Jeremiah 23 - Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: Critical, Doctrinal and Homiletical - Bible Commentaries

Verses 1-8

f. Conclusion and Consolation, in a glance at the just and the justifier

Jeremiah 23:1-8.

1 Wo, pastors,1 who destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture,2 saith Jehovah!

2 Therefore thus saith Jehovah, the God of Israel, concerning the pastors,3 that pasture my people:

Ye have scattered my flock, and dispersed and not visited them.
Behold I visit4 upon you the evil of your doings, saith Jehovah.

3 And I will gather the remnant of my flock

Out of all the countries whither I have dispersed them,
And bring them back to their field;5 and they shall be fruitful and increase.

4 And I awaken over them pastors who shall pasture them.

And they shall fear no more nor be dismayed;6

Neither shall they be missing,7 saith Jehovah.

5 Behold the days are coming, saith Jehovah,

That I awake unto David a righteous scion,
Who shall reign as king and shall prosper,8

And exercise judgment and righteousness in the land.

6 In his days will Judah be saved,

And Israel dwell securely;
And this will be the name by which they will call9 him [Israel],

Jehovah our righteousness.

7 Therefore, behold, the days are coming that they shall no more say,

As Jehovah liveth, who brought the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt,

8 But, as Jehovah liveth, who brought and led the seed of the house of Israel out of the north country,

And out of all lands, whither I had dispersed them;
And they shall dwell in their own land.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

This passage is in general suitably connected with the entirety of the previous context, since in relation to the previous specifications (Jeremiah 22:10-30), it may be regarded as a comprehensive conclusion. But originally it formed a connected whole only with Jeremiah 22:1-9; Jeremiah 13-23, since Jeremiah 22:10-12 must have been inserted afterwards. Going down into the house of the king, who can have been no other than Jehoiakim, Jeremiah first, in Jeremiah 22:1-9, addressed an alternative to him, the purport of which was such that servants and people were also obliged pro rata to apply it to themselves. For in Jeremiah 23:13-19 he turned to the king alone with an incisive speech of rebuke and menace, to which was appended a singular one addressed to 4e people (Jeremiah 23:20-23). Finally, in a grand survey, he contrasts with the deep decline, effectuated by the wicked pastors (Jeremiah 23:1-2), the other extreme, the salvation to be imparted to the re-assembled people, in the distant future, by the Messiah. The remnant restored to their home shall again become a numerous people (Jeremiah 23:3). This people shall be fed in blessing by shepherds appointed by the Lord (Jeremiah 23:4). In particular a “ righteous scion,” sprung from the stock of David, shall rule as king with wisdom and righteousness, to the prosperity of Judah and Israel,—a king, whose deepest significance for his people is expressed in the wonderful name given to the people—Jehovah our Righteousness (Jeremiah 23:5-6). Oaths will then no longer be taken by the name of Jehovah, who brought Israel out of Egypt, but by the name of Jehovah, who brought back Israel from the north country to his native land (Jeremiah 23:7-8). The same antithesis, between deepest impending ruin and highest glory to be expected in the distant future, was found also in Jeremiah 3:0

Jeremiah 23:1-2. Wo, Pastors … saith Jehovah. As the sections Jeremiah 22:1-9; Jeremiah 13-23 ; Jeremiah 23:1-8 contain the discourse delivered in the house of the king, this section is immediately attached to Jeremiah 22:13-23. Both sections begin with הוֹי. After the alternative in Jeremiah 22:3-9 also the prophet pronounces a double woe: first on the shepherds, i.e. on the person of the king then reigning, then on all which may be called bad shepherding. That the kings are to be understood by the shepherds follows : 1. from the previously stated connection of the discourse of which this passage forms a part; 2. from the description of the conduct of the bad shepherds (who destroy and scatter the flock, etc., Jeremiah 23:1-2) which appears to produce so much effect, both extensively and intensively, that we can recognize it only as the action of those who occupy the highest, most influential positions; 3. from the antithesis of the good shepherd, Jeremiah 23:4, and of the righteous scion of David, Jeremiah 23:5, in particular. For that beneficial influence (Jeremiah 23:4) can only be that of (he chief, and in Jeremiah 23:5 the “righteous scion” is directly designated as king. They first corrupt the people morally, and thus effect the external destruction which culminates in their dispersion, comp. 2 Kings 17:21-23; 2Ki 21:10-12; 2 Kings 23:26-27; Jeremiah 15:4.

Jeremiah 23:3-4. And I will gather.....saith Jehovah. Comp. Jeremiah 29:14; Jeremiah 31:8-10; Micah 2:12; Ezekiel 24:12.—The remnant,etc. On this Hengstenberg remarks: “The gathering being promised only to the remnant (comp. Isaiah 10:20; Romans 9:27) indicates that justice accompanies mercy.”—And they shall be fruitful,etc. Comp. rems. on Jeremiah 3:16. In the following verse it should first of all be observed that the prophet has in view two older prophecies: First the foundation-prophecy of the future glory of the Davidic house in 2 Samuel 7:12, where we read the words, “I will set thy seed after thee.” The prophet’s choice of this particular utterance here and in Jeremiah 23:5, could not have been without the object of a double allusion to the passage above quoted, and to the name of Jehoiakim. Since this name (as well as the name יוֹיָבִין) is chosen undoubtedly with reference to the passage mentioned, it was natural that the prophet, thinking in joyful hope of that prophecy, should at the same time remember the contradiction, which prevailed between the present and the promised Jehoiakim. The second passage, to which Jeremiah more plainly alludes, is his own utterance in Jeremiah 3:15. He must have been reminded of this the more readily that it relates to the same future period.

Jeremiah 23:5. Behold the days ... in the land. The connection of this verse with the previous one is formed by behold the days. This expression does not refer to the difference in time. It does not declare that what is spoken of in Jeremiah 23:5 will take place after the events of Jeremiah 23:4, but is antithetic only to the present.—Pastors,etc., in Jeremiah 23:4 is a figurative expression, which is explained in Jeremiah 23:6 in proper language. On the question as to the relation of the singulars צֶמָח, scion,מֶלֶךְking, etc., to the plural רֹעִים, pastors, there are three views. According to one רֹעִים is to be taken as a generic plural, which does not exclude the possibility of one shepherd being intended. Thus Hengstenberg. On the other hand it is rightly objected that elsewhere Jeremiah presents the prospect of a multiplicity of rulers of the seed of David for the time of the great restoration: Jeremiah 33:17-18—

“ There shall not be wanting to David a man,
Sitting on the throne of the house of Judah …
And to the priests and levites shall not be wanting a man,
Offering burnt-offerings,” etc. Ibid. Jeremiah 23:22. “As the host of heaven cannot be numbered

Nor the sand of the sea measured;
So will I multiply the seed of David my servant,
And the Levites that minister to me.”

Ibid. Jeremiah 23:26. “ If I have not appointed the laws of heaven and earth;

Then also may I reject the seed of Jacob
And David my servant,
That I should not take of his seed to be rulers (משְׁלִים)

To the seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.”
According to the second view the passages just quoted are regarded as forming the measure of this, and accordingly the singular צֶמָח, scion, is taken in a collective sense. Graf, who adopts this view, appeals (a) to the idiom, according to which it always has a collective meaning (Genesis 19:25; Psalms 65:11 ; Ezekiel 16:7; Isaiah 61:11); (b) to the idiom according to which דָוֹד, David, and עַבְדִּי דָוִד as much designate the descendants of David, as יַֽעְַקֹב; Jacob, and עַבְדִּי יַֽעְַקֹב, the descendants of Jacob: Jeremiah 30:9; Hosea 3:5; Ezekiel 24:23-24; Ezekiel 37:24-25; Ezekiel 45:8; Ezekiel 46:16, coll. Jeremiah 30:10; Jeremiah 46:27-28; Isaiah 44:1; Isaiah 45:4; Isaiah 48:20, etc.—To this view it may be objected that this entirely ignores the fact that the Jews expected one great deliverer and restorer of their State, the Messiah. Comp. the article “ Messias,” by Oehler in Herzog, R.-Enc, We can only treat here of two points: 1. How is this passage related to the expectation of a single great son of David? 2. If it is based on this idea, how is it to be reconciled with the other that a number of princes of David’s line will rule over Israel? As to the first question, I am of opinion that this passage declares the unity of the Messiah, notwithstanding that pastors preceding (Jeremiah 23:4) intimates a multiplicity. I therefore propose a third view, taking רֹעִים in a plural sense, but צֶמַח, etc., notwithstanding in the sense of unity. The reasons for this are as follows: 1. If Jeremiah wished to set forth a multiplicity, why did he not continue in the plural? Why does he not say “Who shall reign as kings?” צֶמַח has, in the comparatively few passages where it occurs, a collective sense. But not necessarily. It is germen, prolos in general, and may accordingly designate as well a single individual as a number. If the prophet wished it to be taken in the latter sense, and therefore as absolutely identical with רֹעִים, he must have indicated this by the plural. 2. Ezekiel and Zechariah, who, as is acknowledged, refer to this passage, evidently understood it in the sense of unity. Ezekiel says expressly in Ezekiel 34:23, “ And I will set up one shepherd over them.” And Zechariah in Zechariah 3:8, and Zechariah 6:12, used צֶמַח as a proper name, saying (Zechariah 3:8): “For I bring my servant Zemach” [The Branch]—and (Zechariah 6:12): “ Behold a man, Zemach his name, under whom it shall sprout.” As to the second question, previously raised, the subjective conception of the prophet is to be distinguished from the objective reality of the fulfilment. To the prophets the pictures of the future, which came within the circle of their vision, contained by no means always sharply circumscribed and distinctly impressed forms (comp. 1 Peter 1:11). These forms were as little born entirely of the future, severed from the present. Rather were they eternal ideas, which had derived their body from the present. Of this kind are most of the Messianic prophecies. In reality Christ is a different king, priest and prophet, from what the authors of Psalms 2:0; Psalms 110:0; Deuteronomy 18:0 conceived, and yet His advent is the true fulfilment of those prophecies. Thus Jeremiah also sees together with the one grand form of the arch-shepherd, many others, whom he recognizes as His seed. If the prophet conceived among his offspring of a successor, in the sense in which successors of a no longer reigning prince are spoken of, this must have been a point which remained obscure to the subjective perception of the prophet,—in a similar manner, as it may have been dark to the prophet, how he could live so long, of whom it was said that He gave His soul an offering for sin (Isaiah 53:10). Objectively considered, even Jerome and Theodoret understood the apostles by the many רֹעִים—an interpretation which is certainly exposed to the objection of too great limitation. It would be more appropriate, to consider, with others, that we, so far as we are ἐν χριστῶ, are not only Abraham’s seed (Galatians 3:29) but also David’s. We are indeed a royal priesthood (1 Peter 2:9); and He has made us not only priests but kings ἐποίησας αὐτνὺς βασιλείαν καῖ ἱερεῖς, καὶ βασιλεύουσιν ἐπὶ τής γῆς,Revelation 5:10, coll. Jeremiah 1:6). [Henderson: “By the better shepherds whom Jehovah promises to place over His restored people, I understand Zerubbabel, Ezra, Nehemiah, the Maccabees, etc., under whose superintendence and rule they were re-instated in their possessions, and enjoyed protection against both internal and foreign enemies.”—S. R. A.] If now the inquiry is made, how the prophet came to choose the expression צֶמַח, it was long ago pointed out by the Comm. that he had in mind Isaiah 11:2; Isaiah 53:2. As there the sprouting forth of a scion, from the apparently withered root of the house of David, is announced, so here the growth of a scion in the midst of a people, gathered again after along dispersion, and thus about to enter upon a new national existence. This conception appears also to form the basis of the translation of the LXX., which translates צֶמַח here as in Zechariah 3:8; Zechariah 6:12, ἀναταλή. Comp. especially καὶ ὑποκάτωδεν αὐτοῦ�, in the passage last mentioned.—Justice or righteousness is the chief quality of a good king according to the Old Testament doctrine. Comp. Psalms 45:5; Psalms 45:7-8; Psalms 72:1-4; Psalms 72:12-14; Psalms 82:2-4; Psalms 101:1-8.—Hence righteous scion, of which the confirmation in fact is declared in shall exercise judgment. Comp. Psalms 146:7; Psalms 103:6, and the remarks on Jeremiah 7:5-6; Jeremiah 9:23.

Jeremiah 23:6. In his days … our righteousness. Comp. Deuteronomy 33:28-29,—Repetition of our passage, Jeremiah 33:16—Judah is fem., as in Jeremiah 3:7; Jeremiah 14:2; Jeremiah 33:16; Lamentations 1:3; Nahum 2:1; Malachi 2:11. It is then equivalent to daughter of Judah, Lamentations 2:2; Lamentations 2:5. Comp. Naegelsb., Gr. 60. 4.—They will call him. According to the explanation prevalent even from antiquity, this refers to righteous scion. But as Jeremiah is his own best interpreter, the name must be referred to Israel. For in the parallel passage, Jeremiah 33:16, where instead of “and Israel dwell securely,” we read “ Jerusalem shall dwell securely,” the word he, in the latter clause of the verse (“and this is the name by which he shall be called”) can refer to no other than Jerusalem. Jehovah our Righteousness is not then the name of the scion of David, but of the nation. It is a symbolical surname, which is distinguished from other names, in that it serves not for real use, but only for objective characterization, an ideal inscription, as it were. Hence this name is also ascribed to an object, which already has a name. For the nation is already called Israel, but nevertheless it is to be called “ Jehovah, etc.” The prophet does not mean that the old name is to be changed into a new one; for the name does not recur (except in the repetition of this passage, Jeremiah 33:16) and the nation appears as before under its old name, which is also a sacred, God-given name. (Genesis 32:28.) Jerusalem elsewhere receives other names which are likewise not intended for daily use: in Ezek. 48:36, the name יהוהשָֽׁמָּה (The Lord is there) is attributed to the city. In Isaiah 60:14 we read “ they shall call thee The city of Jehovah, the Zion of the Holy One of Israel.” In a similar manner Nathan gives his pupil Solomon the name Jedi-diah, which he never bore in reality. With respect to the name Emmanuel (Isaiah 7:14; Isaiah 8:8-10) the case appears to be the same.—Similar in form are the names Jehovah-nissi (Exodus 17:15), Jehovah-shalom (Judges 6:24), Jehovah-jireh (Genesis 22:14). The LXX. makes a proper name of it, Ἰωσεδἐκ. I suppose with Hermann (Gött. Weihn. Progr. 1752, comp. J. D. Michaelis, Observ. S. 189) that it referred the passage to the post-exilic restoration, and understood by Ἰωσεδέκ its representative, the high-priest Joshua, the son of Jozedek, which it always pronounces ’Ιωσεδέκ (Haggai 1:1; Haggai 1:12; Ezra 3:2; Ezra 3:8; Ezra 5:2; Nehemiah 12:26). In favor also of this view is the Jewish interpretation of the passage concerning Zerubbabel, combated by Theodoret and Eusebius (Dem. Ev., vii. 9), which seems to be supported by the LXX. The strange expression ἐν τοῖς προφήταις (Theodoret: αὐτὸς ἐν τ. πρ., perhaps a trace of the final syllable נוּ, which is wanting in Ἰωσεδέκ: Euseb. Ἰωσεδεκιμ) is also in its favor. It is indeed transferred from Jeremiah 23:9, where it stands as a title, but it is not impossible that the Alexandrian translators perceived in it a reference to the post-exilic prophets, under whose co-opsration Joshua and Zerubbabel labored. The Syriac and Sym-machus, moreorer, read צַדְּקֵנוּ, for they translate δικαίεσον ἡμὰς.—If it is not the name of the Messiah, but of the people, then of course all the deductions are futile, which have been drawn from it in support of the deity of the Messiah. Only one thought remains, that Israel will be a nation, that will have no other righteousness than Jehovah’s. Some would take צֶרֶק exclusively in the sense of “salvation” (Graf). Without denying that it may have this meaning (comp. Rems. on Jeremiah 7:5; Jeremiah 9:23 ; Isaiah 46:12, etc.), I do not think that here בְּרָכָה ,תְּשׁוּעָה or any similar word would have done as well. The prophet certainly chose צדק not without reason, i. e. not without regard to its specific meaning. We are therefore justified in taking it in the entire fulness of its verbal significance as expressing the thought that Jehovah is His people’s righteousness and therefore their salvation. The expression is thus one of those which contain more than the prophet himself imagines, and we may therefore find in it also an antithesis to personal righteousness, which Israel thought to obtain by the works of the law (Romans 9:31-32; Romans 9:7), but did not succeed. It has been further correctly remarked (Vide Hengstenberg, Christology ad h. l.) that Zedekiah changed his former name into this with reference to this passage. Compelled by Nebuchadnezzar to assume mother name (2 Kings 24:17, comp. Keil on Jeremiah 23:34) he chose this, which may very well Signify “Jehovah my Righteousness,” and by which he expressed the presumptuous hope, that Jeremiah’s glorious promise would find in him the beginning of its fulfilment—in which he exdressed rather an irony than a glorification of himself.

Jeremiah 23:7-8. Therefore ... in their own land. These two verses are repeated with unessential alterations from Jeremiah 16:14-15. They stand in both places in a suitable connection, and Jeremiah himself may here, as frequently, have reproduced his own words spoken before. The omission of these verses here by the LXX., and their supplementation at the end of tha chapter, whereas Jeremiah 23:6 closes with the words: ’Ιωσεδὲκ ἐν τοῖς προφήταις, I cannot, with Hitzig and Graf, regard as a proof that the two verses were wanting in the Hebrew original of the Translator. The admitted capvicious arbitrariness of this translator deprives his testimony of all demonstrative force. The occasion of the transposition may have been the circumstance that the verses have in Jeremiah 16:14-15 a minatory, here a friendly, meaning, which led him to think that they must be introduced in the same connection as in Jeremiah 16:0. This end he attained by placing them at the close of the minatory prophecy against the prophets. It should further be remarked that both verses, in the positive part of their relative clauses, agree in part verbatim with Jeremiah 23:3, and in so far might be regarded as superfluous in this place. But the main emphasis is to be laid on the main proposition, “they shall no more say, As Jehovah liveth, etc., but: As Jehovah liveth,” etc., and in this sense they have the significance of a concluding doxology. The reduction of Israel from the later exile will furnish a more glorious substratum to the oath by the name of Jehovah.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. On Jeremiah 21:2. “King Zedekiah sends word to Jeremiah, that the Lord is to do according to all His miracles, that Nebuchadnezzar may withdraw. A demand rather cavalierly made in such evil circumstances. But the noble are so unfortunate! It is indeed as though it only depended on them to arrange matters with God; as if He were only waiting for them, as if it were a point of honor not to be over-hasty, but first to await a little extremity …. It is a very necessary observance for a servant of the Lord, that he try his superiors, whether there is any trace remaining in them of having been once baptized, well brought up and instructed in the fear of the Lord. If he observe anything of this kind, he must insist upon it and especially not allow them to deal too familiarly with the Judge of all the earth, but plainly demonstrate to them their insufficiency and nothingness, if they measure themselves by Him. Though Zedekiah had spoken so superficially, Jeremiah answered him without hesitation, definitely and positively, and accustomed him to a different manner of dealing with the Lord.” Zinzendorf. “When the ungodly desire God’s help, they commonly appeal not to His saving power to heal them, but to His miraculous power to save them, while they persist in their impenitence.” Starke.

2. On Jeremiah 21:8. “It is pure grace on the part of God, when He leaves to man the choice between the good and the evil; not that it is permitted him to choose the evil, but that he may choose freely the good, which he is under obligation to do, Deuteronomy 30:19.” Starke. “God lays before us the way of life and the way of death. The way of life is however always contrary to human reason, and that on which it sees merely death and shame. … If thou wilt save thyself thou must leave the false Jerusalem, fallen under the judgment, and seek thy life where there seems to be only death. He who would save his life must lose it, and he who devotes it for the sake of the truth will save it.” Diedrich.

3. On Jeremiah 21:11-14. “To be such a king is to be an abomination to the Lord, and severe judgment will follow. God appoints magistrates for His service and for the use of men; he who only seeks his own enjoyment in office, is lost. Jerusalem, situated on rocks in the midst of a plain, looks secure; but against God neither rocks avail nor aught else. The fire will break out even in them, and consume all around, together with the forest of cedar-houses in the city. The corruption is seated within, and therefore proceeds from within outwards, so that nothing of the former stock can remain. What shall a government do which no longer bears the sword of justice? What shall a church do which is no longer founded on God’s truth as its only power?” Diedrich. Comp. moreover on the whole of Jeremiah 24:0. the extended moral reflections of Cyrillus Alex. περὶ τῆς ἐν πνεύματι καὶ�. προσκυνήσεως. Lib. I.

4. On Jeremiah 22:1. “Jeremiah is to deliver a sermon at court, in which he reminds the king of his office of magistrate, in which he is to administer justice to every man.” Cramer.

It was no easy task for Jeremiah to go into the lions’ den and deliver such an uncourtly message to him. We are reminded of the prophet Jonah. But Jeremiah did not flee as he did.

5. On Jeremiah 22:1-3. [“But we ought the more carefully to notice this passage, that we may learn to strengthen ourselves against bad examples, lest the impiety of men should overturn our faith; when we see in God’s church things in such disorder, that those who glory in the name of God are become like robbers, we must beware lest we become on this account alienated from true religion. We must, indeed, desert such monsters, but we must take care lest God’s word, through men’s wickedness, should lose its value in our esteem. We ought then to remember the admonition of Christ, to hear the Scribes and Pharisees who sat in Moses’ seat (Matthew 23:2).” Calvin.—S. R. A.]

6. On Jeremiah 22:10. [“Dying saints may be justly envied, while living sinners are justly pitied. And so dismal perhaps the prospect of the times may be, that tears even for a Josiah, even for a Jesus, must be restrained, that they may be reserved for ourselves and our children (Luke 23:28).” Henry.—S. R. A.]

“Nequaquam gentilis plangendus est atque Judæus, qui in ecclesia non fuerunt et simul mortui sunt, de quibus Salvator dicit: dimitte mortuos sepelire mortuos suos (Matthew 8:22). Sed eos plange, qui per scelera atque peccata egrediuntur de ecclesia et nolunt ultra reverti ad earn damnatione vitiorum.” Hieron. Epist. 46 ad Rusticam. “Nolite flere mortuum, sed plorate raptorem avarum, pecuniæ sitientem et inexplebilem auri cupidinem. Cur mortuos inutiliter ploramus? Eos ploremus, qui in melius mutari possunt.” Basilius Seleucensis. Comp. Basil, Magn. Homil. 4 de Gratiarum actione post dimid.—Ghislerus.

7. On Jeremiah 22:6-9. “God does not spare even the authorities. For though He has said that they are gods, when they do not rightly administer their office they must die like men (Psalms 82:6) … No cedars are too high for God, no splendor too mighty; He can destroy all at once, and overturn, and overturn, and overturn. Ezekiel 21:27,” Cramer.

Another passage from which it is seen how perverse and unjustifiable is the illusion that God’s election is a surety against His anger, and a permit to any wilfulness. The individual representatives of the objects of divine election should never forget that God can march over their carcases, and the ruins of their glory, to the fulfilment of His promise, and that He can rebuild on a higher stage, what He has destroyed on a lower. Comp. remarks on Jeremiah 22:24.

8. On Jeremiah 22:13-19. It is blasphemy to imagine that God will be frère et compagnon to all princes as such, and that He has a predilection for them as of His own kind. Does He not say to his majesty the king of Judah, with whom, in respect of the eminence of his dynasty and throne no other prince of earth could compare, that he should be buried like an ass, dragged and cast out before the gates of Jerusalem? This Jehoiakim was however an aristocrat, a heartless, selfish tyrant, who for his own pleasure trampled divine and human rights under foot. If such things were done in the green tree, what shall be done in the dry?

“He who builds his house with other people’s property, collects stones for his grave.” Cramer.

9. On Jeremiah 22:14. [“It was a proof of luxury when men began to indulge in superfluities. In old times the windows were small; for use only was regarded by frugal men; but afterwards a sort of madness possessed the minds of many, so that they sought to be suspended as it were in the air. And hence they began to have wider windows. The thing in itself, as I have said, is not what God condemns; but we must ever remember, that men never go to excesses in external things, except when their hearts are infected with pride, so that they do not regard what is useful, what is becoming, but are carried away by fondness for excess.” Calvin.—S. R. A.]

10. On Jeremiah 22:15. “God may grant the great lords a preference in eating and drinking and the splendor of royal courts, but it is not His will that these be regarded as the main things, but that true religion, right and justice must have the precedence;—this is the Lord’s work. But cursed is he who does the Lord’s work remissly. Jeremiah 48:10.” Cramer.

11. On Jeremiah 22:17. “Description of haughty, proud, magnificent, merciless and tyrannical lords and rulers, who are accomplices of thieves.” Cramer.

12. On Jeremiah 22:19. [“God would have burial a proof to distinguish us from brute animals even after death, as we in life excel them, and as our condition is much nobler than that of the brute creation. Burial is also a pledge as it were of immortality; for when man’s body is laid hid in the earth, it is as it were a mirror of a future life. Since then burial is an evidence of God’s grace and favor towards mankind, it is on the other hand a sign of a curse, when burial is denied.” Calvin.—S. R. A.]

13. On Jeremiah 22:24. “Great lords often imagine that they not only sit in the bosom of God, but that they are a pearl in His crown; or as the prophet says here, God’s signet-ring. Therefore, it is impossible that they should not succeed in their designs. But God looks not on the person of the princes, and knows the magnificent no more than the poor. Job 34:19.” Cramer.

14. On Jeremiah 22:28. [“What is idolized will, first or last, be despised and broken, what is unjustly honored will be justly contemned, and rivals with God will be the scorn of man. Whatever we idolize we shall be disappointed in, and then shall despise.” Henry.—S. R. A.]

“The compliment is a very poor one for a king, who thinks somewhat of himself, and to whom it in a certain measure pertains that he be honored….But here it is the word of the Lord, and in consideration of these words it is declared in 2 Chronicles 36:12, to be evil on the part of Zedekiah, that he did not humble himself before Jeremiah. Teachers must be much on their guard against assuming such purely prophetic, that is, extraordinary acts. It cost the servants of the Lord many a death, who were obliged thus to employ themselves, and when it is easy for one to ape it without a divine calling he thus betrays his frivolity and incompetence, if not his pride and delusion.” Zinzendorf.

15. On Jeremiah 22:28-30. Irenæus (Adv. Hær. 3:30) uses this passage to prove that the Lord could not have been Joseph’s natural son, for otherwise he would have fallen under the curse of this passage, and appear as one not entitled to dominion (“qui eum dicunt ex Joseph generatum et in eo habere spem, abdicatos se faciunt a regno, sub maledictione et increpatione decidentes, quæ erga Jechoniam et in semen ejus est”). Basil the Great (Epist. ad Amphilochium) endeavors to show that this passage, with its declaration that none of Jeconiah’s descendants should sit on David’s throne, is not in contradiction to the prophecy of Jacob (Genesis 49:10), that a ruler should not be lacking from Judah, till He came for whom the nations were hoping. Basil distinguishes in this relation between dominion and royal dignity.—The former continued, the latter ceased, and this period of, so to speak, latent royalty, was the bridge to the present, in which Christ rules in an invisible manner, but yet in real power and glory as royal priest, and at the same time represents Himself as the fulfilment of the hope of the nations. In like manner John of Damascus concludes that according to this passage there could be no prospect of the fulfilment of the promise in Genesis 49:10, if Mary had not virgineo modo borne the scion of David, who however was not to occupy the visible throne of David. (Orat. II. in Nativ. B. Mariæ p. med.)—Ambrose finally (Comment. in Ev. Luc. L. III. cap. ult.) raises the question how Jeremiah could say, that ex semine Jechoniæ neminem regnaturum esse, since Christ was of the seed of Jeconiah and reigned? He answers: “Illic (Jeremiah 22:30) futuros ex semine Jechoniæ posteros non negatur et ideo de semine ejus est Christus (comp. Matthew 1:11), et quod regnavit Christus, non contra prophetiam est, non enim seculari honore regnavit, nee in Jechoniæ sedibus sedit, sed regnavit in sede David.” Ghislerus.

16. On Jeremiah 23:2. “Nonnulli præsmles gregis quosdam pro peccato a communione ceiciunt, ut pæniteant, sed quali sorte vivere debeant ad melius exhortando non visitant. Quibus congrue increpans sermo divinus comminatur: pastores, qui pascunt populum meum, vos dispersistis gregem meum, ejecistis et non visitastis eum.” Isidor. Hisp. de summo bono she LL. sentt. Cap. 46. Ghislerus.

17. On Jeremiah 23:5-6. Eusebius (Dem. Ev. VII. 9) remarks that Christ among all the descendants of David is the only one, who rules over the whole earth, and everywhere not only preaches justice and righteousness by His doctrine but is Himself also the author of the rising [of the Sun] of righteousness for all, according to Psalms 72:7 : ἀνατελεῖ ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις αὐτοῦ δικαιοσύνη, καὶ πλῆθος εἰρήνης ἕως οὗ� (LXX.) Cyril of Alex. (Glaphyr. in Gen. I. p. 133) explains Ἰωσεδέκ as justitia Dei, in so far as we are made righteous in Him, not for the sake of the works of righteousness that we have done, but according to His great mercy. Romans 3:24; Titus 3:5.

18. On Jeremiah 23:6. [“If we regard God in Himself, He is indeed righteous, but not our righteousness. If we desire to have God as our righteousness, we must seek Christ; for this cannot be found except in Him. … Paul says that He has been given or made to us righteousness,—for what end? that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him. (1 Corinthians 1:30). Since, then, Christ is made our righteousness, and we are counted the righteousness of God in Him, we hence learn how properly and fitly it has been said that He would be Jehovah, not only that the power of His divinity might defend us, but also that we might become righteous in Him, for He is not only righteous for Himself, but He is our righteousness.” Calvin. See also a long note in Wordsworth, to show that Jehovah our Righteousness refers to Christ;—S. R. A.]

“The character of a true church is when the Lytrum, the ransom-money of Jesus Christ, is known and valued by all, and when they have written this secret, foolish and absolutely inscrutable to reason, in the heart with the finger of the living God: that Jesus by His blood has taken away the sins of the world. ‘O let it ne’er escape my thought, at what a price my soul was bought.’ This is the evening and morning prayer of every church, which is a true sister from above.” Zinzendorf.

19. On Jeremiah 23:5-8. “The return under Ezra was also a fulfilment of this promise, but inferior and preliminary: not all came, and those who did come brought their sins back with them. They were still under the Law and had to wait for Righteousness; still in their return they had a pledge that the Messiah was yet to come and prepare the true city of peace. Now, however, all has been long fulfilled and we can enjoy it perfectly, if we have the mind for it. We have now a country of which no tyrant can rob us; our walk and citizenship is in heaven. We have been delivered from all our suffering, when we sit down at the feet of Jesus to hear His word. Then there is a power of resurrection within us, So that we can fly with our souls beyond the world and laugh at all our foes. For Christ has made us righteous by His daily forgiveness, so that we may also bring ourselves daily into heaven. Yea verily, the kingdom of heaven is come very nigh unto us! Jeremiah then longed to see and hear this more nearly, and now we can have it.” Diedrich.

20. On Jeremiah 23:9. “Great love renders God’s servant so ardent, that he deals powerful blows on the seducers. He does not think that he has struck a wasp’s nest and embittered his life here forever, for he has a higher life and gives the lower one willingly for love. Yet all the world will hold him for an incorrigible and mad enthusiast, who spares no one. He says himself that he is as it were drunk with God and His word, when he on the other hand contemplates the country.” Diedrich.

21. On Jeremiah 23:11. “They are rogues. They know how to find subterfuges, and I would like to see him who accuses a false and unfaithful teacher, and manages his own case so that he does not himself come into the dilemma.” Zinzendorf.

22. On Jeremiah 23:13-14. “In the prophets of Samaria I see folly. This is the character which the Lord gives to error, false religion, heterodoxy. But in the prophets of Jerusalem I find abomination. This is the description of the or thodox, when they apply their doctrine, so that either the wicked are strengthened or no one is converted.” Zinzendorf.

23. On Jeremiah 23:15. “From the prophets of Jerusalem hypocrisy goes forth into all the land. This is the natural consequence of the superiority, which the consistories, academies, ministers, etc., have and in due measure ought to have, that when they become corrupt they communicate their corruption to the whole region, and it is apparent in the whole land what sort of theologians sit at the helm.” Zinzendorf.

24. On Jeremiah 23:16. Listen not to the words of the prophets, they deceive you. Luther says (Altenb. Tom. II. p. 330): “But a Christian has so much power that he may and ought to come forward even among Christians and teach, where he sees that the teacher himself is wanting,” etc.; and “The hearers altogether have the right to judge and decide concerning all doctrine. Therefore the priests and liveried Christians have snatched this office to themselves; because, if this office remained in the church, the aforesaid could retain nothing for their own.” (Altenb. Tom. II. p. 508).—The exercise of this right on the part of members of the church has its difficulties. May not misunderstanding, ignorance, even wickedness cause this to be a heavy and unjust pressure on the ministers of the word, and thus mediately tend to the injury of the church? Certainly. Still it is better for the church to exercise this right than not to do so. The former is a sign of spiritual life, the latter of spiritual death. It will be easier to find a corrective for some extravagances than to save a church become religiously indifferent from the fate of Laodicea (Revelation 3:16).

25. On Jeremiah 23:16. [“But here a question may be raised, How can the common people understand that some speak from God’s mouth, and that others propound their own glosses? I answer, That the doctrine of the Law was then sufficient to guide the minds of the people, provided they closed not their eyes; and if the Law was sufficient at that time, God does now most surely give us a clearer light by His prophets, and especially by His Gospel.” Calvin—S. R. A.]

26. On Jeremiah 23:17. “The pastors, who are welcome and gladly seen at a rich man’s table, wish him in fact long life, good health, and all prosperity. What they wish they prophesy. This is not unnatural; but he who is softened by it is ill-advised.” Zinzendorf.

27. On Jeremiah 23:21. [“There is a twofold call; one is internal, the other belongs to order, and may therefore be called external or ecclesiastical. But the external call is never legitimate, except it be preceded by the internal; for it does not belong to us to create prophets, or apostles, or pastors, as this is the special work of the Holy Spirit. … But it often happens that the call of God is sufficient, especially for a time. For when there is no church, there is no remedy for the evil, except God raise up extraordinary teachers.” Calvin.—S. R. A.]

28. On Jeremiah 23:22. “If I knew that my teacher was a most abominable miscreant, personally, and in heart the worst enemy of God in his parish; so long as, for any reason, he preaches, expounds, develops, inculcates the word of God; even though he should betray here and there in his expressions, that this word was not dwelling in him; if only he does not ex professo at one time throw down what at another time he teaches of good and true quasi aliud agendo: I assure you before the Lord that I should fear to censure his preaching.” Zinzendorf.

29. On Jeremiah 23:23. “ God’s essential attribute is Omnipresence. For He is higher than heaven, what canst thou do? deeper than hell, what canst thou know? Longer than the earth and broader than the sea (Job 4:8). And He is not far from every one of us (Acts 17:27).” Cramer.—“We often think God is quite far from us, when He is yet near to us, has us in His arms, presses us to His heart and kisses us.” Luther.—“ When we think the Sun of righteousness, Jesus, is not risen, and is still behind the mountain, and will not come to us, He is yet nearest to us. The Lord is nigh unto them that are of a broken heart. (Psalms 34:19) ”—“Deus et omni et nullo loco “—” Cuncta Deus replens molem se fundit in omnem.” MS. notes to my copy of Cramer’s Bibel.—“ Si vis peccare, O homo, quære tibi locum, ubi Deus non videat.” Augustine.

30. On Jeremiah 23:28. [“When any one rejects the wheat because it is covered with chaff, and who will pity him who says that he has indeed wheat on his floor, but that it is mixed with chaff, and therefore not fit for food? … If we be negligent, and think that it is a sufficient excuse for despising the Word of God, because Satan brings in his fallacies, we shall perish in our sloth like him who neglects to cleanse his wheat that he might turn it to bread.” Calvin.—S. R. A.]

He who cannot restrain his mouth or his ink let him expectorate. But let him say openly and honestly that they are his own dreams, which he preaches. The false prophets certainly know that mere falsehood is empty straw. They therefore always mingle some of the genuine word of God amongst it. An unavailing mixture! It is in this mingling that Satan’s highest art is displayed, so that he at the same time furthers his own work and testifies against himself. Comp. Genesis 3:0

31. On Jeremiah 23:29. God’s word is the highest reality, life and power, while the dreams of the false prophets are pretence, death and weakness. God’s word is therefore compared to a fire which burns, warms, and enlightens, so that it burns up the hardest flint, melts the thickest ice, illuminates the deepest obscurities. It is compared further to a hammer which crushes the hardest rocks into sand.—He who mingles God’s wheat among his straw, will find that the wheat will become fire and burn up the straw (1 Corinthians 3:12-15). He Who handles the word of the Lord purely, let him not despair if he sees before him hearts of adamant (Zechariah 7:12). He who seeks peace is not ashamed to bow beneath the hammer of the word. For the destructive power of the word applies to that in us which is opposed to God, while the God-related elements are loosed and set free by those very crushing blows.—He, however, to whom the peace of God is an object of derision, may feed on the straw of this world. But how will it be when finally the day comes that God will come upon him with fire and hammer? What then remains to him as the result of his straw-diet, which is in a condition to withstand the blows of the hammer and the fire?

Help, Lord, against Thy scornful foes,
Who seek our souls to lead astray;
Whose mockeries at mortal woes
Will end in terrible dismay!
Grant that Thy holy word may root
Deep in our hearts, and richer fruit
May ever bear to endless day.
“God’s word converts, all other doctrine befools.” Luther.

32. On Jeremiah 23:29. “God’s word in general is like a fire: the more it is urged the more widely and brightly it extends. God has caused His word to be proclaimed to the world as a matter, which they can dispense with as little as fire. Fire often smoulders long in secret before it breaks out, thus the power of the divine word operates in its time. God’s word can make people as warm as if glowing coals lay upon them; it shines as brightly upon them, as if a lamp were held under their eyes; it tells every one the truth and purifies from all vices. He who deals evilly with God’s word burns himself by it, he who opposes it is consumed by it. But the word of God is as little to blame as a lamp or a fire when an unskilful person is burned by it. Yet it happens that often it will not be suffered in the world, then there is fire in all the streets. That is the unhappy fire of persecution, which is kindled incidentally in the world by the preaching of the Gospel.” Jos. Conr. Schaller, Pastor at Cautendorf, Sermons on the Gospels, 1742.

33. On Jeremiah 23:30. “Teachers and preachers are not to steal their sermons from other books, but take them from the Bible, and testify that which they speak from their inward experience (John 3:11). False teachers steal God’s word, inventing a foreign meaning for it, and using this for the palliation of their errors.” Starke—“Hinc illi ζῆλοι at auctions, who can obtain this or that good book, this or that manuscript? Here they are thus declared to be plagiarios; and they are necessarily so because they are not taught of God. But I would rather they would steal from true men of God than from each other.”—Zinzendorf.

34. On Jeremiah 23:33-40. “ When the word of God becomes intolerable to men, then men in their turn become intolerable to our Lord God; yea, they are no more than inutile pondus terræ, which the land can no more bear, therefore they must be winnowed out, Jeremiah 15:17.” Cramer.

35. On Jeremiah 24:5-7. “ He who willingly and readily resigns himself to the will of God even to the cross, may escape misfortune. But he who opposes himself to the hand of God cannot escape.” Cramer.—“The captives are dearest to God. By the first greater affliction He prepares their souls for repentance and radical conversion, so that He has in them again His people and inheritance. O the gracious God, that He allows even those who on account of sin must be so deeply degraded and rendered slaves, even in such humiliation to be His people! The captives are forgiven their opposition to God; they are separated from the number of nations existing in the world, politically they are dead and banished to the interior. Now, God will show them what His love can do; they shall return, and in true nearness to God be His true Israel.” Diedrich.

36. On Jeremiah 24:7. [“Since He affirms that He would give them a heart to understand, we hence learn that men are by nature blind, and also that when they are blinded by the devil they cannot return to the right way, and that they cannot be otherwise capable of light than by having God to illuminate them by His Spirit. … This passage also shows, that we cannot really turn to God until we acknowledge Him to be the Judge; for until the sinner sets himself before God’s tribunal he will never be touched with the feeling of true repentance. … Though God rules the whole world. He yet declares that He is the God of the Church; and the faithful whom He has adopted He favors with this high distinction, that they are His people; and He does this that they may be persuaded that there is safety in Him, according to what is said by Habakkuk, ‘Thou art our God, we shall not die’ (Habakkuk 1:12). And of this sentence Christ Himself is the best interpreter, when He says, that He is not the God of the dead, but of the living (Luke 20:38).” Calvin.—S. R. A.]

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

1. On Jeremiah 21:8. This text may be used on all occasions when an important decision is to be made or on the entrance on a new section of life, as, e. g., at synods, diets, New Years, beginning of the church-year, at confirmations, weddings, installations, etc. What the present day demands and promises: I. It demands from us an important choice. II. It promises us, according as we choose, life or death.

2. On Jeremiah 22:2-9. In how far the divine election is conditional and unconditional. I. It is conditional with respect to individual elected men, places, things. For 1, these become partakers of the salvation promised by the election only by behaviour well-pleasing to God; 2, if they behave in a manner displeasing to God, the election does not protect them from destruction. II. The election is unconditional with respect to the eternal ideas lying at the foundation of the single appearances, and their absolute realizations.

3. On Jeremiah 22:24. [Payson:—“The punishment of the impenitent inevitable and justifiable. I. To mention some awful instances in which God has verified this declaration: (a), the apostate angels; (b) our first parents; (c) destruction of mankind by the flood; (d) the children of Israel; (e) Moses, David, the disobedient prophet, Christ. II. Some of the reasons for such a declaration. Not a disposition to give pain or desire for revenge. It is the nature and tendency of sin to produce misery.”—S. R. A.]

4. On Jeremiah 23:5-6. The Son of David. What the prophet declares of Him is fourfold: 1. He will Himself be righteous; 2. He will rule well as king and execute judgment and righteousness; 3. He will be our righteousness; 4. Under Him shall Judah be helped and Israel dwell safely.

5. On Jeremiah 23:14. [Lathrop: “The horrible guilt of those who strengthen the hands of the wicked. 1. All sin is horrible in its nature. 2. This is to oppose the government of the Almighty. 3. It directly tends to the misery of mankind. 4. It supports the cause of the Evil Spirit. 5. It is to become partakers of their sins. 6. It is horrible as directly contrary to the command of God, and marked with His peculiar abhorrence.”—S. R. A.]

6. On Jeremiah 23:23-24. The Omnipresence of God. 1. What it means. God is everywhere present, (a). He fills heaven and earth; (b) there is no removal from Him in space; (c) nothing is hidden from Him. 2. There is in this for us (a) a glorious consolation, (b) an earnest admonition. [Charnock, Jortin, and Wesley have sermons on this text, all of very similar outline. The following are Jortin’s practical conclusions; “ This doctrine 1. Should lead us to seek to resemble God’s perfections 2. Should deter us from sin. 3. Should teach us humility. 4. Should encourage us to reliance and contentment, to faith and hope.”—S. R. A.]

7. On Jeremiah 23:29-30. God’s Word and man’s word. 1. The former is life and power (wheat, fire, hammer). The latter pretence and weakness (dream, straw). 2. The two are not to be mixed with each other. [Cecil: This shows 1. The vanity of all human imaginations in religion, (a). What do they afford to man? (b). How much do they hinder? 2. The energy of spiritual truth. Let us entreat God that our estimate may be practical.—S. R. A.]

8. On Jeremiah 24:1-10. The good and bad figs an emblem of humanity well-pleasing and displeasing to God. 1. The prisoners and broken-hearted are, like the good figs, well-pleasing to God. For (a) they know the Lord and turn to Him; (b) He is their God and they are His people. 2. Those who dwell proudly and securely are displeasing to God, like the bad figs. For (a) they live on in foolish blindness; (b) they challenge the judgment of God.

Footnotes:

Jeremiah 23:1; Jeremiah 23:1.—There is nothing remarkable in the absence of the article with רֹעִים, for this is generally the case with הוֹי. It occurs with the article in seven places only: Isaiah 5:20; Isaiah 10:1; Isaiah 29:15; Isaiah 31:1; Amos 5:18; Amos 6:1; Habakkuk 2:6. Of these places, the first six have the plural, one the singular, but in a collective signification.

Jeremiah 23:1; Jeremiah 23:1.—מַרְעִית may designate both the act (Hosea 13:6) the place (Isaiah 49:9), and the object (Jeremiah 10:21; Jeremiah 25:36) of the pasturing. Hence צאן־מרעיתי (comp. Ezekiel 34:31; Psalms 74:1; Psalms 79:13; Psalms 100:3) may mean both: the flock which I pasture (as chief shepherd), and: the flock which feeds on my pasturage. The sense is essentially the same.

Jeremiah 23:2; Jeremiah 23:2.—Here רֹעִים has the article, because the shepherds already mentioned (Jeremiah 23:1) are meant.

Jeremiah 23:2; Jeremiah 23:2.—כָּקַד is here used for the sake of a paronomasia in bonam (comp. Psalms 8:5; Exodus 3:16) and in malam partem (comp. Jeremiah 5:9; Jeremiah 25:12; Jeremiah 27:8; Hosea 1:4) comp. Zechariah 10:3.

Jeremiah 23:3; Jeremiah 23:3.—נויהן Sing. Comp. Olsh., § 165, f. Since it is sheep which are spoken of, נָיֶה here as in 2 Samuel 7:8; Isaiah 65:10; Jeremiah 33:12; Ezekiel 25:5 = pascuum, place of pasturage, field. The fem, suffix is remarkable. Comp. Genesis 30:39; Naegelsb. Gr., § 60, 4.

Jeremiah 23:4; Jeremiah 23:4.—יִהֵתּוּ Comp. Jeremiah 17:18.

Jeremiah 23:4; Jeremiah 23:4.—יכּקדו. This word is frequently used of missing, scattered or robbed sheep, 1 Samuel 25:7; 1 Samuel 25:15; 1 Samuel 25:21; comp. 1 Samuel 20:18.

Jeremiah 23:5; Jeremiah 23:5.—יהשׂכיל is best taken here in a double sense: rem bene, i. e., prudenter et feliciter geret. Comp. rems. on Jeremiah 10:21; Isaiah 52:13.

Jeremiah 23:6; Jeremiah 23:6.—The reading יִקְרְאוּ which is found in some Codd. is occasioned by the endeavor to obtain a designation of the subject, perhaps also by the rarer form of suffix. With respect to the former point the well-known idiom may be referred to, according to which the subject is usually wanting with קָרָא in the meaning “they call.” Comp. Naegelsb. Gr., § 101, 2, b. With respect to the latter comp. Hosea 8:3; Psalms 35:8; Ecclesiastes 4:12; Olsh., § 231, c.

return to 'Top of Page'

Verses 9-15

2. Against the False Prophets (Jeremiah 23:9-40.)

a. The Blind Leaders of the Blind

Jeremiah 23:9-15

9 Against the Prophets:—

Broken is my heart in my breast, all my bones quake,10

I am become like a drunken man, and a man whom wine has overcome.
Because of Jehovah and because of his holy words.

10 For the land is full of adulterers.

(For on account of the curse11 the land mourns,

The pastures of the desert are dried up:)
And their course is become evil and their might not right.

11 For both prophet and priest are profane,

Even in my house have I found their wickedness, saith Jehovah.

12 Therefore their way shall be to them as slippery places in the dark;

They shall be driven12 that they fall therein;

For I shall bring calamity upon them in the year of their visitation,
Saith Jehovah.

13 Also in the prophets of Samaria have I seen perversity.13

They prophesied14 by Baal and led my people Israel astray.

14 But in the prophets of Jerusalem I saw what is horrible;

Adultery and dealing in falsehood,—
They strengthened the hands of the evil-doers,
That they did not turn15 every one from his wickedness.

They are all become to me like Sodom,
And their inhabitants like Gomorrah.

15 Therefore saith Jehovah Zebaoth thus concerning the prophets:

Behold, I feed them with absinthe [wormwood],
And give them poison-water to drink,
For from the prophets of Jerusalem profanation has gone out over the whole land.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

The prophet begins by describing his feelings at the reception of this revelation. His sensations were those of a man of broken heart, or of a drunken man (Jeremiah 23:9). By this introduction we obtain a standard, by which to measure the importance of the following passage. First the moral condition of the people is described as very bad, especially from the prevalence of adultery. (Punishment of this the prevalent drought) (Jeremiah 23:10). How could it be otherwise when the spiritual leaders of the people, prophets and priests were themselves profane men, who even desecrated the sanctuary with their crimes? (Jeremiah 23:11). Therefore in the corresponding period punishment must come upon them also (Jeremiah 23:12). Even the prophets in Samaria had led the people of Israel astray by their scandalous behaviour (Jeremiah 23:13). The prophets of Jerusalem, however, had in the point of popular seduction, accomplished something truly horrible. Not only had they gone before with their example of wickedness, but had actually strengthened the evil-doers in their wickedness and restrained them from conversion, so that the nation had become to the Lord like Sodom and Gomorrah (Jeremiah 23:14). Therefore, as the profaners of the land, they must be given poison to drink and be fed with bitterness (Jeremiah 23:15).

Jeremiah 23:9. Against the prophets … holy words. To connect, as indicated by the accents, broken with against the prophets, is not grammatically impossible (comp. ex. gr.Jeremiah 31:20), but not altogether appropriate in meaning. For a broken heart does not signify anger or indignation (which is the only state of mind Jeremiah could be supposed to be in towards the false prophets), but humiliation, anxiety, care. Comp. Psalms 34:19; Psalms 51:19; 60:21; Isaiah 61:1. But it becomes perfectly clear that we have here a superscription before us, when we observe that evidently the whole section, Jeremiah 23:9-40, as relating to the prophets, is opposed to the preceding as relating to the kings, that the title consequently states the main purport, not only of the next verses, but of the whole following discourse. Such superscriptions are moreover common in the book of this prophet: Jeremiah 46:2; Jeremiah 48:1; Jeremiah 49:1; Jeremiah 49:7; Jeremiah 49:23; Jeremiah 49:28.—By holy words are meant the revelation contained in what follows. What shocked the prophet to such an unusual degree was doubtless a glance granted him into the depths of human depravity and on the other hand of the divine wrath. Comp. Jeremiah 4:19; Jeremiah 8:18 sqq.

Jeremiah 23:10-12. For the land is full … visitation, saith Jehovah.—For is causal. But since the reason of the prophet’s great shock is not expressed in the next sentence only, but in the whole of what follows also, For is to be referred to the entire following discourse.—Adulterers.

That this crime prevailed most extensively is evident from Jeremiah 5:7-8; Jeremiah 9:1; Jeremiah 29:23. Where, however, אֱמוּנָה in this respect is not discovered, it is difficult to find it in other respects, and especially in relation to God. Comp. rems. on Jeremiah 5:1.—For on account, etc. This sentence to dried up is to be regarded as a parenthesis. From the general calamity of drought may be argued the presence of a general guiltiness. Moreover, both the indication of the drought, which looks like a demonstratio ad oculos and the leading back to the false prophets (Jeremiah 23:11), reminds us very strongly of Jeremiah 14:2; Jeremiah 14:13-18.—And their course is connected with “full of adulterers.” Their thought and endeavor generally (their walking and running, comp. Jeremiah 8:6; Proverbs 1:16; Isaiah 59:7; Romans 9:16) is directed to evil, therefore itself evil; they are strong only for that which is not right. Comp. rems. on Jeremiah 8:6.—For both prophet, etc. This sentence states the reason why the moral corruption is so general: it cannot be otherwise, since the teachers and leaders of the people are not only themselves profane and godless, but practise their ungodliness even in the sanctuary, the most influential centre of theocratic life. Therefore the prophet says directly in Jeremiah 23:15, From the prophets of Jerusalem is gone forth profanation over the whole land. Evidently profanation is there used with reference to profane here. On the subject comp. Jeremiah 32:34; Ezekiel 8:3 sqq. The priests are moreover mentioned only incidentally; in the whole subsequent part of the discourse Jeremiah speaks only of the prophets. Perhaps the juxtaposition of the two is only a reminiscence from Jeremiah 14:18, where alone the expression occurs.—In the dark. Comp. Psalms 35:6 [Thomson, The Land and the Book, I., p. 106].—Year of visitation. Comp. Jeremiah 11:23. It is apparent from this expression that the visitation is still in the indefinite future.

Jeremiah 23:13-15. Also in the prophets of Samaria … over the whole land. In these verses it is more particularly shown how the corruption extended from the prophets over the whole country. At the same time its merited punishment is announced to them.—The ו here (Also) and at the beginning of Jeremiah 23:14 (But) correspond, but the whole sentences are not parallel, for it could not be said: Both in the prophets of Samaria I see perversity, and in the prophets of Jerusalem what is horrible, the latter clause containing a climax. The expression is founded on a mingling of two ways of speaking, “both in the prophets of Samaria I see what is bad, and in the prophets of Jerusalem,” and “in the prophets of Samaria I see תפלה, but in the prophets of Jerusalem evenשׁערורה.” Both are confounded in the sentence: both in the prophets of Samaria I see what is bad, and in the prophets of Jerusalem what is horrible.—We cannot well render these modes of expression word for word. Comp. the parallel, equally unfavorable for Judah, in Jeremiah 3:6-10.—By Baal. Comp. rems. on Jeremiah 2:8.—Led astray. In this leading astray by moans of prophecy in the name of idols is the point of connection between Jeremiah 23:10-11.—Horrible. Comp. Jeremiah 5:30.—Strengthened, etc. They thus not only seduced the people into wickedness by their example, but sustained them therein by the authority of their example and detained them from repentance.—The subject of are become is the prophets, while their must refer to Jerusalem—The comparison with Sodom and Gomorrah is here as in Zephaniah 2:9, yet with this difference, that they are here the emblem of moral corruption, there of outward desolation.—Poison-water. Comp. Jeremiah 8:14; Jeremiah 9:14.—Profanation. Comp. Jeremiah 3:9. In this last causal sentence (for from the prophets of Jerusalem has profanation gone out), the fundamental though! of the strophe again comes out clearly.