Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Jeremiah 52:24
And the captain of the guard took Seraiah the chief priest, and Zephaniah the second priest, and the three keepers of the door:
24. Seraiah the chief priest ] probably identical with the ancestor of Ezra, mentioned Ezr 7:1.
Zephaniah ] See on Jer 21:1.
keepers of the door ] Heb. threshold. See on Jer 35:4.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
24 27. Omitted in ch. 39, but cp. with it 2Ki 25:18-21.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Verse 24. The second priest] 2Kg 25:18.
The three keepers] The priests who stood at the door to receive the offerings of the people, see 2Kg 20:9; 2Kg 23:4.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
See Poole “2Ki 25:18“, where we have the same words. This Seraiah was not he mentioned Jer 51:59, but the son of Azariah, 1Ch 6:14. By the
second priest, interpreters understand him that supplied the place of the high priest in case he were sick, &c., he that was sent by Zedekiah to the prophet, Jer 21:1, and whom Jeremiah chose by his letters, Jer 29:25, for not setting Jeremiah in the stocks. It is probable there were more keepers of the door, but the captain of the guard took only three of the principal.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
24. Seraiahdifferent from theSeraiah (Jer 51:59), son ofNeriah; probably son of Azariah (1Ch6:14).
Zephaniahson ofMaaseiah (see on Jer 21:1; Jer29:25).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And the captain of the guard took Seraiah the chief priest,…. That is, out of the temple, where he was ministering, or fled for safety; this is supposed to be the father of Ezra, 1Ch 6:14;
and Zephaniah the second priest: or deputy priest: the “sagan” of the priests, as the Targum calls him, who was deputed to minister for the high priest, in case anything happened which hindered him from officiating; such an one there always was in later times on the day of atonement, as appears from the Misna f; this man is thought to be the same with Zephaniah the son of Maaseiah the priest, Jer 21:1;
and the three keepers of the door; that is, of the temple. The Targum calls them three “amarcalin”; who had, as Jarchi says, the keys of the court committed to them. The number seems better to agree with the “gizbarim” or treasurers; of whom, it is said, they never appoint less than three treasurers, and seven “amarcalin” g.
f Yoma, c. 1. sect. 1. g Misn. Shekalim, c. 5. sect. 2.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
The account given regarding the arrest of the chief officers of the temple and of the city, and concerning their transportation to Riblah, where Nebuchadnezzar caused them to be executed, agrees with 2Ki 25:18-21, except in some unimportant variations, which, however, do not alter the sense; the explanation has been already given in the commentary on that passage. In 2 Kings, the account of the appointment of Gedaliah as the governor of Judah, together with that of his assassination by Ishmael, which follows the narrative just referred to, is here omitted, because the matter has bee already more fully stated in the passage Jer 40:7 on to Jer 43:7, and had no close connection with the object of the present chapter. Instead of this, there follows here, in Jer 52:28-30 (as a continuation of the remark made, Jer 52:27, “Thus was Judah carried away captive out of his own land”), a calculation of the number of the Jews taken to Babylon at the three deportations: in the seventh year of Nebuchadnezzar, 3023 Jews; in the eighteenth year, 832 souls from Jerusalem; and in the twenty-third year, 745 souls, – in all, 4600 persons. The correctness of these data is vouched for by the exactness of the separate numbers, and the agreement of the sum with the individual items. In other respects, however, they present various difficulties. There is, first, the chronological discrepancy that the second deportation is here placed in the eighteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar, in contradiction with Jer 52:12, according to which, the deportation after the taking of Jerusalem occurred in the nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar; and 832 souls could not well be carried out of Jerusalem during the siege. This difference can be settled only by assuming that this list of deportations was derived from another source than the preceding notice regarding the destruction of Jerusalem, in which the years of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign were reckoned in some other way than elsewhere in Jeremiah and in the books of Kings, probably from the date of the actual commencement of his reign, which followed a year after he first appeared in Judah, from which his reign is dated elsewhere; see Comm. on Daniel at Dan 1:1. According to this mode of computation, the seventh year would correspond to the eighth of the common reckoning, and be the year in which Jehoiachin was carried away to Babylon, together with a large number of the people. But this does not agree with 3023, which is given as the number of those who were carried away; for, at that time, according to 2Ki 24:14, 2Ki 24:16, as many as 10,000 Jews, or, according to another view of these verses, even 18,000, were carried away to Babylon. This difference does not permit of being explained in any way. Ewald ( History of the People of Israel, iii. p. 738) accordingly assumes that in Jer 52:28, after , the word has been omitted, as in 2Ch 36:9, where the age of Jehoiachin is given; hence he thinks that, instead of “in the seventh,” we must read “in the seventeenth year of Nebuchadnezzar.” On such a view, the reference would be to a deportation which took place under Zedekiah, a year before the capture, or during the time of the siege of Jerusalem, and that, too, out of the country districts of Judah in contrast with Jerusalem, Jer 52:29. This supposition is favoured not merely by the small number of those who are said to have been carried away, but also by the context of the narrative, inasmuch as, in what precedes, it is only the capture of Jerusalem and the deportation of the people in Zedekiah’s time that is treated of. Ngelsbach has objected to this supposition, that it was not likely the great mass of the people would be carried away during the war, at a time when the approach of the Egyptian army (cf. Jer 37:5) was an object of dread. But the objection does not weaken the supposition, since the former rests on two presuppositions that are quite erroneous: viz., first, that the deportation took place before the defeat of the auxiliary army from Egypt, where as it may have followed that event; and secondly, that the Chaldeans, by keeping the hostile Jews in the country, might have been able to get some assistance against the Egyptian army, whereas, by removing the hostile population of Judah, they would but diminish the number of the enemies with which they had to contend. We therefore regard this conjecture as highly probable, because it is the means of settling all difficulties, and because we can thereby account for the small number of those who were carried away in the deportations during and after the destruction of Jerusalem.
Regarding the third deportation, which was effected by Nebuzaradan (Jer 52:30) in the twenty-third, or, according to another reckoning, in the twenty-fourth year of Nebuchadnezzar, i.e., in the fifth year after the destruction of Jerusalem, we have no other information; for the statement of Josephus, Antt. x. 9. 7, that Nebuchadnezzar made war upon the Ammonites and Moabites in that year, has not been placed beyond a doubt, and is probably a mere inference from this verse, taken in connection with the prophecies in Jer 48 and 49. Yet there is nothing improbable in the statement, viewed by itself. For it must be borne in mind that, after the appointment of Gedaliah as governor, and the departure of the Chaldean hosts, many Jews, who had fled during the war, returned into the country. Hence, in spite of the fact that, after the murder of Gedaliah, a multitude of Jews, fearing the vengeance of the Chaldeans, fled to Egypt, many may have still remained in the country; and many other fugitives may not have returned till afterwards, and given occasion to the Chaldeans for removing other 745 disturbers of the peace to Babylon, four or five years after Jerusalem had been laid in ashes. This deportation may have taken place on the occasion of the subjugation of the Moabites, Ammonites, and Idumeans, or during the war with the Phoenicians, possibly because they had rendered assistance to these nations against the Chaldeans. These verses thus contain nothing to justify the assumption of M. von Niebuhr ( Gesch. Assyr. und Babels, S. 58, note) and Ngelsbach, that they are a gloss. The paucity of those who were carried away is not to be attributed to a desire on the part of the writer of this inserted portion to represent the calamity as not so very terrible after all; nor is it due to the substitution of the number of the Levites for that of the entire people, – two wholly arbitrary assumptions: it is completely explained by a consideration of the historical circumstances. The best of the population of Judah had already been carried away, and Zedekiah and his counsellors must have said to themselves, when they rebelled against Nebuchadnezzar, that the latter would not spare this time; thus they must have defended themselves to the utmost, as is shown by the very fact that the siege of Jerusalem lasted eighteen months. In this manner, war, pestilence, and famine carried off a great number of the population of Jerusalem; so that, of men who were able-bodied and fit for war, and who could be carried into exile, not more than 4600 fell into the hands of the Chaldeans. During the war, also, many had concealed themselves in inaccessible places, while the lowest of the people were left behind in the country to cultivate the fields. Still more strange might appear the circumstance that the sum-total of those who were carried away to Babylon, viz., 10,000 with Jehoiachin, and 4600 under Zedekiah, – 14, 600 in all, – is evidently disproportionate to the number of those who returned to Jerusalem and Judah under Zerubbabel, which number is given in Ezr 2:64 at 42, 360, exclusive of men and maid servants. For this reason, Graf is of opinion that still later deportations may have taken place, of which no mention is made anywhere. This assumption, however, has little probability. On the other hand, we must consider these points: (1.) In the accounts given of those who were carried away, only full-grown and independent persons of the male sex are reckoned, while, along with fathers, both their wives and their children went into exile. (2.) Even so early as the first capture of Jerusalem in the fourth year of Jehoiakim, a number of prisoners of war, perhaps not inconsiderable, came to Babylon; these might unite with the thousands of their brethren who were carried thither at a later period. (3.) When the exiles had settled down in Babylon, and there found not only a means of livelihood, but even in many instances, as is clear from several intimations, attained to opulence as citizens, many, even of those who had been left in the country, may have gone to Babylon, in the hope of finding there greater prosperity than in Judah, now laid waste and depopulated by war. (4.) From the time when the 10,000 were carried away with Jehoiachin, in the year 599 b.c., till the return under Zerubbabel, 536 b.c., 63 years, i.e., nearly two generations, had passed, during which the exiles might largely increase in numbers. If we take all these elements into consideration, then, in the simple fact that the number of those who returned amounts to nearly three times the numbers of those given as having been carried away under Jehoiachin and Zedekiah, we cannot find such a difficulty as entitles us to doubt the correctness of the numbers handed down to us.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| The Babylonish Captivity. | B. C. 588. |
24 And the captain of the guard took Seraiah the chief priest, and Zephaniah the second priest, and the three keepers of the door: 25 He took also out of the city an eunuch, which had the charge of the men of war; and seven men of them that were near the king’s person, which were found in the city; and the principal scribe of the host, who mustered the people of the land; and threescore men of the people of the land, that were found in the midst of the city. 26 So Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard took them, and brought them to the king of Babylon to Riblah. 27 And the king of Babylon smote them, and put them to death in Riblah in the land of Hamath. Thus Judah was carried away captive out of his own land. 28 This is the people whom Nebuchadrezzar carried away captive: in the seventh year three thousand Jews and three and twenty: 29 In the eighteenth year of Nebuchadrezzar he carried away captive from Jerusalem eight hundred thirty and two persons: 30 In the three and twentieth year of Nebuchadrezzar Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard carried away captive of the Jews seven hundred forty and five persons: all the persons were four thousand and six hundred.
We have here a very melancholy account, 1. Of the slaughter of some great men, in cold blood, at Riblah, seventy-two in number (according to the number of the elders of Israel, Num 11:24; Num 11:25), so they are computed, 2Ki 25:18; 2Ki 25:19. We read there of five out of the temple, two out of the city, five out of the court, and sixty out of the country. The account here agrees with that, except in one article; there it is said that there were five, here there were seven, of those that were near the king, which Dr. Lightfoot reconciles thus, that he took away seven of those that were near the king, but two of them were Jeremiah himself and Ebed-melech, who were both discharged, as we have read before, so that there were only five of them put to death, and so the number was reduced to seventy-two, some of all ranks, for they had all corrupted their way; and it is probable that such were made examples of as had been most forward to excite and promote the rebellion against the king of Babylon. Seraiah the chief priest is put first, whose sacred character could not exempt him from this stroke; how should it, when he himself had profaned it by sin? Seraiah the prince was a quiet prince (ch. li. 59), but perhaps Seraiah the priest was not so, but unquiet and turbulent, by which he had made himself obnoxious to the king of Babylon. The leaders of this people had caused them to err, and now they are in a particular manner made monuments of divine justice. 2. Of the captivity of the rest. Come and see how Judah was carried away captive out of his own land (v. 27), and how it spued them out as it spued out the Canaanites that went before them, which God had told them it would certainly do if they trod in their steps and copied out their abominations, Lev. xviii. 28. Now here is an account, (1.) Of two captivities which we had an account of before, one in the seventh year of Nebuchadnezzar (the same with that which is said to be in his eighth year, 2 Kings xxiv. 12), another in his eighteenth year, the same with that which is said (v. 12) to be in his nineteenth year. But the sums here are very small, in comparison with what we find expressed concerning the former (2Ki 24:14; 2Ki 24:16), when there were 18,000 carried captive, whereas here they are said to be 3023; they are also small in comparison with what we may reasonably suppose concerning the latter; for, when all the residue of the people were carried away (v. 15), one would think there should be more than 832 souls; therefore Dr. Lightfoot conjectures that, these accounts being joined to the story of the putting to death of the great men at Riblah, all that are here said to be carried away were put to death as rebels. (2.) Of a third captivity, not mentioned before, which was in the twenty-third year of Nebuchadnezzar, four years after the destruction of Jerusalem (v. 30): Then Nebuzaradan came, and carried away 745 Jews; it is probable that this was done in revenge of the murder of Gedaliah, which was another rebellion against the king of Babylon, and that those who were now taken were aiders and abetters of Ishmael in that murder, and were not only carried away, but put to death for it; yet this is uncertain. If this be the sum total of the captives (all the persons were 4600, v. 30), we may see how strangely they were reduced from what they had been, and may wonder as much how they came to be so numerous again as afterwards we find them; for it should seem that, as at first in Egypt, so again in Babylon, the Lord made them fruitful in the land of their affliction, and the more they were oppressed the more they multiplied. And the truth is, this people were often miracles both of judgment and mercy.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Vs. 24-27: A RECORD OF IMPORTANT CAPTIVES
Here is information that was not recorded in chapter 39. Nebuzaradan took captive Seraiah, the chief priest, and Zepaniah, his assistant, three keepers of the doors, a eunuch of high military authority, seven of Zedekiah’s counselors, a secretary to the commander who drafted men for military duty, along with 60 men of the land who were found in Jerusalem. These he brought to Nebuchadnezzar, at Riblah -all of whom he put to death.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
II. EVENTS SUBSEQUENT TO THE FALL OF JERUSALEM Jer. 52:24-34
A. The Execution of the Princes Jer. 52:24-27
TRANSLATION
(24) And the captain of the guard took Seraiah the chief priest, and Zephaniah the second priest, and the three keepers of the threshold. (25) He also took from the city an officer who had charge of the men of war, seven men who were personal advisers of the king who were found in the city, the secretary of the captain of the host who mustered the people of the land, and sixty men from the people of the land who were found in the midst of the city. (26) And the king of Babylon smote them and had them killed at Riblah in the land of Hamath and deported Judah from upon his land.
COMMENTS
Jer. 52:10 alludes to the execution of the princes of Judah by Nebuchadnezzar at Riblah; Jer. 52:24-27 expands upon that allusion by naming the princes who were slain. The passage is almost identical with 2Ki. 25:18-21. Nebuzaradan selected those who were highest in authority and therefore most responsible for the prolonged resistance of Jerusalem. At the head of these officials is Seraiah the chief of priests, who is not elsewhere mentioned in the Book of Jeremiah. Seraiah comes from a noble line of priests. He was the grandson of the great priest Hilkiah who is famous for his participation in the reforms of king Josiah; he was grandfather of Joshua who was high priest when the Temple was rebuilt after the Exile (cf. 1Ch. 6:13-15; Hag. 1:1). Ezra the scribe also descended from this Seraiah (Ezr. 7:1). After Seraiah, the priest Zephaniah is mentioned. He is probably the same Zephaniah who is mentioned several other times in the Book of Jeremiah (see Jer. 21:1; Jer. 29:25; Jer. 29:29; Jer. 37:3). Zephaniah is called the second priest and it is not entirely clear whether this is an office or an order. According to 2Ki. 23:4 there were several second priests. Three keepers of the threshold were also among those executed at Riblah. These must have been high-ranking clergy who supervised the four thousand Levites (1Ch. 23:5) whose duty it was to prevent any disturbance or desecration of the Temple (cf. 2Ki. 12:10; 2Ki. 22:4; 2Ki. 23:4; Jer. 35:4).
In the second category of those executed are certain officials of state. The first such official is not named but is designated as the officer that was set over the men of war. Some commentators have suggested that this gentleman was the general who commanded the city garrison; others propose that he was a civilian official equivalent to minister of defense or the like. Seven men who saw the kings face i.e., who were part of the kings personal entourage were also among the executed. The account in the Book of Kings gives the figure here as five instead of seven. Perhaps two additional court officers were executed shortly after that day on which Zedekiah saw his princes slain and then had his own eyes put out. Kings would be counting only those slain in the initial execution while Jeremiah 52 is giving totals, The scribe of the captain of the host is next listed among the officials who were slain. His job it was to muster the people of the land. A scribe in the Old Testament is not merely one who knows how to write or a stenographer. Scribe is a title given to the highest officers of state.[429] This particular scribe was likely the head of the war department of Judah.[430]
[429] Cf. 2Sa. 8:7; 2Sa. 20:25 : 2Ki. 12:11; 1Ch. 18:16; 1Ch. 27:32
[430] In 2Ch. 26:11 it is expressly stated that Uzziahs army went out by the hand of Jeiel the scribe i.e. Jeiel was the civilian official who organized and dispatched the host.
In addition to the priests and civilian officials, some sixty of the people of the land were also executed by Nebuchadnezzar (Jer. 52:25). Frequently in the Old Testament the phrase people of the land has the meaning of landed gentry. However, since earlier in this verse the people of the land are the general populace who were mustered for military service, the expression likely has that same meaning here, In other words, sixty men were singled out from the, ranks of the conscripted soldiers for execution as a warning to the rest of the troops. The group that was destined for death was taken to Riblah to stand trial before Nebuchadnezzar (Jer. 52:26). The king of Babylon smote them (perhaps had then flogged) and put them to death (Jer. 52:27).
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
The Execution Of Judah’s Religious And Political Leaders And The Exile Of Its Leading Citizens ( Jer 52:24-30 ).
Nebuzaradan now selected out what remained of the leading citizens in Jerusalem for execution as having main responsibility for the rebellion, taking them to Riblah so that they could be ‘tried’ before Nebuchadrezzar. Along with them he took large numbers of other captives, some to be taken into exile, and others who were of the poorer classes (the predominant class) to be left behind to farm the land.
Jer 52:24-26
‘And the captain of the guard took Seraiah the chief priest, and Zephaniah the second priest, and the three keepers of the threshold, and out of the city he took an officer who was set over the men of war; and seven men of those who saw the king’s face, who were found in the city; and the scribe of the captain of the host, who mustered the people of the land; and threescore men of the people of the land, who were found in the midst of the city. And Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard took them, and brought them to the king of Babylon to Riblah.’
Nebuzaradan now selected out the leaders of Judah for execution. He seized the chief priest, second priest and keepers of the threshold (in charge of the gates overall, not gate-keepers) who were the leading Temple authorities (included among the ‘chief priests’ mentioned in the New Testament). He also seized either the General in charge of the defence of Jerusalem, or one of his aides if the General had escaped or been killed, and seven of the king’s close advisers (those who were caught in Jerusalem), along with the scribe of the commander of the Judean forces who was responsible for mustering the militia. He also seized sixty prominent citizens. These were all taken to be brought before Nebuchadrezzar at Riblah, being seen as bearing responsibility for the rebellion. Nebuchadrezzar no doubt had his sources of information.
‘Seven men of those who saw the king’s face.’ 2Ki 25:19 gives the number as five. This could be because only five of the seven were extremely important men whilst the other two, who were not so important, were not considered worthy of being mentioned by the writer in 2 Kings, or it may indicate the deliberate use of ‘seven’ as a symbolic number indicating the divine choice of the group as selected by YHWH for judgment. When used in this way ‘seven’ could indicate any number from five to nine.
Jer 52:27
‘And the king of Babylon smote them, and put them to death at Riblah in the land of Hamath. So Judah was carried away captive out of his land.’
The leaders in question were no doubt given a summary trial, and they were then executed. This would be because of their part in the rebellion, and as a warning to others. The remainder of those who were taken to Riblah, who were not set free as being the ‘poorest of the land’ were carried off to Babylon (see Jer 52:15-16). As we see below they numbered eight hundred and thirty two persons. This probably signifies the family heads, and along with them may well have gone their wives, servants and children. We must also remember that many had died in the siege, or while seeking to escape, and that many others would have escaped in the breakout from Jerusalem. These were the prominent citizens who remained.
Jer 52:28-30
‘This is the people whom Nebuchadrezzar carried away captive, in the seventh year three thousand and twenty three Jews; in the eighteenth year of Nebuchadrezzar he carried away captive from Jerusalem eight hundred and thirty two persons; in the twenty third year of Nebuchadrezzar Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard carried away captive of the Jews seven hundred and forty five persons: all the persons were four thousand and six hundred.’
We are now provided with information not supplied in 2 Kings about the number of people carried off to exile on three separate occasions. The first were those taken in 597 BC on the occasion of the quelling of Jehoiachim’s rebellion when Jehoiachin his son was included among the exiles. They numbered three thousand and twenty three. These would be the heads of families and as the aim was to settle them in Babylonia, as illustrated in Ezekiel’s prophecy, they would take with them their wives, children and possibly household servants if they were still alive. This would help to explain the round number of ten thousand referred to in 2 Kings 24
The exile of these prominent people in 597 BC (together with those taken in 605 BC when Daniel was taken) would leave Judah bereft of its finest and most experienced leaders, so that Zedekiah would be left with second string material from whom to form his advisory council.
The second group mentioned are the exiles resulting from the destruction of Jerusalem. These numbered eight hundred and thirty two heads of families. They too would be transported with their wives and children as Nebuchadrezzar’s aim was that, apart from those who would be imprisoned, they establish a settlement in Babylonia.
The third group represent exiles resulting from a subsequent invasion by Nebuchadrezzar in 582 BC. This may have been caused by the assassination of Gedaliah and the flight to Egypt of a large number of Judeans, or simply have been the result of simmering rebellion.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
4. THE EXECUTION OF THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PEOPLE AND STATEMENT OF THE NUMBER OF THE CAPTIVES
Jer 52:24-30
24And the captain of the guard [halberdiers] took Seraiah the chief priest, and 25Zephaniah the second priest, and the three keepers of the door: He took also out of the city a eunuch [court officer], which had the charge [was25 overseer] of the men of war; and seven men of them that were near the kings person, which were found in the city; and the principal scribe26 of the host [the scribe, the prince of the host], who mustered the people of the land; and three-score men of the people 26of the land, that were found in the midst of the city. So Nebuzar-adan the captain of the guard took them and brought them to the king of Babylon to Riblah.27And the king of Babylon smote them, and put them to death in Riblah in the land 28of Hamath. Thus Judah was carried away captive out of his own land. This is the people whom Nebuchadrezzar carried away captive: in the seventh year three 29thousand Jews and three and twenty: In the eighteenth year of Nebuchadrezzar he carried away captive from Jerusalem eight hundred and thirty and two persons: 30In the three and twentieth year of Nebuchadrezzar Nebuzar-adan the captain of the guard carried away captive of the Jews seven hundred forty and five persons: all the persons were four thousand and six hundred.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
Jer 52:24-27. And the captain out of his own land. These verses differ from the corresponding verses in 2 Kings 25, with the exception of some trifling variations in language, only in the statement of a, number (seven instead of five in Jer 52:25), of which hereafter. It is related that representatives of all classes of the people, priests, officials and simple citizens had to suffer death, evidently in token that Nebuchadnezzar held not only the king but the people guilty of rebellion. At the head of those executed stands the high-priest Seraiah, who is nowhere mentioned in the book of Jeremiah. According to 1 Chron. 5:40 he was the son of Azariah and grandson of Hilkiah; according to Ezr 7:1, Ezra was descended from him.After Seraiah is mentioned Zephaniah, doubtless the same who is mentioned in Jer 21:1; Jer 29:25; Jer 29:29; Jer 37:3 as priest simply and son of Maaseiah. Here he is called the second priest, but in 2 Kings 25. second priest only without the article. As according to 2Ki 23:4 (where as here three grades of priests are enumerated) there were several second priests, the reading of the Book of Kings is probably the correct one. Comp. Oehler in Herzog, R.-Enc. VI. S. 203, 4.The keepers of the door [or threshold] are also mentioned in 2Ki 12:10; 2Ki 22:4; 2Ki 23:4; Jer 35:4. As only three of them are mentioned, we must regard these as the superiors of the four thousand Levitical (1Ch 23:5). For further details consult Oehler in Herz., R.-Enc. VIII. S. 3546.In the second category of those executed are mentioned certain inhabitants of Jerusalem, who held offices at court, especially in the war-department. The city here seems to stand in antithesis both to the temple (Jer 52:24) and to the country (Jer 52:25 b). The one (court-officer, but possibly at the same time eunuch, comp. rems. on Jer 29:2) was not the overseer, but only an overseer, etc. He was therefore one of the generals, perhaps commander of the city garrison.And seven men. In 2 Kings 25 we read five men, whether correctly or incorrectly cannot here be decided as in Jer 52:12; Jer 52:22. The analogy of these cases however favors our text.That were near the kings person, literally, that saw the kings face, viz. in the sense of a daily custom, is a designation of high, yea, highest position (Est 1:14; comp. Mat 18:10). These were therefore officials of high rank, and as it is not said that they were endued with military functions, they may be regarded as representatives of the civil authorities.Scribe, the prince of the host. Scribe is not a writer in our sense. The title belongs not only, as Graf supposes, to the people of the pen, but is given to the highest officers of State. Comp. 2Sa 8:7; 2Sa 20:25; 2Ki 12:11; 1Ch 18:16; 1Ch 27:32. And in 2Ch 26:11 it is expressly recorded that Uzziahs army went out by the hand of Jeiel the scribe. This Sopher was not the leader of the host, but chief of the war-department, minister or secretary of war. Comp. Saalschuetz, Mos. Recht. S. 63.And threescore men. These sixty men appear as the third class of persons executed, and representatives of the country population, as is indicated by their number and the remark that they were found in the midst of the city (2Ki 25:19 in the city). This remark would be altogether superfluous, if the object was not to set forth that these men did not originally belong to the city.On Riblah comp. rems. on Jer 39:5.The words, Thus Judah was carried away captive out of his land, are found in both texts and in both places are appropriate. For in Jeremiah they form the transition to the numbering of the deported, and in 2 Kings they lead to the account of what happened in the country after the deportation. They therefore furnish no data for the solution of the question which of the two recensions is the original. Moreover, there seems to be an allusion in them to Jer 1:3.
Jer 52:28-30. This is the people four thousand and six hundred. This section is entirely wanting in 2 Kings. It is difficult to bring it into harmony with the other statements respecting the deportations. The differences are as follows: 1. This section speaks of three deportations, while according to the other testimonies of the Old Testament there were only two (under Jehoiakim and Zedekiah). 2. The section follows a divergent chronology, stating that the deportations took place in the seventh, eighteenth and twenty-third years of Nebuchadnezzar, while this very chapter (Jer 52:12) and 2Ki 24:12; 2Ki 25:8 name the eighth and nineteenth years of Nebuchadnezzar as the dates of the deportation, but know nothing of any in the twenty-third year of this king. 3. According to this passage three thousand and twenty-three were carried away the first time, eight hundred and thirty-two the second time, seven hundred and forty-five the third time, total four thousand six hundred, which sum is expressly given at the close of Jer 52:30. According to 2Ki 24:14-16, however, eighteen thousand souls were carried away at the first deportation alone. There are no counter-statements with regard to the other numbers, but their smallness is surprising; of this hereafter. On these points we make the following remarks: 1. By the seventh year in Jer 52:28, we are certainly to understand the seventh year of Nebuchadnezzar, since both the other deportations are dated in years of this monarch. 2. These statements are not necessarily erroneous, but may possibly follow another reckoning of the years, and perhaps the same as Josephus follows (Antiqq. X., 8, 6; C. Ap. I., 21), though evidently only on the basis of this passage. Comp. Niebuhr, Ass. u. Bab., S. 68 sqq. 3. Jer 52:29 mentioning the eighteenth year after Jer 52:12 has stated the nineteenth as the date of the same fact, shows that we have here another author. 4. The view of Ewald (Gesch. d. V. Isr., III., 1 S. 435) which Graf also adopts, that in Jer 52:29 we are to read , that accordingly one year before the last capture of Jerusalem three thousand and twenty-three were carried captive from the country (hence ),after the capture eight hundred and thirty-two from the city (hence , Jer 52:29), and finally five years later from the land already somewhat repopulated seven hundred and forty-five, has much in its favor, but is yet not perfectly satisfactory. For the circumstance that the difference between the eighth and nineteenth, and the seventh and eighteenth years of Nebuchadnezzar is the same, does not authorize us to supply a word , fallen out after . Then, too, the deportation of the mass of the people during the war, at a time when the Egyptian army was to be feared (comp. Jer 37:5), is scarcely probable. Finally the assumption of a deportation five years after the capture of the city is pure hypothesis, for which there is no positive testimony. It is also not to be supposed that five years after the destruction, admitting the return of a few scattered individuals, an almost equally great number could be carried away as after the destruction of the capital. Would not these have rather again betaken themselves to flight? 5. Even if we grant that the strikingly small numbers of the exiles are to be judged from a specific point of view, and therefore do not necessarily imply an error, any more than the number of the years of Nebuchadnezzars reign, yet the differences between Jer 52:12; Jer 52:28 still remain, with the exceedingly obscure third deportation, as irremovable stones of stumbling, and I therefore agree with Niebuhr, when he says, it cannot be a subject of doubt that Jer 52:28-30 in the fifty-second chapter of Jeremiah are a gloss.
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:
[25]Jer 52:25.In 2 Kings 25 we find for . The former does not necessarily, as Hitzig asserts, signify which is. takes the place of the copula generally, without reference to time. Comp. Ewald, 297 b.
[26]Jer 52:25 . In 2 Kings 25 , which I regard as the more correct reading.
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Jer 52:24-27
24Then the captain of the guard took Seraiah the chief priest and Zephaniah the second priest, with the three officers of the temple. 25He also took from the city one official who was overseer of the men of war, and seven of the king’s advisers who were found in the city, and the scribe of the commander of the army who mustered the people of the land, and sixty men of the people of the land who were found in the midst of the city. 26Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard took them and brought them to the king of Babylon at Riblah. 27Then the king of Babylon struck them down and put them to death at Riblah in the land of Hamath. So Judah was led away into exile from its land.
Jer 52:24 As Zedekiah was forced to view the death of his sons and princes, so now the temple leadership was forced to view the exile of the temple treasures and decorations.
1. Seraiah the high priest (see genealogy in 1Ch 6:1-15)
2. Zephaniah the second priest (cf. Jer 29:24-32; Jer 37:3)
Jer 52:25 Others were also brought to Nebuchadnezzar at Riblah.
1. the city official who was overseer of the Judean military
2. seven of Zedekiah’s advisors
3. the scribe of the commander of enlistment for the Judean military
4. sixty citizens of Jerusalem (probably of the wealthy land owner class)
Jer 52:26-27 All of these mentioned above were killed at Riblah and all others were taken into exile.
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
Seraiah. See 2Ki 25:18. 1Ch 6:14. Compare Jer 51:59.
door = threshold.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Jer 52:24-27
Jer 52:24-27
ZEDEKIAH’S ADVISORS EXECUTED
And the captain of the guard took Seraiah the chief priest, and Zephaniah the second priest, and the three keepers of the threshold: and out of the city he took an officer that was set over the men of war; and seven men of them that saw the king’s face, that were found in the city; and the scribe of the captain of the host, who mustered the people of the land; and threescore men of the people of the land, that were found in the midst of the city. And Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard took them, and brought them to the king of Babylon to Riblah. And the king of Babylon smote them, and put them to death at Riblah in the land of Hamath. So Judah was carried away captive out of his land.
This paragraph deals with the execution of the priests, that is, the false priests who had pressured Zedekiah into rebellion against Babylon, threatening death to Jeremiah who opposed their views. Those wicked priests dominate this list. The high priest, his deputy, and the three keepers of the threshold in the temple were included.
The other important officers mentioned here were presumed to have been responsible either for urging or approving the king’s rebellious behavior.
The people of the land…
(Jer 52:25). By the fact of their being in the midst of the city, probably in some of those great houses’ they burned, suggests that these were the wealthy aristocrats who had sided with the king in his rebellion. If that was not the case, these were executed merely as reprisals against Jerusalem.
The king of Babylon smote them, and put them to death…
(Jer 52:27). This indicates that the men mentioned here were first beaten without mercy, and then executed. Such was Babylonian justice.
EVENTS SUBSEQUENT TO THE FALL OF JERUSALEM Jer 52:24-34
The Execution of the Princes Jer 52:24-27
Jer 52:10 alludes to the execution of the princes of Judah by Nebuchadnezzar at Riblah; Jer 52:24-27 expands upon that allusion by naming the princes who were slain. The passage is almost identical with 2Ki 25:18-21. Nebuzaradan selected those who were highest in authority and therefore most responsible for the prolonged resistance of Jerusalem. At the head of these officials is Seraiah the chief of priests, who is not elsewhere mentioned in the Book of Jeremiah. Seraiah comes from a noble line of priests. He was the grandson of the great priest Hilkiah who is famous for his participation in the reforms of king Josiah; he was grandfather of Joshua who was high priest when the Temple was rebuilt after the Exile (cf. 1Ch 6:13-15; Hag 1:1). Ezra the scribe also descended from this Seraiah (Ezr 7:1). After Seraiah, the priest Zephaniah is mentioned. He is probably the same Zephaniah who is mentioned several other times in the Book of Jeremiah (see Jer 21:1; Jer 29:25; Jer 29:29; Jer 37:3). Zephaniah is called the second priest and it is not entirely clear whether this is an office or an order. According to 2Ki 23:4 there were several second priests. Three keepers of the threshold were also among those executed at Riblah. These must have been high-ranking clergy who supervised the four thousand Levites (1Ch 23:5) whose duty it was to prevent any disturbance or desecration of the Temple (cf. 2Ki 12:10; 2Ki 22:4; 2Ki 23:4; Jer 35:4).
In the second category of those executed are certain officials of state. The first such official is not named but is designated as the officer that was set over the men of war. Some commentators have suggested that this gentleman was the general who commanded the city garrison; others propose that he was a civilian official equivalent to minister of defense or the like. Seven men who saw the kings face i.e., who were part of the kings personal entourage were also among the executed. The account in the Book of Kings gives the figure here as five instead of seven. Perhaps two additional court officers were executed shortly after that day on which Zedekiah saw his princes slain and then had his own eyes put out. Kings would be counting only those slain in the initial execution while Jeremiah 52 is giving totals, The scribe of the captain of the host is next listed among the officials who were slain. His job it was to muster the people of the land. A scribe in the Old Testament is not merely one who knows how to write or a stenographer. Scribe is a title given to the highest officers of state. Cf. 2Sa 8:7; 2Sa 20:25 : 2Ki 12:11; 1Ch 18:16; 1Ch 27:32 This particular scribe was likely the head of the war department of Judah. In 2Ch 26:11 it is expressly stated that Uzziahs army went out by the hand of Jeiel the scribe i.e. Jeiel was the civilian official who organized and dispatched the host.
In addition to the priests and civilian officials, some sixty of the people of the land were also executed by Nebuchadnezzar (Jer 52:25). Frequently in the Old Testament the phrase people of the land has the meaning of landed gentry. However, since earlier in this verse the people of the land are the general populace who were mustered for military service, the expression likely has that same meaning here, In other words, sixty men were singled out from the, ranks of the conscripted soldiers for execution as a warning to the rest of the troops. The group that was destined for death was taken to Riblah to stand trial before Nebuchadnezzar (Jer 52:26). The king of Babylon smote them (perhaps had then flogged) and put them to death (Jer 52:27).
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
the captain: Jer 52:12, Jer 52:15, 2Ki 25:18
Seraiah: 1Ch 6:14, Ezr 7:1
Zephaniah: Jer 21:1, Jer 29:25, Jer 29:29, Jer 37:3, 2Ki 25:18
door: Heb. threshold, Jer 35:4, 1Ch 9:19-26, Psa 84:10, *marg.
Reciprocal: 2Ki 12:9 – the priests Isa 22:3 – thy rulers Isa 24:2 – as with the people Jer 21:7 – I will Jer 25:35 – nor Jer 34:21 – Zedekiah Jer 52:10 – he slew Eze 11:7 – but Eze 11:10 – fall Eze 24:5 – the choice Eze 34:10 – and cause
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Jer 52:24-25. And the captain of the guard took Seraiah the chief priest 1Ch 6:14, he was the father of Ezra; Ezr 7:1. And Zephaniah the second priest See note on Jer 29:26; 2Ki 25:18. And the three keepers of the door These were not the ordinary porters, who were taken from among the Levites, but were priests who stood at the door to receive the offerings of the people, and thus were keepers of the sacred treasury, an office of high trust and consideration: see 2Ki 12:9; 2Ki 23:4. He took also out of the city a eunuch
An officer: so it is in the parallel place, 2Ki 25:19, where, instead of seven men, we read five. Josephus agrees with the reading here. And the principal scribe of the host The muster-master-general, as we style him, or secretary of war. And threescore men that were in the midst of the city Of whom see note on 2Ki 25:19.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
52:24 And the captain of the guard took Seraiah the chief priest, and Zephaniah {k} the second priest, and the three keepers of the door:
(k) Which served in the high priests stead, if he had any necessary impediment.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
C. The numbers deported to Babylon 52:24-30
The number of exiles who went into captivity was important, because it was on this group that the future of Israel depended. Their deportation also validated many of Jeremiah’s prophecies that predicted the people would go into captivity in Babylon.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Nebuzaradan took captive Seraiah, the chief priest, Zephaniah (Jer 29:24-32; Jer 37:3), the priest who was second in authority, and three other temple officials. Seraiah’s grandfather, Hilkiah, had been King Josiah’s chief priest (1Ch 6:13-15). Seraiah’s son was Ezra the reformer (Ezr 7:1). Seraiah’s grandson, Joshua (Jeshua), by another son, Jehozadak, was the chief priest after the Exile when the returned Israelites rebuilt the temple (Ezr 5:2; Hag 1:1).
"The other priest named here, Zephaniah, seems by his high position to have been the one who had passed on a threat of ’the stocks and collar’ to Jeremiah over this very question of the temple vessels a few years earlier [cf. Jer 29:24-29]. On two subsequent occasions he had been part of a deputation from the king to consult the prophet over the siege of Jerusalem [Jer 21:1-2; Jer 37:3-5]. But Jeremiah’s call to surrender had seemed too radical, and now the city’s leaders had to pay the price that Babylon put on their refusal." [Note: Kidner, p. 160.]