocation of the God of Israel. The first and great commandment said, Thou shalt love Iahvah thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve. And they loved and served and followed and sought after and worshipped the sun and the moon and the host of heaven, the objects adored by the nation that was so soon to enslave them. {Jer 8:2} Not only did a worldly, covetous, and sensual priesthood connive in the restoration of the old superstitions which associated other gods with Iahvah, and set up idol symbols and altars within the precincts of His temple, as Manasseh had 2Ki 21:4-5; they went further than this in their “syncretism,” or rather in their perversity, their spiritual blindness, their wilful misconception of the God revealed to their fathers. They actually confounded Him-the Lord “who exercised lovingkindness, justice, and righteousness, and delighted in” the exhibition of these qualities by His worshippers {Jer 9:24} -with the dark and cruel sun god of the Ammonites. They “rebuilt the high places of the Tophet, in the valley of ben Hinnom,” on the north side of Jerusalem, “to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire”; if by means so revolting to natural affection they might win back the favour of heaven-means which Iahvah “commanded not, neither came they into His mind.” {Jer 7:31} Such fearful and desperate expedients were doubtless first suggested by the false prophets and priests in the times of national adversity under king Manasseh. They harmonised only too well with the despair of a people who saw in a long succession of political disasters the token of Iahvahs unforgiving wrath. That these dreadful rites were not a “survival” in Israel, seems to follow from the horror which they excited in the allied armies of the two kingdoms, when the king of Moab, in the extremity of the siege, offered his eldest son as a burnt offering on the wall of his capital before the eyes of the besiegers. So appalled were the Israelite forces by this spectacle of a fathers despair, that they at once raised the blockade, and retreated homeward. {2Ki 3:27} It is probable, then, that the darker and bloodier aspects of heathen worship were of only recent appearance among the Hebrews, and that the rites of Molech had not been at all frequent or familiar, until the long and harassing conflict with Assyria broke the national spirit and inclined the people, in their trouble, to welcome the suggestion that costlier sacrifices were demanded, if Iahvah was to be propitiated and His wrath appeased. Such things were not done, apparently, in Jeremiahs time; he mentions them as the crown of the nations past offences; as sins that still cried to heaven for vengeance, and would surely entail it, because the same spirit of idolatry which had culminated in these excesses, still lived and was active in the popular heart. It is the persistence in sins of the same character which involves our drinking to the dregs the cup of punishment for the guilty past. The dark catalogue of forgotten offences witnesses against us before the Unseen Judge, and is only obliterated by the tears of a true repentance, and by the new evidence of a change of heart and life. Then, as in some palimpsest, the new record covers and conceals the old; and it is only if we fatally relapse, that the erased writing of our misdeeds becomes visible again before the eye of Heaven. Perhaps also the prophet mentions these abominations because at the time he saw around him unequivocal tendencies to the renewal of them. Under the patronage or with the connivance of the wicked king Jehoiakim, the reactionary party may have begun to set up again the altars thrown down by Josiah, while their religious leaders advocated both by speech and writing a return to the abolished cultus. At all events, this supposition gives special point to the emphatic assertion of Jeremiah, that Iahvah had not commanded nor even thought of such hideous rites. The reference to the false labours of the scribes {Jer 8:8} lends colour to this view. It may be that some of the interpreters of the sacred law actually anticipated certain writers of our own day, in putting this terrible gloss upon the precept, “The firstborn of thy sons shalt thou give unto Me.” {Exo 22:29}

The people of Judah were misled, but they were willingly misled. When Jeremiah declares to them, “Lo, ye are trusting, for your part, upon the words of delusion, so that ye gain no good!” {Jer 7:8} it is perhaps not so much the smooth prophecies of the false prophets as the fatal attitude of the popular mind, out of which those misleading oracles grew, and which in turn they aggravated, that the speaker deprecates. He warns them that an absolute trust in the “praesentia Numinis” is delusive; a trust, cherished like theirs independently of the condition of its justification, viz., a walk pleasing to God. “What! will ye break all My laws, and then come and stand with polluted hands before Me in this house, {Isa 1:15} which is named after Me Iahvahs House, {Isa 4:1} and reassure yourselves with the thought, We are absolved from the consequences of all these abominations?” (Jer 7:9-10). Lit. “We are saved, rescued, secured, with regard to having done all these abominations”: cf. Jer 2:35. But perhaps, with Ewald, we should point the Hebrew term differently, and read, “Save us!” “to do all these abominations,” as if that were the express object of their petition, which would really ensue, if their prayer were granted: a fine irony. For the form of the verb. {cf. Eze 14:14} They thought their formal devotions were more than enough to counterbalance any breaches of the decalogue; they laid that flattering unction to their souls. They could make it up with God for setting His moral law at naught. It was merely a question of compensation. They did not see that the moral law is as immutable as laws physical; and that the consequences of violating or keeping it are as inseparable from it as pain from a blow, or death from poison. They did not see that the moral law is simply the law of mans health and wealth, and that the transgression of it is sorrow and suffering and death.

“If men like you,” argues the prophet, “dare to tread these courts, it must be because you believe it a proper thing to do. But that belief implies that you hold the temple to be something other than what it really is; that you see no incongruity in making the House of Iahvah a meeting place of murderers. {“spelunca latronum” Mat 21:13} That you have yourselves made it, in the full view of Iahvah, whose seeing does not rest there, but involves results such as the present crisis of public affairs; the national danger is proof that He has seen your heinous misdoings.” For Iahvahs seeing brings a vindication of right, and vengeance upon evil. {2Ch 24:22; Exo 3:7} He is the watchman that never slumbers nor sleeps; the eternal Judge, Who ever upholds the law of righteousness in the affairs of man, nor suffers the slightest infringement of that law to go unpunished. And this unceasing watchfulness, this perpetual dispensation of justice, is really a manifestation of Divine mercy; for the purpose of it is to save the human race from self-destruction, and to raise it ever higher in the scale of true well-being, which essentially consists in the knowledge of God and obedience to His laws.

Jeremiah gives his audience further ground for conviction. He points to a striking instance in which conduct like theirs had involved results such as his warning holds before them. He establishes the probability of chastisement by a historical parallel. He offers them, so to speak, ocular demonstration of his doctrine. “I also, lo, I have seen, saith Iahvah!” Your eyes are fixed on the temple; so are Mine, but in a different way. You see a national palladium; I see a desecrated sanctuary, a shrine polluted and profaned. This distinction between Gods view and yours is certain: “for, go ye now to My place which was at Shiloh, where I caused My Name to abide at the outset” (of your settlement in Canaan); “and see the thing that I have done to it, because of the wickedness of My people Israel” (the northern kingdom). There is the proof that Iahvah seeth not as man seeth; there, in that dismantled ruin, in that historic sanctuary of the more powerful kingdom of Ephraim, once visited by thousands of worshippers like Jerusalem today, now deserted and desolate, a monument of Divine wrath.

The reference is not to the tabernacle, the sacred Tent of the Wanderings, which was first set up at Nob {1Sa 22:11} and then removed to Gibeon, {2Ch 1:3} but obviously to a building more or less like the temple, though less magnificent. The place and its sanctuary had doubtless been ruined in the great catastrophe, when the kingdom of Samaria fell before the power of Assyria (721 B.C.).

In the following words (Jer 7:13-15) the example is applied. “And now”-stating the conclusion-“because of your having done all these deeds” (“saith Iahvah,” LXX omits), “and because I spoke unto you” (“early and late,” LXX omits), “and ye hearkened not, and I called you and ye answered not”: {Pro 1:24} “I will do unto the house upon which My Name is called, wherein ye are trusting, and unto the place which I gave to you and to your fathers-as I did unto Shiloh.”

Some might think that if the city fell, the holy house would escape, as was thought by many like-minded fanatics when Jerusalem was beleaguered by the Roman armies seven centuries later: but Jeremiah declares that the blow will fall upon both alike; and to give greater force to his words, he makes the judgment begin at the house of God. (The Hebrew reader will note the dramatic effect of the disposition of the accents. The principal pause is placed upon the word “fathers,” and the reader is to halt in momentary suspense upon that word, before he utters the awful three which close the verse: “as I-did to-Shiloh.” The Massorets were masters of this kind of emphasis.)

“And I will cast you away from My Presence, as I cast” (“all”: LXX omits) “your kinsfolk, all the posterity of Ephraim.” {2Ki 17:20} Away from My Presence: far beyond the bounds of that holy land where I have revealed Myself to priests and prophets, and where My sanctuary stands; into a land where heathenism reigns, and the knowledge of God is not; into the dark places of the earth, that lie under the blighting shadow of superstition, and are enveloped in the moral midnight of idolatry. “Projiciam vos a facie mea.” The knowledge and love of God-heart and mind ruled by the sense of purity and tenderness and truth and right united in an Ineffable Person, and enthroned upon the summit of the universe-these are light and life for man; where these are, there is His Presence. They who are so endowed behold the face of God, in Whom is no darkness at all. Where these spiritual endowments are nonexistent; where mere power, or superhuman force, is the highest thought of God to which man has attained; where there is no clear sense of the essential holiness and love of the Divine Nature; there the world of man lies in darkness that may be felt; there bloody rites prevail; there harsh oppression and shameless vices reign: for the dark places of the earth are full of the habitations of cruelty.

“And thou, pray thou not for this people,” {Jer 18:20} “and lift not up for them outcry nor prayer, and urge not Me, for I hear thee not. Seest thou not what they do in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem? The children gather sticks, and the fathers light the fire, and the women knead dough, to make sacred buns” {Jer 44:19} “for the Queen of Heaven, and to pour libations to other gods, in order to grieve.” {Deu 32:16; Deu 32:21} “Is it Me that they grieve? saith Iahvah; is it not themselves” (rather), “in regard to the shame of their own faces” (Jer 7:16-19).

From one point of view, all human conduct may be said to be “indifferent” to God; He is self-sufficing, and needs not our praises, our love, our obedience, any more than He needed the temple ritual and the sacrifices of bulls and goats. Man can neither benefit nor injure God; he can only affect his own fortunes in this world and the next, by rebellion against the laws upon which his welfare depends, or by a careful observance of them. In this sense, it is true that wilful idolatry, that treason against God, does not “provoke” or “grieve” the Immutable One. Men do such things to their own sole hurt, to the shame of their own faces: that is, the punishment will be the painful realisation of the utter groundlessness of their confidence, of the folly of their false trust; the mortification of disillusion, when it is too late. That Jeremiah should have expressed himself thus is sufficient answer to those who pretend that the habitual anthropomorphism of the prophetic discourses is anything more than a mere accident of language and an accommodation to ordinary style.

In another sense, of course, it is profoundly true to say that human sin provokes and grieves the Lord. God is Love; and love may be pained to its depths by the fault of the beloved, and stirred to holy indignation at the disclosure of utter unworthiness and ingratitude. Something corresponding to these emotions of man may be ascribed, with all reverence, to the Inscrutable Being who creates man “in His own image,” that is, endowed with faculties capable of aspiring towards Him, and receiving the knowledge of His being and character.

“Pray not thou for this people for I hear thee not!” Jeremiah was wont to intercede for his people. {Jer 11:14; Jer 18:20; Jer 15:1; cf. 1Sa 12:23} The deep pathos which marks his style, the minor key in which almost all his public utterances are pitched, proves that the fate which he saw impending over his country grieved him to the heart. “Our sweetest songs are those which tell of saddest thought”; and this is eminently true of Jeremiah. A profound melancholy had fallen like a cloud upon his soul; he had seen the future, fraught as it was with suffering and sorrow, despair and overthrow, slaughter and bitter servitude; a picture in which images of terror crowded one upon another, under a darkened sky, from which no ray of blessed hope shot forth, but only the lightnings of wrath and extermination. Doubtless his prayers were frequent, alive with feeling, urgent, imploring, full of the convulsive energy of expiring hope. But in the midst of his strong crying and tears, there arose from the depths of his consciousness the conviction that all was in vain. “Pray not thou for this people, for I will not hear thee.” The thought stood before him, sharp and clear as a command; the unuttered sound of it rang in his ears, like the voice of a destroying angel, a messenger of doom, calm as despair, sure as fate. He knew it was the voice of God.

In the history of nations as in the lives of individuals there are times when repentance, even if possible, would be too late to avert the evils which long periods of misdoing have called from the abyss to do their penal and retributive work. Once the dike is undermined, no power on earth can hold back the flood of waters from the defenceless lands beneath. And when a nations sins have penetrated and poisoned all social and political relations, and corrupted the very fountains of life, you cannot avert the flood of ruin that must come, to sweep away the tainted mass of spoiled humanity; you cannot avert the storm that must break to purify the air, and make it fit for men to breathe again.

“Therefore”-because of the national unfaithfulness-“thus said the Lord Iahvah, Lo, Mine anger and My fury are being poured out toward this place-upon the men, and upon the cattle, and upon the trees of the field, and upon the fruit of the ground; and it will burn, and not be quenched!” {Jer 7:20} The havoc wrought by war, the harrying and slaying of man and beast, the felling of fruit trees and firing of the vineyards, are intended; but not so as to exclude the ravages of pestilence and droughts {Jer 14:1-22} and famine. All these evils are manifestations of the wrath of Iahvah., cattle and trees and “the fruit of the ground,” i.e., of the cornlands and vineyards, are to share in the general destruction, {cf. Hos 4:3} not, of course, as partakers of mans guilt, but only by way of aggravating his punishment. The final phrase is worthy of consideration, because of its bearing upon other passages. “It will burn and not be quenched,” or “it will burn unquenchably.” The meaning is not that the Divine wrath once kindled will go on burning forever; but that once kindled, no human or other power will be able to extinguish it, until it has accomplished its appointed work of destruction.

“Thus said Iahvah Sabaoth, the God of Israel: Your holocausts add ye to your common sacrifices, and eat ye flesh!” that is, Eat flesh in abundance, eat your fill of it! Stint not yourselves by devoting any portion of your offerings wholly to Me. I am as indifferent to your “burnt offerings,” your more costly and splendid gifts, as to the ordinary sacrifices, over which you feast and make merry with your friends. {1Sa 1:4; 1Sa 1:13} The holocausts which you are now burning on the altar before Me will not avail to alter My settled purpose. “For I spake not with your fathers, nor commanded them, in the day that I brought them forth out of the land of Egypt, concerning matters of holocaust and sacrifice, but this matter commanded I them, Hearken ye unto My voice, so become I God to you, and you-ye shall become to Me a people; and walk ye in all the way that I shall command you, that it may go well with you!” (Jer 7:22-23) cf. Deu 6:3. Those who believe that the entire priestly legislation as we now have it in the Pentateuch is the work of Moses, may be content to find in this passage of Jeremiah no more than an extreme antithetical expression of the truth that to obey is better than sacrifice. There can be no question that from the outset of its history. Israel, in common with all the Semitic nations, gave outward expression to its religious ideas in the form of animal sacrifice. Moses cannot have originated the institution, he found it already in vogue, though he may have regulated the details of it. Even in the Pentateuch, the term “sacrifice” is nowhere explained; the general understanding of the meaning of it is taken for granted. {see Exo 12:27; Exo 23:18} Religious customs are of immemorial use, and it is impossible in most cases to specify the period of their origin. But while it is certain that the institution of sacrifice was of extreme antiquity in Israel as in other ancient peoples, it is equally certain, from the plain evidence of their extant writings, that the prophets before the Exile attached no independent value either to it or to any other part of the ritual of the temple. We have already seen how Jeremiah could speak of the most venerable of all the symbols of the popular faith. {Jer 3:16} Now he affirms that the traditional rules for the burnt offerings and other sacrifices were not matters of special Divine institution, as was popularly supposed at the time. The reference to the Exodus may imply that already in his day there were written narratives which asserted the contrary; that the first care of the Divine Saviour after He had led His people through the sea was to provide them with an elaborate system of ritual and sacrifice, identical with that which prevailed in Jeremiahs day. The important verse already quoted {Jer 8:8} seems to glance at such pious fictions of the popular religious teachers: “How say ye, We are wise, and the instruction” (A.V. “law”) “of Iahvah is with us? But behold for lies hath it wrought-the lying pen of the scribes!”

It is, indeed, difficult to see how Jeremiah or any of his predecessors could have done otherwise than take for granted the established modes of public worship, and the traditional holy places. The prophets do not seek to alter or abolish the externals of religion as such; they are not so unreasonable as to demand that stated rites and traditional sanctuaries should be disregarded, and that men should worship in the spirit only, without the aid of outward symbolism of any sort, however innocent and appropriate to its object it might seem. They knew very well that rites and ceremonies were necessary to public worship; what they protested against was the fatal tendency of their time to make these the whole of religion, to suppose that Iahvahs claims could be satisfied by a due performance of these, without regard to those higher moral requirements of His law which the ritual worship might fitly have symbolised but could not rightly supersede. It was not a question with Hosea, Amos, Micah, Isaiah, Jeremiah, whether or not Iahvah could be better honoured with or without temples and priests and sacrifices. The question was whether these traditional institutions actually served as an outward expression of that devotion to Him and His holy law, of that righteousness and holiness of life, which is the only true worship, or whether they were looked upon as in themselves comprising the whole of necessary religion. Since the people took this latter view, Jeremiah declares that their system of public worship is futile.

“Hearken unto My voice”: not as giving regulations about the ritual, but as inculcating moral duty by the prophets, as is explained immediately, {Jer 7:25} and as is clear also from the statement that “they walked in the schemes of their own evil heart” (omit: “in the stubbornness,” with LXX, and read “moacoth” stat. constr.), “and fell to the rear and not the front.”

As they did not advance in the knowledge and love of the spiritual God, who was seeking to lead them by His prophets, from Moses downwards, {Deu 18:15} they steadily retrogaded and declined in moral worth, until they had become hopelessly corrupt and past correction. (Lit. “and they became back and not face,” which may mean, they turned their backs upon Iahvah and His instruction.) This steady progress in evil is indicated by the words, “and they hardened their neck, they did worse than their fathers.” {Jer 7:26} It is implied that this was the case with each successive generation, and the view of Israels history thus expressed is in perfect harmony with common experience. Progress, one way or the other, is the law of character; if we do not advance in goodness, we go back, or, what is the same thing, we advance in evil.

Finally, the prophet is warned that his mission also must fail, like that of his predecessors, unless indeed the second clause of Jer 7:27, which is omitted by the Septuagint, be really an interpolation. At all events, the failure is implied if not expressed, for he is to pronounce a sentence of reprobation upon his people. “And thou shalt speak all these words unto them” (“and they will not hearken unto thee, and thou shalt call unto them, and they will not answer thee”: LXX omits). “And thou shalt say unto them, This is the nation that hearkened not unto the voice of Iahvah its God, and received not correction: Good faith is perished and cut off from their mouth.” {cf. Jer 9:3 sq.} The charge is remarkable. It is one which Jeremiah reiterates: see Jer 7:9; Jer 6:13; Jer 7:5; Jer 9:3 sqq.; Jer 12:1. His fellow countrymen are at once deceivers and deceived. They have no regard for truth and honour in their mutual dealings; grasping greed and lies and trickery stamp their everyday intercourse with each other; and covetousness and fraud equally characterise the behaviour of their religious leaders. Where truth is not prized for its own sake, there debased ideas of God and lax conceptions of morality creep in and spread. Only he who loves truth comes to the light; and only he who does Gods will sees that truth is divine. False belief and false living in turn beget each other; and as a matter of experience it is often impossible to say which was antecedent to the other.

In the closing section of this first part of his long address (Jer 7:29 – Jer 8:3), Jeremiah apostrophises the country, bidding her bewail her imminent ruin. “Shear thy tresses” (coronal of long hair) “and cast them away, and lift upon the bare hills a lamentation!”-sing a dirge over thy departed glory and thy slain children, upon those unhallowed mountain tops which were the scene of thine apostasies: {Jer 3:21} “for Iahvah hath rejected and forsaken the generation of His wrath.” The hopeless tone of this exclamation (cf. also Jer 7:15, Jer 7:16, Jer 7:20) seems to agree better with the times of Jehoiakim, when it had become evident to the prophet that amendment was beyond hope, than with the years prior to Josiahs reformation. His own contemporaries are “the generation of Iahvahs wrath,” i.e., upon which His wrath is destined to be poured out, for the day of grace is past and gone; and this, because of the desecration of the temple itself by such kings as Ahaz and Manasseh, but especially because of the horrors of the child sacrifices in the valley of ben Hinnom, {2Ki 16:3; 2Ki 21:3-6} which those kings had been the first to introduce in Judah. “Therefore behold days are coming, saith Iahvah, and it shall no more be called the Tophet” (an obscure term, probably meaning something like “Pyre” or “Burning place”: cf. the Persian tabidan “to burn,” and “to bury,” strictly “to burn” a corpse; also “to smoke,” Sanskrit dhup: to suppose a reproachful name like “Spitting” = “Object of loathing,” is clearly against the context: the honourable name is to be exchanged for one of dishonour), “and the Valley of ben Hinnom, but the Valley of Slaughter, and people shall bury in (the) Tophet for want of room (elsewhere)!” A great battle is contemplated, as is evident also from Deu 28:25-26, the latter verse being immediately quoted by the prophet. {Jer 7:33} The Tophet will be defiled forever by being made a burial place; but many of the fallen will be left unburied, a prey to the vulture and the jackal. In that fearful time, all sounds of joyous life will cease in the cities of Judah and in the capital itself, “for the land will become a desolation.” And the scornful enemy will not be satisfied with wreaking his vengeance upon the living; he will insult the dead, by breaking into the sepulchres of the kings and grandees, the priests and prophets and people, and haling their corpses forth to lie rotting in face of the sun, moon, and stars, which they had so sedulously worshipped in their lifetime, but which will be powerless to protect their dead bodies from this shameful indignity. And as for the survivors, “death will be preferred to life in the case of all the remnant that remain of this evil tribe, in all the places whither I shall have driven them, saith Iahvah Sabaoth” (omit the second “that remain,” with LXX as an accidental repetition from the preceding line, and as breaking the construction). The prophet has reached the conviction that Judah will be driven into banishment; but the details of the destruction which he contemplates are obviously of an imaginative and rhetorical character. It is, therefore, superfluous to ask whether a great battle was actually fought afterwards in the valley of ben Hinnom, and whether the slain apostates of Judah were buried there in heaps, and whether the conquerors violated the tombs. Had the Chaldeans or any of their allies done this last, in search of treasure for instance, we should expect to find some notice of it in the historical chapters of Jeremiah. But it was probably known well enough to the surrounding peoples that the Jews were not in the habit of burying treasure in their tombs. The prophets threat, however, curiously corresponds to what Josiah is related to have done at Bethel and elsewhere, by way of irreparably polluting the high places; {2Ki 23:16 sqq.} and it is probable that his recollection of that event, which he may himself have witnessed, determined the form of Jeremiahs language here.

In the second part of this great discourse {Jer 8:4-22} we have a fine development of thoughts which have already been advanced in the opening piece, after the usual manner of Jeremiah. The first half (or strophe) is mainly concerned with the sins of the tuition (Jer 8:4-13), the second with a despairing lament over the punishment (Jer 8:14-22; Jer 9:1). “And thou shalt say unto them: Thus said Iahvah, Do men fall and not rise again? Doth a man turn back, and not return? Why doth Jerusalem make this people to turn back with an eternal” (or perfect, utter, absolute) “turning back? Why clutch they deceit, refuse to return?” The LXX omits “Jerusalem,” which is perhaps only a marginal gloss. We should then have to read “shobebah,” as “this people” is masc.

The “He” has been written twice by inadvertence. The verb, however, is transitive in Jer 50:19; Isa 47:10, etc.; and I find no certain instance of the intrans, form besides Eze 38:8, participle. “I listened and heard; they speak not aright”; {Exo 10:29; Isa 16:6} “not a man repenteth over his evil, saying (or thinking), What have I done? They all” (lit. “all of him,” i.e., the people) “turn back into their courses” (plur. Heb. text; sing. Heb. marg.), “like the rushing horse into the battle.”

There is something unnatural in this obstinate persistence in evil. If a man happens to fall he does not remain on the ground, but quickly rises to his feet again; and if he turn back on his way for some reason or other, he will usually return to that way again. There is a play on the word “turn back” or “return,” like that in Jer 3:12; Jer 3:14. The term is first used in the sense of turning back or away from Iahvah, and then in that of returning to Him, according to its metaphorical meaning “to repent.” Thus the import of the question is: Is it natural to apostatise and never to repent of it? Perhaps we should rather read, after the analogy of Jer 3:1 “Doth a man go away on a journey, and not return?”

Others interpret: “Doth a man return, and not return?” That is, if he return, he does it, and does not stop midway; whereas Judah only pretends to repent, and does not really do so. This, however, does not agree with the parallel member, nor with the following similar questions.

It is very noticeable how thoroughly the prophets, who, after all, were the greatest of practical moralists, identify religion with right aims and right conduct. The beginning of evil courses is turning away from Iahvah; the beginning of reform is turning back to Iahvah. For Iahvahs character as revealed to the prophets is the ideal and standard of ethical perfection; He does and delights in love, justice, and equity. {Jer 9:23} If a man look away from that ideal, if he be content with a lower standard than the Will and Law of the All-Perfect, then and thereby he inevitably sinks in the scale of morality. The prophets are not troubled by the idle question of medieval schoolmen and sceptical moderns. It never occurred to them to ask the question whether God is good because God wills it, or whether God wills good because it is good. The dilemma is, in truth, no better than a verbal puzzle, if we allow the existence of a personal Deity. For the idea of God is the idea of a Being who is absolutely good, the only Being who is such; perfect goodness is understood to be realised nowhere else but in God. It is part of His essence and conception; it is the aspect under which the human mind apprehends Him. To suppose goodness existing apart from Him, as an independent object which He may choose or refuse, is to deal in empty abstractions. We might as well ask whether convex can exist apart from concave in nature, or motion apart from a certain rate of speed. The human spirit can apprehend God in His moral perfections, because it is, at however vast a distance, akin to Him-a “divinae particula aurae”; and it can strive towards those perfections by help of the same grace which reveals them. The prophets know of no other origin or measure of moral endeavour than that which Iahvah makes known to them. In the present instance, the charge which Jeremiah makes against his contemporaries is a radical falsehood, insincerity, faithlessness: “they clutch” or “cling to deceit, they speak what is not right” or “honest, straightforward.” {Gen 42:11; Gen 42:19} Their treason to God and their treachery to their fellows are opposite sides of the same fact. Had they been true to Iahvah, that is, to His teachings through the higher prophets and their own consciences, they would have been true to one another. The forbearing love of God, His tender solicitude to hear and save, are illustrated by the words: “I listened and heard not a man repented over his evil, saying, What have I done?” (The feeling of the stricken conscience could hardly be more aptly expressed than by this brief question.) But in vain does the Heavenly Father wait for the accents of penitence and contrition: “they all return”-go back again and again {Psa 23:6} -“into their own race” or “courses, like a horse rushing” lit. “pouring forth”: of rushing waters, {Psa 78:20} “into the battle.” The eagerness with which they follow their own wicked desires, the recklessness with which they “give their sensual race the rein,” in set defiance of God, and wilful oblivion of consequences, is finely expressed by the simile of the warhorse rushing in headlong eagerness into the fray. {Job 39:25} “Also” (or “even”) “the stork in the heavens knoweth her appointed times, and turtledove, swift and crane observe the season of their coming; but My people know not the ordinance of Iahvah”-what He has willed and declared to be right for man (His Law; “jus divinum, relligio divina”). The dullest of wits can hardly fail to appreciate the force of this beautiful contrast between the regularity of instinct and the aberrations of reason. All living creatures are subject to laws upon obedience to which their well-being depends. The life of man is no exception; it too is subject to a law-a law which is as much higher than that which regulates mere animal existence as reason and conscience and spiritual aspiration are higher than instinct and sexual impulse. But whereas the lower forms of life are obedient to the laws of their being, man rebels against them, and dares to disobey what he knows to be for his good; nay, he suffers himself to be so blinded by lust and passion and pride and self-will that at last he does not even recognise the Law-the ordinance of the Eternal-for what it really is, the organic law of his true being, the condition at once of his excellence and his happiness.

The prophet next meets an objection. He has just alleged a profound moral ignorance-a culpable ignorance-against the people. He supposes them to deny the accusation, as doubtless they often did in answer to his remonstrances {cf. Jer 17:15; Jer 20:7 sq.} “How can ye say, We are wise”-morally wise-“and the teaching of Iahvah is with us!” (“but behold”: LXX omits: either term would be sufficient by itself) “for the Lie hath the lying pen of the scribes made it!” The reference clearly is to what Jeremiahs opponents call “the teaching (or law: torah) of Iahvah”; and it is also clear that the prophet charges the “scribes” of the opposite party with falsifying or tampering with the teaching of Iahvah in some way or other. Is it meant that they misrepresent the terms of a written document, such as the Book of the Covenant, or Deuteronomy? But they could hardly do this without detection, in the case of a work which was not in their exclusive possession. Or does Jeremiah accuse them of misinterpreting the sacred law, by putting false glosses upon its precepts, as might be done in a legal document wherever there seemed room for a difference of opinion, or wherever conflicting traditional interpretations existed side by side? (Cf. my remarks on Jer 7:31). The Hebrew may indicate this, for we may translate: “But lo, into the lie the lying pen of the scribes hath made it!” which recalls St. Pauls description of the heathen as changing the truth of God into a lie. {Rom 1:26} The construction is the same as in Gen 12:2; Isa 44:17. Or, finally, does he boldly charge these abettors of the false prophets with forging supposititious law books, in the interest of their own faction, and in support of the claims and doctrines of the worldly priests and prophets? This last view is quite admissible, so far as the Hebrew goes, which, however, is not free from ambiguity. It might be rendered, “But behold, in vain,” or “bootlessly” {Jer 3:23} “hath the lying pen of the scribes laboured”; taking the verb in an absolute sense, which is not a common use. {Rth 2:19} Or we might transpose the terms for “pen” and “lying,” and render, “But behold, in vain hath the pen of the scribes fabricated falsehood.” In any case, the general sense is the same: Jeremiah charges not only the speakers, but the writers, of the popular party with uttering their own inventions in the name of Iahvah. These scribes were the spiritual ancestors of those of our Saviours time, who “made the word of God of none effect for the sake of their traditions.” {Mat 15:6} “For the Lie” means, to maintain the popular misbelief. It might also be rendered, “for falsehood, falsely,” as in the phrase “to swear falsely,” i.e., for deceit. It thus appears that conflicting and competing versions of the law were current in that age. Has the Pentateuch preserved elements of both kinds, or is it homogeneous throughout? Of the scribes of the period we, alas! know little beyond what this passage tells us. But Ezra must have had predecessors, and we may remember that Baruch, the friend and amanuensis of Jeremiah, was also a scribe. {Jer 36:26}

“The wise will blush, they will be dismayed and caught! Lo, the word of Iahvah they rejected, and wisdom of what sort have they?” {Jer 6:10} The whole body of Jeremiahs opponents, the populace as well as the priests and prophets, are intended by “the wise,” that is, the wise in their own conceits; {Jer 7:8} there is an ironical reference to their own assumption of the title. These self-styled wise ones, who preferred their own wisdom to the guidance of the prophet, will be punished by the mortification of discovering their folly when it is too late. Their folly will be the instrument of their ruin, for “He taketh the wise in their own craftiness” as in a snare. {Pro 5:22}

They who reject Iahvahs word, in whatever form it comes to them, have no other light to walk by; they must needs walk in darkness, and stumble at noonday. For Iahvahs word is the only true wisdom, the only true guide of mans footsteps. And this is the kind of wisdom which the Holy Scriptures offer us; not a merely speculative wisdom, not what is commonly understood by the terms science and art, but the priceless knowledge of God and of His will concerning us; a kind of knowledge which is beyond all comparison the most important for our well-being here and hereafter. If this Divine wisdom, which relates to the proper conduct of life and the right education of the highest faculties of our being, seem a small matter to any man, the fact argues spiritual blindness on his part; it cannot diminish the glory of heavenly wisdom.

Some well meaning but mistaken people are fond of maintaining what they call “the scientific accuracy of the Bible,” meaning thereby an essential harmony with the latest discoveries, or even the newest hypotheses, of physical science. But even to raise such a preposterous question, whether as advocate or as assailant, is to be guilty of a crude anachronism, and to betray an incredible ignorance, of the real value of the Scriptures. That value I believe to be inestimable. But to discuss “the scientific accuracy of the Bible” appears to me to be as irrelevant to any profitable issue, as it would be to discuss the meteorological precision of the Mahabharata, or the marvellous chemistry of the Zendavesta, or the physiological revelations of the Koran, or the enlightened anthropology of the Nibelungenlied.

A man may reject the word of Iahvah, he may reject Christs word, because he supposes that it is not sufficiently attested. He may urge that the proof that it is of God breaks down, and he may flatter himself that he is a person of superior discernment, because he perceives a fact to which the multitude of believers are apparently blind. But what kind of proof would he have? Does he demand more than the case admits of? Some portent in earth or sky or sea, which in reality would be quite foreign to the matter in hand, and could have none but an accidental connection with it, and would, in fact, be no proof at all, but itself a mystery requiring to be explained by the ordinary laws of physical causation? To demand a kind of proof which is irrelevant to the subject is a mark not of superior caution and judgment, but of ignorance and confusion of thought. The plain truth is, and the fact is abundantly illustrated by the teachings of the prophets and, above all, of our Divine Lord, that moral and spiritual truths are self-attesting to minds able to realise them: and they no more need supplementary corroboration than does the ultimate testimony of the senses of a sane person.

Now the Bible as a whole is a unique repertory of such truths; this is the secret of its age-long influence in the world. If a man does not care for the Bible, if he has not learned to appreciate this aspect of it, if he does not love it precisely on this account, I, in turn, care very little for his opinion about the Bible. There may be much in the Bible which is otherwise valuable, which is precious as history, as tradition, as bearing upon questions of interest to the ethnologist, the antiquarian, the man of letters. But these things are the shell, that is the kernel; these are the accidents, that is the substance; these are the bodily vesture, that is the immortal spirit. A man who has not felt this has yet to learn what the Bible is in his text as we now have it, Jeremiah proceeds to denounce punishment on the priests and prophets, whose fraudulent oracles and false interpretations of the Law ministered to their own greedy covetousness, and who smoothed over the alarming state of things by false assurances that all was well (Jer 8:10-12). The Septuagint, however, omits the whole passage after the words, “Therefore I will give their wives to others, their fields to conquerors!” and as these words are obviously an abridgment of the threat, Jer 6:12, {cf. Deu 28:30} while the rest of the passage agrees verbatim with Jer 6:13-15, it may be supposed that a later editor inserted it in the margin here, as generally apposite (cf. Jer 6:10 to with Jer 8:9), whence it has crept into the text. It is true that Jeremiah himself is fond of repetition, but not so as to interrupt the context, as the “therefore” of Jer 8:10 seems to do. Besides, the “wise” of Jer 8:8 are the self-confident people; but if this passage be in place here, “the wise” of Jer 8:9 will have to be understood of their false guides, the prophets and priests. Whereas, if the passage be omitted, there is manifest continuity between the ninth verse and the thirteenth: “I will sweep, sweep them away, saith Iahvah; no grapes on the vine, and no figs on the fig tree, and the foliage is withered, and I have given them destruction” (or “blasting”).

The opening threat is apparently quoted from the contemporary prophet Zephaniah. {Zep 1:2-3} The point of the rest of the verse is not quite clear, owing to the fact that the last clause of the Hebrew text is undoubtedly corrupt. We might suppose that the term “laws” had fallen out, and render, “and I gave them laws which they transgress.” {cf. Jer 5:22; Jer 31:35} The Vulgate has an almost literal translation, which gives the same sense: “et dedi eis quae praetergressa sunt.” The Septuagint omits the clause, probably on the ground of its difficulty. It may be that bad crops and scarcity are threatened. {cf. Jer 14:1-22, Jer 5:24-25} In that case, we may correct the text in the manner suggested above; Jer 17:18, for Amo 4:9). Others understand the verse in a metaphorical sense. The language seems to be coloured by a reminiscence of Mic 7:12; and the “grapes” and “figs” and “foliage” may be the fruits of righteousness, and the nation is like Isaiahs unfruitful vineyard {Isa 5:1-30} or our Lords barren fig tree, {Mat 21:19} fit only for destruction (cf. also Jer 6:9 and Jer 7:20). Another passage which resembles the present is Hab 3:17 “For the fig tree will not blossom, and there will be no yield on the vines; the produce of the olive will disappoint, and the fields will produce no food.” It was natural that tillage should be neglected upon the rumour of invasion. The country folk would crowd into the strong places, and leave their vineyards, orchards, and cornfields to their fate. {Jer 7:14} This would, of course, lead to scarcity and want, and aggravate the horrors of war with those of dearth and famine. I think the passage of Habakkuk is a precise parallel to the one before us. Both contemplate a Chaldean invasion, and both anticipate its disastrous effects upon husbandry. It is possible that the original text ran: “And I have given (will give) unto them their own work” (i.e., the fruit of it: used of fieldwork, Exo 1:14; of the earnings of labour. {Isa 32:17} This, which is a frequent thought in Jeremiah, forms a very suitable close to the verse. The objection is that the prophet does not use this particular term for “work” elsewhere. But the fact of its only once occurring might have caused its corruption. (Another term, which would closely resemble the actual reading, and give much the same sense as this last) “their produce.” This, too, as a very rare expression, only known from Jos 5:11-12, might have been misunderstood and altered by an editor or copyist. It is akin to the Aramaic and there are other Aramaisms in our prophet. One thing is certain; Jeremiah cannot have written what now appears in the Masoretic text.

It is now made clear what the threatened evil is, in a fine closing strophe, several expressions of which recall the prophets magnificent alarm upon the coming of the Scythians (cf. Jer 4:5 with Jer 8:14; Jer 4:15 with Jer 8:16; Jer 4:19 with Jer 8:18). Here, however, the colouring is darker, and the prevailing gloom of the picture unrelieved by any ray of hope. The former piece belongs to the reign of Josiah, this to that of the worthless Jehoiakim. In the interval between the two, moral decline and social and political disintegration had advanced with fearfully accelerated speed, and Jeremiah knew that the end could not be far off.

The fatal news of invasion has come, and he sounds the alarm to his countrymen. “Why are we sitting still” (in silent stupefaction)? “assemble yourselves, that we may go into the defenced cities, and be silent” (or “amazed, stupefied,” with terror) “there! for Iahvah our God hath silenced us” (with speechless terror) “and given us water of gall to drink; for we trespassed toward Iahvah. We looked for peace” or, weal, prosperity, “and there is no good; for a time of healing, and behold panic fear!” So the prophet represents the effect of the evil tidings upon the rural population. At first they are taken by surprise; then they rouse themselves from their stupor to take refuge in the walled cities. They recognise in the trouble a sign of Iahvahs anger. Their fond hopes of returning prosperity are nipped in the bud; the wounds of the past are not to be healed; the country has hardly recovered from one shock, before another and more deadly blow falls upon it. The next verse describes more particularly the nature of the bad news; the enemy, it would seem, had actually entered the land, and given no uncertain indication of what the Judeans might expect, by his ravages on the northern frontier.

“From Dan was heard the snorting of his horses; at the sound of the neighings of his chargers all the land did quake: and they came in” (into the country) “and eat up the land and the fulness thereof, a city and them that dwelt therein.” This was what the invaders did to city after city, once they had crossed the border; ravaging its domain, and sacking the place itself. Perhaps, however, it is better to take the perfects as prophetic, and to render: “From Dan shall be heard . . . shall quake: and they shall come and eat up the land,” etc. This makes the connection easier with the next verse, which certainly has a future reference: “For behold I am about to send” (or simply, “I send”) “against you serpents.” {Isa 11:8}, a small but very poisonous snake; (Aquila basili Vulg. regulus), “for whom there is no charm, and they will bite you! saith Iahvah.” If the tenses be supposed to describe what has already happened, then the connection of thought may be expressed thus: all this evil that you have heard of has happened, not by mere ill fortune, but by the Divine will: Iahvah Himself has done it, and the evil will not stop there, for He purposes to send these destroying serpents into your very midst. {cf. Num 21:6}

The eighteenth verse begins in the Hebrew with a highly anomalous word, which is generally supposed to mean “my source of comfort.” But both the strangeness of the form itself, which can hardly be paralleled in the language, and the indifferent sense which it yields, and the uncertainty of the Hebrew MSS., and the variations of the old versions, indicate that we have here another corruption of the text. Some Hebrew copies divide the word, and this is supported by the Septuagint and the Syro-Hexaplar version, which treat the verse as the conclusion of Jer 8:17, and render “and they shall bite you incurably, with pain of your perplexed heart” (Syro-Hex. “without cure”). But if the first part of the word is “without” (“for lack of”), what is the second? No such root as the existing letters imply is found in Hebrew or the cognate languages. The Targum does not help us: “Because they were scoffing” “against the prophets who prophesied unto them, sorrow and sighing will I bring” “upon them on account of their sins: upon them, saith the prophet, my heart is faint,” It is evident that this is no better than a kind of punning upon the words of the Masoretic text. I incline to read “How shall I cheer myself? Upon me is sorrow; upon me my heart is sick.” The prophet would write for “against,” without a suffix. {Job 9:27; Job 10:20} The passage is much like Jer 4:19.

Another possible emendation is: “Iahvah causeth sorrow to flash forth upon me”: after the archetype of Amo 5:9; but I prefer the former.

Jeremiah closes the section with an outpouring of his own overwhelming sorrow at the heart rending spectacle of the national calamities. No reader endued with any degree of feeling can doubt the sincerity of the prophets patriotism, or the willingness with which he would have given his own life for the salvation of his country. This one passage alone says enough to exonerate its author from the charge of indifference, much more of treachery to his fatherland. He imagines himself to hear the cry of the captive people, who have been carried away by the victorious invader into a distant land: “Hark! the sound of the imploring cry of the daughter of my people from a land far away! Is Iahvah not in Sion? or is not her King in her?”. {cf. Mic 4:9} Such will be the despairing utterance of the exiles of Judah and Jerusalem; and the prophet hastens to answer it with another question, which accounts for their ruin by their disloyalty to that heavenly King; “O why did they vex Me with their graven images, with alien vanities?” Compare a similar question and answer in an earlier discourse. {Jer 5:19} It may be doubted whether the pathetic words which follow-“The harvest is past, the fruit gathering is finished, but as for us, we are not delivered!”-are to be taken as a further complaint of the captives, or as a reference by the prophet himself to hopes of deliverance which had been cherished in vain, month after month, until the season of campaigns was over. In Palestine, the grain crops are harvested in April and May, the ingathering of the fruit falls in August. During all the summer months, Jehoiakim, as a vassal of Egypt, may have been eagerly hoping for some decisive interference from that quarter. That he was on friendly terms with that power at the time appears from the fact that he was allowed to fetch back refugees from its territory. {Jer 26:22 sq.} A provision for the extradition of offenders is found in the far more ancient treaty between Ramses II and the king of the Syrian Chetta (fourteenth century B.C.). But perhaps the prophet is alluding to one of those frequent failures of the crops, which inflicted so much misery upon his people, {cf. Jer 7:13; Jer 3:3; Jer 5:24-25} and which were a natural incident of times of political unsettlement and danger. In that case, he says, the harvest has come and gone, and left us unhelped and disappointed. I prefer the political reference, though our knowledge of the history of the period is so scanty that the particulars cannot be determined.

It is clear enough from the lyrical utterance which follows (Jer 8:21-22), that heavy disasters had already befallen Judah: “For the shattering of the daughter of my people am I shattered; I am a mourner: astonishment hath seized me!” This can hardly be pure anticipation. The next two verses may be a fragment of one of the prophets elegies (qinoth). At all events, they recall the metre of Lam 4:1-22; Lam 5:1-22 :

Doth balm in Gilead fail?

Fails the healer there?

Why is not bound up

My peoples deadly wound?

“Oh that my head were springs,

Mine eye a fount of tears!

To weep both day and night

Over my peoples slain.”

It is not impossible that these two quatrains are cited from the prophets elegy upon the last battle of Megiddo and the death of Josiah. Similar fragments seem to occur below {Jer 9:17-18; Jer 9:20} in the instructions to the mourning women, the professional singers of dirges over the dead.

The beauty of the entire strophe, as an outpouring of inexpressible grief, is too obvious to require much comment. The striking question “Is there no balm in Gilead, is there no physician there?” has passed into the common dialect of religious aphorism: and the same may be said of the despairing cry, “The harvest is past, the summer is ended, and we are not saved!”

The wounds of the state are past healing; but how, it is asked, can this be? Does nature yield a balm which is sovereign for bodily hurts, and is there nowhere a remedy for those of the social organism? Surely that were something anomalous, strange, and unnatural. {cf. Jer 8:7} “Is there no balm in Gilead?” Yes, it is found now here else (cf. Plin., “Hist. Nat.,” 12:25 ad init. “Sed omnibus odoribus praefertur balsamum, uni terrarum Judaeae, concessum”). Then has Iahvah mocked us, by providing a remedy for the lesser evil, and leaving us a hopeless prey to the greater? The question goes deep down to the roots of faith. Not only is there an analogy between the two realms of nature and spirit; in a sense, the whole physical world is an adumbration of things unseen, a manifestation of the spiritual. Is it conceivable that order should reign everywhere in the lower sphere, and chaos be the normal state of the higher? If our baser wants are met by provisions adapted in the most wonderful way to their satisfaction, can we suppose that the nobler-those cravings by which we are distinguished from irrational creatures-have not also their satisfactions included in the scheme of the world? To suppose it is evidence either of capricious unreason, or of a criminal want of confidence in the Author of our being.

“Is there no balm in Gilead? Is there no healer there?” There is a panacea for Israels woes-the “law” or teaching of Iahvah; there is a Healer in Israel, Iahvah Himself, {Jer 3:22; Jer 17:14} who has declared of Himself, “I wound and I heal.” {Deu 32:39; Deu 30:17; Deu 33:6} “Why then is no bandage applied to the daughter of my people?” This is like the cry of the captives, “Is Iahvah not in Sion, is not her King in her?” {Jer 8:19} The answer there is, Yes! it is not that Iahvah is wanting; it is that the national guilt is working out its own retribution. tie leaves this to be understood here; having framed his question so as to compel people, if it might be, to the right inference and answer.

The precious balsam is the distinctive glory of the mountain land of Gilead, and the knowledge of Iahvah is the distinctive glory of His people Israel.

Will no one, then, apply the true remedy to the hurt of the state? No, for priests and prophets and people “know not-they have refused to know” Iahvah. {Jer 8:5} The nation will not look to the Healer and live. It is their misfortunes that they hate not their sins. There is nothing left for Jeremiah but to sing the funeral song of his fatherland.

While weeping over their inevitable doom, the prophet abhors with his whole soul his peoples wickedness, and longs to fly from the dreary scene of treachery and deceit. “O that I had in the wilderness a lodging place of wayfaring men”-some lonely khan on a caravan track, whose bare, unfurnished walls, and blank almost oppressive stillness, would be a grateful exchange for the luxury and the noisy riot of Judahs capital-“that I might leave my people and go away from among them!” The same feeling finds expression in the sigh of the psalmist, who is perhaps Jeremiah himself: “O for the wings of a dove!” {Psa 55:6 sqq.} The same feeling has often issued in actual withdrawal from the world. And under certain circumstances, in certain states of religion and society, the solitary life has its peculiar advantages. The life of towns is doubtless busy, practical, intensely real; but its business is not always of the ennobling sort, its practice in the strain and struggle of selfish competition is often distinctly hostile to the growth and play of the best instincts of human nature; its intensity is often the mere result of confining the manifold energies of the mind to one narrow channel, of concentrating the whole complex of human powers and forces upon the single aim of self-advancement and self-glorification; and its reality is consequently an illusion, phenomenal and transitory as the unsubstantial prizes which absorb all its interest, engross its entire devotion, and exhaust its whole activity. It is not upon the broad sea, nor in the lone wilderness, that men learn to question the goodness, the justice, the very being of their Maker. Atheism is born in the populous wastes of cities, where human beings crowd together, not to bless, but to prey upon each other; where rich and poor dwell side by side, but are separated by the gulf of cynical indifference and social disdain; where selfishness in its ugliest forms is rampant, and is the rule of life with multitudes:-the selfishness which grasps at personal advantage and is deaf to the cries of human pain; the selfishness which calls all manner of fraud and trickery lawful means for the achievement of its sordid ends; and the selfishness of flagrant vice, whose activity is not only earthly and sensual, but also devilish, as directly involving the degradation and ruin of human souls. No wonder that they whose eyes have been blinded by the god of this world, fail to see evidence of any other God; no wonder that they in whose hearts a coarse or a subtle self-worship has dried the springs of pity and love can scoff at the very idea of a compassionate God; no wonder that a soul, shaken to its depths by the contemplation of this bewildering medley of heartlessness and misery, should be tempted to doubt whether there is indeed a Judge of all the earth, who doeth right.

There is no truth, no honour in their dealings with one another; falsehood is the dominant note of their social existence: “They are all adulterers, a throng of traitors!” The charge of adultery is no metaphor. {Jer 5:7-8} Where the sense of religious sanctions is weakened or wanting, the marriage tie is no longer respected; and that which perhaps lust began, is ended by lust, and man and woman, are faithless to each other, because they are faithless to God.

“And they bend their tongue, their bow, falsely.” The tongue is as a bow of which words are the arrows. Evildoers “stretch their arrow, the bitter word. to shoot in ambush at the blameless man.” {Psa 64:4; cf. Psa 11:2} The metaphor is common in the language of poetry; we have an instance in Longfellows “I shot an arrow into the air,” and Homers familiar, “winged words,” is a kindred expression. Others render, “and they bend their tongue as their bow of falsehood,” as though the term “sheqer, mendacium” were an epithet qualifying the term for “bow.” I have taken it adverbially, a use justified by Psa 38:20; Psa 69:5; Psa 119:78; Psa 119:86. In colloquial English a man who exaggerates a story is said to “draw the long bow.”

Their tongue is a bow with which they shoot lies at their neighbours, “and it is not by truth”-faithfulness, honour, integrity-“that they wax mighty in the land”; their riches and power are the fruit of craft and fraud and overreaching. As was said in a former discourse, “their houses are full of deceit, therefore they become great, and amass wealth.” {Jer 5:27} “By truth,” or more literally “unto truth, according to the rule or standard of truth according {cf. Isa 32:1} to right”; Gen 1:11 “according to its kind.” With the idea of the verb, we may compare Psa 112:2 “Mighty in the land shall his seed become.” {cf. also Gen 7:18-19} The passage Jer 5:2-3, is essentially similar to the present, and is the only one besides where we find the term “by truth.” The idiom seems certain, and the parallel passages, especially Jer 5:27, appear to establish the translation above given; otherwise one might be tempted to render: “they stretch their tongue, their bow, for lying,” {Jer 5:2} “and it is not for truth that they are strong in the land.” “Noblesse oblige” is no maxim of theirs; they use their rank and riches for unworthy ends.

“For out of evil unto evil they go forth”-they go from one wickedness to another, adding sin to sin. Apparently, a military metaphor. What they have and are is evil, and they go forth to secure fresh conquests of the same kind. Neither good nor evil is stationary; progress is the law of each-“and Me they know not, saith Iahvah”-they know not that I am truth itself, and therefore irreconcilably opposed to all this fraud and falsehood.

“Beware ye, every one of his companion, and in no brother confide ye; for every brother will surely play the Jacob, -and every companion will go about slandering. And they deceive each his neighbour, and truth they speak not: they have trained their tongue to speak falsehood, to pervert” {their way, Jer 3:21} “they toil.” {Jer 20:9; cf. Gen 19:11} “Thine inhabiting is in the midst of deceit; through deceit they refuse to know Me, saith Iahvah” (Jer 8:3-5). As Micah had complained before him, {Mic 7:5} and as bitter experience had taught our prophet, {Jer 11:18 sqq., Jer 12:6} neither friend nor brother was to be trusted; and that this was not merely the melancholy characteristic of a degenerate age, is suggested by the reference to the unbrotherly intrigues of the far-off ancestor of the Jewish people, in the traditional portrait of whom the best and the worst features of the national character are reflected with wonderful truth and liveliness, Every brother will not fail to play the Jacob (Gen 25:29 sqq., Gen 27:36; Hos 12:4), to outwit, defraud, supplant: cunning and trickery will subserve acquisitiveness. But though an inordinate love of acquisition may still seem to be specially characteristic of the Jewish race, as in ancient times it distinguished the Canaanite and Semitic nations in general, the tendency to cozen and overreach ones neighbour is so far from being confined to it that some modern ethical speculators have not hesitated to assume this tendency to be an original and natural instinct of humanity. The fact, however, for which those who would account for human nature upon purely “natural” grounds are bound to supply some rational explanation, is not so much that aspect of it which has been well known to resemble the instincts of the lower animals ever since observation began, but the aspect of revolt and protest against those lower impulses which we find reflected so powerfully in the documents of the higher religion, and which makes thousands of lives a perpetual warfare.

Jeremiah presents his picture of the universal deceit and dissimulation of his own time as something peculiarly shocking and startling to the common sense of right, and unspeakably revolting in the sight of God, the Judge of all. And yet the difficulty to the modern reader is to detect any essential difference between human nature then and human nature now-between those times and these. It is still true that avarice and lust destroy natural affection; that the ties of blood and friendship are no protection against a godless love of self. The work of slander and misrepresentation is not left to avowed enemies; your own acquaintance will ratify their envy, spite, or mere ill will in this unworthy way. A simple child may tell the truth; but tongues have to be trained to expertness in lying, whether in commerce or in diplomacy, in politics or in the newspaper press, in the art of the salesman or in that of the agitator and the demagogue. Men still make a toil of perverting their way, and spend as much pains in becoming accomplished villains as honest folk take to excel in virtue. Deceit is still the social atmosphere and environment, and “through deceit” men “refuse to know Iahvah.” The knowledge, the recognition, the steady recollection of what Iahvah is, and what His law requires, does not suit the man of lies; his objects oblige him to shut his eyes to the truth. Men “do not will” and “will not,” to know the moral impediments that lie in the way of self-seeking and self-pleasing. Sinning is always a matter of choice, not of nature, nor of circumstances alone. To desire to be delivered from moral evil is, so far, a desire to know God.

“Thine inhabiting is in the midst of deceit”: who that ever lifts an eye above the things of time has not at times felt thus? “This is a Christian country.” Why? Because the majority are as bent on self-pleasing, as careless of God, as heartlessly and systematically forgetful of the rights and claims of others, as they would have been had Christ never been heard of? A Christian country? Why? Is it because we can boast of some two hundred forms or fashions of supposed Christian belief, differentiated from each other by heaven knows what obscure shibboleths, which in the lapse of time have become meaningless and obsolete; while the old ill will survives, and the old dividing lines remain, and Christians stand apart from Christians in a state of dissension and disunion that does despite and dishonour to Christ, and must be very dear to the devil? Some people are bold enough to defend this horrible condition of things by raising a cry of Free Trade in Religion. But religion is not a trade, not a thing to make a profit of, except with Simon Magus and his numerous followers both inside and outside of the Church.

A Christian country! But the rage of avarice, the worship of Mammon, is not less rampant in London than in old Jerusalem. If the more violent forms of oppression and extortion are restrained among us by the more complete organisation of public justice, the fact has only developed new and more insidious modes of attack upon the weak and the unwary. Deceit and fraud have been put upon their mettle by the challenge of the law, and thousands of people are robbed and plundered by devices which the law can hardly reach or restrain. Look where the human spider sits, weaving his web of guile, that he may catch and devour men! Look at the wonderful baits which the company monger throws out day by day to human weakness and cupidity! Do you call him shrewd and clever and enterprising? It is a sorry part to play in life, that of Satans decoy, tempting ones fellow creatures to their ruin. Look at the lying advertisements, which meet your eyes wherever you turn, and make the streets of this great city almost as hideous from the point of view of taste as from that of morality! What a degrading resource! To get on by the industrious dissemination of lies, by false pretences, which one knows to be false! And to trade upon human misery-to raise hopes that can never be fulfilled-to add to the pangs of disease the smart of disappointment and the woe of a deeper despair, as countless quacks in this Christian country do!

A Christian country: where God is denied on the platform and through the press; where a novel is certain of widespread popularity if its aim be to undermine the foundations of the Christian faith; where atheism is mistaken for intelligence, and an inconsistent agnosticism for the loftiest outcome of logic and reason; where flagrant lust walks the streets unrebuked, unabashed; where every other person you meet is a gambler in one form or another, and shopmen and labourers and loafers and errand boys are all eager about, the result of races, and, all agog to know the forecasts of some wily tipster, some wiseacre of the halfpenny press!

A Christian country: where the rich and noble have no better use for profuse wealth than horse training, and no more elevating mode of recreation than hunting and shooting down innumerable birds and beasts; where some must rot in fever dens, clothed in rags, pining for food, stifling for lack of air and room; while others spend thousands of pounds upon a whim, a banquet, a party, a toy for a fair woman. I am not a Socialist, I do not deny a mans right to do what he will with his own, and I believe that state interference would be in the last degree disastrous to the country. But I affirm the responsibility before God of the rich and great; and I deny that they who live and spend for themselves alone are worthy of the name of Christian.

A Christian country: where human beings die, year after year, in the unspeakable, unimaginable agonies of canine madness, and dogs are kept by the thousand in crowded cities, that the sacrifice to the fiend of selfishness and the mocking devil of vanity may never lack its victims! There is a more than Egyptian worship of Anubis, in the silly infatuation which lavishes tenderness upon an unclean brute, and credulously invests instinct with the highest attributes of reason; and there is a worse than heathenish besottedness in the heart that can pamper a dog, and be utterly indifferent to the helplessness and the sufferings of the children of the poor. And people will go to church, and hear what the preacher has to say, and “think he said what he ought to have said,” or not, as the case may be, and return to their own settled habits of worldly living, as a matter of course. Oh yes! it is a Christian country the name of Christ has been named in it for fifteen centuries past; and for that reason Christ will judge it.

“Therefore, thus said Iahvah Sabaoth: Lo, I am about to melt them and put them to proof”; {Job 12:11; Jdg 17:4; Jer 6:25} “for how am I to deal in face of” (“the wickedness of,” LXX: the term has fallen out of the Hebrews text: cf. Jer 4:4, Jer 7:12) “the daughter of My people?” This is the meaning of the disasters that have fallen and are even now falling upon the country. Iahvah will melt and assay this rough, intractable human ore in the fiery furnace of affliction; the strain of insincerity that runs through it, the base earthy nature, can only thus be separated and purged away. {Isa 48:10} “A deadly arrow” (LXX a “wounding” one, i.e., one which does not miss, but hits and kills) “is their tongue; deceit it spake: with his mouth peace with his companion he speaketh, and inwardly he layeth his ambush.” {Psa 55:22} The verse again specifies the wickedness complained of, and justifies our restoration of that word in the previous verse.

Perhaps, with the Peshito Syriac and the Targum, we ought rather to render: “a sharp arrow is their tongue.” There is an Arabic saying quoted by Lane, “Thou didst sharpen thy tongue against us,” which seems to present a kindred root {cf. Psa 52:3; Psa 57:4 Pro 25:18} The Septuagint may be right, with its probable reading: “deceit are the words of his mouth.” This certainly improves the symmetry of the verse.

“For such things” (emphatic) “shall I not”-or “should I not,” with an implied “ought-shall I not punish them, saith Iahvah, or on such a nation shall not My soul avenge herself?” {Jer 5:9; Jer 5:29, after which the LXX omits “them” here} These questions, like the previous one, “How am I to deal”-or, “how could I act-in face of the wickedness of the daughter of My people?” imply the moral necessity of the threatened evils. If Iahweh be what He has taught mans conscience that He is, national sin must involve national suffering, and national persistence in sin must involve national ruin. Therefore He will “melt and try” this people, both for their punishment and their reformation, if it may be so. For punishment is properly retributive, whatever may be alleged to the contrary. Conscience tells us that we deserve to suffer for ill-doing, and conscience is a better guide than ethical or sociological speculators who have lost faith in God. But Gods chastisements as known to our experience, that is to say, in the present life, are reformatory as well as retributive; they compel us to recollect, they bring us, like the Prodigal, back to ourselves, out of the distractions of a sinful career, they humble us with the discovery that we have a Master, that there is a Power above ourselves and our apparently unlimited capacity to choose evil and to do it: and so by Divine grace we may become contrite and be healed and restored.

The prophet thus, perhaps, discerns a faint glimmer of hope, but his sky darkens again immediately. The land is already to a great extent desolate, through the ravages of the invaders, or through severe droughts, {cf. Jer 4:25; Jer 8:20(?}; Jer 12:4). “Upon the mountains will I lift up weeping and wailing, and upon the pastures of the prairie a lamentation, for they have been burnt up,” {Jer 2:15; 2Ki 22:13} “so that no man passeth over them, and they have not heard the cry of the cattle: from the birds of the air to the beasts, they are fled, are gone.” {Jer 4:25} The perfects may be prophetic and announce what is certain to happen hereafter. The next verse, at all events, is unambiguous in this respect: “And I will make Jerusalem into heaps, a haunt of jackals; and the cities of Judah will I make a desolation without inhabitant.” Not only the country districts, but the fortified towns, and Jerusalem itself, the heart and centre of the nation, will be desolated. Sennacherib boasts that he took forty-six strong cities, and “little towns without number,” and carried off 200,150 male and female captives, and an immense booty in cattle, before proceeding to invest Jerusalem itself; a statement which shows how severe the sufferings of Judah might be, before the enemy struck at its vitals.

In the words “I will make Jerusalem heaps,” there is not necessarily a change of subject. Jeremiah was authorised to “root up and pull down and destroy” in the name of Iahvah.

He now challenges the popular wise men {Jer 8:8-9} to account for what, on their principles, must appear an inexplicable phenomenon. “Who is the (true) wise man, so that he understands this,” {Hos 14:9} “and who is he to whom the mouth of Iahvah hath spoken, so that he can explain it” (“unto you?” LXX). “Why is the land undone, burnt up like the prairie, without a passer by?” Both to Jeremiah and to his adversaries the land was Iahvahs land; what befell it must have happened by His will, or at least with His consent. Why had He suffered the repeated ravages of foreign invaders to desolate His own portion, where, if anywhere on earth, He must display His power and the proof of His deity? Not for lack of sacrifices, for these were not neglected. Only one answer was possible, to those who recognised the validity of the Book of the Law, and the binding character of the covenant which it embodied. The people and their wise men cannot account for the national calamities; Jeremiah himself can only do so, because he is inwardly taught by Iahvah himself: {Jer 7:12} “And Iahvah said.” It may be supposed that Jer 7:11 states the popular dilemma, the anxious question which they put to the official prophets, whose guidance they accepted. The prophets could give no reasonable or satisfying answer, because their teaching hitherto had been that Iahvah could be appeased “with thousands of rams, and ten thousand torrents of oil.” Mic 6:7 On such conditions they had promised peace, and their teaching had been falsified by events. Therefore Jeremiah gives the true answer for Iahvah. But why did not the people cease to believe those whose word was thus falsified? Perhaps the false prophets would reply to objectors, as the refugees in Egypt answered Jeremiahs reproof of their renewed worship of the Queen of Heaven: “It was in the years that followed the abolition of this worship that our national disasters began” (Jer 44:18). It is never difficult to delude those whose evil and corrupt hearts make them desire nothing so much as to be deluded.

“And Iahvah said: Because they forsook” (lit. “upon” = on account of “their forsaking”) “My Law which I set before them”, {Deu 4:18} “and they hearkened not unto My voice,” {Deu 28:15} “and walked not therein” (in My Law; LXX omits the clause); “and walked after the obstinacy of their own” (“evil”: LXX) “heart, and after the Baals” {Deu 4:3} “which their fathers taught them”-instead of teaching them the laws of Iahvah. {Deu 11:19} Such were, and had always been, the terms of the answer of Iahvahs true prophets. Do you ask “upon what ground” (“al mah”) misfortune has overtaken you? Upon the ground of your having forsaken Iahvahs “law” or instruction, His doctrine concerning Himself and your consequent obligations towards Him. They had this teaching in the Book of the Law, and had solemnly undertaken to observe it, in that great national assembly of the eighteenth year of Josiah. And they had had it from the first in the living utterances of the prophets.

This, then, is the reason why the land is waste and deserted. And therefore-because past and present experience is an index of the future, for Iahvahs character and purpose are constant-therefore the desolation of the cities of Judah and of Jerusalem itself will ere long be accomplished. “Therefore thus said Iahvah Sabaoth,” the God of Armies and “the God of Israel; Lo, I am about to feed them” or, “I continue to feed them”-to wit, “this people” (an epexegetical gloss omitted by the LXX) “with wormwood, and I will give them to drink waters of gall” Deu 29:17. An Israelite inclining to foreign gods is “a root bearing wormwood and gall”-bearing a bitter harvest of defeat, a cup of deadly disaster for his people; {cf. Amo 6:12} “and I will scatter them among the nations, whom they and their fathers knew not.” {Deu 28:36; Deu 28:64} The last phrase is remarkable as evidence of the isolation of Israel, whose country lay off the beaten track between the Trans-Euphratean empires and Egypt, which ran along the seacoast. They knew not Assyria, until Tiglath Pilesers intervention (circ. 734), nor Babylon till the times of the New Empire. In Hezekiahs day, Babylon is still “a far country.” {2Ki 20:14} Israel was in fact an agricultural people, trading directly with Phoenicia and Egypt, but not with the lands beyond the Great River. The prophets heighten the horror of exile by the strangeness of the land whither Israel is to be banished.

“And I will send after them the sword, until I have consumed them.” The survivors are to be cut off; {cf. Jer 8:3} there is no reserve, as in Jer 4:27, Jer 5:10, Jer 5:18; a “full end” is announced; which, again, corresponds to the aggravation of social and private evils in the time of Jehoiakim, and the prophets despair of reform.

The judgment of Judah is the ruin of her cities, the dispersion of her people in foreign lands, and extermination by the sword. Nothing is left for this doomed nation but to sing its funeral song; to send for the professional wailing women, that they may come and chant their dirges, not over the dead, but over the living who are condemned to die: “Thus said Iahvah Sabaoth” (here as in Jer 7:6, LXX omits the expressive “Sabaoth”), “Mark ye well” the present crisis, and what it implies (cf. Jer 2:10; LXX wrongly omits this emphatic term), “and summon the women that sing dirges, that they come, and unto the skilful women send ye, that they come” (LXX omits), “and hasten” (LXX “and speak and”) “to life up the death wail over us, that our eyes may run down with tears, and our eyelids pour down waters.” The “singing women” of 2Ch 35:25, or the “minstrels” of St. Mat 9:23, are intended. The reason assigned for thus inviting them assumes that the prophets forecast is already fulfilled. Already, as in Jer 8:19, Jeremiah hears the loud wailing of the captives as they are driven away from their ruined homes: “For the sound of the death wail is heard from Sion, How are we undone! We are sore ashamed”-of our false confidence and foolish security and deceitful hopes-“for,” after all, “we have left the land, for our dwellings have cast (us) out!” The last two lines appear to be parallels, which is against the rendering, “For men have cast down our dwellings.” {Cf. Lev 18:25; Lev 22:28} From the wailing women, the address now seems to turn to the Judean women generally; but perhaps the former are still intended, as their peculiar calling was probably hereditary and passed on from mother to daughter: “For hear, ye women, the word of Iahvah, and let your ear take in the word of His mouth! and teach ye your daughters the death wail, and each her companion the lamentation”; for

“Death scales our lattices,

Enters our palaces,

To cut off boy without,

The young men from the streets.”

“And the corpses of men will fall”-the tense certifies the future reference of the others-“like dung” {Jer 8:2} “on the face of the field” 2Ki 9:37, of Jezebels corpse-left without burial rites to rot and fatten the soil-“and like the corn swath behind the reaper, and none shall gather (them).” The quatrain {Jer 8:20} is possibly quoted from some familiar elegy; and the allusion seems to be to a mysterious visitation like the plague, which used to be known in Europe as “the Black Death.” {cf. Jer 15:2; Jer 18:21; Jer 43:11} In this time of closed gates and barred doors, death is represented as entering the house, not by the door, but “climbing up some other way” like a thief. {Joe 2:9; St. Joh 10:1} Bars and bolts will be futile against such an invader. The figure is not continued in the second half of the stanza. The point of the closing comparison seems to be that whereas the corn swaths are gathered up in sheaves and taken home, the bodies will lie where the reaper Death cuts them down.

“Thus said Iahvah: Let not a wise man glory in his wisdom, and let not the mighty man glory in his might! Let not a rich man glory in his riches, but in this let him glory that glorieth, in being prudent and knowing Me,” {LXX omits pronoun, cf. Gen 1:4} “that I, Iahvah, do lovingkindness” (“and” LXX and Orientals), “justice and righteousness upon the earth: for in these I delight, saith Iahvah.”

It is not easy, at first sight, to see the connection of this, one of the finest and deepest of Jeremiahs oracles, with the sentence of destruction which precedes it. It is not satisfactory to regard it as stating “the only means of escape and the reason why it is not used” (the latter being set forth in Jer 7:24-25); for the leading idea of the whole composition, from Jer 7:13 to Jer 9:22, is that retribution is coming, and no escape, not even that of aremnant, is contemplated. The passage looks like an appendix to the previous pieces, such as the prophet might have added at a later period when the crisis was over, and the country had begun to breathe again, after the shock of invasion had rolled away. And this impression is confirmed by its contents. We have no details about the first interference of the new Chaldean power in Judah; we only read that in Jehoiakims days “Nebucladrezzar the king of Babylon came up, and Jehoiakim became his servant three years: then he turned and rebelled against him” {2Ki 24:1} But before this, for some two or three years, Jehoiakim was the vassal of the king of Egypt to whom he owed his crown, and Nebuchadrezzar had lo reduce Necho before he could attend to Jehoiakim. It may be, therefore, that the worst apprehensions of the time not having been realised, in the year or two of lull which followed, the politicians of Judah began to boast of their foresight and the caution and sagacity of their measures for the public safety, instead of ascribing the respite to God; the warrior class might vaunt the bravery which it had exhibited or intended to exhibit in the service of the country; and the rich nobles might exult in the apparent security of their treasures and the new lease of enjoyment accorded to themselves. To these various classes, who would not be slow to ridicule his dark forebodings as those of a moody and unpatriotic pessimist, {Jer 20:7; Jer 26:11; Jer 29:26; Jer 37:13} Jeremiah now speaks, to remind them that if the danger is over for the present, it is the lovingkindness and the righteous government of Iahvah which has removed it, and to declare that it is only suspended and postponed, not abolished forever: “Behold, days are coming, saith Iahvah, when I will visit” (his guilt) “upon every one that is circumcised in foreskin” (only, and not “in heart” also): “upon Egypt and upon Judah, and upon Edom and upon the ben Ammon and upon Moab, and upon all the tonsured folk that dwell in the wilderness: For all the nations are uncircumcised, and all the house of Israel are uncircumcised in heart.” Egypt is mentioned first, as the leading nation, to which at the time the petty states of the west looked for help in their struggle against Babylon. {cf. Jer 27:3} The prophet numbers Judah with the rest, not only as a member of the same political group, but as standing upon the same level of unspiritual life. Like Israel, Egypt also practised circumcision, and both the context here requires and their kinship with the Hebrews makes it probable that the other peoples mentioned observed the same custom (Herod., 2:36, 104), which is actually portrayed in a wall painting at Karnak. The “tonsured folk” or “cropt heads” of the wilderness are north Arabian nomads like the Kedarenes, {Jer 49:28; Jer 49:32} and the tribes of Dedan, Tema, and Buz Jer 25:23, whose ancestor was the circumcised Ishmael. {Gen 25:13 sqq., Gen 17:23} Herodotus records their custom of shaving the temples all round, and leaving a tuft of hair, on the top of the head (Herod., 3:8), which practice, like circumcision, had a religious significance, and was forbidden to the Israelites. {Lev 19:27; Lev 21:5}

Now why does Jeremiah mention circumcision at all? The case is, I think, parallel to his mention of another external distinction of the popular religion, the Ark of the Covenant. {Jer 3:15} Just as in that place God promises “shepherds according to Mine heart which shall shepherd” the restored Israel “with knowledge and prudence,” and then directly adds that, in the light and truth of those days, the ark will be forgotten; {Jer 3:15-16} so here, he bids the ruling classes, the actual shepherds of the nation, not to trust in their own wisdom or valour or wealth, {cf. Jer 17:5 sqq.} but in “being prudent and knowing Iahvah,” and then adds that the outward sign of circumcision, upon which the people prided themselves as the mark of their dedication to Iahvah, was in itself of no value, apart from a “circumcised heart,” i.e., a heart purified of selfish aims and devoted to the will and glory of God. {Jer 4:4} So far as Iahvah is concerned, all Judahs heathen neighbours are uncircumcised, in spite of their observance of the outward rite.

The Jews themselves would hardly admit the validity of heathen circumcision, because the manner of it was different, just as at this day the Muhammadan method differs from the Jewish. But Jeremiah puts “all the house of Israel,” who were circumcised in the orthodox manner, on a level with the imperfectly circumcised heathen peoples around them. All alike are uncircumcised before God; those who have the orthodox rite, and those who have but an inferior semblance of it; and all alike will in the day of judgment be visited for their sins. {cf. Amo 1:1-15}

With the increasing carelessness of moral obligations, an increasing importance would be attached to the observance of such a rite as circumcision, which was popularly supposed to devote a man to Iahvah in such sense that the tie was indissoluble. Jeremiah says plainly that this is a mistaken view. The outward sign must have an inward and spiritual grace corresponding thereto; else the Judeans are no better than those whose circumcision they despise as defective. His meaning is that of the Apostle, “Circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law; but if thou be a breaker of law, thy circumcision hath become uncircumcision.” {Rom 2:25} “Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God, ” scil., is everything. {1Co 7:19} It is “faith working by love,” it is the “new creature” that is essential in spiritual religion. {Gal 5:6; Gal 6:15}

Haec dicit Dominus: Non glorietur sapiens in sapientia sua. Glancing back over the whole passage, we discern an inward relation between these verses and the preceding discourse. It is not the outward props of statecraft, and strong battalions, and inexhaustible wealth, that really and permanently uphold a nation; not these, but the knowledge of Iahvah, a just insight into the true nature of God, and a national life regulated in all its departments by that insight. At the outset of this third section of his discourse, {Jer 9:3-6} Jeremiah declared that corrupt Israel “knew not” and “refused to know” its God. At the beginning of the entire piece Jer 7:3 sq.), he urged his countrymen to “amend their ways and their doings,” and not go on trusting in “lying words” and doing the opposite of “lovingkindness and justice and righteousness,” which alone are pleasing to Iahvah, {Mic 6:8} Who “delighteth in lovingkindness and not sacrifice, and in the knowledge of God more than in burnt offerings.” {Hos 6:6} And just as in the opening section the sacrificial worship was disparaged, taken as an “opus operatum,” so here at the close circumcision is declared to have no independent value as a means of securing Divine favour. {Jer 9:25} Thus the entire discourse is rounded off by the return of the end to the beginning; and the main thought of the whole, which Jeremiah has developed and enforced with so much variety of feeling and oratorical and poetical ornament, is the eternally true thought that a service of God which is purely external is no service at all, and that rites without a loving obedience are an insult to the Majesty of Heaven.

Jer 10:17-25. The latter part of Jer 10:1-25 resumes the subject suspended at Jer 9:22. It evidently contemplates the speedy departure of the people into banishment. “Away out of the land with thy pack” (or “thy goods”; “property,” Targ. “merchandise,” the Heb. term, which is related to “Canaan,” occurs here only), “O thou that sittest in distress!” (or “abidest in the siege.” {Jer 52:5; 2Ki 24:10} Sion is addressed, and bidden to prepare her scanty bundle of bare necessaries for the march into exile. So Egypt is bidden to “make for herself vessels of exile,” Jer 46:19. Some think that Sion is warned to withdraw her goods from the open country to the protection of her strong walls, before the siege begins, as in Jer 8:14; but we have passed that stage in the development of the piece, and the next verse seems to show the meaning: “For thus hath Iahvah said, Lo, I am about to sling forth the inhabitants of the land this time”-as opposed to former occasions, when the enemy retired unsuccessful, {2Ki 16:5; 2Ki 19:36} or went off satisfied with plunder or an indemnity, like the Scythians {see 2Ki 14:14} -“and I will distress them that they may find out” the truth, which now they refuse to see. The aposiopesis “that they may find out!” is very striking. The Vulgate renders the verb in the passive: Tribulabo eos ita ut inveniantur. This, however, does not give so good a sense as the Masoretic pointing, and Ewalds reference of the term to the goods of the panic-stricken fugitives seems flat and tasteless (“the inhabitants of the land will this time not be able to hide their goods from the enemy!”). The best comment on the phrase is supplied by a later oracle: “Lo, I am about to make them know this time-I will make them know My hand and My might; that they may know that My name is Iahvah.” {Jer 16:21} Cf. also Jer 17:9; Ecc 8:17.

The last verse (Jer 10:17) resembles a poetical quotation; and this one looks like the explication of it. There the population is personified as a woman; here we have instead the plain prose expression, “inhabitants of the land.” The figurative, “I will sling them forth” or “cast them out,” explains the bidding of Sion to “pack up her bundle” or “belongings”-there seems to be a touch of contempt in this isolated word, as much as to signify that the people must go forth into exile with no more of their possessions than they can carry like a beggar in a bundle. The expression, “I will distress them,” seems to show that “thou that sittest in the distress” is proleptic, or to be rendered “thou that art to sit in distress,” which comes to the same thing.

And now the prophet imagines the distress and the remorse of this forlorn mother, as it will manifest itself when her house is ruined and her children are gone and she realises the folly of the past:-{cf. Jer 4:31}

“Woes me for my wound!

Fatal is my stroke!”

(perhaps quoted from a familiar elegy). “And yet I-I thought,” {Jer 22:21; Psa 30:7} “Only this”-no more than this-“is my sickness: I can bear it!” The people had never fully realised the threatenings of the prophets, until they began to be accomplished. When they heard them, they had said half-incredulously, half-mockingly, Is that all? Their false guides, too, had treated apparent danger as a thing of little moment, assuring them that their half reforms, and zealous outward worship, were sufficient to turn away the Divine displeasure. {Jer 6:14} And so they said to themselves, as sinners are still in the habit of saying, “If the worst come to the worst, I can bear it. Besides, God is merciful, and things may turn out better for frail humanity than your preachers of wrath and woe predict. Meanwhile-I shall do as I please, and take my chance of the issue.”

The lament of the mourning mother continues: “My tent is laid waste and all my cords are broken; My sons went forth of me” (to battle) “and are not; There is none to spread my tent any more, And to set up my curtains.” {Amo 9:11} Overhearing, as it were, this sorrowful lamentation (“qinah”), the prophet interposes with the reason of the calamity: “For the shepherds became brutish” or “behaved foolishly,” stulte egerunt (Vulg.)-the leaders of the nation showed themselves as insensate and silly as cattle-“and Iahvah they sought not”; {Jer 2:8} “Therefore”-as they had no regard for Divine counsel-“they dealt not wisely,” {Jer 3:15; Jer 9:23; Jer 20:11} “and all their flock was scattered abroad.”

Once more, and for the last time, the prophet sounds the alarm: “Hark! a rumour! lo, it cometh! and a great uproar from the land of the north; to make the cities of Judah a desolation, a haunt of jackals!” It is not likely that the verse is to be regarded as spoken by the mourning country; she contemplates the evil as already done, whereas here it is only imminent. {cf. Jer 4:6; Jer 6:22; Jer 1:15} The piece concludes with a prayer (Jer 10:23-25), which may be considered either as. an intercession by the prophet on behalf of the nation, {cf. Jer 18:20} or as a form of supplication which he suggests as suitable to the existing crisis. “I know, Iahvah, that mans way is not his own; That it pertaineth not to a man to walk and direct his own steps: Correct me, Iahvah, but with justice; Not in Thine anger, lest Thou make me small!” Partly quoted, {Psa 6:1; Psa 38:1} “Pour out Thy fury upon the nations that know Thee not, And upon tribes that have not called upon Thy name; For they have devoured Jacob” (“and will devour him”) (“and consumed him”), “and his pasture they have desolated!” {Psa 79:6-7, quoted from this place. In Jeremiah the LXX omits “and will devour him”; while the psalm omits both of the bracketed expressions.}

The Vulgate renders Jer 7:23 “Scio, Domine, quia non est hominis via ejus; nec viri est ut ambulet, et dirigat gressus suos.” I think this indicates the correct reading of the Hebrew text; cf. Jer 9:23, where two infinitives absolute are used in a similar way. The Septuagint also must have had the same text, for it translates, “nor will (can) a man walk and direct his own walking.” The Masoretic punctuation is certainly incorrect; and the best that can be made of it is Hitzigs version, which, however, disregards the accents, although their authority is the same as that of the vowel points: “I know Iahvah that not to man belongeth his way, not to a perishing” (lit. “going,” “departing”) “man-and to direct his steps.” Any reader of Hebrew may see at once that this is a very unusual form of expression. {For the thought, cf. Pro 16:9; Pro 19:21; Psa 37:23}

The words express humble submission to the impending chastisement. The penitent people does not deprecate the penalty of its sins, but only prays that the measure of it may be determined by right rather than by wrath. {cf. Jer 46:27-28} The very idea of right and justice implies a limit, whereas wrath, like all passions, is without limit, blind and insatiable. “In the Old Testament, justice is opposed, not to mercy, but to high-handed violence and oppression, which recognise no law but subjective appetite and desire. The just man owns the claims of an objective law of right.”

Non est hominis via ejus. Neither individuals nor nations are masters of their own fortunes in this world. Man has not his fate in his own hands; it is controlled and directed by a higher Power. By sincere submission, by a glad, unswerving loyalty, which honours himself as well as its Object, man may cooperate with that Power, to the furtherance of ends which are of all possible ends the wisest, the loftiest, the most beneficial to his kind. Self-will may oppose those ends, it cannot thwart them; at the most it can but momentarily retard their accomplishment, and exclude itself from a share in the universal blessing.

Israel now confesses, by the mouth of his best and truest representative, that he has hitherto loved to choose his own path, and to walk in his own strength, without reference to the will and way of God. Now, the overwhelming shock of irresistible calamity has brought him to his senses, has revealed to him his powerlessness in the hands of the Unseen Arbiter of events, has made him see, as he never saw, that mortal man can determine neither the vicissitudes nor the goal of his journey. Now he sees the folly of the mighty man glorying in his might, and the rich man glorying in his riches; now he sees that the how and the whither of his earthly course are not matters within his own control; that all human resources are nothing against God, and are only helpful when used for and with God. Now he sees that the path of life is not one which we enter upon and traverse of our own motion, but a path along which we are led; and so, resigning his former pride of independent choice, he humbly prays, “Lead Thou me on!” Lead me whither Thou wilt, in the way of trouble and disaster and chastisement for my sins; but remember my human frailty and weakness, and let not Thy wrath destroy me! Finally, the suppliant ventures to remind God that others are guilty as well as he, and that the ruthless destroyers of Israel are themselves fitted to be objects as well as instruments of Divine justice. They are such

(1) because they have not “known” nor “called upon” Iahvah; and

(2) because they have “devoured Jacob” who was a thing consecrated to Iahvah, {Jer 2:3} and therefore are guilty of sacrilege. {cf. Jer 50:28-29}

It has never been our lot to see our own land overrun by a barbarous invader, our villages burnt, our peasantry slaughtered, our towns taken and sacked with all the horrors permitted or enjoined by a non-Christian religion. We read of but hardly realise the atrocities of ancient warfare. If we did realise them, we might even think a saint justified in praying for vengeance upon the merciless destroyers of his country. But apart from this, I see a deeper meaning in this prayer. The justice of this terrible visitation upon Judah is admitted by the prophet. Yet in Judah many righteous were involved in the general calamity. On the other hand, Jeremiah knew something of the vices of the Babylonians, against which his contemporary Habakkuk inveighs so bitterly. They “knew not” nor “called upon” Iahvah; but a base polytheism reflected and sanctioned the corruption of their lives. A kind of moral dilemma, therefore, is proposed here. If the propose of this outpouring of Divine wrath be to bring Israel to “find out” {Jer 7:18} and to acknowledge the truth of God and his own guiltiness, can wrath persist, when that result is attained? Does not justice demand that the torrent of destruction be diverted upon the proud oppressor? So prayer, the forlorn hope of poor humanity, strives to overcome and compel and prevail with God, and to wrest a blessing even from the hand of Eternal Justice.

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary