Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Jeremiah 52:12
Now in the fifth month, in the tenth [day] of the month, which [was] the nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, came Nebuzaradan, captain of the guard, [which] served the king of Babylon, into Jerusalem,
12 27. Severities following upon the capture
12. From this to Jer 52:23, a part of the narrative which has been summarized in Jer 39:8-10, we find in almost verbal accord with 2Ki 25:8-17.
in the fifth month ] See Zec 7:3 for the commemorative fast.
tenth ] 2 Kgs has seventh. We have no grounds whereby to decide between the two dates.
captain of the guard ] See on Jer 39:9.
stood before ] See on Jer 15:19.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Served – The word implies high office.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 12. Now in the fifth month] Answering nearly to our August.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
12. tenth dayBut in 2Ki25:8, it is said “the seventh day.” Nebuzara-danstarted from Riblah on the “seventh” day and arrivedin Jerusalem on the “tenth” day. Seeming discrepancies,when cleared up, confirm the genuineness of Scripture; for they showthere was no collusion between the writers; as in all God’s worksthere is latent harmony under outward varieties.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Now in the fifth month, in the tenth [day] of the month,…. Hence the fast of the fifth month, for the burning of the city, which was the month Ab, and answers to part of July and part of August, Zec 8:19;
which [was] the nineteenth year of Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon; that is, the nineteenth year of his reign; who reigned in all forty three years, according to Ptolemy’s canon:
came Nebuzaradan captain of the guard, [which] served the king of Babylon, into Jerusalem; or “stood before the king of Babylon” s; ministered to him, was a servant of his, the provost marshal, or chief marshal; he was sent, and came from Riblah to Jerusalem, with a commission to burn the city. In 2Ki 25:8; it is said to be on the “seventh” day of the fifth month that he came thither; here, on the “tenth” day; which difficulty may be solved, without supposing different copies, or any error: he might set out from Riblah on the seventh day, and come to Jerusalem on the tenth; or he might come thither on the seventh, and not set fire to the city till the tenth; or, if he set fire to it on the seventh, it might be burning to the tenth, before it was wholly consumed. The Jews t account for it thus,
“strangers entered into the temple, and ate in it, and defiled it, the seventh and eighth days; and on the ninth, towards dark, they set fire to it; and it burned and continued all that whole day, as it is said, Jer 6:4;”
R. Johanan was saying, if I had been in that generation, I should have fixed on that day, for the greatest part of the temple was burnt on that day. The authors of the Universal History say u it was on Wednesday the eleventh of the fourth month, answering to our twenty seventh of July; but, according to the express words of the text, the city was broke up on the ninth of the fourth month, and burnt on the tenth day of the fifth month; and which was, according to Bishop Usher w, the twenty seventh of August, on a sabbath day, and in the year of the world 3416, and before Christ 588; and is placed by them in the same years; and by Mr. Whiston x in 589; and by Mr. Bedford y in the year 587. This was a month after the taking of the city.
s “qui setit coram rege”, Schmidt. t T. Bab. Taanith, fol. 29. 1. u Vol 4. p. 189. & vol. 21. p. 61. w Annales Vet. Test. p. 131. x Chronological Tables, cent. 10. y Scripture Chronology, p 684.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
The destruction of Jerusalem and of the temple, and the carrying away of the people, which are only very summarily stated in Jer 39:8-10, are here related in complete accordance with the account given in 2Ki 25:8-17. The deviations for the most part originated through the freedom exercised by the epitomizer in his work, or only when mistakes were made by later copyists. The text before us has some amplifications (especially the notices regarding the ornaments of the brazen pillars, Jer 52:23) which are found nowhere else in the Old Testament. The difference in date between Jer 52:12 (“on the tenth of the month”) and the passage in Kings (“on the seventh of the month”) has arisen through one number having been mistaken for another in copying; it cannot now be decided which is correct; see on 2Ki 25:18. As to Nebuzaradan, see on Jer 39:13. Instead of , is found in 2Ki 25:8, which certainly is a simpler reading, but one having less appearance of being the original. The only strange point is the want of the relative in plain prose before , which is probably to be pointed . , instead of (Kings), is a pregnant expression for “he came into Jerusalem.” – Jer 52:14. From the expression , as given in Jer 52:14, “all” is omitted in Kings, as being not indispensable for the meaning.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| The Babylonish Captivity. | B. C. 588. |
12 Now in the fifth month, in the tenth day of the month, which was the nineteenth year of Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon, came Nebuzaradan, captain of the guard, which served the king of Babylon, into Jerusalem, 13 And burned the house of the LORD, and the king’s house; and all the houses of Jerusalem, and all the houses of the great men, burned he with fire: 14 And all the army of the Chaldeans, that were with the captain of the guard, brake down all the walls of Jerusalem round about. 15 Then Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard carried away captive certain of the poor of the people, and the residue of the people that remained in the city, and those that fell away, that fell to the king of Babylon, and the rest of the multitude. 16 But Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard left certain of the poor of the land for vinedressers and for husbandmen. 17 Also the pillars of brass that were in the house of the LORD, and the bases, and the brasen sea that was in the house of the LORD, the Chaldeans brake, and carried all the brass of them to Babylon. 18 The caldrons also, and the shovels, and the snuffers, and the bowls, and the spoons, and all the vessels of brass wherewith they ministered, took they away. 19 And the basons, and the firepans, and the bowls, and the caldrons, and the candlesticks, and the spoons, and the cups; that which was of gold in gold, and that which was of silver in silver, took the captain of the guard away. 20 The two pillars, one sea, and twelve brasen bulls that were under the bases, which king Solomon had made in the house of the LORD: the brass of all these vessels was without weight. 21 And concerning the pillars, the height of one pillar was eighteen cubits; and a fillet of twelve cubits did compass it; and the thickness thereof was four fingers: it was hollow. 22 And a chapiter of brass was upon it; and the height of one chapiter was five cubits, with network and pomegranates upon the chapiters round about, all of brass. The second pillar also and the pomegranates were like unto these. 23 And there were ninety and six pomegranates on a side; and all the pomegranates upon the network were a hundred round about.
We have here an account of the woeful havoc that was made by the Chaldean army, a month after the city was taken, under the command of Nebuzaradan, who was captain of the guard, or general of the army, in this action. In the margin he is called the chief of the slaughter-men, or executioners; for soldiers are but slaughter-men, and God employs them as executioners of his sentence against a sinful people. Nebuzaradan was chief of those soldiers, but, in the execution he did, we have reason to fear he had no eye to God, but he served the king of Babylon and his own designs, now that he came into Jerusalem, into the very bowels of it, as captain of the slaughter-men there. And, 1. He laid the temple in ashes, having first plundered it of every thing that was valuable: He burnt the house of the Lord, that holy and beautiful house, where their fathers praised him, Isa. lxiv. 11. 2. He burnt the royal palace, probably that which Solomon built after he had built the temple, which was, ever since, the king’s house. 3. He burnt all the houses of Jerusalem, that is, all the houses of the great men, or those particularly; if any escaped, it was only some sorry cottages for the poor of the land. 4. He broke down all the walls of Jerusalem, to be revenged upon them for standing in the way of his army so long. Thus, of a defenced city, it was made a ruin, Isa. xxv. 2. 5. He carried away many into captivity (v. 15); he took away certain of the poor of the people, that is, of the people in the city, for the poor of the land (the poor of the country) he left for vine-dressers and husbandmen. He also carried off the residue of the people that remained in the city, that had escaped the sword and famine, and the deserters, such as he thought fit, or rather such as God thought fit; for he had already determined some for the pestilence, some for the sword, some for famine, and some for captivity, ch. xv. 2. But, 6. Nothing is more particularly and largely related here than the carrying away of the appurtenances of the temple. All that were of great value were carried away before, the vessels of silver and gold, yet some of that sort remained, which were now carried away, v. 19. But most of the temple-prey that was now seized was of brass, which, being of less value, was carried off last. When the gold was gone, the brass soon went after it, because the people repented not, according to Jeremiah’s prediction, ch. xxvii. 19, c. When the walls of the city were demolished, the pillars of the temple were pulled down too, and both in token that God, who was the strength and stay both of their civil and their ecclesiastical government, had departed from them. No walls can protect those, nor pillars sustain those, from whom God withdraws. These pillars of the temple were not for support (for there was nothing built upon them), but for ornament and significancy. They were called Jachin–He will establish and Boaz–In him is strength; so that the breaking of these signified that God would no longer establish his house nor be the strength of it. These pillars are here very particularly described (Jer 52:21-23; 1Ki 7:15), that the extraordinary beauty and stateliness of them may affect us the more with the demolishing of them. All the vessels that belonged to the brazen altar were carried away; for the iniquity of Jerusalem, like that of Eli’s house, was not to be purged by sacrifice or offering, 1 Sam. iii. 14. It is said (v. 20), The brass of all these vessels was without weight; so it was in the making of them (1 Kings vii. 47), the weight of the brass was not then found out (2 Chron. iv. 18), and so it was in the destroying of them. Those that made great spoil of them did not stand to weigh them, as purchasers do, for, whatever they weighted, it was all their own.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Vs. 12-16: THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM
1. Nebuzar-adan, captain of the guard, in the service of king Nebuchadnezzar, entered Jerusalem on the 10th day of the 5th month (586-585 B.C. vs. 12).
2. He burned the temple, the king’s palace, and the houses of all the prominent men of the city, (vs. 13; 2Ch 36:8; 2Ch 36:19; Psa 74:6-8; Psa 79:1; Isa 64:10-11; La 2:7).
3. Then he directed the soldiers that were with him in the breaking down of the walls that were around Jerusalem, (vs. 14; 2Ki 25:10; Neh 1:3).
4. Having completed his task, he left some of the poorest of the land to be vinedressers and husbandmen – leading a number of captives to Babylon, (vs. 15-16; 2Ki 25:11-12; Jer 39:10; Jer 40:2-6).
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
B. The Destruction of Jerusalem Jer. 52:12-16
TRANSLATION
(12) In the tenth day of the fifth month of the nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, Nebuzaradan, captain of the guard who served the king of Babylon, came to Jerusalem. (13) And he burned the house of the LORD and the house of the king; and all the houses of Jerusalem and every great house he burnt with fire. (14) And all the army of the Chaldeans that were with the captain of the guard broke down all the walls of Jerusalem round about. (15) Then Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard carried away captive some of the poor people, the rest of the people who were left in the city, and the deserters who had gone over to the king of Babylon, and the rest of the multitude. (16) But Nebuzaradan, captain of the guard, left some of the poor of the land as vinedressers and laborers.
COMMENTS
The account of the destruction of Jerusalem, already summarized in Jer. 39:8-10, is almost identical with 2Ki. 25:8-17. After the city of Jerusalem fell to the Chaldeans the soldiers awaited further instructions concerning the fate of the city. A month after the successful breaching of the walls, Nebuzaradan, the captain of the guard[426] arrived from Riblah with the orders of Nebuchadnezzar (Jer. 52:12). The English text of Kings and Jeremiah seems to present a contradiction as to the date that Nebuzaradan arrived at Jerusalem. According to the former account he arrived on the seventh day of the month while in the present narrative it is the tenth day of the month (cf. 2Ki. 25:8). The simpliest solution is that Nebuzaradan arrived at Jerusalem on the seventh day and for some unexplained reason did not enter Jerusalem until the tenth day of the month.[427] Nebuzaradans orders were to destroy Jerusalem and prepare its inhabitants for deportation to Babylon. The entire city including the Temple area was put to the torch (Jer. 52:13) and the walls were razed (Jer. 52:14). Both Psalms (Psa. 74:6-7) and Lamentations (Jer. 2:7-9) provide vivid poetic descriptions of this destruction. Those who had deserted to the Chaldeans during the siege, and the rest of the multitude (i.e., the country people)[428] were prepared for the long trip to Babylon (Jer. 52:15). Only the very poorest people were left in the land to serve as vinedressers and husbandmen (Jer. 52:16).
[426] On the title of Nebuzaradan see note on Jer. 39:9.
[427] In the Hebrew the word Jerusalem has no preposition attached to it in 2Ki. 25:8 but has the preposition beth in Jeremiah 62:12.
[428] Some prefer to translate the Hebrew word as artisans. In the light of the parallel passage 2Ki. 25:11 multitude is the best translation
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(12) In the tenth day of the month.2Ki. 25:8 gives the seventh day. We have no means of ascertaining which of the two statements is the more accurate. The Jews have always kept the ninth day as a commemorative fast. And this date is given in the Syriac version of 2 Kings.
Which served the king of Babylon.Better, which stand before the king. The Hebrew word is one used continually of honourable service (Jer. 35:19; Num. 27:2; Num. 27:21; Deu. 1:30). In 2Ki. 25:8 we have the less accurate term of servant or slave, or captain of the guard. (See Note on Jer. 39:9.)
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
12. The tenth day of the month In 2Ki 25:8, we read the seventh day. This discrepancy is probably owing to letters having been used for numerals, and the proper letter having been wrongly transcribed.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
The Destruction Of Jerusalem And Of The Temple Followed By The Taking Of Exiles And The Treasures Of The Temple To Babylon ( Jer 52:12-23 ).
Having taken Jerusalem Nebuzaradan, the commander of the king’s bodyguard, burned down the Temple and the royal palace, together with the leading residences of Jerusalem, completely dismantled the defensive walls of Jerusalem (the efficiency with which he did this has been testified to archaeologically), and carried away the cream of the population into exile (which only numbered eight hundred and thirty two, together no doubt with their wives and families) leaving the poorer people to look after the land. He also took the treasures of the Temple as spoils to Babylon.
Jer 52:12
‘Now in the fifth month, on the tenth day of the month, which was the nineteenth year of king Nebuchadrezzar, king of Babylon, came Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard, who stood before the king of Babylon, into Jerusalem,’
One month later Nebuzaradan the captain of Nebuchadrezzar’s guard (he ‘stood before the king of Babylon’) arrived in Jerusalem, no doubt with strict instructions as to what he was to do. The city had rebelled once too often, and both YHWH and Nebuchadrezzar were sick of it. Nebuzaradan was going to teach them a severe lesson.
2Ki 25:8 says that it was on the seventh day of the month. This may in fact have been the day on which he started his journey, with Jeremiah giving the arrival date. Or it may be that he arrived at the Babylonian camp outside Jerusalem on the seventh day and had discussions there with the Babylonian commanders in order to plan what he was going to do, prior to actually commencing his activity on the 10th. Jer 52:29 says that it was in the eighteenth year demonstrating that the year of accession was there ignored in the calculation.
Jer 52:13-14
‘And he burned the house of YHWH, and the king’s house; and all the houses of Jerusalem, even every great house, he burned with fire. And all the army of the Chaldeans, who were with the captain of the guard, broke down all the walls of Jerusalem round about.’
The book of Kings began by describing the building of the house of YHWH and the king’s house, in all their splendour (1Ki 5:1 to 1Ki 7:12). Now those same houses were to be burned with fire, along with all the other large houses in Jerusalem (no one would bother about the hovels). The walls also of the city were broken down all round the city, something testified to archaeologically. Jerusalem was to be left a ruin, almost uninhabited apart from the poor and the totally defenceless. This was demonstrating that Judah was no longer to be allowed to continue as a semi-independent state.
Jer 52:15-16
‘Then Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard carried away captive of the poorest of the people, and the residue of the people who were left in the city, and those who fell away, who fell to the king of Babylon, and the residue of the multitude. But Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard left of the poorest of the land to be vinedressers and husbandmen.’
The whole of what remained of the repopulated Jerusalem (it had had to be repopulated following what happened in 597 BC) were transported to Riblah, even those who had surrendered to the Babylonians during the siege (those who ‘fell away to the king of Babylon’). ‘The residue of the multitude’ probably refers to those who had taken refuge in the city before the siege began. All were carried away captive because of their connection with Jerusalem.
The land was not, however, to be left totally deserted and of those transported to Riblah were the common and unimportant folk (and there would be many of them) who were left in the land in order to maintain its agriculture and pay tribute to Babylon. Thus while Jerusalem itself was now almost deserted and in ruins, the land around remained populated and was tended, although hardly initially being in good condition. Those who were left of Judah still survived in the land, and they would no doubt be supplemented by those who came out of hiding in the mountains once the Babylonian forces had withdrawn. Thus it is wrong to think of Judah as totally deserted. Babylon’s purpose had been to draw Judah’s teeth, not to commit genocide. Furthermore as far as we know Lachish, and possibly other cities, had not been taken, and if so their inhabitants may have been treated more leniently. Gedaliah the new governor would come from Lachish.
A Description Of The Treasures Of YHWH’s House Which Were Taken Away.
We are now given a description of the Temple treasures which were removed to Babylon. These included the two huge free-standing pillars which Solomon had erected in front of the Sanctuary, and the great brazen ‘sea’, erected on twelve brazen bulls, which had contained water for the cleansing of the priests. Also included were the pots and vessels used in worship, many of which would be stored up in Babylon and made available to them on the decree of Cyrus when the exiles began to return.
Jer 52:17
‘And the pillars of bronze which were in the house of YHWH, and the bases and the brazen sea which were in the house of YHWH, did the Chaldeans break in pieces, and carried all the bronze from them to Babylon.’
Reference back to the first part of Kings continues (see 1Ki 7:13 onwards). The two pillars of bronze and the brazen sea which Solomon had made were broken in pieces and their bronze carried back to Babylon. Previously these had been allowed to remain. Now the last remnants of their former glory were being removed. All that Judah had built up was being broken down. Such was the consequence of their disobedience.
Jer 52:18-19
‘The pots also, and the shovels, and the snuffers, and the basins, and the spoons, and all the vessels of bronze with which they ministered, they took away, and the cups, and the firepans, and the basins, and the pots, and the lampstands, and the spoons, and the bowls what was of gold, in gold, and what was of silver, in silver, the captain of the guard took away.’
The description here expands slightly on 2 Kings, but the gist of it is the same. All the means of worship were ‘taken away’ for the sake of their valuable metallic content. Many of these had been replacements for those initially taken by the Babylonians in 597 BC (Jer 27:16; 2Ki 24:13). Some of the bronze ones were possibly taken away as spoils by the soldiers, although the large part would go to the treasury in Babylon, but in contrast the gold and silver was especially watched, and was taken away by the ‘captain of the guard’, the commander of the king’s bodyguard, no doubt again for the king’s treasury. Theoretically at least all worship in Jerusalem had ceased. It is interesting that the silver and gold items that remained were especially taken charge of by Nebuzaradan himself, no doubt in the king’s name.
Jer 52:20
‘The two pillars, the one sea, and the twelve brazen bulls which were under the bases, which king Solomon had made for the house of YHWH the bronze of all these vessels was without weight.’
The two huge bronze pillars, and the moulten ‘sea’ with its twelve brazen bulls providing support for the bases, could not be weighed, either because they were too heavy, or because they were too cumbersome. They had lasted throughout all Judah’s tribulations without being called on for tribute purposes, but now even this reminder of Solomon’s glory would be no more. Judah was being stripped bare and left with nothing. All that God had given had been taken away.
Jer 52:21-23
‘And as for the pillars, the height of the one pillar was eighteen cubits; and a line of twelve cubits encompassed it; and its thickness was four fingers. It was hollow. And on it was a capital of bronze; and the height of the one capital was five cubits, with network and pomegranates n the capital round about, all of bronze: and the second pillar also had similar to these, and pomegranates. And there were ninety and six pomegranates on the sides; all the pomegranates were a hundred on the network round about.’
We have here a detailed description of the two huge pillars of Solomon. More detail is given here than in 2 Kings. “ Kings, however, tells us that ‘the height of the capital was three cubits’ compared with five here and in 1Ki 7:16. The loss of two cubits was possibly due to the necessity for earlier repair work on one of the pillars. Pomegranates were holy symbols prominent in the Sanctuary, and were symbols of fruitfulness and of YHWH’s provision.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
2. THE DESTRUCTION OF THE CITY AND DEPORTATION OF THE PEOPLE
Jer 52:12-16
12Now in the fifth month, in the tenth day of the month, which was the nineteenth year of Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon, came Nebuzar-adan, captain of the guard [of the halberdiers], who served [stood before]6 the king of Babylon, into Jerusalem. 13And burned the house of the Lord [Jehovah] and the kings house; and all the houses of Jerusalem, and all the houses of the great men [every great house],7 burned 14he with fire. And all the army of the Chaldeans, that were with the captain of 15the guard, brake down all the walls of Jerusalem, round about. Then Nebuzaradan captain of the guard [halberdiers] carried away captive certain of the poor [a part of the lowest] of the people, and the residue of the people that remained in the city, and those that fell away, that fell to the king of Babylon, and the rest of 16the multitude [work-people].8 But Nebuzar adan the captain of the guard left certain of the poor [part of the meanest]9 of the land for vinedressers and for husbandmen.10
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
Jer 52:12-14. Now in the fifth round about. Instead of the tenth day, 2 Kings (as also Bar 1:2) mentions the seventh, as the same text also states three cubits instead of the five in Jer 52:23, and five men instead of the seven in Jer 52:25. Hitzig, Thenius, Graf, Keil [Blayney, Henderson] rightly suppose that these differences arose from the interchange of the letters of the older alphabet used as numerals. Which statements are correct is not ascertainable. Thenius [comp. also Wordsworth] declares the statement here made to be the correct one, because the Jews afterward kept the ninth day as a fast. But on the other hand comp. Keil on 2Ki 25:8.
Jer 52:15-16. Then Nebuzar-adan. husbandmen.The poor of the people, which is wanting in 2 Ki., has come here either by mistake from Jer 52:16, where it also begins the sentence, or it is to express the thought, that the poor people did not all remain behind, but were partly carried away. the latter is probably the correct view.Multitude [work-people]. It is difficult to decide which is the correct rendering. Both suit the sense, for a remnant of workpeople might just as well be spoken of as a remnant, of the masses of the people (either in antithesis to the warriors or the population of the city). I prefer to take the word in the sense in which it undoubtedly occurs in Pro 8:30 [then was I as a workman with him], and Son 7:1.
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
1. Docemur hoc capite, quod comminationes divin rum sint de pelvi fulgura, quodque Deus pro misericordia sua infinita calamitates a se immissas mitigare plerumque soleat, si seria interveniat pnitentia. Frster.
2. On Jer 52:1-3. From this we see why God sometimes places ungodly rulers over a country, who cast it to destruction. It is done on account of the rulers and the peoples sins, that they may draw down the well merited punishment, as Sirach says. On account of violence, injustice and avarice, a kingdom passes from one nation to another (Jer 10:8). So also says king Solomon. Because of the sins of a nation occur many changes of rulers, but for the sake of the people who are intelligent and reasonable, the State is prolonged (Pro 28:2). Wurtemb. Summarien.
3. On Jer 52:4. God allows many slight and mild punishments to come as warnings, till at last comes the finishing stroke. This is a witness to the divine long-suffering (Rom 2:4). Cramer.
4. On Jer 52:6. The fact that in this siege compassionate women had to kill and eat their own children (Lam 4:10) is a reminder that by bodily hunger God would punish; 1. satiation and disgust towards His holy word and soul-food; 2. the terrible offering up of children to Moloch; 3. the loose discipline of children. Cramer.
5. On Jer 52:7. No fortress can protect the ungodly, even though they had their nest in the clouds. Cramer.
6. On Jer 52:8. An example of faithless, perjured men of war. But as Zedekiah broke his oath to the king at Babylon, he was paid back in the same coin. Cramer. His people forsook the poor king Zedekiah on his flight and he was captured, from which we see that great men cannot depend on their body-guard; these flee in time of need, and leave their masters in the lurch. The surest and best protection is when we have the holy angels for our guard This angelic protection is, however, to be obtained and preserved by faith and godliness, but is lost by unbelief and ungodly conduct. Wurtemb. Summ.
7. On Jer 52:9-11. The punishment of perjury. Ubi monemur, quod fides hosti, etiam barbaro, qualis hodie Turca, a Christianis data, mimine violanda. Frster.
8. On Jer 52:9. sqq. God had shown Zedekiah by Jeremiah a way in which he could escape the calamity. But because he forsook the Lord and would not follow it, the others were only leaky cisterns (Jer 2:13). For woe to the rebellious who take counsel without the Lord (Isa 30:1). This is useful for an instance against the holy by works, who reject Gods way of escaping the Devil; when they devise other ways for themselves they are caught by the Chaldeans of hell. Cramer.
9. On Jer 52:12 sqq. Holy places, external ceremonies and opus operatum do not avail for hypocrites If God punished His own institution so severely, how shall human institutions remain unpunished? Cramer.
10. On Jer 52:12. Quale fatum, ne et nostris obtingat templis caveamus, ne profanemus templa ulterius tum externa vel materialia, tum interna vel spiritualia in cordibus nostris, de quibus 1Co 3:16 sqq.; Jer 6:19 sqq. Frster.
11. On Jer 52:15. It is another work of mercy that some of Judah were preserved. For Gods grace is always to be found in His punishments. Cramer.
12. On Jer 52:15. He who will not serve God and his neighbor at home and in quiet, must learn to do it in a strange land in affliction and distress. Cramer.
13. On Jer 52:24 sqq. As teachers are often to blame for their behaviour that sin gets the upper hand in a community, it is exceedingly just when God brings such for an example into great punitive judgment (1Sa 2:27-34). Starke.
14. On Jer 52:24. The priests are caught and slain; 1. because they could not believe the truth for themselves; 2. because they led others astray; 3. because they appealed to the temple of the Lord; 4. because they persecuted the true prophets; 5. because they troubled the whole church of God. But he who troubleth shall bear his judgment, whosoever he be (Gal 5:10). Cramer.
15. On Jer 52:31 sqq. Sane omnino verisimile videtur judicio Philippi Melanchthonis in Chron. part, I fol. 33 Evilmerodachum amplexum esse doctrinam Danielis de Vero Deo, quam et pater publico edic professus est, eamque ob causam clementiam exercuisse erga regem Jechoniam. Frster.Narrant Hebri hujusmodi fabulam: Evilmerodach, qui patre suo Nabuchodonosor vivente per septem annos inter bestias, ante regnaverat, postquam ille restitutus in regno est, usque ad mortem patris cum Joakim rege Jud in vinculis fuit; quo mortuo, quum rursus in regnum succederet, et non susciperetur a principibus, qui metuebant, ne viveret qui dicebatur extinctus, ut fidem patris mortui faceret, aperuit sepulcrum et cadaver ejus unco et funibus traxit. Jerome on Jer 14:18-19. Josephus speaks of it as follows: , , . (Antiqq., X. 11, 21.)
16. On Jer 52:31 sqq. Ceterum potest hoc exemplo, quod Jechonias rex dignitati su in exilio Babylonico restitutus, refutari exceptio Judorum contra vaticinium Jacobi (Gen 49:10) de Messia jamdudum exhibito, postquam per Romanos sceptrum de Juda ablatum, id quod Messi jamjam nascituri esse debuit. Frster.
17. On Jer 52:31 sqq. No one should despair in misfortune, for the right hand of the Highest can change all (Psa 77:10) and Christ rules even in the midst of His enemies (Psa 110:2). For His are the praise, the glory and the power from everlasting to everlasting. Amen. Cramer.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
1. On Jer 52:1-11. The truth of the word What a man soweth, that shall he also reap, exhibited in the example of the Jewish State under Zedekiah.1. The seed (Jer 52:2); 2. The crop (a) the siege, (b) the famine, (c) the capture of the city and flight of the king, (d) the punishment of the king and his princes, (e) the fate of the people (Jer 52:3).
2. On Jer 52:12-20. The rejection of Judah appears at first sight a contradiction. For Jerusalem is the holy city (Mat 4:5; Neh 11:1; Neh 11:18), the city of God (Psa 46:5; Psa 48:2; Psa 48:9; Psa 78:3); the temple is the house of Jehovah (Jer 7:2. etc.); Gods service rests on divine authority (Ex. chh. 2527, 30, 31). But God cannot contradict Himself. We have, therefore, to show the unity of the divine thoughts in the choice and rejection of Jerusalem. 1. The rejection was a conditional one (Jer 7:3 sqq). Hence notwithstanding the election the rejection involved nothing contradictory, but was a necessary consequence of the unfulfilled condition.2. The election remains (a) objectively notwithstanding the rejection; it is (b) subjectively brought to its realization by the rejection; the latter as a means of discipline operating to produce the disposition, from which alone thefulfillment of this condition can proceed. Comp. rems. on Jer 32:41, p. 288.
3. On Jer 52:24-27. That great lords sometimes make an example of gross miscreants, promotes righteousness, only it must not be done on the innocent, or with such severity that there is no proportion between the crime and its punishment (Jos 7:25). Starke.
4. On Jer 52:31-34. The deliverance of Jehoiachin. 1. It shows us that the Lord can help (a) out of great distress (grievous imprisonment of thirty-seven years), (b) in a glorious manner. 2. It admonishes us (a) to steadfast patience, (b) to believing hope, Psalms 13 [It was a prelude and pledge of the liberation and exaltation of the Jewish Nation, when it had been humbled and purified by the discipline of suffering; and of its return to its own land; and a joyful pre-announcement of that far more glorious future restoration which the prophets in the Old Testament, and the Apostles in the New foretellof Israel to God in Christ; to whom, with the Father and Holt Ghost, be ascribed all honor, glory, dominion, adoration and praise, now and forever. Amen. Wordsworth.S. R. A.].
Footnotes:
[6]Jer 52:12.For , of which words the former owes its punctuation to the erroneous connection with (hence also ), 2 Kings reads as a correction, and without . He ought doubtless to read . Comp. Jer 35:19; Jdg 20:28.
[7]Jer 52:13.Before the article is wanting in 2 Ki. according to rule. Comp. Naegelsb. Gr., 82, 6. But the construct state of is surprising in both cases. Probably it read originally, as Hitzig supposes. . A mistake (comp. the twice before) caused , from which came . This can be taken only in the sense of rhetorical emphasis, being collective for the great (2Ki 4:8; 2Ki 5:1). Then certainly the constr. state is perfectly normal, but, in 2 Ki. the traces of an older form of the text are to be recognized. Before Jer 52:14 is wanting in 2 Ki. the certainly unnecessary , before however the grammatically necessary .
[8]Jer 52:15.Instead of , 2 Ki. has . The word must have seemed obscure even to the authors of the text of 2 Kings 25. and Jeremiah 39, the one rendering it as above, the other by . In Pro 8:30 and in Son 7:1 certainly has the sense of work-man, and accordingly we may take the word here as a collective designation of the and , whose deportation is spoken of in Jer 24:1 and Jer 29:2. Thus Hitzig, Graf, Meier, Keil, on the other hand, appeals to Jer 39:9. But this passage, as well as 2Ki 25:11, proves only that to both authors the word appeared strange. Whether they interpreted it correctly is another question. If it should be alleged that it is a word appertaining only to a higher style, we reply that it would not be an easy alteration from .
[9]Jer 52:16.Instead of 2 Ki. has . This also betrays the hand of the corrector, since does not occur elsewhere either as plural or singular (Ewald, 165, c). It is the plural of (Jer 40:7; 2Ki 24:14; 2Ki 25:12)=tenuitates, insignificances.
[10]Jer 52:16.The name Nebuzar-adan appeared superfluous to the author of 2 Kings 25., having been mentioned in Jer 52:12. The word , which does not occur elsewhere, he altered into (from , fodit, aravit). Comp. remarks on Jer 39:10.
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Jer 52:12-16
12Now on the tenth day of the fifth month, which was the nineteenth year of King Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, Nebuzaradan the captain of the bodyguard, who was in the service of the king of Babylon, came to Jerusalem. 13He burned the house of the Lord, the king’s house and all the houses of Jerusalem; even every large house he burned with fire. 14So all the army of the Chaldeans who were with the captain of the guard broke down all the walls around Jerusalem. 15Then Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard carried away into exile some of the poorest of the people, the rest of the people who were left in the city, the deserters who had deserted to the king of Babylon and the rest of the artisans. 16But Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard left some of the poorest of the land to be vinedressers and plowmen.
Jer 52:12 As the date of the siege and the fall of Jerusalem are specified, so too, the date when Nebuchadnezzar’s military official arrived in Jerusalem to oversee its destruction.
1. burned the temple, Jer 52:13
2. burned the palace, Jer 52:13
3. burned all large houses, Jer 52:13
4. broke down the whole outer wall, Jer 52:14
5. exiled even more people
6. left a few people, Jer 52:15
a. defectors from the Babylonian military
b. the remaining craftsmen
The parallel in 2Ki 25:8 has the seventh day, not the tenth day. R. K. Harrison, Tyndale OT Commentary Series, p. 190, speculates the difference is between the day Nebuzaradan came to Jerusalem and the day the destruction started. This follows a rabbinical tradition (B. Ta’anit 29a). The NASB Study Bible, (p. 1143) asserts that one of the two dates (i.e., seven or ten) is a copyist error.
In the ANE there were two ways to calculate a king’s reign: (1) from the first partial year, (2) from the annual coronation ceremony. Often these ways are mixed, as is done in Jer 52:12 (1 above) and Jer 52:19 (2 above).
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
tenth day. In 2Ki 25:8 it says “seventh day”, but that was “[to] Jerusalem”. This is “into Jerusalem”.
into = in.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
fifth month
i.e. August.
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
fifth: 2Ki 25:8, Zec 7:3-5, Zec 8:19
the tenth: It appears from the parallel passage of Kings, that Nebuzar-adan came from Riblah to Jerusalem on the seventh of the fifth month; but it seems that he did not set fire to the temple and city till the tenth day, being probably occupied on the intervening days in taking the vessels out of the house of the Lord, and collecting together all the riches that could be found. In memory of this calamity, the Jews devote two fasts to this day; the seventeenth of the fourth month, which falls in June, for the destruction of Jerusalem, and the ninth of the fifth month, which falls in July, for the destruction of the temple; both of which are mentioned by Zechariah as kept from this event till his time, a period of seventy years, under the names of the fast of the fourth month, and fast of the fifth month.
the nineteenth: Jer 52:29, 2Ki 24:12, 2Ki 25:8
captain of the guard: or, chief marshal, Heb. chief of the executioners, or slaughtermen, and so, Jer 52:14, Jer 39:9, Gen 37:36,*marg.
served: Heb. stood before
Reciprocal: 2Ki 25:11 – the rest 1Ch 6:15 – when the Lord Psa 80:13 – The boar Jer 1:3 – in the fifth Jer 52:24 – the captain Dan 2:14 – captain of the king’s guard
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Jer 52:12-13. Now in the fifth month This gave occasion to that solemn fast of the fifth month, observed in the times of the captivity: see Zec 7:3-5; Zec 8:19. In the tenth day of the month In the parallel place, 2Ki 25:8, we read, on the seventh day. This difference some attempt to reconcile, by supposing that the one place may speak of the day Nebuzar-adan set out from Riblah, and the other of the day that he arrived at Jerusalem; or else, that he came on the seventh, but did not set fire to the building till the tenth. But it is more likely, says Blaney, to have arisen from some mistake of the transcriber, perhaps, in setting down the numbers at full length, which were expressed by numeral letters in the old copies. And in this instance such a mistake might easily happen between the and the , of which the first stands for seven, the latter for ten. And burned the house of the Lord After it had stood, says Josephus, four hundred and seventy years; but Archbishop Usher reckons it only four hundred and twenty-four years from the laying of the first foundation by Solomon: see note on 2Ki 25:9.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
52:12 Now in the fifth month, in the {d} tenth [day] of the month, which [was] the nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, came Nebuzaradan, captain of the guard, [who] {e} served the king of Babylon, into Jerusalem,
(d) In 2Ki 25:8 is it called the seventh day, because the fire began then and so continued to the tenth.
(e) That is, who was his servant, as in 2Ki 25:8 .
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
In 586 B.C. Nebuzaradan, the captain of Nebuchadnezzar’s bodyguard, came to Jerusalem and burned down the temple, the royal palace, and every sizable building. Evidently Nebuzaradan arrived in Jerusalem on the seventh of the month (2Ki 25:8) and began burning the city on the tenth. The soldiers with Nebuzaradan also broke down the wall of the city to make it indefensible (cf. Jer 1:10; Jer 18:7; Jer 31:28).
"The people of Judah had been guilty of the unthinkable, rebellion against their Babylonian suzerain, and thus suffered the consequences of their foolishness." [Note: Keown, p. 380.]