Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Jeremiah 3:14
Turn, O backsliding children, saith the LORD; for I am married unto you: and I will take you one of a city, and two of a family, and I will bring you to Zion:
14. one of family ] Very small places were called “cities,” while “family” must mean a considerable number, a clan, or even a larger group. Cp. Jer 8:3, Jer 25:9.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
14 18. Much here is probably a later editorial insertion (see Intr. iv. 8), for (i) the picture ( Jer 3:14) of a very limited number of the captives returning from Assyria, and settling in Jerusalem, while afterwards ( Jer 3:16) spreading over the land, is inconsistent with Jer 31:7 ff., (ii) we have no warrant for thinking that Jeremiah ( Jer 3:17) expected all nations to gather at Jerusalem to worship, (iii) Jer 3:18 contemplates a return of Judah and Israel together from exile, but the earlier part of the ch. emphasizes the difference of treatment to be accorded to the two. Is the reference to the Ark ( Jer 3:16) also late? After Solomon’s time its history is obscure. Was it carried off by Shishak (1Ki 14:26), or removed by Manasseh (as suggested by 2Ch 33:7) to be replaced, according to the Chronicler’s tradition (2Ch 35:3), by Josiah, though there is no confirmation of this in the parallel account in 2 Kings 23. We therefore cannot be sure that it existed in Jeremiah’s time. The post-exilic Temple had no Ark (Josephus, Wars, V. Jer 3:5). But whether the Ark was still in existence or not, this part of Jer 3:16 is probably a genuine fragment, though displaced, for the prophet’s attitude towards the Ark, as symbolical of the old Covenant which was destined to yield to the new one for which he looked (Jer 31:31 ff.), is paralleled by his view as to the Temple (Jer 7:4).
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Children … married – The twofold relationship gives a double certainty of acceptance. As children, they were sure of a fathers love, as a wife they might hope for a revival of past affection from the husband of their youth.
One of a city, and two of a family – The family (in Hebrew) is far larger than a city, as it embraces all the descendants of a common ancestor. Thus, the tribe of Judah was divided into only four or five families. However national the apostasy, it does not involve in its guilt the few who are faithful, and the promises are still their rightful possession.
To Zion – To the true Church. The fulfillment of the promise began with the return to Palestine after the Babylonian exile, but is complete only in Christianity.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 14. I will take you one of a city, and two of a family] If there should be but one of a city left, or one willing to return, and two only of a whole tribe, yet will I receive these, and bring them back from captivity into their own land. I have heard these words most sinfully applied to show the nature of a fancied eternal decree of election, that has appointed in several cases one only out of a whole city, and two out of a whole family, to be eternally saved, leaving the rest, according to the decree of reprobation, to perish everlastingly! And yet these persons, who spoke thus of the Fountain of eternal goodness and mercy, professed to believe in Him who by the grace of God tasted death for every man.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Turn, O backsliding children; for I am married unto you; I am in covenant with you, Deu 29:1,10-12, &c., and this covenant, notwithstanding all your unfaithfulness, I am ready to renew with you, Hos 2:19,20.
One of a city, and two of a family: this word family is not always to be taken strictly for a household; for then the expression would seem to imply more in a family than in a city; but frequently for a country or nation; compare Gen 12:3, with Gen 22:18; see Jer 1:15; or for a tribe; and this may partly respect the fewness of those that will be found penitents and return. God will have a sprinkling in every city, and in every family, or tribe, or country. But chiefly it respects Gods exact care of them, that being now married to them, there shall not be one in a city, or two in a country or tribe, but he will find them out; if there be but one or two, he will not overlook them: this seems to be intimated Isa 27:12, a text that points at the same thing.
I will bring you to Zion, i.e. to JerusaLem, a type of the church; a double metonymy of the subject. It is the manner of the prophets, when they are treating of temporal deliverances, especially from Babylon, frequently to break out abruptly into the spiritual deliverance by Christ, and so probably he doth here; and therefore bringing them to Zion must be understood, either of joining them to his church under the Messiah, or bringing them again to worship with Judah at Jerusalem; as may seem to be intimated, Jer 31:6; but the ten tribes did never return into their own land, and therefore that text must be understood of a spiritual going up to Zion, viz. when all Israel shall be saved, Rom 11:26. See Isa 56:7,8; 66:20; and this chapter, Jer 3:18. Thus we may look upon this part of the prophecy to have respect, partly to what God was at that time about to do, in this verse; and partly what he would hereafter do, when they should be again settled in their own land, under the Messiah, Jer 3:16-19.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
14. I am marriedliterally, “Iam Lord,” that is, husband to you (so Jer31:32; compare Hos 2:19;Hos 2:20; Isa 54:5).GESENIUS, following theSeptuagint version of Jer31:32, and Paul’s quotation of it (Heb8:9), translates, “I have rejected you”; so thecorresponding Arabic, and the idea of lordship, maypass into that of looking down upon, and so rejecting.But the Septuagint in this passage translates, “Iwill be Lord over you.” And the “for” has much moreforce in English Version than in that of GESENIUS.The Hebrew hardly admits the rendering though[HENGSTENBERG].
take you one of a cityThoughbut one or two Israelites were in a (foreign) city, they shallnot be forgotten; all shall be restored (Am9:9). So, in the spiritual Israel, God gathers one convert here,another there, into His Church; not the least one is lost (Mat 18:14;Rom 11:5; compare Jer24:5-7).
familya clan or tribe.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Turn, O backsliding children, saith the Lord,…. All of them were children by national adoption, and some by special grace, and yet “backsliders”, O monstrous ingratitude! “backsliders”, and yet “children”, still the relation continues, O marvellous grace! God’s own children may backslide, and often do; either in heart, when love waxes cold, faith declines, zeal wanting; when they get into a carnal sleepy frame of spirit, and have not that quick sense of sin, and of duty, as heretofore: or in practice, when private prayer is restrained; public worship is neglected; get into bad company, and fall into gross sins; all which is owing to the prevalence of indwelling sin, the force of Satan’s temptations, and the enticing snares of the world; but God will not leave them, he calls unto them again and again to turn unto him by repentance, and to doing their first works; which calls, at length, through powerful grace, become effectual; see Jer 3:22 and the arguments used to engage to it follow,
for I am married unto you; in a civil sense as a nation, Jer 31:32, and in a spiritual sense to a remnant of them; Christ is the bridegroom, the church is the bride, which he has secretly betrothed to himself in eternity; openly in time, at the conversion of everyone of them; and will more publicly at the last day, when all are gathered in and prepared for him. This relation, as it is a very near one, so it is very astonishing, considering the disparity between the two parties, and it always continues; love, the bond of it, never alters; the covenant, in which this transaction is carried on, is ever sure; and Christ always behaves agreeably to it; wherefore it is base ingratitude to backslide; and reason there is sufficient why his backsliding spouse should return to him. The Septuagint version is, “because I will rule over you.” agreeable to which is Jarchi’s note,
“because I am your Lord, and it is not for my glory, (or honour) to leave you in the hand of enemies.”
Kimchi’s father interprets the word used by , “I loath you”, or I am weary of you; the reverse of which is the Targum,
“for I am well pleased with you;”
and so the Syriac version, “I delight in you”; which carries in it a much more engaging argument to return, and agrees with what follows:
and I will take you one of a city, and two of a family: or tribe, or country; for sometimes a whole country is called a family, as in Jer 1:15 and here it must design more than a city; for otherwise there are many families in a city; the meaning is, according to Kimchi, that though there may be but one Jew in a city of the Gentiles, or two only in a nation, the Lord would take them from thence; and, according to others, that though one or two, or a few, here and there one of the backsliders, should return to him by true repentance, he would receive them graciously; the smallness of their number would be no objection to him; which is a sense not to be despised: but the phrase seems to denote the distinguishing grace of God to his people; which appears in the choice of them in his Son; the redemption of them by him; and the sanctification of them by his Spirit; and very few are the objects of his grace, as it were one of a city, and two of a tribe; however, they shall none of them be lost, notwithstanding their backslidings, to which they are bent: for it is added,
and I will bring you to Zion; to the church of God here, a Gospel church state, whither to come is the great privilege of the saints,
Heb 12:22 and to the Zion above, the heavenly state, where all the chosen and ransomed, and sanctified ones, shall come, with songs, and everlasting joy upon their heads, Isa 35:10 and all as the fruit of distinguishing and efficacious grace.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Jeremiah repeats the same thing in other words; but God by so many words shews clearer how ready he would be to grant pardon, provided the Israelites really repented. It would have been enough for God to testify once, that he would be reconcilable, but seeing that they were slow and hard to believe, he proceeds in the same strain. It is a wonderful forbearance and kindness that God, finding his favor neglected, and as it were rejected through the sloth of men, should yet persevere, and invite them again and again. What man would thus patiently bear the loathing of his favor and kindness? But we see that God does not immediately reject the tardy and the slothful, but adds new stimulants that he might at length move them, though this may seem more than necessary. How great is our torpidity? Were not God daily to urge us, how little attention would any of us give to his admonitions? It is, therefore, no wonder that he, pardoning our tardiness, should again and again invite us to repentance; which we find is done continually in the Church.
This, then, is the reason why the Prophet now repeats the same thing, Return, now, ye rebellious children; for he had said before, “Return, thou rebellious Israel.” He then adds, For I am a husband to you Some regard בעל bol, in the sense of being wearied, when found as here, בעלתי בכם bolti b e k e m, “ I have been wearied by you:” but this meaning does not comport with this passage. (84) More correctly, then, have others rendered the words, “I am lord to you: “but this lord is not to be taken indefinitely as in Latin, for it properly means a husband, who is a lord to his wife. God, then, no doubt, continues the same comparison, that of a marriage, which has already been often mentioned; for he charges the Israelites with adultery, because they had departed from him. Hence it is that he says, I am your husband He had previously said, “Though a person, when he repudiates his wife, and she be married to another, will never again be reconciled to her; yet I am ready to forgive your perfidy and wantonness: only observe chastity hereafter, and I will deal kindly with you.” Similar is this passage, “I am your husband,” though I have repudiated you. He had, indeed, said, that he had given them a bill of divorce, and thus testified, as by a public document, that there was no longer any connection between him and that people, for exile was a kind of divorce; but he says now, “I am your husband; for though I have been grievously offended with you, because you have broken your pledged faith, I yet remain in the same mind, so as to be ready to be your husband.”
We now, then, perceive the real meaning of the Prophet: despair might have laid hold on the Israelites so as to dread that access to which the Prophet had invited them; but that no terror might hinder them to repent, God here declares that he would become their husband, and that he had not forgotten that relationship with which he had once favored them. The sum of what he says is, “I have once embraced you with the love of a husband; ye have, indeed, become alienated from me, but return, and I am ready to forgive and to receive you, as though ye had always been faithful to me.”
Again will I take you, he says; and then he adds, one from a city, two from a family Deserving of especial notice is this passage; for God shews that they were not to wait for one another, and also, that though the whole body of the people rotted in their sins, yet a few would return to him, and that he would be reconciled to them. This was a point most necessary to be taught; for God’s covenant was in common with the whole seed of Abraham; they might then have concluded that the covenant was extinct, except he gathered together the whole people; for he had not chosen one or two or a hundred or a thousand, but all the seed of Abraham. Since then the promise, without exception, was common, to all, any one might thus reason, “What connection have I with God, except as one born of the race of Abraham? but I am not alone, for we are all the children of Abraham: yet I see that none turn to God, so I must perish with the rest of the people.” Now, that this thought should not hinder the godly, he says, “I will take one from a city, two from a family;” (85) that is, “If one only come to me from a city he shall find an open door; if two only from a tribe come to me, I shall receive them.” We now apprehend the design of the Prophet.
Interpreters, indeed, explain one from a city as meaning, that though the multitude should perish, yet God would not deny forgiveness to three or four; but they teach not what is especially worthy of notice, that two or three are mentioned, because this thought, as it has been said, might have perplexed them, that is, that they had been all in common chosen as a holy people.
What is here taught may be useful to us in the present day. For we see many foolishly excluding themselves from the hope of salvation, and seeking no access to God, because they have a regard to one another, and the great mass hold them entangled. How is it under the Papacy, that so many pertinaciously resist God? even because they think themselves safely hid in the multitude. We also find among us that some are an hindrance to others. Let this truth be ever remembered, that when God stretches forth his arms, he is ready to receive, not only all, were they with one consent to come to him, but also two or three, even from one city, or from a whole people.
He adds, I will cause you to come to Zion. This had been once said before: God intimates that their exile would be temporary, that the Israelites would again be made partakers of his inheritance, if they returned to God in sincerity and truth. It follows —
(84) Nor is there an instance of such a meaning. Literally it is, “For I have been married with (or to) thee.” When this verb is followed by כ, as in Jer 31:32, this is its meaning; but when followed by ל, as in 1Ch 4:22, it means to rule, to exercise dominion. The Vulgate is, “For I am thy husband.” The Targum gives the meaning, “For I have chosen you.” The Septuagint went astray, “For I will rule over you.” — Ed
(85) The word is taken sometimes in a limited sense, and means what we understand by family: but it has here evidently a more extended meaning, and signifies a tribe, a community; for it includes more than a city. Such is its meaning in Jer 8:3; and in Amo 3:1, it comprehends the whole community of Israel. It is rendered “ ἐκ πατριᾶς, — from a tribe,” by the Septuagint, but improperly; “kindred,“ by the Vulgate and the Targum It no doubt means sometimes kindred, but not evidently in this place. — Ed
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
GRACE FOR THE BACKSLIDER
Jer 3:14.
THIS text we take from an extensive setting.
The first chapter of this Book was introductory and explanatory. It introduced Jeremiah, the son of Hilkiah, a priestly descendant who was made a Prophet of God, and to whom the Word of the Lord came in the days of Josiah the son of Amon king of Judah, in the thirteenth year of his reign.
The Prophet tells us of his call and of his enduement for office, and of his Divine encouragement.
The necessity for all of this becomes the more apparent as we proceed with the further study of this Book, for he is to deal not with the people who are living in the favor of the Lord, and consequently are responsive to His lightest Word, but rather with a people who are sadly backslidden, and whose sore spiritual estate becomes the supreme burden of the prophetic message.
That minister of Gods Word who has to do with backsliders needs an absolute assurance that he is speaking the Word of the Lord, and to be both endued and endowed; in addition, he will need the encouragement of the Divine voice again and again, to keep him from the fear of the faces of them to whom he ministers. For no people are so difficult and none more dangerous than the spiritually backslidden.
It is true, as a rule, that the young man, the freshly-commissioned minister, the inexperienced man, has the most difficult of all pastoral and prophetic tasks. The churches that are in spiritual decline are commonly small, and the members stingy, their spiritual estate lowthey can command the services of only the young and inexperienced prophet, or the prophet who has proven himself a partial failure. The result is that the truly strong and great prophets of God enjoy an office of ease as compared with the young or the inadequate.
The backslidden man is always a problem. The backslidden church is a greater problem still; and yet, the Book of Jeremiah, one of the most extensive of sacred Scriptures, constituted of fifty-two lengthy chapters, is made up of a long series of appeals to the backslider.
That fact harmonizes with the suggestion of our text, and shows forth clearly what we shall attempt to set before you as readers, namely, Gods Interest in the Backslider: Gods Affection for the Backslider: and Gods Grace Toward the Backslider.
GODS INTEREST IN THE BACKSLIDER
Turn, O backsliding. children, saith the Lord; for I am married unto you: and I Will take you one of a city, and two of a family, and I will bring you to Zion.
He does not petulantly cast off the backslider.
The Book of Jeremiah is a proof of that fact.
Paul, in his Epistle to the Romans, takes note of His grace in dealing with spiritual indifference and deadness on the part of His own. He raises this question,
Hath God cast away His people?
He answers it,
God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.
God hath not cast away His people which He foreknew.
Wot ye not what the Scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying, Lord, they have killed Thy Prophets, and digged down Thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life.
So it looked to Elias, and as a matter of fact, so it was, for the most part; and yet, God, who knows all things, took a better view of Israels estate than Elias was able to get, and God answers Elias, saying, I have reserved to Myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.
Even so at the present time, there is a remnant according to the election of grace; and certainly it was of grace, as it always is of grace. As God sought for the remnant in backslidden Israel, so God doubtless looks for any remnant of good left in the backslidden individual, and often He finds it when the individual himself is not conscious of it. Hence John writes, For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things (1Jn 3:20).
The Church of God has in it today no small number of consecrated spirits who recovered from their backsliding because God did not deal with them impetuously, but with grace instead.
He does not shortly forget the backslider. It is quite common for people who pass through some accident that renders them unconscious, to have obliterated from the memory the immediately preceding events. Recently an officer of my church, one of Gods noblemen, together with his wife, was driving home from Florida. In a spot of new, deep gravel on the highway, their car skidded and struck a side blow against a passing truck, practically demolishing the car and turning the truck over. It killed the owner of the truck and also my officer. Those who came to their help found the devoted wife sitting at the roadside with her dying husband in her arms, she herself badly wounded and only semi-conscious. To this hour she has no memory whatever of the crash; doesnt recall having seen the truck with which the collision took place, or anything else to indicate danger.
Some years since, riding home from a beautiful days outing with three of my church officials, we were crashed into by drunken men who were driving at the rate of fifty miles or more an hour. We were all more or less wounded. It cost me nine months off duty. The owner of the car, my good officer, was the only one of the four who was left immediately unconscious, and to this hour he has no memory whatever of seeing the car that struck us, and no memory of the collision itself.
Contrast this with the experience of Christ who hung on a Cross, and went through hours and hours of agony, before He yielded up His spirit; and yet, recall the fact that in it all He suffered no lapse of memory whatever, and you have another evidence of His Deity. They laid Him in the grave where He remained for three days; but when He came forth, everything that had led up to that hour was as clearly in His mind as though there had been no interim of unconsciousness. One of the last things that smote His soul was the denial of Peter, the cursing and swearing of this officer in His presence. He looked on him, and Peter, abashed, departed to grieve his ingratitude and his godless denial.
Depression of spirit followed, and Peter was a hopeless man. His sin was such that he felt in his soul that he could never be forgiven. But the Risen Jesus, when He sent a message to His disciples to meet Him in Galilee, added to the invitation, And Peter.
He meant to encourage and thereby recover the backslider. He meant to get through to him a message of the Masters unfailing love; and it is a type of His treatment of all backsliders. He does not quickly forget them.
His appeal is a plea for attention. It is little less than pathetic to hear the mighty God pleading with sinful children, practically begging them to attend upon His Word. And yet it reveals all the more His Father-heart.
Some years ago the Chicago Tribune carried the following article:
Dear Helen:
We miss you so and want you so. It doesnt matter where you have been or what has happened. Our arms and hearts are waiting for you. Wont you come back to us or let us know where we can find you. Dont feel afraid. We are ready to forgive everything. Only come. Your wondering, heartaching family.
So God feels toward His wayward children. This text is His tender appeal and it tells a kindred story. It says as those parents said, No matter what you have done, what you have been! Only come, and be not afraid.
The heart of love is never content save in the response of affection from its objects.
When we were children, a little cousin came to visit us. I was ten years old, my younger brother was four, and this little girl cousin was three. The little children were devoted friends, and playmates from the first hour of meeting; but their affairs, like those of all lovers, did not run smoothly. Once in a while there would be a break, and the boy would go off angry, but the little cousin would follow with her persistent question, Do you love me now? and never would she be silenced until she got a satisfactory answer, and the answer had to be, not only in words, but an answer proven by action as well.
The human heart, at its best, is only a poor type of the heart Divine. Gods love is so great that He is never satisfied save when there is response to the same.
This leads us to the second suggestion,
GODS AFFECTION FOR THE BACKSLIDER
The backslider is Gods very own.
I am married unto you.
The marriage relation was meant to be a permanent relation. Both the Old and New Testament make that fact clear. It was not a convenience of lust, nor was it a mere tryout as the modern companionate philosophy suggests. The old formulas of the Church were biblically justified, and each was supposed to take the other so long as life should last, or until death did them part.
Somebody asked George Ade recently what he thought of companionate marriage. George is a bachelor, but something of a philosopher. His answer was, I hardly know what to think of it. They didnt allow such things in my youth.
Sioux Falls, Reno, and Hollywood and now all Arkansaswhat deadly blows they have struck against the divinest of institutionsmarriage.
America is more and more a land of looseness in that sacred relation. When the Prophet Jeremiah used these words, the bond of matrimony was practically an unbreakable thing; and he didnt mean to say that God thought a little of the backslider; that He was willing to flirt with him, or even to give him a few weeks of trial. He meant to say that God was married to him; that between them there was an indissoluble bonda bond that might be forgotten on the part of the wayward, but could never be dissolved. That, then, answers the old question, If a man is once saved, is he always saved? Yes, so far as his sonship to God is concerned. Once a son, always a son. Christ so understood it. He said, Those that Thou gavest Me I have kept, and none of them is lost. He didnt mean by that that Thomas wouldnt doubt Him and become utterly unbelieving; He didnt mean that Peter wouldnt deny Him and make his denial emphatic with profanity; He didnt mean that John, the beloved, would not disappoint Him and sleep in the hour when He needed him most; but He did mean that, in the end of time, for these, they would still be His own, and He would take them Home to dwell forever with Him.
That is what He meant. He meant that however great the failure of man, when once He had made them His own, had married them, so to speak, He would never fail them.
You remember the story that is told of Romney the artist, who had a great ambition to become famous as a painter. He left his plain little home and went up to London, where his talents lifted him to greater and greater heights. His profession brought him into touch with the elite and the beautiful, and Londons famous beauties posed for him and became his consorts in iniquity. For thirty years his plain country wife never heard from him. At the end of that time, he developed tuberculosis. His health becoming worse and worse, and all his charms having fled with the same, his social friends soon forgot him. Poverty came in the wake of this misfortune. He found at last that there was no one to care for him, unless he turn back to his country home again; and back he went, a wreck, physically, mentally and morally. His wife was a plain woman, but with a loyal heart, and she took him in. Never once did she upbraid him for his long absence, for his utter neglect of her, for his scandalous behavior. But day after day, night after night, with an affection that never flagged, and with a willingness that refused to be weary, she waited on him and served him until death separated them.
Such love is a loud hint of love Divine! I am married unto you.
The tie that binds, then, is not human, but Divine. The language is accurate; the idea is perfectly expressed. God doesnt say to the backslider, You are married unto Me, but just exactly the opposite, I am married unto you. It is not human affection that holds man to God; it is Divine affection that holds God to man.
That is why Paul, answering this question concerning backslidden Israel could say, and did truthfully say, And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work. What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it (Rom 11:6-7).
There are those who balk at the doctrine of election, but the true believer thanks God for it, and knows it is only by the election of His grace that he is redeemed at all; that he is ever kept from sin or recovered from the same when once he is fallen into it.
Dear old Henry Varley, who preached in this pulpit more than once, used to tell the story of a man who had been a member of a church, but had fallen into sin and had been expelled. For twelve long years he had been outside the fold of church fellowship, and when addressed on the subject, said, I have been utterly miserable about it, and would have given anything to be what I once was.
Varley replied, Would you like to be restored at this moment, for as surely as God lives you may be.
He looked at Varley as if amazed to think that it could be done in a moment, and to help his mind, Varley said, Suppose you had a daughter who had sinned against you, given you great sorrow. Last night, however, she came and threw her arms about her mothers neck and said, Oh, mother, I am so ashamed of myself for having given you and dear father such anxiety and sorrow. Can you, will you forgive me? How long would it be before you restored and assured her? Twelve years?
Certainly not, he said.
Well, twelve months, then.
No, he replied.
Three months, I suppose, at least.
Not at all.
Well, then, how long?
Instantly, was his answer.
All right, does your love for your daughter exceed Gods love for His children?
No.
Did you ever read what David said in the 23rd PsalmHe restoreth my soul?
Yes.
Will you trust Him to restore you now?
Yes, thank God; and He will do it, for it is His promise, isnt it?
Surely, for such is the love of God toward us all.
GODS GRACE TOWARD THE BACKSLIDER
I will take you one of a city, and two of a family, and I will bring you to Zion.
This sentence is quite suggestive: first, it shows clearly that salvation is of the Lord.
Here is another indication of the scientific accuracy and spiritual dependableness of the Holy Book. He doesnt say that one will come out of a city, and two will come out of a family, and find Him. If He did, that would be a reversal of human experience. But He says, I will take you one of a city, and two of a family.
In other words, the man who is saved doesnt save himself. He doesnt even put himself in the way of salvation.
The fifteenth chapter of Luke holds three great parables: the parable of the lost sheep, the parable of the lost coin, and the parable of the lost son. It is commonly supposed the parable of the lost son is the greater of the three. To me that is very questionable. I am quite inclined to the parable of the lost sheep as doctrinally the greatest. In that parable the sheep does nothing toward getting home. On the contrary, in his wild wanderings, he goes farther and farther from the flock and from the shepherd. But the shepherd goes after him, and follows him until he finds him, and then tenderly laying him upon his shoulders, brings him home. That is the revelation of Gods grace in Christ. Men wander from Him but in love He follows them, and follows until He finds.
Jonah reduced the Gospel to a sentence when from the whales belly, he said, Salvation is of the Lord.
Salvation is but for a few.
I will take you one of a city, and two of a family, and I will bring you to Zion.
What a sad suggestion! One of a city! Is it conceivable that a whole city, a veritable metropolis may have in it but one saved man? Remember Sodom and recall the Divine proposition, If there are ten righteous men in the city, I will save it.
The modern city is more and more like that metropolis, steeped in sin; and while the saints are still the salt of its life, and perhaps the only reason why it is preserved at all, it must be conceded that they are few. Wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat.
And sad to say, this is not because we do not know better. It is not because Gods revelation is insufficient. It is not because His grace is no longer proffered. But it is because we refuse or fail to appropriate the knowledge and power at our command.
Aquila Webb in his volume, A Thousand and One Illustrations, prints the story of the hustling young solicitor for a farm journal, who was canvassing a rural community. He came to an old farmer who was leaning against a rickety fence in front of his dilapidated house, reflectively chewing his tobacco cud, while the juice therefrom streaked his beard. After introducing himself, the agent went straight to his task. You should take this paper. It will be of immense value to you. By reading it you will be able to do a heap better farming than you have ever done, and do it more economically, and you will naturally make more money.
The old farmer shook his head decisively.
Dont you want to know how to farm better? urged the young man.
Nope, answered the old fellow, as he spit the tobacco out of the corner of his mouth, taint no use for me ter read yer paper, young feller. I aint farmin now half as good as I know.
That is the trouble with most of us. We know the way, but we dont walk in it, and in fact, with many, though we know the way, we wont walk in it. It isnt instruction we need; it is consecration. It isnt more information, but it is reformation the product of an indwelling Holy Ghost. It isnt more knowledge of the Word even, but a willingness to walk according to the same.
Salvation is for all willing ones. If there were two in a city, He would bring them to Zion. If there were four in a family. He would bring them to Zion. He does it when He finds two, when He finds four, when He finds a thousandHe brings to Zion all willing ones. His Word is, Him that cometh unto Me I will in no wise cast out.
Paul in his Second Letter to the Corinthians, (2Co 8:12) says, For if there he first a willing mind, it is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not. And again, If any man will do His will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God.
One of the most pathetic things that has ever characterized Christian history is the instance of that man who at one time names the Name of the Lord and then drifts so far away from Him that he never finds his way back, and by that circumstance seems to prove that he never truly found Him, but that he was himself deceived and in turn became a deceiver.
Charles Spurgeon uses the story of the long line of portraits of the Doges in the palace at Venice, where one space is empty, and the semblance of a black curtain remains as a melancholy record of glory forfeited. The likeness of Marino Falieri had once hung there, but he had been found guilty of treason against the state and beheaded by the state, and the likeness was taken from its place and a blank spot marked where it had once hung. Spurgeon says, As we regarded the singular memorial, we thought of Judas and of Demas, and then we heard afresh the Masters warning, One of you shall betray Me, and we asked with solemn feeling, Lord, is it I? Every ones eye rests longer upon the one dark vacancy than upon any one of the many fine portraits of the merchant monarchs; and so the apostates of the Church are far more frequently the theme of the worlds talk than the thousands of good men and true who adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things.
Hence the greater need of care lest any one of us, after having confessed Christ publicly and having been regarded as His disciples, should become a castaway.
Fuente: The Bible of the Expositor and the Evangelist by Riley
(14) Turn, O backsliding children.In his desire to individualise his call to repentance, the prophet drops his parable, or rather combines the sign and the thing signified, with the same assonance as beforeturn back, ye children who have turned away.
I am married unto you.The tender pity of Jehovah leads Him to offer pardon even to the adulterous wife. Jeremiah had learned, in all their fulness, the lessons of Hosea 1-3.
One of a city, and two of a family.The latter word is the wider in its range of the twoa clan, or tribe, that might embrace many cities. The limitation to the one and the two is after the manner of Isaiahs reference (Isa. 1:9) to the remnant that should be saved, and reminds of the ten righteous men who might have saved the cities of the plain (Gen. 18:32).
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
14. I am married unto you A divine tenderness breathes in these words. God still remembers the sacred covenant between himself and his faithless people; and, in spite of their infidelities, looks upon their miseries with sincere and yearning pity. He even turns suppliant himself, and pleads with them to return. The mingling of metaphor in this passage, which starts with the parental and then introduces the conjugal relation, is not a blemish, but reveals the warm feeling which underlies the passage; a feeling that struggles in vain for adequate expression. The two most expressive figures which human experience furnishes are here blended in a way that leaves the impression of an unfathomable depth of meaning behind.
One of a city, and two of a family The word rendered “family” is of broad import, and answers in a general way to stock or tribe. If but “one of a city,” or “two of a tribe,” (evidently a larger term than city,) shall turn to me, I will be careful to save even them. This promise is full and absolute.
Though not exclusively Messianic and spiritual, yet, on the other hand, it is not limited to any material restoration. It is one of those broad predictive promises which sweep over the centuries, and are being constantly and everywhere fulfilled. And yet its highest force and significance belong to the highest things, and so the promise contains the glory of the Messianic revelation.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Jer 3:14. Turn,for I am married, &c. Turnand though I have rejected you, I will take you one of a city, and two of a tribe, or country: that is to say, “I will receive you, though there should be but one from a city willing to return, and two for a province, or tribe.” These prophesies were accomplished in the letter, after the edict of Cyrus, when several of the Israelites returned to Palestine, but only by little and little, and as it were one by one. Spiritually, these promises were fulfilled by the conversion of the Jews to the Gospel, when God gave them pastors, Jer 3:15 who fed them with true evangelical knowledge. Zerubbabel, Ezra, and Nehemiah, are the pastors referred to in the letter, after the captivity.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Jer 3:14 Turn, O backsliding children, saith the LORD; for I am married unto you: and I will take you one of a city, and two of a family, and I will bring you to Zion:
Ver. 14. Turn, O backsliding children. ] See on Zec 1:3 .
For I am married unto you.
And I will take you one of a city,
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Turn = Return, as in verses: Jer 3:12, Jer 3:22.
married = am become your husband. This will be the result of the Restoration here promised.
family. Probably a family, or group of cities.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Jer 3:14-18
Jer 3:14-18
“Return, O backsliding children, saith Jehovah; for I am a husband unto you: and I will take you one of a city, and two of a family, and I will bring you to Zion. And I will give you shepherds according to my heart, who shall feed you with knowledge and understanding. And it shall come to pass when ye are multiplied and increased in the land, in those days, saith Jehovah, they shall say no more, The ark of the covenant of Jehovah; neither shall it come to mind; neither shall they remember it; neither shall they miss it; neither shall it be made any more. At that time they shall call Jerusalem the throne of Jehovah; and all the nations shall be gathered unto it; to the name of Jehovah, to Jerusalem: neither shall they walk any more after the stubbornness of their evil heart. In those days the house of Judah shall walk with the house of Israel, and they shall come together out of the land of the north to the land that I gave for an inheritance unto your fathers.”
“One of a city, two of a family …” (Jer 3:14). Here surfaces again the doctrine of the “righteous remnant” of Israel as stressed throughout both Isaiah and Jeremiah. “Out of God’s purifying judgment upon his apostate people shall come a few refined souls. They will be gathered and shall constitute the New Israel, blessed of God (Rom 11:5).
“They shall say no more, The ark of the covenant …” (Jer 3:16 b). “This shows that the old economy was to be dissolved. The old covenant, of which the ark was a central feature, was to give way to another – a preview of 31:31-35.” Concurring in this view are the remarks of Cheyne: “In the Messianic period … the ark would no longer be thought of.”
“In those days … at that time … in those days …” (Jer 3:16-18). All such expressions, including “in the last day,” “in the latter times,” etc., are indications that the times of the Messiah are intended. These, as Cook stated, “were a regular formula for the time of Christ’s coming when all the nation’s hopes would be fulfilled.”
“Jerusalem the throne of Jehovah …” (Jer 3:18). “Jehovah’s throne shall not be the ark, but Jerusalem, the Christian Church (Rev 21:2; Gal 4:26).” It might be readily admitted that neither Jeremiah nor the people who received his prophecy for the first time fully understood all that was involved in these promises; but even if they should have misunderstood, thinking that there would be some kind of a return to the literal land of Palestine, the message would nevertheless have been a very effective message for them.
“The Messianic reference in this chapter is the ruling one. The fulfillment of these promises is carried on during the lives of the apostles of Christ and is carried on throughout the whole history of the Church, and attains its completion in the final conversion of Israel.”
Keil’s expectation of the “final conversion of Israel,” projected to take place at the end of the current dispensation, and considered by some to be a salient feature of the so-called Millennium is a view held by many scholars; but it is one which this writer has never accepted. That such a thing indeed may be possible we cannot deny; but we do deny that the Bible declares any such thing as an event that God has promised will occur.
Whether or not any such thing as a wholesale conversion of racial Israel will ever take place is left as an open and undecided question in both the Old Testament and the New Testament. In the Old Testament, it must be remembered that Jonah was not placated by the conversion of Nineveh, but that the sacred narrative rings down the curtain upon him still angry, still pouting, still unwilling to appreciate what God did.
In the New Testament, in the parable of the prodigal, it will be remembered that the narrative closes with the father, still pleading, still waiting, still inviting the elder brother to share in the feast, but with the elder brother still angry, still refusing to come in. Of course, both Jonah and the elder brother constitute divine presentations of the way it is with racial Israel to this very day; and we have observed nothing whatever that adds any more favorable details to the picture.
Some commentators think they find the old land promise to Abraham in this chapter and speak confidently of the time when racial Israel shall again be in Palestine with the Lord reigning on a throne in Jerusalem. We are absolutely certain that nothing of this kind is in the chapter or anywhere else in the Word of God. Yes indeed, Jerusalem is the throne of God, now, in the sense that “The word of the Lord went forth from Jerusalem” on the day of Pentecost. “When Christ came, the kingdom was indeed established in Zion, but not in material terms (Joh 18:36; Act 1:6, etc.). “The Jerusalem which is above, which is free, is our mother” (Gal 4:26). It appears to us that if one searches for a certainty, it would surely appear in the fact that the very city that crucified God’s only begotten Son should be the very last place on earth where God would establish his throne! On the Day of Pentecost, the apostle Peter revealed that the Old Testament promise of a Messianic successor to David’s throne was a promise of the Resurrection of Christ! (Act 2:31).
“Judah… and Israel… shall come together … to the land that I gave for an inheritance …” (Jer 3:18). Such an event as the union of the divided kingdom of Israel could never occur until there was a genuine repentance and return to the fold of God by both peoples. There having never been the slightest indication that anything like that ever happened, “The projected union must point to the Messianic age of grace, when Jew and Gentile alike will do honor before the enthroned Lord in Zion.” That such a remark is indeed sound exegesis is proved by the words of the author of Hebrews regarding “where” Christians worship God:
“Ye are not come unto a mount that might be touched… but ye are come unto mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable hosts of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, and to Jesus the mediator of the New Covenant” (Heb 12:18-24).
In passages like this, it is clear enough that words like mount Zion and Jerusalem, in the days of the New Covenant, are to be understood spiritually. “Mount Zion, the heavenly Jerusalem, is that holy hill upon which Christ reigns.”
“Out of the land of the north …” (Jer 3:18). “This refers to the glorious days of Christianity and the ingathering of Jews from all the lands of their dispersion and the uniting of them with the Christian church.”
Robert Jamieson understood these verses to mean that, “The good land covenanted to Abraham is to be restored to his seed; but the question arises, How shall this be done? Many sincere people ask this same question; but the answer is simple enough. God has already fulfilled his holy promise to deliver Palestine to the posterity of Abraham; but when they became more evil than the pagan Canaanites they had replaced, God threw them out of Palestine for just reasons; and there is no record anywhere that God ever promised to establish an apostate and rebellious nation forever in Palestine, merely upon the basis that they had indeed once inherited it.
Subsequently to their loss of Palestine through their gross sins, there are many promises like the one in this chapter, in which God speaks of the “return” of his people and of his restoring them to “their land”; but all such promises have their fulfillment, not in the old racial Israel at all, which has never repented and is still God’s enemy; but in the “righteous remnant” along with the Gentiles who constitute the New Israel of God, and who are “spiritually returned” to Jerusalem, not the old one, but “the heavenly Jerusalem.”
If individuals of the ten northern tribes truly repent and are brought by God into spiritual Zion they will experience many wonderful blessings. First, they will be blessed with a new leadership (Jer 3:15). After evangelism must come education and conservation. God is not just concerned to win back His people but also to preserve them in the faith. Thus He will provide for them shepherds, spiritual leaders who will be in harmony with His will and who will impart to the converts wisdom and knowledge of God. One thinks of Christ, the Good Shepherd (Joh 6:35-63), and the faithful men of God who have fed the flock through the centuries.
The second blessing is that of prosperity and growth. The rapid increase of the spiritual Israel of God is one of the characteristic traits of Messianic prophecy. See Gen 15:5-6; Gen 17:2; Gen 28:14; Jer 23:3; Eze 36:11; Hos 1:10; Hos 2:23. The Book of Acts contains the record of the thrilling fulfillment of this prediction. The number of the New Israel of God grew from 120 souls (Act 1:15) to 3,000 souls (Act 2:41) to 5,000 souls (Act 4:4). And that was only the beginning! Surely God has kept His promise and blessed the New Israel numerically.
In the Messianic age a new covenant will replace the cherished Ark of the Covenant (Jer 3:16). The Ark of the Covenant was vital to the religious life in Old Testament times. It must have come as a shock to even the most devout Jew to hear for the first time the announcement that the Ark would not play any role whatsoever in the New Israel. After all, the God-ordained worship of the Old Testament centered around the Sanctuary and around the Ark. The Ark is represented in the law of Moses as the throne of the Lord. It was the tangible, visible symbol of Gods presence. But worship of the New Israel would be internalized and spiritual. A symbol of Gods presence would no longer be needed when God Himself in the person of His Son would dwell in the midst of His people. The once for all time sacrifice on Calvary would make unnecessary and superfluous the mercy seat upon which blood was sprinkled annually for the sins of the people. The Ark will disappear, says the prophet. So it did. When the Jews returned from Babylon to rebuild their Temple they had no Ark to place in the Holy of Holies. The absence of that Ark was an evident token to those who were spiritually wise that the Old Covenant was ready to vanish away and make way for the New.
In years to come a new city would replace earthly Jerusalem (Jer 3:17). The throne of God will no longer be the Ark of the Covenant but rather the holy city, the new Jerusalem. The Ark of the Covenant is never called in the Old Testament the throne of God, yet it was in fact no less than that. The New Covenant Jerusalem is none other than the New Testament Church. The Apostle Paul calls it the Jerusalem which is above i.e., spiritual Jerusalem of which all believers are citizens (Gal 4:24-31). Jesus Christ sits on the throne of God and rules over His church and in the midst of His church (Eph 1:20-23). Ezekiel speaks of that same city when he says the name of the city from that day shall be, the LORD is there (Eze 48:35).
In the Messianic age Jerusalem will be blessed with a new attractiveness. Jerusalem shall become the spiritual center of the world and all nations shall gather there. The gathering of Gentiles into the Church of Christ is another frequent theme in Messianic prophecy (e.g., Isaiah 60; Isaiah 62). Because they have experienced genuine conversion these Gentiles no longer walk after the stubbornness of their evil heart. But what is it that attracts these Gentiles to the New Covenant Jerusalem, the Church? The verse seems to suggest that it is the Name of the Lord which attracts them. The name of God in the Old Testament was very significant. It revealed something of the character and nature of God. The Name of God in this verse is not an abstract idea or even a personification but a person. Note the language of Isa 30:27; Isa 26:8; Isa 59:19 where the name of God is personalized. It is the Lord Jesus Christ who came into the world to reveal to men the character and nature of God. The Name here is virtually equivalent to the Logos or Word of John 1.
A new fellowship shall characterize the Israel of the future. Israel and Judah shall be reunited for the first time since the great schism of 931 B.C. The reunion of these two estranged sister nations is also a major theme in the Messianic prophecy of the Old Testament. See Jer 2:4; Isa 11:12; Eze 37:16 ff.; Hos 2:2; Hos 1:11. The Israelites and Jews are depicted returning together from the land of the north, i.e., Assyria and Babylonia, to the land of Canaan which God had given to their fathers centuries earlier. The Apostle Paul quotes a similar reunion passage from Hosea and applies it to the unity of believers that exists in the Church of Christ (Rom 9:25-26). Therefore while the present passage may have had a prefillment in the days of the restoration from Babylon, its fulfillment came in the Messianic age.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
O backsliding: Jer 2:19
for I am married: Jer 3:1, Jer 3:8, Jer 2:2, Jer 31:32, Isa 54:5, Hos 2:19, Hos 2:20
one of a city: Jer 23:3, Jer 31:8-10, Isa 1:9, Isa 6:13, Isa 10:22, Isa 11:11, Isa 11:12, Isa 17:6, Isa 24:13-15, Eze 34:11-14, Zec 13:7-9, Rom 9:27, Rom 11:4-6
Reciprocal: 1Sa 7:6 – We have sinned Neh 1:9 – will bring Psa 87:3 – Glorious Pro 1:23 – Turn Isa 27:12 – ye shall be Isa 31:6 – Turn Isa 43:6 – bring Isa 62:4 – Beulah Jer 4:1 – return Jer 11:15 – my Jer 23:4 – I Jer 31:21 – O Jer 31:22 – backsliding Jer 35:15 – Return Jer 49:4 – O backsliding Hos 2:16 – Ishi Hos 12:6 – turn Zep 2:3 – Seek ye
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Jer 3:14. In Jer 3:8 the people of God are said to be divorced from him white here it is said that God is married. to them. The word is from BAWAL. and Strong’s first definition is, A primitive root; to be master.” Being their master the Lord will be able to do by and with them as he sees fit, hence he makes the prediction that he will come to their rescue at the proper time. One of a city and two of a family is the familiar prediction of the “remnant that was to be saved from the captivity. See 2 Samuel 24; 2 Samuel 9 and Ezr 2:1; Ezr 2:64 and note the decrease in tbelr number. It will be seen that the proportion is practically that which is indicated in the italicized words.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Jer 3:14. Turn, for I am married unto you I am in covenant with you, and this covenant, notwithstanding all your unfaithfulness, I am ready to renew with you. Hebrew, , which Blaney translates, I have been a husband among you; observing, that God hereby means to remind them that he had fulfilled the covenant on his part, by protecting and blessing them, as he had promised when he engaged to be their God: and therefore, as they had never any reason to complain of him, he urges them to return to their duty, and promises, in that case, to be still kinder to them than before. I will take you one of a city, &c. Some interpret these words thus: I will receive you, though there should be but one from a city willing to return, and two from a province, or tribe. This prophecy was accomplished in the letter, after the edict of Cyrus, when several of the Israelites returned to Palestine, but only by little and little, and, as it were, one by one. But undoubtedly it was intended to be understood chiefly, in a spiritual sense, of their conversion to Christianity, and their reception into the gospel church, into which they partly have been, and probably hereafter in greater numbers will be admitted, not all at a time, or in a national capacity, but severally, as individuals, here and there one. See Isa 27:12.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Changing the figure, the Lord invited the prodigal Israelites to return to their Father (Jer 3:4). He would take them back and be their master (Heb. Ba’al) again. [Note: Perhaps this promise is the reason the prodigal son in Jesus’ parable asked to come back home as a servant rather than as a son (cf. Luke 15:11-32).] He, the sovereign Lord of the covenant, was their master, not Baal (lit. "master").
". . . ’I am your ba’al (husband)’ implies that no longer would Judah be bound to the Baals of the fertility faith to which she had so easily fallen away from the true covenant faith." [Note: Craigie, p. 60. Ba’al sometimes has the connotation of "husband."]
The Israelites did not have to come en mass. The Lord would receive any individual Israelites who really repented, even though they were part of a larger group that did not repent. The Lord would even bring them back to Himself in Zion, the place where He had promised to meet with His people. Thus the way was open for a remnant of spiritually sensitive Israelites to respond.