_________________________________________________________________

   Title: Commentary on Jeremiah and Lamentations - Volume 1
   Creator(s): Calvin, John (1509-1564)
   (Alternative)
   (Translator)
   Rights: Public Domain
   LC Call no: BS491
   LC Subjects:

   The Bible

   Works about the Bible
     _________________________________________________________________

   COMMENTARIES

   ON THE

   BOOK OF THE PROPHET JEREMIAH

   AND

   THE LAMENTATIONS


   BY JOHN CALVIN



   TRANSLATED FROM THE LATIN, AND EDITED

   BY THE REV. JOHN OWEN,

   VICAR OF THRUSSINGTON, LEICESTERSHIRE



   VOLUME FIRST



   CHRISTIAN CLASSICS ETHEREAL LIBRARY
   GRAND RAPIDS, MI

   [1]http://www.ccel.org
     _________________________________________________________________

   TRANSLATOR’S PREFACE.

   The Commentaries On Jeremiah, like those on The Minor Prophets, were
   delivered as Lectures In The Theological School At Geneva, taken down by
   some of the Pupils, and afterwards read to Calvin, and corrected. We find in
   them the production of the same vigorous and expansive mind: The Divine
   Oracles are faithfully explained, the meaning is clearly stated, and such
   brief deductions are made as the subjects legitimately warrant. Though the
   Lectures were extemporaneously delivered, there is yet so much order
   preserved, and such brevity, clearness, and suitableness of diction are
   found in them, that in these respects they nearly equal the most finished
   compositions of Calvin as proof that he possessed a mind of no common order.

   The Ministry Of Jeremiah extended over a large space of time from the
   thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign till after the final overthrow of the
   nation; but for how long after that period, it is not known. [1] Between the
   thirteenth year of Josiah and the destruction of the city and Temple, there
   were about forty years. This was a remarkable period, and Jeremiah nearly
   alone labored among the people. Their sins had been for the most part the
   same for a long time — for nearly two centuries, as it appears from the
   testimonies of his predecessors, Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, Joel, Micah, Nahum,
   and Zephaniah; for these seven had in this order preceded him. Zephaniah And
   Habakkuk were probably for a time his contemporaries, the first at the
   commencement, and the other near the end of his ministry. The contumacy with
   which Jeremiah often charged the Jews was here evident, as they continued in
   their evil courses after so many urgent remonstrances by the former
   Prophets.

   What an example of blindness and of the power of superstition does the
   history of the Jews at this period exhibit! No past nor present calamities,
   and no threatenings of still greater calamities, and no promises of Divine
   favor and of temporal blessings, were sufficient to keep them from
   idolatrous and immoral practices — and such practices, too, as were plainly
   and explicitly condemned by that very Law which they professed to receive!
   Such inconsistency might have been deemed impossible, had it not been
   exemplified in the Jews: but it is an inconsistency which is still exhibited
   in the conduct of many calling themselves Christians.

   As to The Style Of Jeremiah, the opinion of the accurate and elegant Lowth
   is as follows:

   “Jeremiah, though not wanting either in elegance or sublimity, is yet in
   both inferior to Isaiah. Jerome seems to charge him with some measure of
   rusticity as to his expressions; but of this, I truly confess, I have found
   no traces. In thoughts, indeed, he is somewhat less elevated, being for the
   most part more loose and diffuse in his sentences, as one more conversant
   with the more tender feelings, being especially capable of expressing sorrow
   and sympathy. This, indeed, appears mainly in The Lamentations, where these
   feelings alone predominate; but it is also often found in his Prophecies,
   and particularly in the first part of his Book, which is chiefly poetical.
   The middle part is nearly all historical; and the last, consisting of six
   chapters, is altogether poetical, and contains several oracles plainly
   expressed, in which the Prophet nearly approaches the sublimity of Isaiah.
   But of the whole Book of Jeremiah, hardly the half do I consider to be
   poetical.” — Proel, 21.

   Venema mainly agrees with Lowth: he blames Jerome for ascribing rusticity of
   diction to our Prophet, and says that he was no good judge (peritus Judex)
   of such matters. Speaking of Jeremiah’s style, he says, “His diction is not
   so lofty and sublime as that of Isaiah, though in the six last chapters,
   46-51., it seems to me to be nearly equal to it, being no less pure,
   expressive, and copious, besprinkled also with tropes and metaphors as with
   lights, and fitted to move the feelings and to stimulate the heart to
   repentance, for which it was designed. The Lamentations alone are sufficient
   to defend Jeremiah against the charge of ignorance and rusticity; for
   antiquity, as Sanctums rightly observes, has nothing more grave, more
   harmonious, more expressive.” Com. ad Jer., p. 8.

   “He is admirably pathetic,” says Scott; “his descriptions of approaching
   judgments are peculiarly vivid; and his eloquence is very vigorous and
   impressive, when inveighing against the shameless audacity of the people in
   rebellion against God.”

   Of Jeremiah as a Prophet, Henry mentions these particulars: 1. That he was
   made a Prophet when young;-2. That he continued long a Prophet;-3. That he
   was a reproving Prophet;-4. That he was a weeping Prophet; — and, 5. That he
   was a suffering Prophet, having been persecuted by his own nation more than
   any other.

   There are several references in the New Testament to Jeremiah and to his
   writings. See Matthew 2:17, 18; Matthew 16:14; Hebrews 8:8-13; Hebrews
   10:15-17. “These last references, “observes Scott, “are peculiarly
   important; for in one of them God himself is mentioned as speaking the words
   referred to; and in the other it is said, ‘Whereof the Holy Ghost is a
   witness to us.’ This is decisive, as to the judgment of the inspired
   Apostles, respecting the Book on which we now enter, and is peculiarly
   suited to put us on our guard against those professed friends of the
   Scriptures, who speak of these books as venerable, authentic, or genuine
   remains of antiquity, of great value and high authority, but hesitate to
   vindicate them as divinely inspired.” Pref. to Jer.

   Nothing is with any certainty known as having been written by Jeremiah,
   except this Book and the Lamentations. Ascribed to him has been a funeral
   song on the death of Josiah, (2 Chronicles 35:25) which, Josephus says, was
   extant in his day. It has been also said by some that he wrote the 137th
   Psalm (Psalm 137), and in connection with Ezekiel, the 46th Psalm (Psalm
   46). His Letter to the captives in Babylon in the Apocrypha, appended to the
   book of Barite, is no doubt spurious: its style is very different from that
   of Jeremiah.

   It is universally admitted that the Chapters in this Book are not in their
   right order. How this has happened, none have been able to conjecture; but
   the fact is evident. According to Blayney, whose account seems correct, the
   twelve first chapters contain prophecies delivered in the reign of Josiah.
   Those in the thirteenth, and in the following chapters to the twentieth
   inclusively, were delivered in the reign of Jehoiakim. Now begins the
   disorder; the twenty — first contains what was spoken in the time of
   Zedekiah, the last king: and afterwards we have what was delivered in a
   former reign. The kings of Judah, during Jeremiah’s ministry, were these:
   Josiah; Shallum or Jehoahaz, his second son; Jehoiakim, his eldest son;
   Jeconiah, the son of Jehoiakim; and Zedekiah, the youngest son of Josiah.
   Blayney thinks that no prophecies were delivered in the reigns of Shallum
   and of Jeconiah. Then his classification may be stated as follows:-During
   the reign of

   Josiah, were delivered, chapters 1-12, inclusively.

   Shallum, none.

   Jehoiakim, chapters 13-20, inclusively, 22, 23, 25, 26, 35, 36, 45, 46, 47,
   48, and 49 to verse 33 inclusively.

   Jeconiah, none.

   Zedekiah, chapters 21, 24, 27 -34, 37-39, 49: from verse 34 to the end, 1,
   and 51.

   The 40-44, inclusively, were written after the destruction of Jerusalem and
   the captivity of the people; and the 52, the last, during the same time, or
   as it is commonly supposed, by Ezra; it is an epitome of the progressive and
   final overthrow of the kingdom.

   There were several circumstances worthy of notice, with regard to The Jews,
   during the ministry of Jeremiah:

   1. The means which God employed to lead them to repentance, and to a
   reformation of their conduct, both as to religion and morals: he gave them a
   pious and a reforming king in Josiah; the Book of the Law was providentially
   discovered and widely made known; a reformation was carried on according to
   its requirements, while idolatrous practices were in a great measure put an
   end to; the people had also before their eyes the awful judgment of God on
   their brethren, The Israelites, in banishing them from their country; and
   the powerful preaching of Jeremiah sounded in their ears.

   2. The manifest evidences of God’s displeasure: their good king, Josiah, was
   suddenly taken from them, no doubt as a judgment for their ingratitude; his
   successor, Suallum, was, after three months’ reign, taken prisoner by the
   Egyptians, and the country was put under tribute; the country was visited
   with grievous famine, as recorded in chap. 14.; and Jeremiah, by God’s
   command, denounced on them the punishment of an entire extinction as a
   nation.

   3. The extremely corrupted state of the people: they were both most
   idolatrous and most immoral, unfaithful to God and to man in a degree hardly
   credible. During Josiah’s reign they pretended to cast away their gross
   superstitions, but after his death they returned to them, as it were, with
   increased avidity; and with these superstitions was combined the prostration
   of every moral principle, and of every natural feeling. Superstition ever
   destroys morality, and enfeebles all the social and natural sympathies of
   men. What a picture of the effects of superstition is given by Jeremiah in
   chapter 9!

   4. Notwithstanding this extremely degenerated state of things, The Jews
   harbored the conviction that their ruin, as denounced by Jeremiah, was
   impossible. While practically denying God, they yet rested their confidence
   on his promises respecting the perpetuity of David’s kingdom, and on their
   outward privileges; taking as unconditional what was conditional, and
   regarding the mere possession of divine institutions as a sufficient
   security. And in this vain confidence they were encouraged and confirmed by
   false Prophets and corrupt Priests, in opposition to God’s messages by his
   Prophet Jeremiah, and to the plain declarations of that Law, the authority
   of which they still ostensibly acknowledged!

   These things have been recorded for our instruction.

   Some of Jeremiah’s Prophecies were fulfilled in the days of many of those
   who heard them; such as those which refer to the Captivity of the people,
   and to the destruction of the neighboring nations by the king of Babylon.
   Other prophecies extend farther, to times more remote, to the destruction of
   Babylon, to the restoration of the Jews after the term of seventy years, and
   to the destinies of various nations. There are also Prophecies respecting
   The Messiah, as The Lord Our Righteousness, The Evangelical Covenant, The
   Call of the Gentiles, and final Restoration of The Jews. So that there are
   in this Book some Prophecies which were soon fulfilled, others at a more
   distant time, and some which are still to be fulfilled. Who but GOD, the
   Sole and the Supreme Ruler of the world, and the regulator and disposer of
   all events, could have announced such Prophecies? All those which refer to
   the past have been fulfilled, fully and completely; and with no less
   certainty shall all such as refer to what is future be in due time
   fulfilled. Nothing can intercept the exercise of Divine Faithfulness;
   nothing can obstruct the working of Infinite Power.

   Facsimile copies of the old Latin, French, and English title — pages follow
   this Preface, with a reprint of the Dedication by Clement Cotton to the
   Countess Of Bedford, prefixed to his English Translation of 1620.

   J. O.
   Thrussington, September 1850.
     _________________________________________________________________

   [1] According to an ancient tradition, mentioned by Jerome and others,
   Jeremiah was stoned to death by the Jews at Tahpanhes in Egypt, (see
   Jeremiah 43:8) shortly after their removal there, subsequent to the
   destruction of Jerusalem. So that he did not live long after that event: it
   may be two or three years.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Facsimile of the title page to the 1589 Latin Edition
     _________________________________________________________________

   Facsimile of the title page to the 1565 French Edition
     _________________________________________________________________

   Facsimile of the title page to the 1620 English Translation

     _________________________________________________________________

   TO THE NOBLE

   AND VERTVOVS LADY,

   THE LADY LVCIE, COVNTESSE

   of Bedford: And to the Right Honorable and highly honored Lady, the Lady
   Anne Harrington, Barrones: mercy
   and peace be multiplied

   Right Honorable: The holy Prophet Jeremiah (according to the diuers subjects
   he had to work upon in his ministerial function) is forced sometimes, with
   Isaiah his forerunner, to lift up his voice like unto a Sonne of Thunder;
   (Isaiah 58:1) and eftsoones, with the same Prophet againe, to altar and
   change the same into the still and soft voice of a Sonne of Consolation: (1
   Kings 19:20) wherein, as God’s faithful messenger, hee carries himself
   faithfully: For as a Sonne of Thunder, he sharply inueyes against the sinnes
   and sinners of his time, boldly denouncing God’s judgements against them;
   and as a Sonne of Consolation, (for their sakes whom the Lord had appointed
   to bee heires of sahation,) hee sweetly preacheth Christ, mixing often with
   the terrible threats of the Law the sauing promises of the Gospel; that if
   any came, by the ministry of the one, to be pricked in conscience and
   humbled, (Acts 2:37) he readily, like the good Samaritan, powreth in the
   mollifying and healing oyle of the other to cure and reuiue them. And thus,
   as a wise disposer and dispenser of the manifold secrets of God, (Psalm
   101:1) his song (in a manner) throughout his Prophesy (like Aaron’s Bels —
   Exodus 28:33) soundeth forth judgement and mercy; preaching judgement to
   such as were and would be sinners in Sion, (Isaiah 33:14) and mercy to such
   as he saw to be mourners in Sion. (Isaiah 61:3). In which respects he may
   serue as a liuely patterne for all Preachers to follow in their ordinary
   course of preaching. These Sermons of his (many of them) doe notably sute to
   our times; and therefore ought to be read, and read againe, of all estates
   high and low.

   But for as much as in reading the Prophets sundry difficulties are met
   withall, which euery one hath not the skill of himself to dissolue, it would
   (as I think) be very beneficial for such if they had an holy helper, such an
   one as this, ready at hand: An interpreter; One (indeed) of a thousand, (Job
   33:23) that might help to dissolve their doubts, and unloose their hard
   knots for them; that so understanding what they read, they might (by the
   blessing of God) with the more ease come to profit by their reading. This
   hath our Philip (Acts 8:34-35) faithfully performed (according to that light
   of understanding wherewith the Lord had extraordinarily endowed him)
   throughout the Prophets; and pity it is that so great light should after a
   sort he buried in darkness from many well minded Christians, onely because
   they are not (as they might be) turned into our owne natiue language.

   Not many yeeres since, a Lampe (if I may so speake) began to be kindled, for
   giuing them some insight into the harder passages of the Prophets, by
   translating this Author’s Commentaries vpon the Prophecie of Isaiah into
   English; but much more cleere would the light haue now shined if thereunto
   had been added the translation of all his Lectures vpon the Prophesie of
   Ieremiah also. For mine owne part, seeing sufficiency of oyle hath failed me
   to furnish out this second Lampe vnto the end, I haue for the present
   proceeded onely through the flue first Chapters.

   The which (Right Honorable) as a testimony of that seruice and duty I owe
   your Honors, I have presumed (as one ouertaken with Ahimaaz his hast,
   sorewhat abruptly, I confesse) to dedicate vnto you: And if in token of your
   favorable acceptance thereof you shall be pleased to suffer the same to
   passe vnder your Honorable names and patronage, many may be occasioned
   thereby to blesse God for you, and my selfe still to pray, that the blessing
   of him who was ready to perish may come vpon you.

   Your Honor’s humbly
   at commandment,

   CLEMENT COTTON.
     _________________________________________________________________

   TO THE

   MOST ILLUSTRIOUS PRINCE,

   D. FREDERICK,

   LORD PALATINE OF THE RHINE, AND ELECTOR OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE, ETC.,

   AND HIS MOST BENEVOLENT LORD,

   JOHN CALVIN

   WISHES ALL HAPPINESS.

   As your heroic valor, Most Illustrious Prince, has been acknowledged by
   superior men and competent judges, and especially your singular piety, your
   labor to cherish and to promote true Religion, and uniform moderation
   through life; and also your great courtesy, such as can hardly be found in a
   private individual, and which I have not only known by report, but have also
   myself experienced, I have long wished by some public act to testify to
   posterity the high regard I entertain for you, being not satisfied with
   having it only in secret. This is well known to the noble — minded Edward,
   the Count or Espach, whom I have consulted on the subject.

   But to discharge this duty at this time, not only an opportunity seems to be
   offered to me, but a certain necessity appears to constrain me; for, as you
   have reverently embraced the sound and orthodox doctrine concerning the Holy
   Supper of Christ, and have not hesitated freely and wisely to avow the same
   in your dominion, so turbulent and unreasonable men rage against you, as
   though you had upset all Germany! Hence they rush headlong to assail your
   Highness with violent clamors; and as they cannot prevail by authority and
   power, being full of presumption and insolence, they hesitate not to vomit
   forth their curses, of which men in their right mind would be ashamed; and
   not only so, but as it is not in their power to kill you, they fabricate
   shameful rumors respecting your death, as though a plot of flies were
   sufficient to darken the sun. And you, indeed, Most Illustrious Prince,
   according to the magnanimity of your mind, and in accordance with the high
   dignity in which God has placed you, do altogether disregard their mad
   conduct; but as they so busily labor to provoke you, and at the same time
   bring in my name to create an ill — will to you, I have thought it my duty,
   in refuting these calumnies, to set up as a shield against them the very
   name which they wish to make so odious; for certainly they are wholly
   unworthy that your Highness should raise your little finger against them, or
   utter the smallest word. Were I indeed disposed to expostulate with them on
   account of their madness in hating so much a man who has done something for
   the Church of God, and of whose labors they avail themselves with the
   unlearned, though they acknowledge it not, they would have no plea for their
   ingratitude. While, then, they endeavor, by bringing forward Calvinism, to
   affix to your Highness some mark of infamy, they do nothing more than betray
   their own perversity, and also their folly and disgrace. But if they think
   that they gain something among those who are like themselves, my voice, on
   the other hand, in speaking of your just praises, will, I hope, be attended
   to by the godly, the well — informed, and men of calm minds and sound
   judgment.

   Unprincipled men of this character do indeed pretend and loudly exclaim that
   they fight for God and their country; but whether it be so, it is easy for
   any one to judge: and I will not indeed discuss at large their delirious
   notions, as the greater part of them understand not what they vainly talk; I
   will only touch briefly on the main points in which we differ from their
   masters, for whom, nevertheless, I have a sincere regard.

   That we really feed in the Holy Supper on the flesh and blood of Christ, no
   otherwise than as bread and wine are the aliments of our bodies, we freely
   confess. If a clearer explanation is asked, we say, that the substance of
   Christ’s flesh and blood is our spiritual life, and that it is communicated
   to us under the symbols of bread and wine; for Christ, in instituting the
   mystery of The Supper, promised nothing falsely, nor mocked us with a vain
   shew, but represented by external signs what he has really given us.

   Now the question rests on the mode of communication; and hence the conflict
   arises, because we refuse to subscribe to their fancy respecting a local
   presence. We say, that though Christ is in heaven, yet through the hidden
   and incomprehensible power of his Spirit, this favor comes to us that His
   flesh becomes life to us, so that we become flesh of his flesh and bones of
   his bones. (Ephesians 5:30.) By them, on the contrary, it is maintained,
   that except Christ comes down on earth, there is no participation. That they
   may, however, get rid of the absurdity of a local presence, it has been
   found necessary to fabricate the strange notion of ubiquity; which, if we
   think it not possible to reconcile to the principles of faith, we must beg
   them at least to pardon our ignorance. Here we follow not our own
   understanding; but according to the knowledge given us from above, we cannot
   comprehend that it is at all agreeable to Scripture to say that the body of
   Christ is everywhere. Both Christ himself and His Apostles clearly shew that
   the immensity of God does not belong to the flesh; a personal union is what
   they teach; and no one, except Eutyches, has hitherto taught, that the two
   natures became so blended, that when Christ became man, the attributes of
   Deity were communicated to his human nature. I am not indeed disposed to
   raise an odium against them by means of a man who has been condemned; they
   are yet to be reminded to think more attentively, and to consider how
   contention leads astray even good, learned, and acute men, when they are led
   away only by a desire to defend their own cause. Doubtless the best and the
   shortest way of confronting Nestorius at the Council of Ephesus would have
   been to say, that personal union communicates to two natures what is
   peculiar to each: to adduce this no one thought of doing on account of its
   absolute absurdity. I therefore greatly wonder that they who oppose us do
   not consider into what labyrinth they plunge themselves.

   For if the infinity of God appertains to the flesh of Christ, because God
   was manifested in the flesh, with equal reason His Divinity may be said to
   have grieved and to have been thirsty, and to have been subject to death,
   and, in short, to have died; for they cannot escape, as it is a similar mode
   of reasoning. Christ, while yet a mortal, declared that He knew not when the
   day of judgment would be. Does He not in these words clearly and distinctly
   ascribe something to His human nature which could not justly be ascribed to
   His Divinity? What they bring forward as to the communication of properties,
   it is unreasonable, and what I may say without offending them, they mistake
   in a matter that is very simple and plain; for to ascribe what is peculiar
   to Deity to the Son of man, and again to attribute to Deity what belongs
   only to humanity, is very improper and rash. To prevent the ignorant from
   stumbling by blending together different things, and to take away from the
   dishonest any occasion for contending, orthodox writers have called this
   figure, “The communication of properties.” [2]

   What they have said of certain expressions, has been with little thought
   applied to the subject. While Christ was on earth he said that the Son of
   man was in heaven. That no one, ill — informed, might think Christ’s body to
   be infinite, it has been deemed necessary to meet this case by a plain
   admonition, that on account of the unity of person what is suitable only to
   Divinity has been said of the Son of man. Paul says, as it is recorded by
   Luke, that God redeemed the Church by His own blood. (Acts 20:28.) Lest no
   one may hence conceive that God has blood, the same admonition ought to be
   sufficient to untie the knot; for as Christ was man and God, what is
   peculiar to His human nature is ascribed to His Divinity. As it was the
   Father’s design to employ this figure of speech for the purpose of teaching
   the simple and ignorant, it is absurd and even shameful to apply it for a
   different purpose, and to say that the communication of properties is the
   real blending of two natures.

   But Christ, it is said, sits at the Father’s right hand, which is to be
   taken as meaning everywhere, confined within no limits. I indeed allow that
   God’s right hand is unlimited, and that wherever it is there is the kingdom
   of Christ; which is metaphorically represented in Scripture by the tern
   sitting: for whatever is declared of God is beyond controversy to be now
   ascribed to Christ; and therefore to sit, which means to govern the world,
   is what Christ has in common with the Father; and still more, as the Father
   by Him sustains the world, rules all things by His power, and especially
   manifests the presence of His grace in governing His Church, He may be said,
   strictly speaking, to reign in His own person. It hence follows, that he in
   a manner is everywhere; for He can be limited to no place who sustains and
   protects all parts of heaven and earth, and rules and regulates by His power
   all things above and below. When now I name Christ, I include the whole
   Person of the only — begotten Son, as manifested in the flesh. He, I say,
   God and man, is everywhere as to his authority and incomprehensible power,
   and infinite glory, according to what the faithful experience by evident
   effects, as they know and feel His presence. It is not then without reason
   that Paul declares, that He dwells in us. (Ephesians 3:17.) But to distort
   what is said of His infinite power, which is evident in His spiritual gifts,
   in the invisible aid which He affords, and in the whole of our salvation,
   and to apply it to His flesh, is by no means reasonable or consistent.

   I wish that many of those who are with little reason angry with us, were at
   least to recall to mind that common and notable saying used in the Papal
   Schools, “Christ is whole everywhere, but not altogether.” [3] They may
   repeat’ it as it is in the barbarous language of Peter Lombard, which is not
   pleasant to their tender and delicate ears. It is yet wisely expressed, from
   whomsoever it may have come, and I willingly adopt it. But I wonder whence
   is this daintiness! Seeing the Recantation of Berengarius delights
   Westphalus and those who are like him that Christ’s body is broken by the
   teeth and digested by the stomach — why is this sober distinction to be
   loathed, that Christ our Mediator is every — where entire, but not as to His
   flesh, which is confined within certain limits, while this power is
   infinite, and its operation felt on earth as well as in heaven?

   There are two words commonly used, Union (unio) and Unity (unitas;) the
   first is applied to the two Natures, and the second to the Person alone. To
   assert the unity of the flesh and of Divinity, those would be ashamed to do,
   if I am not deceived, who yet inconsiderately adopt this absurdity; for,
   except the flesh differs and is distinct in its own peculiar properties from
   the Divine nature, they are by blending together become one. They,
   cavilling, facetiously ask, “In what region of the empyreal heaven does
   Christ sit?” let them indeed enjoy these fine speculations. I am taught by
   the Holy Spirit, that He is above all heavens, (Ephesians 4:10) according to
   the common mode of speaking in Scripture, I call whatever is beyond the
   world heaven. Hence it is enough for me, when Christ is to be sought, that
   our minds are to be raised above, that they may not remain on the earth and
   be entangled in gross superstitions.

   This, then, is the sum and substance of the whole controversy, which the
   chief leaders of the adverse party too pertinaciously agitate, unless,
   indeed, we add another subject that the wicked, as they contend, partake of
   the flesh and blood of Christ no less than the true servants of God. And we
   indeed allow that they are equally offered to both; and that whatever may be
   the difference between men, yet God ever continues like himself the same;
   and that hence the difference in those who presumptuously thrust themselves
   does not arise from the nature of the sacrament. When, therefore, Christ
   gives his body to the unworthy, the difference proceeds from the manner in
   which it is received. But we deny that those are capable of receiving Christ
   whom the devil holds as his slaves, and in whom he has his habitation. We do
   not, however, reject the usual mode of speaking, that Christ is received by
   them sacramentally, provided absurd interpreters pervert not the words of
   Augustine, in which sacramental eating is said to be the reception of the
   substance without the grace; but this is a foolish remark, and unknown to
   Augustine. The reason they adduce, as it is weak, may easily be refuted.
   They say, that Christ came not only for salvation to the elect, but also for
   condemnation to the reprobate, because the Gospel being not received, but
   rejected, is the savor of death unto death to those who perish. But who has
   ever heard that the participation of Christ produces death? But if Christ be
   the occasion of condemnation to unbelievers because He is rejected by them,
   I see not how it can be that they procure for themselves condemnation by
   receiving his flesh. They answer and say, that they are, nevertheless,
   closed up so as not to admit His grace. But that they may gain credit to
   what they say, they must first prove their strange notion that those who are
   alienated from Christ eat His flesh, while it is to those without life
   destitute of its own virtue, and empty.

   I have now faithfully and plainly explained why they who boast themselves to
   be the followers of Luther so hastily contend with us at this day. For the
   same reason they pour forth their execrations on Phillip Melancthon, now
   dead, a man who, for his incomparable knowledge in the highest branches of
   literature, his deep piety, and other endowments, deserves to be remembered
   by all ages, and whom they have hitherto regarded as their leader: and it is
   strange, that in order to obtain the favor of the public, they pretend to
   adopt that noble Confession Of Augsburg, of which he was especially the
   author, and ought to be deemed its true interpreter. I regard them as
   turbulent and unprincipled men, who possess no common courtesy, and feel no
   shame.

   But there are those who, in this respect, are different, and observe some
   moderation: and yet I have a just reason to complain, for some of them have
   acted so unfairly as to give my name in what they have published in German,
   and to withhold it in the Latin editions. Now this is to curse the deaf!

   But, to omit other things, I revert again to their violent clamors, which
   are similar to the clamors of those frantic zealots, mentioned by Josephus,
   through whose excesses a cruel war was kindled, which involved Judea in
   entire ruin. (De Bell. Jude., lib. 14 et 15.) They can find nothing more
   atrocious by which they can irritate your Highness, Most Illustrious Prince,
   than the word Calvinism. But whence this bitter hatred towards me it is not
   difficult to conjecture. For as they have thought the shortest way to
   victory to be by suppressing and concealing the real state of the case, and
   by dazzling the eyes of the simple, it is no wonder that they burn with rage
   when the clouds of ignorance in which they securely exulted were dissipated;
   and what especially drives them even to madness, is the fact, that they find
   that the whole subject is fully and really known by you, so that the
   doctrine, for which they triumphed while it was unknown, having obtained the
   patronage of high authority, and being supported by the pious and strong
   defense of a wise Prince, makes a freer progress.

   It would indeed be superfluous to exhort you, who are of yourself
   sufficiently disposed, to persevere. That you may, however, disregard their
   impotency, and pursue the object so happily as well as judiciously
   undertaken, it seems not an useless attempt to confirm you in your course by
   leaving a pledge of the high regard I entertain for you. And I thought it no
   act of ingratitude for your incredible courtesy to dedicate to your renowned
   name my Commentaries On Jeremiah. I indeed confess that it has not been
   elucidated with that care which so excellent a Book deserves; for as I
   delivered the Lectures from the pulpit, they were taken from my mouth; and I
   have indeed been before ashamed, that what might have been more accurately
   revised and polished by a longer meditation has come forth to light. I am
   also afraid lest the malevolent should accuse me of arrogance, for having
   obtruded on the public discourses extemporaneous and unwritten, and designed
   for a small auditory. It is easy to reply to the latter charge, for the
   first volume was sent to press against my will. That I may not, however, be
   without excuse, what I have to say is, that I have been led by the judgment
   of others. I hear of impartial and plain readers, who declare that they have
   received no small benefit from this kind of labor. And further, some think
   that a good end may be attained by making known my extempore mode of
   teaching, as its simplicity may cure many, who are too anxious of display,
   of that vice. Though learning and aptness to teach cannot satisfy all, I
   have yet carefully endeavored that Religion and Faith should not be found
   wanting by the impartial and well disposed. Nor do I, indeed, fear the
   charge of arrogance, when I fully avow, that I would have by no means
   suffered this Book to go forth to the public had I not thought that it would
   be useful and profitable to the Church of God.

   But it may be that some rigid and severe critics will deem it a present
   unworthy of your Highness; but relying on your rare courtesy, Most
   Illustrious Prince, I hope it will be favorably accepted. And if Jeremiah
   himself were now alive on earth, he would add, if I am not deceived, his
   recommendation; for he would acknowledge that his Prophecies have been
   explained by me not less honestly than reverently; and further, that they
   have been usefully accommodated to present circumstances. I feel not,
   however, over anxious to find an excuse, provided I know that I have done no
   wrong, except through an excessive desire to testify the veneration with
   which I regard your Highness.

   But, to omit now what I have slightly mentioned at the beginning, I should
   condemn myself for ingratitude, were I not to consider myself under
   obligations to you for being so ready and disposed to receive The Christian
   Exiles who flee to you. It is the saying of a heathen woman, as mentioned by
   a poet-

   “Being acquainted with evil, I learn to aid the miserable.” [4]

   Let all who worship God and serve Christ be not ashamed, under similar
   circumstances, to be at least of the same mind. As my power of aiding is not
   equal to my wish, it becomes me at least to regard every kindness shewn to
   them as done to myself. Thirty years have passed away since my voluntary
   exile from France, because thence were exiled the truth of the Gospel, pure
   Religion, and the true Worship of God. I am now become so inured to my
   peregrination, that I feel no desire to return to my country. I am indeed
   here so far a stranger, (though once banished, I was yet so recalled, that I
   never feel ashamed,) that they deem me no more a foreigner than if I could
   name my ancestors as the citizens of this place. But the more kindly God has
   dealt with me, the greater concern ought I to feel for my brethren from
   France as well as from Flanders: and as they have been received with the
   same kindness by your Highness, this stimulates and constrains me to avow my
   gratitude to one so much entitled to it.

   Nor let it cause you any regret, Most Illustrious Prince, that you have been
   sometimes deceived in foreigners, and indeed in men of our language, but go
   on in your wonted course of benevolence. All know how basely you have been
   deceived by that most audacious and unprincipled man, at the same time vile,
   proud, and perfidious-in short, a monster, made up of a mass of filthy
   materials, even Francis Baldwin, and yet a skillful collector of the Civil
   Law. For having been in The University Of Heidelberg, and having, under the
   pretext of the Gospel, been received under your patronage, and being made a
   Professor of the Civil Law through your liberality in The University Of
   Heidelberg, he ought to have considered himself as altogether bound by
   kindness to so munificent a Prince; but he regarded his elevation as
   advantageous to him to seek, after his own manner, a new situation. Hence,
   as soon as hope appeared, he deserted his station, having despised the
   honorable office which he had fraudulently attained, and passed over to the
   enemies of true and pure Religion, the name of which he had assumed. And
   first indeed (as though he retained some portion of shame) he went on
   stealthily in a clandestine manner, he discussed some secret treacheries
   with The Cardinal of Lorraine, into whose favor he had insinuated himself.
   The object of the whole was to subvert the Churches Of France by means of a
   spurious doctrine and a mixture of ceremonies. But as there appeared no
   reward for masked and hidden perfidy, he not only rushed headlong into open
   defection, but so insolently boasted of his wickedness, that he has
   surpassed similar apostates in canine wantonness. It is however well, that
   the perfidy of one unprincipled man does not stop the course of your
   kindness towards others; and you have some recompense for your perseverance,
   for among the ornaments of your University are to be found some foreigners
   well known for their high character, whom it is unnecessary for me to name.

   Though I can add nothing to the character of your Highness, either by my
   praise or by the dedication of this Work, yet I could not restrain myself
   from doing what I thought to be my duty. Farewell, Most Illustrious Prince.
   May God enrich you more and more with His spiritual gifts, keep you long in
   safety, and render your dignified station prosperous to you and yours.

   GENEVA, July 23, 1563.
     _________________________________________________________________

   [2] Idiomatōn koinōnian, which may be rendered “The communication of
   peculiarities.” — Ed

   [3] “Christus ubique totus est, sed non totum.” Lib. 3, Senten. dist. 22.

   [4] Non ignora mali, miseris succurrere disco
     _________________________________________________________________

   THE PRINTER TO THE CHRISTIAN READER,

   HEALTH.

   Though Readers were sufficiently reminded, when the Lectures of the beloved
   and learned John Calvin, on The Minor Prophets and on Daniel, were
   published, by what means and by whom they had been attained, so that it is
   to no purpose to sing the same song, for so would I seem to do, were I again
   to explain at large what has been before set forth; it is yet necessary, if
   I am not mistaken, to add now, that these Lectures On Jeremiah and the
   Lamentations were taken down by our two brethren, John Budeus and Charles
   Jonville, with the same care, fidelity, and diligence as the former
   Lectures, which cannot but appear to every one who will attentively read
   them.

   The Hebrew Text has not been inserted; and among other things, for this
   reason, because it is already possessed by those who understand the
   language, and to others it would be of no advantage. We were also afraid,
   that by increasing the Volume and the expense, we should unnecessarily
   charge the buyer.

   But that I may not be prolix and tedious, I pass by the great and manifold
   benefit that may be derived from this Volume, which will appear to each one
   better when it is read: for it is so replete with the precious wealth of
   heavenly Truth, that from it, as from a storehouse, may be drawn the sum and
   substance of Religion; and so it will no doubt be of great service to the
   whole Church of God.

   It remains for you, Christian Reader, to ascribe to God alone whatever
   benefit you may derive from these Commentaries; and to pray for Calvin, who
   well deserves this from all the godly, until he shall at length enjoy his
   eternal inheritance. Make use also thankfully of this so valuable a
   treasure, and judge kindly and impartially of what is cordially presented to
   you.

   GENEVA, July 23, 1576.
     _________________________________________________________________

   THE PRAYER
   WHICH JOHN CALVIN WAS WONT TO USE AT THE BEGINNING OF HIS LECTURES:

   MAY the Lord grant, that we may engage in contemplating
   the mysteries of his heavenly wisdom with really increasing devotion,
   to his glory and to our edification. AMEN.
     _________________________________________________________________

   CALVIN’S PREFACE

   TO THE BOOK OF

   THE PROPHET JEREMIAH.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Lecture First.

   After having explained The Twelve Minor Prophets, we reached at length to
   the end of Daniel. I now undertake to explain The Book Of Jeremiah, provided
   life be spared and leisure be given me. But if through God’s grace time will
   be allowed, there will remain still one Prophet, that is, Ezekiel; which I
   hope will be undertaken by a more competent Interpreter.

   As to Jeremiah, it must be first observed, that he commenced his office as a
   Prophet under Josiah, and in the thirteenth year of his reign, who was a
   sincere servant of God, and yet the state of things was then very confused:
   the Book of the Law was unknown; so that every one indulged his fancy in
   inventing many impious forms of worship. No doubt at a time when such
   liberty prevailed, there were many turbulent men laboring to pervert the
   worship of God and pure doctrine, and fabricating for themselves many absurd
   things. For if the priests taught rightly, they must have derived all their
   knowledge from the Law: and though it is probable, that the memory of it was
   not wholly lost, yet a few fragments only remained, so that they could not
   with certainty learn how the Church was to be regulated according to what
   had been received from above. For it is related in sacred history, that the
   Book was found in the eighteenth year of Josiah, (2 Chronicles 34:8, 15;) so
   that Jeremiah had been then teaching for four, and even for five years.

   Now this fact clearly proves how great is the carelessness and sloth of men
   in the great concerns of Religion. God had commanded Moses, that a copy of
   the Law should not only be kept reverently and carefully in the Temple, but
   also by the kings themselves, (Deuteronomy 17:18;) and there was also added
   a command, that the whole Law should be read to the people at their
   festivals. (Deuteronomy 31:11.) But when the kings departed from the true
   worship of God, no copy of the Law was preserved by them: and at length the
   whole Law became as it were extinct. No doubt this happened through the
   tyranny of King Manasse, who cruelly raged against the priests and against
   all the other servants of God. Wherever only a spark of religion appeared,
   he was intent on slaughter; so that blood, as sacred history testifies,
   flowed through all the streets of Jerusalem. (2 Kings 21:16.) It was then no
   wonder, if he took away from the Temple all the copies of the Law found
   there, in order to extinguish all memory of true doctrine. However, a book,
   which had been hid, was found, as we are told, by the priest Hilkiah.

   The first thing then to be observed is the time when he began to teach: as
   religion was then so corrupted, and every one invented errors to suit his
   own humor, the office of Jeremiah must have been hard and arduous.

   Secondly, the termination of his ministry must be noticed. He says, that
   from that time he pursued his office until the transmigration. He therefore
   continued in his course for forty years. We shall hereafter see what hard
   contests he had to undergo during his life. But had the people been
   teachable, he could not have performed what God had commanded him without
   great pain and even weariness: for we shall presently see what was the
   doctrine which he was commanded to proclaim. As then he was assiduous in his
   labor for forty years, we hence perceive with what a courageous spirit he
   was endued. If we further consider what storms had been raised, calculated
   to cast him down from his high station, and even wholly to drive him from
   the right way, more clearly still will shine forth the invincible firmness
   of his mind and his zeal; for he never desisted from executing the office
   committed to him.

   We must further observe, that after the city was cut off, and the
   inhabitants of Jerusalem were led captives into Babylon, Jeremiah still
   continued to discharge his office. He was indeed drawn into Egypt, as we
   learn from the end of his Book, especially from chapter 44 (Jeremiah 44);
   nay, he was taken there by force, while yet he pronounced a curse on all the
   Jews who sought hiding — places in Egypt. Though he was forced to go there,
   yet it much lessened his authority; for we know that ungodly men lay hold on
   any pretense for evil — speaking. There was here a specious pretense; “He
   cursed, “they said, “all who went to Egypt, and now where does he dwell
   himself? In Egypt with the other refugees.” No doubt the faith of the holy
   man was shaken by these banterings: ungodliness has been wanton in all ages.
   There, then, after the destruction of the city, Jeremiah was constrained to
   bend his course: and it may be, that he persevered in his work and labor
   beyond fifty years. It is said, that he was stoned to death, and not
   unlikely, for he inveighed with no less severity against the Jews who had
   fled into Egypt, than against the city while it was standing; and despair
   might have roused them into madness. It is hence probable that they slew the
   holy Prophet, and thought this lawful because he upbraided them with their
   miseries, while his object was to correct their perverseness, which was
   untamable; and this they did not consider.

   I come now to The Contents of the Book. As Isaiah and the other Prophets
   spent their labor almost in vain, nothing remained for Jeremiah but briefly
   to announce this sentence, — “There is now no pardon, but it is the time of
   extreme vengeance, for they have too long abused God’s forbearance, who has
   borne with them, kindly and even sweetly exhorted them to repent, and
   testified that he would be exorable and propitious, provided they returned
   to the right way.” Since then God’s kindness had been despised by them, it
   became necessary for Jeremiah to fulminate against them as men lost and in a
   hopeless state of perverseness. The main thing then in his teaching was
   this:

   “It is all over with the kingdom and the priesthood; for the Jews have so
   often and in such various ways, and for so long a time, provoked God’s wrath
   and rejected the pious warnings of his servants.”

   Isaiah also in his time used threatenings; but we see that to mitigate what
   was terrible, some hope of pardon was added whenever he spoke with severity.
   But after the ten tribes had been carried into exile, and the kingdom had
   been visited with various calamities, while the Jews still continued
   impenitent, and even hardened themselves more and more under God’s scourges,
   it was necessary, as I have said, that he should deal more sharply with
   them. God had contended with them by Isaiah and the other prophets; by
   Jeremiah and also by Ezekiel, he proved them guilty, and denounced on them
   the sentence of condemnation. This difference between the teaching of Isaiah
   and that of our Prophet, ought to be noticed. [5] At the same time, that
   Jeremiah’s teaching might not be imperfect, it was God’s purpose that he
   should be also the herald of his grace and of the salvation promised in
   Christ. This exception, however, ought to be borne in mind, that he offered
   them no hope of mercy until they had suffered the punishment due to their
   sins.

   We now then understand what Jeremiah mainly taught: but particulars will be
   better and more distinctly understood by readers by following the course of
   the text. And I do not now treat in general of what is to be found in the
   prophets; for this is what I have done elsewhere. I now then say only, that
   Jeremiah was sent by God to proclaim to the people their last calamity; and
   also to speak to them of their future redemption, and at the same time, ever
   to remind them of the interposition of seventy years in exile. I come now to
   the words.
     _________________________________________________________________

   [5] Scott says that Jeremiah “entered upon the prophetic office almost
   seventy years after the death of Isaiah.” — Ed
     _________________________________________________________________
     _________________________________________________________________

   CHAPTER 1
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 1:1-3

   1. The words of Jeremiah the son of Hilkiah, of the priests that were in
   Anathoth in the land of Benjamin:

   1. Verba Jeremiae filii Helkiae, ex sacerdotibus qui erant in Anathoth, in
   terra Benjamin,

   2. To whom the word of the LORD came in the days of Josiah the son of Amon
   king of Judah, in the thirteenth year of his reign.

   2. Nempe (אשר explicative hic ponitur) fecit sermo Jehovae ad ipsum, in
   diebus Josiea, filii Amon, regis Jehudah, decimo tertio anno regm ejus;

   3. It came also in the days of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of Judah,
   unto the end of the eleventh year of Zedekiah the son of Josiah king of
   Judah, unto the carrying away of Jerusalem captive in the fifth month.

   3. Et fuit (hoc est, perrexit in, cursum vocationis suae) diebus Joakim,
   filii Josiae, regis Jehudah, usque ad complementum undecimi anni Zedechiae,
   filii Josiae, regis Jehudah, ad transmigrationem Jerusalem, mense quinto.


   I Have said that the time, when Jeremiah began to discharge his office of a
   Prophet in God’s Church, is not stated here without reason, and that it was
   when the state of the people was extremely corrupt, the whole of Religion
   having become vitiated, because the Book of the Law was lost: for nowhere
   else can be found the rule according to which God is to be worshipped; nor
   can right knowledge be obtained from any other source. It was then, at the
   time when impiety had by a long custom prevailed among the Jews, that
   Jeremiah suddenly came forth. There was then laid on his shoulders the
   heaviest burden; for many enemies must have risen to oppose him, when he
   attempted to bring back the people to the pure doctrine of the law, which
   the greater part were then treading under their feet.

   He calls himself the son of Hilkiah The Rabbins think that this Hilkiah was
   the priest by whom the Book of Moses was found five years after: but this
   seems not to me probable. The conjecture also of Jerome is very frivolous,
   who concludes that the Prophet was a boy when he began to prophesy, because
   he calls himself נער (nor,) a child, a little farther on, as though he did
   not use the word metaphorically. [6] At what age he was called to the
   prophetic office, we do not know; it is, however, probable that he was of
   mature age, for it was a work of high authority; and further, had he been a
   youth, doubtless such a miracle would not have been passed over in silence,
   that is, that he was made a prophet before the age of maturity.

   With regard to his father, it is nothing strange that the Rabbins have
   regarded him as the high priest; for we know that they are always prone to
   vain boastings. Ambition possessed them, and hence they have said that
   Jeremiah was the son of the high priest, in order to add to the splendor of
   his character. But what does the Prophet himself say? He declares indeed
   that he was the son of Hilkiah, but does not say that this was the high
   priest; on the contrary he adds, that he was from the priests who were in
   Anathoth in the land of Benjamin Now we know that this was a mean village,
   not far from Jerusalem; and Jeremiah says, that it was in the tribe of
   Benjamin. Its nearness to Jerusalem may be gathered from the words of
   Isaiah, who says that small Anathoth was terrified. (Isaiah 10:30) He
   threatened Jerusalem by saying that the enemy was near.

   “What,” he says, “is your security? Ye can hear the noise of your enemies
   and the groans of your brethren from your very gates; for Anathoth is not
   far from you, being only three miles distant.”

   Since then Jeremiah only says, that he came from Anathoth, why should we
   suppose him to be the sort of the high priest? And frivolous is what the
   Chaldee paraphraser adds here, that Hilkiah had possessions in the town of
   Anathoth, as though it was allowed the priests to possess land: God allowed
   them only what was necessary to feed their flocks. We may then take it as
   certain, and what the Prophet indeed expressly declares, that he came from
   the village of Anathoth. [7]

   He further says, that he was of the priestly order. Hence the prophetic
   office was more suitable to him than to many of the other prophets, such as
   Amos and Isaiah. God took Isaiah from the court, as he was of the royal
   family, and made him a prophet. Amos was in a different situation: he was
   taken from the shepherds, for he was a shepherd. Since God appointed such
   prophets over his Church, he no doubt thus intended to cast a reflection on
   the idleness and sloth of the priests. For, though all the priests were not
   prophets, yet they ought to have been taken from that order; for the
   priestly order was as it were the nursery of the prophets. But when gross
   want of knowledge and ignorance prevailed among them, God chose his prophets
   from the other tribes, and thus exposed and condemned the priests. They
   ought, indeed, to have been the messengers of the God of hosts, so as to
   keep the law in their lips, that the people might seek it from their mouth,
   according to what is said by Malachi. (Malachi 2:7) But as they were dumb
   dogs, God transferred the honor of the prophetic office to others; but
   Jeremiah, as I have already stated, was a prophet as well as a priest.

   He begins in the second verse to speak of his calling. [8] It would have,
   indeed, been to little purpose, had he said that he came forth and brought a
   message; but he explains, in the second verse, that he brought nothing but
   what had been delivered to him by God, as though he had said, that he
   faithfully declared what God had commanded him. For we know that the whole
   authority belongs entirely to God, with regard to the doctrine of religion,
   and that it is not in the power of men to blend this or that, and to make
   the faithful subject to themselves. As God, then, is the only true teacher
   of the Church, whosoever demands to be heard, must prove that he is God’s
   minister. This is, then, what Jeremiah is now carefully doing, for he says
   that the word of Jehovah was given to him.

   He had before said, the words of Jeremiah, the son of Hilkiah; but any one
   of the people might have objected and said, “Why dost thou intrude thyself,
   as though any one is to be heard? for God claims this right to himself
   alone.” Hence Jeremiah, by way of correction, subjoins, that the words were
   his, but that he was not the author of them, but the minister only. He says,
   then, that he only executed what God had commanded, for he had been the
   disciple of God himself, before he undertook the office of a teacher.

   As to the beginning of his time and its termination, it has been briefly
   shewn, why he says that he had been chosen a prophet in the thirteenth year
   of Josiah, and that he discharged his office till the eleventh year of
   Zedekiah.

   Now that Josiah is called the son of Amon, it is doubtful whether Josiah was
   properly his son. Amon began to reign in his twenty-second year, and reigned
   only two years. Josiah succeeded him in the eighth year of his age. If we
   number the years precisely, Josiah must have been born when Amon was in his
   sixteenth year; but it does not appear likely, that Amon was a father when
   he was sixteen years of age, for in this case he must have begotten a son in
   his fifteenth year; as the birth must have taken place nine months after.
   Then Josiah must have been begotten in the fifteenth year of Amon’s age. It
   is hence a probable conclusion, that he was a son by law and not by nature,
   according to what is afterwards said of Zedekiah, that he was Josiah’s son,
   because he was his successor, while he was, as many think, his nephew, a
   brother’s son. But it was a common thing to call the successors of kings
   their sons, who were their sons by law, and not, as I have said, by nature.
   It now follows-
     _________________________________________________________________

   [6] The word does not properly mean a “child,“ as in our version, or
   “puer,“ as rendered by Calvin, but a youth, or rather a young man.
   Abraham’s trained servants were thus called, Genesis 14:24, and his servant
   who dressed the calf for the angels, Genesis 18:7, and his “young men” who
   accompanied him to Mount Moriah, Genesis 22:5. Joshua had this name given
   him, when he was attending Moses at the tabernacle, Exodus 33:11. It is
   rendered “(neōteros)-a youth or a young man,“ by the Septuagint The most
   probable thing is, that he was, not as Adam Clarke supposes, about 14, but a
   young man verging on maturity. The length of time during which he
   prophesied, would lead us to conclude that he was young when he was
   appointed to his office. There are two remarkable resemblances between
   Jeremiah and Moses. They both made an excuse for declining the office to
   which God called them, and made a similar excuse. The other resemblance is
   what Lightfoot has noticed, that Moses was a teacher of the people for forty
   years before they entered the land of Canaan, and that Jeremiah was their
   teacher for forty years before they were banished from it and driven into
   exile. — Ed.

   [7] The reasons alleged against Jeremiah being the son of the high priest
   are by no means conclusive: indeed, all the circumstances being considered,
   the probability is in favor of that supposition. The family of the high
   priest resided no doubt at Anathoth; what is said in 1 Kings 2:26,
   respecting Abiathar, is a proof of this. That the high priest resided at
   Jerusalem during the term of his office forms no objection; nor is the
   genealogy of the high priests as given in 1 Chronicles 6:1-17, any
   objection; for though in verse 13, Azariah is said to be the son of Hilkiah,
   yet Jeremiah might have been one of his younger sons. Most commentators
   agree indeed with Calvin, -Gataker, Henry, Scott, Blayney, etc.; but they
   adduce no satisfactory reasons, sufficient to invalidate the opinion of the
   Rabbins and the intimation contained in the Targum: and this opinion is what
   the translators of the Geneva Bible have adopted. — Ed.

   [8] The second verse begins with אשר which Calvin renders “nempeeven,“ and
   takes it in an exegetic sense: but this is not its meaning. Our version is
   no doubt correct, “to whom;” though there is no preposition before it, it is
   yet found before the personal pronoun “to him,“ that comes afterwards. It is
   an idiom of the language, and the very same exists in Welsh, in which the
   version is literally the same with the Hebrew a relative pronoun without a
   preposition followed by a personal pronoun with a preposition profixed to
   it. It would be literally in English, “whom the word of Jehovah came to
   him.” The Welsh also retains the peculiarity of the Hebrew, in having
   prepositions prefixed to pronouns and attached to them, though this is not
   the case generally with nouns, Yr hwn y daeth gair Jehova atto. The verb
   too, as in the Hebrew, precedes its nominative; “came” is before “the word
   of Jehovah.” It is rather singular that the Septuagint have rendered this
   relative by “hōs — as,” which shews that the Hebrew idiom was not understood
   by them. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 1:4-5

   4. Then the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,

   4. Et fuit sermo Jehova ad me dicendo,

   5. Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest
   forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto
   the nations.

   5. Antequam formarem to in utero novi to, et antequam egressus esses e vulva
   sanetificavi to, Prophetam in gentibus constituite.


   Here Jeremiah explains more fully what he had already mentioned that he had
   been called from above, for otherwise he would have presumptuously obtruded
   himself: for no one, as the Apostle says, takes this honor to himself; but
   the call of God alone raises up prophets and teachers to their dignity {see
   Hebrews 5:4}. Hence, that Jeremiah might secure attention, he declares that
   he had been called to the prophetic office, and that by the clear voice of
   God. For this purpose, he says, that this word was given him, Before I
   formed thee in the womb [9] I knew thee He introduces God as the speaker,
   that what he declares might be more emphatical, that it might be of more
   weight and more forcible: for, if he had said simply in his own person, that
   he had been made a prophet by God’s voice, it would not have so much moved
   the hearers; but when he brings forward God as the speaker, there is
   necessarily more weight and force in what is said.

   I pass by here what might be more largely said on what is necessary in
   one’s call, so that he may be attended to by God’s people; for no one, by
   his own and private right, can claim this privilege of speaking, as I have
   already said, inasmuch as this is what belongs to God alone. But I have
   elsewhere spoken at large on the prophetic call; it is therefore enough now
   to point at such things as these as it were by the finger: and particular
   discussions must be sought elsewhere; for were I to dwell at large on every
   subject, my work would be endless. I will, therefore, according to my usual
   practice, give a brief exposition of this Prophet.

   Jeremiah then says, that he had been called by God, for this end, that he
   might on this account gain a hearing from the people. God declares that he
   knew Jeremiah before he formed him in the womb. This is not said specially
   of the Prophet, as though other men are unknown to God, but it is to be
   understood of the prophetic office, as though he had said, “Before I formed
   thee in the womb, I destined thee for this work, even that thou mayest
   undertake the burden of a teacher among the people.” And the second part is
   a repetition, when he says, Before thou camest forth from the womb I
   sanctified thee Sanctification is the same as the knowledge of God: and thus
   we perceive that knowledge is not mere prescience, but that predestination,
   by which God chooses every single individual according to his own will, and
   at the same time appoints and also sanctifies him; for no one, as Paul
   declares, (2 Corinthians 2:16,) is according to his own nature fitted for
   the work. Since then this fitness is the gratuitous gift of God, it is
   nothing strange that God declares that he had sanctified Jeremiah, as though
   he had said, “I formed thee man in the womb, and at the same time appointed
   thee for this particular work; and as it was not in thy power to bring with
   thee a qualification for the prophetic office, I formed thee not only a man,
   but a prophet.” This is the import of the passage.

   But they refine too much, who think that the Prophet was sanctified from the
   womb as John the Baptist was, for the words mean no such thing; but only
   that is testified of Jeremiah, which Paul also affirms respecting himself in
   the first chapter of the Epistle to the Galatians, that he was known by God
   before he was born. Jeremiah then was not actually sanctified in the womb,
   but set apart according to God’s predestination and hidden purpose; that is,
   God chose him then to be a Prophet. It may be asked, whether he was not
   chosen before the creation of the world? To this it may be readily answered,
   that he was indeed foreknown by God before the world was made; but Scripture
   accommodates itself to the measure of our capacities, when it speaks of the
   generation of any one: it is then the same as though God had said of
   Jeremiah, that he was formed man for this end that in due time he might come
   forth a Prophet.

   And no doubt the following clause is added exegetically, A prophet for the
   nations I made thee His sanctification, then, as I have said, was not real,
   but intimated that he was appointed a Prophet before he was born.

   It however seems strange that he was given a Prophet to the nations God
   designed him to be the minister of his Church; for he neither went to the
   Ninevites, as Jonah did, (Jonah 3:3,) nor traveled into other countries, but
   spent his labors only among the tribe of Judah; why then is it said that he
   was given as a Prophet to the nations? To this I answer, that though God
   appointed him especially for his Church, yet his teaching belonged to other
   nations, as we shall presently see, and very evidently, as we proceed; for
   he prophesied concerning the Babylonians, the Egyptians, and the Moabites;
   in short, he included all the nations who were nigh and known to the Jews.
   This was indeed as it were accidental: but though he was given as a Prophet
   especially to his own people, yet his authority extended to heathen nations.
   No doubt nations are mentioned, including many, in order that the power and
   dignity of his teaching might appear more evident. It follows-
     _________________________________________________________________

   [9] More strictly, “in the inside,” or belly, בטן. The specific term for
   womb is in the next sentence, רחם. — Ed
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 1:6-7

   6. Then said I, Ah, Lord GOD! behold, I cannot speak: for I am a child.

   6. Et dixi, Ahah, Domine Jehova, ecce non novi loqui, quia puer ego.

   7. But the LORD said unto me, Say not, I am a child: for thou shalt go to
   all that I shall send thee, and whatsoever I command thee thou shalt speak.

   7. Et dixit Jehova ad me, Ne dicas, Puer ego (id est, sum puer,) quia ad
   quaecunque to misero, ibis, et quaeunque tibi praecepero, loqueris.


   After having spoken of his call, the Prophet adds, that he at first refused
   his office, and he states this for two reasons; first, that he might clear
   himself from every suspicion of rashness, for we know how much ambition
   prevails among men, according to what James intimates, that many wish to be
   teachers, (James 3:1) and there is hardly one who is not anxious to be
   listened to. Since, then, most men too readily assume the office of
   teaching, and many boldly intrude into it, Jeremiah, in order to avoid the
   very suspicion of rashness, informs us that he was constrained to take the
   office. Secondly, he says that he refused the office, that he might gain
   more esteem, and render his disciples more attentive. But why did he refuse
   to obey God, when called to the prophetic function? Because its difficulty
   frightened him: and yet this very reason ought to rouse readers to a greater
   attention, as it no doubt awakened hearers when Jeremiah spoke to them.

   If any one asks, whether Jeremiah acted rightly in refusing what God
   enjoined? the answer is, that God pardoned his servant, for it was not his
   design to reject his call, or to exempt himself from obedience, or to shake
   off the yoke, because he regarded his own leisure, or his own fame, or any
   similar considerations: Jeremiah looked on nothing of this kind; but when he
   thought of himself, he felt, that he was wholly unequal to undertake an
   office so arduous. Hence the excuse that is added is that of modesty. We
   then see that God forgave his timidity, for it proceeded, as we have just
   said, from a right feeling; and we know that from good principles vices
   often arise. But it was yet a laudable thing in Jeremiah, that he thought
   himself not sufficiently qualified to undertake the prophetic office, and
   that he wished to be excused, and that another should be chosen endued with
   more courage and with better qualifications. I shall proceed with what
   remains tomorrow.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Prayer

   Grant, Almighty God, that as thou hast not only provided for thine ancient
   Church, by choosing Jeremiah as thy servant, but hast also designed that the
   fruit of his labors should contilme to our age, O grant that we may not be
   unthankful to thee, but that we may so avail ourselves of so great a
   benefit, that the fruit of it may appear in us to the glory of thy name; may
   we learn so entirely to devote ourselves to thy service, and each of us be
   so attentive to the work of his calling, that we may strive with united
   hearts to promote the honor of thy name, and also the kingdom of thine only
   — begotten Son, until we finish our warfare, and come at length into that
   celestial rest, which has been obtained for us by the blood of thine only
   Son. Amen.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Lecture Second

   We mentioned yesterday the reason why Jeremiah refused the office of
   teaching, even because he thought himself unequal to the work; and for this
   reason he called himself a child, not in age, but in knowledge. Hence the
   word “child” is to be taken metaphorically; for thereby the Prophet
   confessed that he was not sufficiently qualified as to knowledge and
   practice. Some, as I have said, have unwisely applied this to his age.
   Though then he was of a mature age, yet he called himself a child, because
   of his unskillfulness, and because he possessed not the gifts necessary for
   an office so important. [10]

   Now follows the answer given to him, Say not, I am a child; for thou shalt
   go, etc. God not only predicts here what the Prophet was to do, but declares
   also what he designed him to do, and what he required from him, as though he
   had said, “It is thy duty to obey, because I have the right to command: thou
   must, therefore, go wheresoever I shall send thee, and thou must also
   proclaim whatsoever I shall command thee.” By these words God reminds him
   that he was his servant, and that there was no reason why a sense of his own
   weakness should make him afraid; for it ought to have been enough for him
   simply to obey his command.

   And it is especially necessary to know this doctrine: for as we ought to
   undertake nothing without considering what our strength is, so when God
   enjoins anything, we ought, immediately to obey his word as it were with
   closed eyes. Prudence is justly praised by writers; and it is what ought to
   be attended to by all generally; they ought to consider what the shoulders
   can bear, and cannot bear. For whence is it that many have so much audacity
   and boldness, except that they hurry on through extreme self — confidence?
   Hence, in all undertakings, this should be the first thing, that every one
   should weigh well his own strength, and take in hand what comports with the
   measure of his capacity. Then no one would foolishly obtrude himself, and
   arrogate to himself more than what is right. But when God calls us, we ought
   to obey, however deficient we may in all things be: and this is what we
   learn from what God says here, Say not, I am a child; that is, “though thou,
   indeed, thinkest thyself destitute of every qualification, though thou art
   conscious of thine own weakness, yet thou shalt go, thou must go wheresoever
   I shall send thee.” God, then, requires this honor to be simply conceded to
   him, that men should obey his commands, though the qualification necessary
   to execute them be wanting. It afterwards follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [10] The words admit of two meanings. לא-ידעתי דבר-I have not known word,
   or, I know not word. The phrase may signify, I have no word to say, or, I
   know not how to say a word. The first meaning is what the context seems to
   countenance. The answer given to him refers to his two objections — that he
   had no word to say, and that he was a young man. The last is first answered,
   according to the usual mode of writing adopted by the prophets, “To every
   one whom I shall send thee to, thou shalt go;” and then the first objection
   is removed, “and everything that I shall command thee, thou shalt speak.”
   The answer goes on, and refers to the points in the same order, “Fear
   not;” and then to remedy the want complained of; Jehovah is represented as
   putting his words in his mouth, so that he might have what was necessary for
   him to say. God promised courage though he was young, and gave him a message
   to deliver: thus his two objections were removed. We meet with a similar
   phrase in Jeremiah 6:15; Jeremiah 8:12, which is, literally, “and shame they
   know not.” — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 1:8

   8. Be not afraid of their faces: for I am with thee to deliver thee, saith
   the LORD.

   8. Ne timeas a facie ipsorum, quia tecum ego (id est, ego sum tecum) ad
   eripiendum to, dicit Jehova.


   We may learn from this verse that Jeremiah, when he observed the heavy and
   hard conflicts he had to undertake, was greatly disturbed; for he had not
   courage enough firmly and boldly to assail enemies so many and so violent.
   He indeed saw, that he had to do with a degenerated people, who had almost
   all departed from the law of God: and since they had for many years shaken
   off the yoke, and were petulantly exulting in their freedom, it was
   difficult to bring them back to obedience, and to a right course of life. It
   hence appears that the Prophet was restrained by this difficulty, so as not
   to venture to undertake the prophetic office. But God applied a suitable
   remedy to his fear; for what does he say? Fear not their face It appears,
   then, that when Jeremiah said that he was a child, he had in view, as I have
   already hinted, the difficulty of the undertaking; he could hardly bear to
   carry on contests so severe with that rebellious people, who had now become
   hardened in their wickedness. We hence see how he refused, in an indirect
   manner, the burden laid on him, for he ventured, not openly and ingenuously,
   and in plain words, to confess how the matter was; but God, who penetrates
   into the hearts of men, and knows all their hidden feelings and motives,
   heals his timidity by saying, Fear not their face. [11]

   Now this passage shews that corruptions had so prevailed among the chosen
   people, that no servant of God could peaceably perform his office. When
   prophets and teachers have to do with a teachable people, they have no need
   to fight: but when there is no fear of God, and no regard for him, yea, when
   men are led away by the violence of their lusts, no godly teacher can
   exercise his duty without being prepared for war. This, then, is what God
   intimates, when he bids his Prophet to be courageous; for he saw that there
   would be as many enemies as professed themselves to be the children of
   Abraham.

   The reason, also, for boldness and confidence, that is added, ought to be
   noticed, For I am with thee to deliver thee By these words God reminds the
   Prophet, that there would be sufficient protection in his power, so that he
   had no need to dread the fury of his own nation. It was, indeed, at first, a
   formidable undertaking, when Jeremiah saw that he had to carry on war, not
   with a few men, but with the whole people; but God sets himself in
   opposition to all men, and says, I am with thee, [12] fear not. We hence see
   that due honor is then conceded to God, when being content with his defense
   we disregard the fury of men, and hesitate not to contend with all the
   ungodly, yea, though they may rise up in a mass against us: and were their
   forces and power the strongest, we ought yet to feel assured that the
   defense of God alone is sufficient to protect us. This is the full meaning
   of the passage. It now follows-
     _________________________________________________________________

   [11] The proper rendering is, “Fear not before them,” or, on their account:
   סמני is invariably a preposition, before, from before, because of, on
   account of, for, by, through; Deuteronomy 2:21; Exodus 14:19; Deuteronomy
   7:19; Jeremiah 6:13; and it is often, though not always, so rendered in our
   version. The very same phrase is found in Joshua 11:6, and rendered, “Be not
   afraid, because of them;” and also in this book, Jeremiah 41:18, “They were
   afraid of them.” It may, indeed, be rendered, “Fear them not,” or, “Be not
   afraid of them.” To introduce “face” or “faces” is by no means right.
   Gataker’s rendering is, “Fear not before them;” and Blayney’s, “Be not thou
   afraid because of them.” — Ed

   [12] “Earthly kings and sovereigns,” observes Gataker on this verse, “are
   not wont to go with those whom they send on embassage; God goeth along with
   those whom he sends, and is by his powerful protection, at all times and in
   all places, present with them.” — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 1:9-10

   9. Then the LORD put forth his hand, and touched my mouth. And the LORD said
   unto me, Behold, I have put my words in thy mouth.

   9. Et extendit Jehova manum suam, et tetigit os meum; et dixit Jehova ad me,
   Ecce posui verba mea in ore tuo:

   10. See, I have this day set thee over the nations and over the kingdoms, to
   root out, and to pull down, and to destroy, and to throw down, to build, and
   to plant.

   10. Vide, constitui to (vel, praefeci) hodie super gentes et super regna, ad
   evellendum et ad destruendum et ad eruendum et ad perdendum, ad aedificandum
   et ad plantandum.


   Here Jeremiah speaks again of his calling, that his doctrine might not be
   despised, as though it proceeded from a private individual. He, therefore,
   testifies again, that he came not of himself, but was sent from above, and
   was invested with the authority of a prophet. For this purpose he says, that
   God’s words were put in his mouth.

   This passage ought to be carefully observed; for Jeremiah briefly describes
   how a true call may be ascertained, when any one undertakes the office of a
   teacher in the Church: it is ascertained even by this when he brings nothing
   of his own, according to what Peter says in his first canonical epistle,

   “Let him who speaks, speak as the oracles of God,”
   (1 Peter 4:11)

   that is, let him not speak doubtingly, as though he introduced his own
   glosses; but let him boldly, and without hesitation, speak in the name of
   God. So also Jeremiah in this place, in order that he might demand to be
   heard, plainly declares that the words of God were put in his mouth. Let us,
   then, know, that whatever proceeds from the wit of man, ought to be
   disregarded; for God wills this honor to be conceded to him alone, as it was
   stated yesterday, to be heard in his own Church. It hence follows, that none
   ought to be acknowledged as God’s servants, that no prophets or teachers
   ought to be counted true and faithful, except those through whom God speaks,
   who invent nothing themselves, who teach not according to their own fancies,
   but faithfully deliver what God has committed to them.

   A visible symbol was added, that there might be a stronger confirmation: but
   there is no reason to make this a general rule, as though it were necessary
   that the tongues of all teachers should be touched by the hand of God. There
   are here two things — the thing itself, and the external sign. As to the
   thing itself, a rule is prescribed to all God’s servants, that they bring
   not their own inventions, but simply deliver, as from hand to hand, what
   they have received from God. But it was a special thing as to Jeremiah, that
   God, by stretching out his hand, touched his mouth; it was, that he might
   openly shew that his mouth was consecrated to himself. It is therefore
   sufficient as to the ministers of the word, that their tongues be
   consecrated to God, so that they may not mix any of their own fictions with
   his pure doctrine. But it was God’s will, as to Jeremiah, to add also the
   visible signs of the thing itself, by extending his hand and touching his
   mouth.

   God having now shewn that Jeremiah’s mouth was consecrated to himself, and
   separated from common and profane use, proceeds to invest him with power:
   See, he says, I have set thee this day over nations and over kingdoms By
   these words God shews how reverently he would have his word received, even
   when conveyed by frail mortals. There is no one who pretends not, that he
   desires to obey God, but yet hardly one in a hundred really receives his
   word. For as soon as he speaks, almost all raise a clamor; or if they dare
   not furiously, and in a hostile manner, oppose it, we yet see how some evade
   it, and others secretly oppose it. The authority, then, which God ascribes
   to his own word, ought to be noticed by us: Behold, I have set thee over
   nations and kingdoms

   Farther, by saying, See, I have set thee, he encourages the Prophet to be
   magnanimous in spirit. He was to remember his calling, and not timidly or
   servilely to flatter men, or to shew indulgence to their lusts and passions:
   See, he says. We may hence perceive, that teachers cannot firmly execute
   their office except they have the majesty of God before their eyes, so that
   in comparison with him they may disregard whatever splendor, pomp, or power
   there may be in men. Experience indeed teaches us, that the sight of men,
   whatever dignity they may possess, be it the least, brings fear with it. Why
   are prophets and teachers sent? That they may reduce the world to order:
   they are not to spare their hearers, but freely reprove them whenever there
   may be need; they are also to use threatenings when they find men perverse.
   But when there is any dignity connected with men, the teacher dares not to
   offend; he is afraid of those who are invested with power, or who possess
   wealth, or a high character for prudence, or who are endued with great
   honors. In such cases there is no remedy, except teachers set God before
   their eyes, and regard him to be himself the speaker. They may thus with
   courageous and elevated minds look down on whatever height and pre —
   eminence there may be among mortals. This, then, is the object of what God
   says here, See, I have set thee over nations and kingdoms; for he shews that
   there is so much authority in his word, that whatever is high and exalted on
   earth is made subject to it; even kings are not excepted.

   But what God has joined together let no man separate. (Matthew 19:6; Mark
   10:9) God indeed extols here his Prophets above the whole world, and even
   above kings; but he has previously said, Behold, I have put my words, in thy
   mouth; so that whosoever claims such a power, must necessarily bring forth
   the word of God, and really prove that he is a prophet, and that he
   introduces no fictions of his own. And hence we see how fatuitous is the
   boasting of the Pope, and of his filthy clergy, when they wickedly dare to
   appropriate to themselves what is here said. “We are, “they say, “above both
   kings and nations.” By what right? “God hath thus spoken by the Prophet
   Jeremiah.” But these two things are to be joined together — I have put my
   words in thy mouth, and, I have set thee over nations and kingdoms Now let
   the Pope shew that he is furnished with the word of God, that he claims for
   himself nothing that is his own, of apart from God; in a word, that he
   introduces nothing of his own devices, and we shall willingly allow that he
   is pre — eminent above the whole world. For God is not to be separated from
   his word: as his majesty shines eminently above the whole world, yea, and
   above all the angels of heaven; so there is the same dignity belonging to
   his word. But as these swine and dogs are empty of all true doctrine and
   piety, what effrontery it is, yea, what stupidity, to boast that they have
   authority over kings and nations! We, in short, see from the context, that
   men are not here so much extolled, though they be true ministers of
   celestial truth, as the truth itself; for God ascribes here the highest
   authority to his own word, though its ministers were men of no repute, poor
   and despised, and having nothing splendid connected with them. The purpose
   for which this was said I have already explained; it was, that true prophets
   and teachers may take courage, and thus boldly set themselves against kings
   and nations, when armed with the power of celestial truth.

   He then adds, To root up, to destroy, to pull down, to lay waste God seems
   here to have designedly rendered odious his own word and the ministry of the
   Prophet; for the word of God in the mouth of Jeremiah could not have been
   acceptable to the Jews, except they perceived that it was for their safety
   and welfare: but God speaks here of ruin and destruction, of cutting down
   and desolation. But he subjoins, to build and to plant God then ascribes two
   effects to his word, that on the one hand it destroys, pulls down, lays
   waste, cuts off; and that on the other it plants and builds

   But it may, however, be rightly asked, why does God at first speak of ruin
   and extermination? The order would have seemed better had he said first, I
   set thee to build and to plant, according to what is said by Paul, who
   declares that vengeance was prepared by him and the other teachers against
   all despisers, and against all the height of the world, when your obedience,
   he says, shall be completed. (2 Corinthians 10:5, 6.) Paul then intimates
   that the doctrine of the gospel is properly, and in the first place,
   designed for this end — to call men to the service of God. But Jeremiah here
   puts rhin and destruction before building and planting. It then seems, as I
   have said, that he acts inconsistently. But we must ever bear in mind what
   the state of the people was: for impiety, perverseness, and hardened
   iniquity had for so long a time prevailed, that it was necessary to begin
   with ruin and eradication; for Jeremiah could not have planted or have built
   the temple of God, except he had first destroyed, pulled down, laid waste,
   and cut off. How so? Because the Devil had erected there his palace; for as
   true religion had been for many years despised, the Devil was there placed,
   as it were, on his high throne, and reigned uncontrolled at Jerusalem, and
   through the whole land of Judea. How, then, could he have built there a
   temple for God, in which he might be purely worshipped, except ruin and
   destruction had preceded? for the Devil had corrupted the whole land. We
   indeed know that all kinds of wickedness then prevailed everywhere, as
   though the land had been filled with thorns and briers. Jeremiah then could
   not have planted or sown his heavenly doctrine until the land had been
   cleansed from so many vices and pollutions. This is no doubt the reason why
   in the first place he speaks of cutting off and ruin, of exterminating and
   eradicating, and afterwards adds planting and building.

   The heap of words employed shews how deep impiety and the contempt of God
   had fixed their roots. God might have said only, I have set thee to pull
   down and to destroy; he might have been content with two words, as in the
   latter instance — to plant and to build. But as the Jews had been obstinate
   in their wickedness, as their insolence had been so great, they could not be
   corrected immediately, nor in one day, nor by a slight effort. Hence God
   accumulated words, and thus encouraged his Prophet to proceed with unwearied
   zeal in the work of clearing away the filth which had polluted the whole
   land. We now then understand what is here said, and the purpose of using so
   many words. [13]

   But he speaks again of kingdoms and nations; for though Jeremiah was given
   as a Prophet especially to his own nation, yet he was also a Prophet to
   heathen nations, as they say, by accident, according to what we shall
   hereafter see: and it seems that, God designedly mentioned nations and
   kingdoms, in order to humble the pride of that people who thought themselves
   exempt from all reproof. Hence he says, that he gave authority to his
   servant, not only over Judea, but also over the whole world; as though he
   had said, “Ye are but a small portion of mankind; raise not then your horns
   against my servant, as ye shall do this without effect; for he shall
   exercise power not only over Judea, but also over all nations, and even over
   kings, as the doctrine which I have deposited with him is of such force and
   power that it will stand eminent above all mortals, much more above one
   single nation.”

   We at the same time see that though the treachery of men constrains God to
   use severity, yet he never forgets his own nature, and kindly invites to
   repentance those who are not wholly past remedy, and offers to them the hope
   of pardon and of salvation; and this is what celestial truth ever includes.
   For though it be the odour of death unto death to those who perish, it is
   yet the odor of life unto life to the elect of God. It indeed often happens
   that the greater part turn the doctrine of salvation to their ruin; yet God
   never suffers all to perish. He therefore makes the truth the incorruptible
   seed of life to his elect, and builds them up as his temples. This is what
   we must bear in mind. And so there is no reason why the truth of God should
   be disliked by us, though it be the occasion of perdition to many; for it
   always brings salvation to the elect: it so plants them, that they strike
   roots into the hope of a blessed immortality, and then it builds them for
   holy temples unto God. It now follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [13] The whole of this verse is arranged according to the usual manner of
   the Prophets. The word “nations” comes first, and then “kingdoms.” Three
   lines follow; the first word in each line refers to “kingdoms,” and the last
   to “nations.” The ו, vau, in the second line is omitted in many copies, and
   there seems to be no need of it; and it is not true what Blayney says, that
   there are MSS. which supply the ו before the last line, though it be
   supplied by the Septuagint To preserve the distinct meaning of each verb, I
   offer the following rendering: — See, I have set thee this day
   Over nations and over kingdoms,
   To root up, and to break down,
   To destroy, and to erase,
   To build up, and to plant. He was to root up kingdoms, and to break down
   nations; then he adds stronger words, for he was to destroy, or wholly to
   destroy kingdoms, and to erase or to obliterate nations. The reason for the
   repetition is well stated by Calvin. As to his other work, two words only
   are used: he was to build up kingdoms, and to plant nations. A nation, of
   course, exists before a kingdom, and this order is observed in the second
   line; but the order, as it is usual with the sacred writers, not only of the
   Old, but also of the New Testament, is then reversed. See an instance in
   Romans 10:9, 10, where indeed the true order is given last, the ostensible
   act being in the first instance stated, and then the principle from which it
   proceeds. — Ed.}
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 1:11-12

   11. Moreover, the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, Jeremiah, what
   seest thou? And I said, I see a rod of an almond tree.

   11. Et (hoc est, postea) factus est sermo Jehovae ad me (datus est mihi,
   fuit, ad verbum,) dicendo, Quid tu vides, Jeremia? Et dixi, Baculum vigilis
   (aut, amigdali) ego video.

   12. Then said the LORD unto me, Thou hast well seen: for I will hasten my
   word to perform it.

   12. Et dixit Jehova ad me, Bene fecisti ad videndam (hoc est, recte
   vidisti,) quia vigilo (aut, festino, vigilans ego, ad verbum) super sermonem
   meum ut ipsum faciam (hoc est, ut compleam.)


   God confirms in this passage what he had previously said of the power of his
   word. These two verses, then, are to be taken as explanatory, for no new
   subject is introduced; but the former part is confirmed — that the Prophets
   spoke not in vain, or to no purpose, because they were invested with
   celestial power to plant and to build, and, on the other hand, to pull down
   and to root up, according to what we have quoted from Paul, who says that
   true teachers are armed with such power. (2 Corinthians 10:5, 6) We have in
   readiness, he says, vengeance against all the unbelieving, however proud
   they may be: and though their height may terrify the whole world, yet we
   have a sword in our hands which will stay them; for God’s word has
   sufficient power to destroy the rebellious.

   God then proceeds with the same subject when he says, What seest thou,
   Jeremiah? He had set before him a staff or a rod of almond, as some render
   the word: and שקר, shaked, means an almond; but as it comes from a verb
   which means to watch or to hasten, we cannot fitly render it here, almond. I
   do not, however, deny that the Hebrew word has this meaning. But it is
   written here with Kamets; the participle which afterwards follows has Holem:
   we hence see what affinity there is between the two words. The word שקר,
   shaked, an almond, is derived from the verb, שקר, shakad, to watch; and it
   has been thought that this tree is so called, because it brings forth fruit
   earlier than other trees; for almonds, as it is well known, flower even in
   winter, and in the coldest seasons. Now, were we to say in Latin, I see a
   rod or a staff of almond; and were the answer given, Thou hast rightly seen,
   for I watch, the allusion in the words would not appear, the sentence would
   lose its beauty, and there would indeed be no meaning. It is hence necessary
   to give another version, except we wish to pervert the passage, and to
   involve the Prophet’s meaning in darkness. It should be, “I see the rod, “or
   the staff, “of a watcher.” Let us grant that the almond is intended; yet the
   tree may be called watchful, according to what etymology requires, and also
   the sense of the passage, as all must see. [14]

   God then caused his servant to see the staff of a watcher. For what purpose?
   The answer is given: Thou hast rightly seen the staff of a watcher, because
   I watch over my word to execute (or, fulfill) it Interpreters seem to have
   unwisely confined this to the punishments afterwards mentioned: they think
   that what is intimated is, that the threatenings which the Prophet announced
   would not be without effect, because God was prepared to inflict whatever he
   would denounce. But this, as I think, is too restricted a view; for God, I
   have no doubt, extols here his own word, and speaks of its accomplishment;
   as though he had said, that he spoke not by his servants, that what they
   said might vanish into air, or fall to the ground, but that power would
   accompany it, according to what is said in Isaiah,

   “Not return shall my word to me empty, but shall prosper in all things,”
   (Isaiah 55:11)

   that is, “I will cause the prophetic doctrine to take effect, that the whole
   world may know that I have not spoken in vain, and that my word is not an
   empty sound, but that it has real power, which in due time will appear.”

   Hence I have said that these verses ought to be connected with the last, in
   which God said, that he sent his Prophet to root up and to plant, to
   demolish and to build. He then gives a proof of this in other words, and
   says that he would watch over his word, that he might execute whatever he
   had announced by his servants; as though he had said, “I indeed allot their
   parts (so to speak) to the prophets; but as they speak from my mouth, I am
   present with them to fulfill whatever I command them.” In short, God
   intimates that the might and the power of his hand would be connected with
   the word, of which the prophets were ministers among men. Thus it is a
   general declaration which refers not only to punishments, but also to
   promises. Rightly, then, hast thou seen, he says; for I am watching.

   God does not here resign his own office to Jeremiah, though he employs him
   as his teacher; for he shews that the power to accomplish what the Prophet
   would declare remained with him. God indeed does not here ascribe to
   Jeremiah anything as his own, or apart from himself, but sets forth only the
   power of his word; as though he had said, “Provided thou be my faithful
   minister, I will not frustrate thy hope, nor the hope of those who shall
   obey thee; for I will fulfill whatever thou and they may justly hope for:
   nor shall they escape unpunished who shall resist thee; for I will in due
   time bring on them the punishment they deserve.”

   He therefore uses the word to watch, or to hasten, in order to shew that he
   stood ready to give effect to his word at the appointed time. The effect
   does not indeed always appear to us: it is on this account said by Habakkuk,
   that if prophecy delays, we are to wait;

   “for it will not be,” he says,
   “beyond its time; but coming it will come.” (Habakkuk. 2:3)

   God then bids us with quiet minds to wait for the accomplishment of his
   word; but he afterwards adds, in order to modify what he had said, “coming
   it will come;” that is, “I will accomplish and really perform whatever my
   prophets have spoken by my command.” So there shall be no delay, for the
   suitable time depends on God’s will, and not on the judgment of men. It then
   follows, — but as the clock strikes, I cannot proceed farther today.
     _________________________________________________________________

   [14] The word is rendered “a rod of almond” by the Septuagint, the Arabic
   version, and Theodotion; and also by Piscator, Drusius, Grotius, and
   Blayney; and “the rod of the watcher” by Sym., Aq., and the Vulgate The
   latter is no doubt more suitable in a translation. Some conclude, from what
   is related in Numbers 17, that the head of each tribe carried a wand or a
   staff made of the almond tree as a token of watchfulness: if so, the
   probability is, that this wand was presented to the view of the Prophet. It
   being a well-known emblem of watchfulness, and called perhaps the watchful
   rod or staff, it was most suitable to the purposes here designed. The verb
   שקד does not mean to hasten, but to watch, or to be awake. Then the version
   of the passage would be the following: - 11. And the word of Jehovah came to
   me, saying, “What seest thou, Jeremiah?” and I said, “The rod of a watcher
   is what I see.” 12. Then Jehovah said to me, “Thou seest rightly, for I am
   watching over my word to do it.” — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   PRAYER

   Grant, Almighty God, that since thou art pleased kindly to invite us to
   thyself, and hast consecrated thy word for our salvation, — O grant that we
   may willingly, and from the heart, obey thee, and become so teachable, that
   what thou hast designed for our salvation may not turn to our perdition; but
   may that incorruptible seed by which thou dost regenerate us into a hope of
   the celestial life so drive its roots into our hearts, and bring forth
   fruit, that thy name may be glorified; and may we be so planted in the
   courts of thine house, that we may grow and flourish, and that fruit may
   appear through the whole course of our life, until we shall at length enjoy
   that blessed life which is laid up for us in heaven, through Christ our
   Lord. — Amen.

     _________________________________________________________________

   Lecture Third
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 1:13-14

   13. And the word of the LORD came unto me the second time, saying, What
   seest thou? And I said, I see a seething pot; and the face thereof is toward
   the north.

   13. Et fuit sermo Jehovae ad me secundo, dicendo, Quid tu rides? Et dixi,
   Ollam ferventem ego video, facies ejus a facie Aquilonis.

   14. Then the LORD said unto me, Out of the north an evil shall break forth
   upon all the inhabitants of the land.

   14. Et dixit Jehova ad me, Ab Aquilone aperietur (alii vertunt, pendetur;
   alii, solvetur; erumpet, proprie) malum super cunctos habitatores terrae.


   Jeremiah begins now to address the people to whom he was sent as a Prophet.
   He has hitherto spoken of his calling, that the authority of his doctrine
   might be evident: and he spoke generally; but now he accommodates his
   teaching specially to the people. Hence he says, that he had a vision, and
   saw a boiling-pot, whose face was towards the north. By God asking, and the
   Prophet answering, the design was to confirm the prediction; for if it had
   been only said that he saw a boiling-pot, and if an explanation of the
   metaphor had been given, there would not have been so much force and weight
   in the narrative. But when God is set forth as being present, and explaining
   what the boiling-pot signified, the prediction becomes more certain: and the
   Prophet no doubt gave this narrative, in order to shew that God, being as it
   were present, thereby proved himself to he the Author of this prophecy.

   Now the import of the whole is, that the Chaldeans would come to overthrow
   the city Jerusalem, to take away and abolish all the honor and dignity both
   of the kingdom and of the priesthood.

   This indeed had been previously announced by Isaiah as well as by other
   prophets; but all their threatenings had been despised. While indeed Isaiah
   was living, the king of Babylon had secured the friendship of Hezekiah; and
   the Jews thought that his protection had been opportunely obtained against
   the Assyrians. But they did not consider that the hearts of men are ruled by
   the hand of God, and are turned as he pleases: nor did they consider that
   they had for many years provoked God, and that he was become their enemy.
   Since, then, all threatening had been despised and regarded with derision,
   Jeremiah came forth and declared, that the northern nations would come, the
   Assyrians as well as the Chaldeans. For we know that the one monarchy had
   been swallowed up by the other; and the Chaldeans ruled over the Assyrians;
   and thus it happened that the whole eastern empire, with the exception of
   the Medes and Persians, had passed over to them; and with respect to Judea,
   they were northward. Hence the Prophet says, that he saw a boiling-pot,
   having its face towards the north.

   By the pot many understand the king of Babylon; but they seem not rightly to
   understand what the Prophet says: and I could easily disprove their
   interpretation, but I shall be satisfied with a simple statement of what is
   true; and the meaning will become evident as we proceed. The pot, then, as
   it will be presently seen more clearly, is the nation of the Jews: I say
   this now, as I do not wish to heap together too many things. They are said
   to be like a boiling-pot, because the Lord, as it were, boiled them, until
   they were reduced almost to nothing. It is said also, that the face of the
   pot was towards the north; because there, as Jeremiah immediately explains,
   was the fire kindled. And the comparison is very apposite; for when a pot is
   set on the fire, it boils on that side nearest the fire, and all the scum
   passes over to the other side. Hence he says that it boiled, but so that its
   mouth was on the north side; for there was the fire, and there was the
   blowing. In short, God intended to shew to his Prophet, that the people were
   like flesh which is cast into the pot, boiled, and afterwards burnt, or
   reduced after a long time almost to nothing. The Prophet saw the mouth or
   the face of the boiling-pot, and on the side on which it boiled it looked
   towards the north; hence God, the interpreter of the vision which he
   presented to his servant, answers and says, From the north shall break forth
   evil on all the inhabitants of the land, that is, of Judea. In these words
   God declares, that the fire was already kindled by the Chaldeans and the
   Assyrians, by which he would boil, as it were, his people like flesh, and at
   length wholly consume them, as it is commonly the case, when the flesh
   remains in the pot, and the fire is continually burning, and blowing is also
   added; the flesh must necessarily be reduced to nothing when thus boiled or
   seethed. [15]

   And thus God testifies that the fire was already kindled in Chaldea and
   Assyria, which was not only to boil the Jews, but also reduce them to
   nothing. And then he expresses the same in other words — that evil would
   come from the north upon all the Jews. We shall hereafter see that there is
   presented here a brief summary of the truth which was committed to Jeremiah;
   at least it is a summary of one half of it; for God designed also to provide
   for his own elect; and he thus terrified them, that they might be subdued,
   and submit to him, and not that they might abandon themselves to despair. At
   the same time, this half of the prediction was — that there was no hope of
   pardon, because the Jews had with extreme obstinacy provoked God’s wrath,
   and had so abused his patience, that their impiety could no longer be
   tolerated. Hence, what other prophets had denounced Jeremiah now confirms
   more strongly, and points it out, as it were, by the finger. It afterwards
   follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [15] Most agree with Calvin, that the pot means the Jewish nation; so the
   learned Gataker in the Ass. Ann., Grotius, Henry, and Scott. There is some
   difference as to “its face.” The first of these authors, followed by the two
   last, thinks that the face means the front of the fire or the hearth, and
   therefore the front of the pot. This face or front was towards the north,
   signifying that the fuel and the blowing would be from that quarter, as it
   is afterwards stated. As to the metaphor, the pot, or cauldron, see Ezekiel
   11:3, 7; 24:3, 5. The version of the Geneva Bible is, “I see a seething-pot
   looking out of the north;” and the Chaldean army is regarded as the pot: and
   Blayney, following the marginal reading of our version, has given a similar
   rendering, “and the face thereof is turned from the north.” But מפני is a
   preposition, and rendered often, “from before,” and, “before,” (see [2]note
   on verse 8;) and to say that its face was before the north means the same as
   towards the north: and this is the rendering of Jun. and Trem , and
   Piscator, “versus Aquilonem.” “The boiling-pot” is a pot “kindled
   under-hupokaiomenon,” by the Sept The literal rendering of סיר נפוח is, “a
   pot blown,“ meaning the fire under it. It was a pot set on a fire that was
   blown, and the front of it was toward the north, from whence the blowing
   came. The same word as a noun is used by Jeremiah in Jeremiah 6:29, and
   signifies an instrument for blowing, and is rendered “bellows” in our
   version. It was then a pot set on a fire that was blown, which intimated the
   severe calamities which the Jews were soon to endure, as Grotius observes.
   — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 1:15

   15. For, lo, I will call all the families of the kingdoms of the north,
   saith the LORD; and they shall come, and they shall set every one his throne
   at the entering of the gates of Jerusalem, and against all the walls thereof
   round about, and against all the cities of Judah.

   15. Quoniam ecce ego voco omnes familias regnorum Aquilonis, dicit Jehova,
   et venient; ponent quisque solium suum in ostio postarum Jerosolymae, et
   super omnes muros ejus in circuitu, et super omnes urbes Jehudah.


   This verse contains an explanation of the last; for God more dearly and more
   specifically expresses what he had before referred to — that the evil would
   come from the north. He says that he would be the sender of this evil, and
   speaks thus of it: Behold, I call all the families of the kingdoms of the
   north The prediction would not have been so effectual had not this
   declaration been expressly added — that the Chaldeans would come by the
   authority of God; for men are ever wont to ascribe to fortune whatever takes
   place: and we shall hereafter see in the Book of Lamentations (Lamentations
   3:37, 38) that the Jews were so besotted, that in their calamities they
   attributed to the events of fortune the destruction of the temple and city,
   and the ruin of the kingdom. Hence God sharply expostulated with them,
   because they were so blind in a matter so clear, and did not acknowledge his
   judgments. The Prophet, then, after having testified that the evil would
   come from the north, now adds, that this evil would by no means be by
   chance, but through that war which the Chaldeans would bring on them; that
   God would be the chief commander, who would gather soldiers from all parts,
   and prepare an army to destroy the Jews.

   The Prophet uses the word, to cry: Behold, he says, I will cry to all the
   kindreds, or families, etc. [16] God employs various modes of speaking, when
   he intends to teach us that all nations are in his hand, and subject to his
   will, so that he can excite wars whenever it pleases him. He says, “Behold,
   I will hiss (or whistle) for the Egyptians;” and he compares them sometimes
   to bees. (Isaiah 5:26; Isaiah 7:18.) Again, in another place he says,
   “Behold, I will blow with the trumpet, and assemble shall the Assyrians.”
   All these modes of speaking are intended to shew, that though men make a
   great stir, and disturb the whole world, yet God directs all things by his
   sovereign power, and that nothing takes place except under his guidance and
   authority. We then see that the Prophet does not speak as an historian; nor
   does he simply predict what was to be, but also adds a doctrine or a great
   truth. It would have been a naked prediction only, had he said, “An evil
   shall break forth from the north: “but he now, as I have already said,
   performs the office of a teacher, that his prediction might be useful, and
   says that God would be the chief commander in that war: Behold, then, I will
   cry to all the families [17] of the kingdoms of the north.

   There was then indeed but one monarchy; but as the self — confidence of the
   Jews was so great, and hence their sottishness, so that they dreaded no
   evil, God, in order to arouse them, says that he would assemble all the
   families of the kingdoms: and doubtless those belonged to many kingdoms whom
   God brought together against the Jews. A regard also was had to that vain
   confidence which the Jews entertained, in thinking that the Egyptians would
   be ever ready to supply them with help. As, then, they were wont to set up
   the Egyptians as their shield, or even as a mountain, God here exposes their
   folly, — that trusting in the Egyptians, they thought themselves
   sufficiently fortified against the power and arms of the whole Chaldean
   monarchy. For these reasons, then, he mentions the families, and then the
   kingdoms, of the north.

   It follows, And they shall come, and set each (man, literally) his throne
   [18] at the entrance of the gates The Prophet here means that the power of
   the Chaldeans would be such, that they would boldly pitch their tents before
   the gates, and not only so, but would also close up the smaller gates, for
   he mentions the doors (ostia) of the gates [19] And by speaking of each of
   them, he meant the more sharply to touch the Jews: for they, relying on the
   help of Egypt, thought themselves capable of resisting, while yet the
   Chaldeans, who had conquered the Assyrians, would be irresistible. Hence he
   says, that not only the army itself would encamp before the gates, but that
   each individual would fix himself there, and set up his tent as in a place
   of safety. In short, God intimates that the Chaldeans and Assyrians would be
   victorious, that they would entirely rule and rest themselves as at their
   own homes, in the fields and before the gates of the city Jerusalem. These
   things are afterwards more distinctly expressed, and many circumstances are
   added: but God intended at first to announce this declaration, that the Jews
   might know that it would be all over with them.

   He then says, On its walls around, and on all the cities of Judah The
   Prophet here declares, that the whole country would be laid waste, as though
   he had said, “The Jews in vain trust to their own resources, and help from
   others, for God will fight against them; and as the Chaldeans and the
   Assyrians shall be armed by him, they shall be victorious, whatever force
   the Jews may oppose to them.” It follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [16] Perhaps the more literal rendering would be, “I will call to,” or for.
   The version of Septuagint is, “sunkalō-I will summon;” of Vatablus,
   “invitabo — I will invite;” of Piscator, “vocabo — I will call;” and of
   Blayney, “I will call for.” — Ed

   [17] They are called “families,“ say some, because kings are called fathers;
   but probable it is a mode of speaking retained from primitive times, as we
   find that those called “families” in Genesis 12:3, are called “nations” in
   Genesis 22:18. — Ed.

   [18] The original word, כסא, not only means a throne, but a seat; see 1
   Samuel 1:9; 1 Samuel 4:18; and 2 Kings 4:10, where it is rendered in our
   version “a stool.” Grotius renders it here “praetorium castrense — a camp’s
   tent.” The “throne” is derived from the Septuagint. — Ed

   [19] Literally it is “The opening of the gates.” The preposition at is not
   in the original; and the word in some other places is found without it. See
   Genesis 19:11; Genesis 43:17. The preposition epi is given by the
   Septuagint, “epi ta prothura-at or in the vestibules,“ etc. We have the
   fulfillment of this expressly recorded in Jeremiah 39:3. The idea suggested
   by Adam Clarke, that they would sit as judges in the gates, as these were
   the courts of justice, is evidently not intended here; for they would also
   fix their tents or their seats by or on the walls, and in all the cities of
   Judah. The latter portion of the verse may be thus rendered, — And they
   shall come, and set, each his seat,
   At the entrance of the gates of Jerusalem,
   And on all its walls around,
   And on all the cities of Judah. The description betokens an entire
   possession of the whole land. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 1:16

   16. And I will utter my judgments against them touching all their
   wickedness, who have forsaken me, and have burnt incense unto other gods,
   and worshipped the works of their own hands.

   16. Et loquar (vel, proferam) judicia mea cum ipsis super omni malitia
   eorum; quia (nam אשר hic ponitur vice כי valet causalem particulam, quia)
   dereliquerunt me, et suffitum fecerunt diis alienis et prostrati fuerunt
   (vel, se prostraverunt) coram operibus manuum suarum.


   God now assigns the reason why he had resolved to deal so severely with the
   Jews. It was necessary to teach them two things, — first, that the Chaldeans
   would not of themselves come upon them, but through God, who would gather
   and arm them; and secondly, that God Would not act in a cruel manner, nor
   forget his covenant, in becoming a rigid avenger, but that he would thus be
   angry, because there was extreme iniquity in the Jews, so that it was
   needful to distress and wholly to break them down, as moderate corrections
   had availed nothing. God, then, after having testified that he would be the
   leader in that war, now explains the reasons why he would chastise the Jews,
   and shews that his conduct towards them could not be ascribed to cruelty,
   inasmuch as that they had provoked him by their impious superstitions.

   Hence he says, I will speak my judgments with them This is referred by many
   interpreters to the Chaldeans and Assyrians, as though God would prescribe
   to them what was to be decreed, as chief judges are wont to do to those who
   are under them: but this exposition is strained, and confuted by what
   follows, on account of their wickedness What, then, is to speak judgments?
   It is done, when God summons the wicked before his tribunal, and executes
   the office of a judge. And this mode of speaking is common in Scripture,
   according to what we read at the end of this book, — The king of Babylon
   spoke judgments with the King Zedekiah, (Jeremiah 52:9) that is, he dealt
   judicially with him, as we commonly say. [20] So now God declares that he
   would be the judge of the people, as though he had said, that hitherto he
   had been silent, not that the sins of the people were not known, but because
   he had borne with them, in order to try whether there was any hope of
   repentance. But he says now that he would become their judge, as he had
   found by long experience that they were past remedy.

   There is, then, to be understood a contrast between the forbearance of God,
   which he had long exercised while he dealt with the people, not as he might
   have justly done, but deferred his vengeance, and the time of vengeance
   which was now at hand; I will then speak my judgments with the Jews; that
   is, “I will now ascend my tribunal: I have hitherto abstained from
   exercising my right, and waited for them to return to me; but as there is no
   return, and I see that they are men wholly irreclaimable, and their
   disposition is so depraved that they continually add evils to evils, I will
   now begin to undertake mine office, the office of a judge.” But we must bear
   in mind, as I have already said, the design of God in this declaration; for
   it was his object to clear himself from every charge, and from all
   calumnies, inasmuch as even the worst of men usually clamor against his
   judgments when he chastises them. Hence he presented before them his own
   judgments, as though he had said, “They shall not be able to blame me for
   dealing with them in a severe and cruel manner; for however severe I may be,
   I shall yet be an equitable judge.” Hence he adds, on account of all their
   wickedness

   He afterwards shews what kind of wickedness it was, They have forsaken me,
   and burnt incense to strange gods The Jews had, indeed, in various ways,
   provoked his vengeance; but he mentions here one kind of wickedness, because
   it was the very fountain of evils, — they had departed from the law and the
   pure worship of God; and yet he mentions generally all wickedness The word
   all is not here without meaning, “on account of all their wickedness:” for
   he intimates that they were not only in one way wicked, but that they had
   heaped together various sins. And then he adds, for they have forsaken me
   Here God introduces their defection; for it may be, as we daily see, that
   one offends in this thing, and another in that, and each one for different
   causes may expose himself to God’s judgment; but God shews here that the
   Jews were become so depraved, that there was nothing sound or pure in them:
   hence he charges them with all wickedness; and then he mentions their
   defection, they have forsaken me; as though he had said, “They have wholly
   denied me; I say not that one is a thief, another an adulterer, and another
   a drunkard; but they are all become apostates, they are all perjurers and
   violators of the covenant: thus I am wholly forsaken by them, and they are
   in every respect alienated from me.” We hence see how greatly the Prophet
   enhances the guilt of his own nation.

   It is afterwards added, for the sake of illustration, that they burnt
   incense to strange gods They had fallen away from God, and joined themselves
   to idolatry. He also adds this, — that they bowed down before the works of
   their own hands The Prophet divests the Jews of every excuse, and more fully
   discovers their shame and baseness, — “they prostrated themselves before the
   works of their own hands.” Whenever Scripture uses these expressions, it
   intimates that there is extreme madness in those men, who worship in the
   place of God not only the sun and moon, and other created things, but also
   the idols which they form for themselves. For how is it that they worship
   their own idols, except that they have formed for them a nose, and hands,
   and ears? A log of wood no one worships; a piece of brass or of silver all
   disregard; no one thinks a stone to be God: but when a thing is sculptured
   and artificially formed by the hand of man, miserable and blind idolaters
   immediately prostrate themselves; — how is this? Because they have formed
   for their statues and pictures noses, eyes, and ears! hence they themselves
   have made gods. We now see the meaning of the Prophet, when he says, that
   the Jews bowed down before the works of their own hands But I pass over such
   things as these lightly, as ye must be well informed on the subject
   generally. It now follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [20] The idea conveyed by the Septuagint is somewhat different, and I
   believe that it is what the original words mean, “lalēsō pros autous meta
   kriseōs — I will speak to them with judgment.” The original literally is,
   “and I will speak my judgments to them;” that is, I will not speak words but
   judgments: or, I will not address them with words, but with actual
   judgments. Then in the following words the reason is assigned. The verse may
   be thus rendered, — 16. And I will speak by my judgments to them, On account
   of all their wickedness, Because they have forsaken me, And have burnt
   incense to strange gods, And have bowed down to the work of their own hands.
   It is better to retain the outward act as expressed by the last verb, “bowed
   down.” or, more literally, “bowed down themselves,“ as the verb is in the
   reflective mood, than to adopt the abstract term “worshipped.” So the verb
   is rendered in the second commandment, Exodus 20:5; Deuteronomy 5:9. The
   first, line is rendered by Grotius, “Proedicam illis decreta mea — I will
   declare to them my decrees, “that is, by Jeremiah and others, — by Jun. and
   Trem., “I will speak my judgments against them,” that is, by the prophets,
   — by Henry. “I will pass sentence upon them,” — by Blayney, “I will
   pronounce my judgments against them;” and Scott gives the same view. But
   Gataker says, “It seems rather to import an efficacious and actual decree
   that God would, in his own appointed time, pass upon them, and put in
   execution by the Chaldeans.” Hence he renders the phrase like Henry, “I will
   pass sentence,“ or, “give judgment, upon them.” — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 1:17

   17. Thou therefore gird up thy loins, and arise, and speak unto them all
   that I command thee: be not dismayed at their faces, lest I confound thee
   before them.

   17. Et tu accinge lumbos tuos et surge, et loquere ad ipsos quaecunque (vel,
   omnia quae) ego mandavero tibi; ne timeas a facie ipsorum, ne to conteram
   (vel, timere faciam) a facie ipsorum (est enim verbum sumptum ex eadem
   radice.)


   God first bids his Prophet to be the herald of the dreadful judgment, which
   we have already noticed: for it was not his purpose to speak only as it were
   in a corner, or secretly, to Jeremiah, but he committed to him what he
   intended should be proclaimed audibly to the whole people. It hence follows,
   And thou, etc. We therefore see that the Prophet had been taught by the
   Lord, that he might confidently and boldly declare what we shall hereafter
   see. These things should then be connected, — that God would ascend his
   tribunal to execute the vengeance he had deferred, — and also that Jeremiah
   would be the herald of that vengeance he was prepared to inflict. Thou then,
   — an illative is to be added here, for the copulative is to be thus taken in
   this place, — Thou then; that is, as thou hast heard that I shall be now the
   avenger of the people’s sins, and that the time of vengeance is at hand; and
   also as thou knowest that this has been told thee, that thou mightest warn
   them to render them more inexcusable, — Thou then, [21] gird thy loins We
   see why God addressed his servant Jeremiah privately; it was, that he might
   publicly exercise his office as a teacher.

   And hence we learn, that all who are called to rule the Church of God cannot
   be exempt from blame, unless they honestly and boldly proclaim what has been
   committed to them. Hence Paul says that he was free from the blood of all
   men, because he had from house to house and publicly declared whatever he
   had received from the Lord, (Acts 20:26, 27;) and he says in another place,

   “Woe is to me if I preach not the Gospel,
   for it has been committed to me.” (1 Corinthians 9:16)

   God bids the Prophet to gird his loins This is to be understood of the kind
   of dress which the Orientals used and continue to use, for they wear long
   garments; and when they undertake any work, or when they proceed on a
   journey, they gird themselves. Hence he says, gird thy loins, that is,
   undertake this expetition which I devolve on thee. At the same time he
   requires activity, so that the work might be expeditiously undertaken.
   Arise, he says, and speak to them whatsoever I shall command thee In short,
   God intimates in these words, that he was unwilling to proceed to extremes,
   until he had still tried whether there was any hope of repentance as to the
   people. He indeed knew that they were wholly irreclaimable; but he intended
   to discover more fully their perverseness in bidding Jeremiah, in the last
   place, to pronounce the extreme sentence of condemnation.

   He now again repeats what he had before said, Fear not their face And this
   exhortation was very needful, as Jeremiah undertook an office in no small
   degree disliked; for it was the same as though he was an herald, to proclaim
   war in the name of God. As, then, Jeremiah had distinctly to declare that it
   was all over with the people, because their perverseness had been so great
   that God would no longer be entreated, it was a very hard message, not
   likely to be attended to, especially when we consider what great pride the
   Jews had. They gloried in their holy descent, and also thought, as we shall
   hereafter see, that the Temple was an impregnable fortress even against God
   himself. Since, then, their temper was so refractory, it was needful that
   the Prophet should be more than once confirmed by God, so that he might
   boldly undertake his office. The exhortation is, therefore, repeated, Fear
   not before them.

   He afterwards adds, lest I make thee to fear But the word חת, chet, means
   sometimes to fear, and sometimes to break in pieces. Jerome perverts the
   meaning of the Prophet, by rendering the phrase, “I shall never make thee to
   fear.” It is indeed a godly truth, that God would give courage to his
   Prophet so as to render him invincible against his enemies; and doubtless he
   would exhort us in vain, were he not to supply us with fortitude by his
   Spirit. This is, indeed, true; but the word פן, pen, will not allow us thus
   to explain the passage. What then does God mean? We must either render the
   verb to break or to fear. The verb אחתך achetak, is transitive; and either
   meaning would be suitable. For God, after having bidden the Prophet to be of
   a courageous and invincible mind, now adds,

   “Take heed to thyself; for if thou be timid, I will cause thee really to
   fear, or, I will break thee down before them.”

   He then intimates, in these words, that the Prophet ought to be sufficiently
   fortified, as he knew that he was sent by God, and thus acted as it were
   under the authority of the highest power, and that he should not fear any
   mortal man. [22] There is also to be understood here a threatening, “See, if
   thou conductest thyself courageously I shall be present with thee, and
   however formidable at the first view thy opponents may be, they shall not
   yet prevail; but if thou be timid and faint — hearted, [23] I will render
   thee an object of contempt: thou shalt not only be timid in heart; but I
   will make thee to be despised by all, so that thou shalt be contemptuously
   treated; for in that case thou wilt not be worthy that I should fight for
   thee and supply thee with any courage and power to put thine enemies to
   flight.”

   We hence see what this means, Fear not, lest I should make thee to fear;
   that is, “Be of a good courage and of a ready mind, lest thou be justly
   exposed to shame; and fear them not, lest thou shouldest really fear them,
   and lest they should even tear thee to pieces and tread thee under their
   feet: for in case thou fearest them, thou wilt be unworthy of being
   supported by the strength of my Spirit.”

   This passage contains a useful doctrine, from which we learn that strength
   shall never be wanting to God’s servants, while they derive courage from the
   conviction that God himself is the author of their calling and become thus
   magnanimous; for God will then supply them with strength and courage
   invincible, so as to render them formidable to the whole world: but if they
   be unhinged and timid, and turn here and there, and be influenced by the
   fear of men, God will render them base and contemptible, and make them to
   tremble at the least breath of air, and they shall be wholly broken down;
   — and why? because they are unworthy that God should help them, that he
   should stretch forth his hand and fortify them by his power, and supply
   them, as it has been already said, with that fortitude, by which they might
   terrify both the Devil and the whole world.
     _________________________________________________________________

   [21] This is correctly given, only the ו need not be rendered “then” or
   “therefore.” It is an instance of the nominative absolute, or of the
   anticipative case, - And thou, gird thy loins,
   And arise, and speak to them
   All that I shall command thee. “And as for thee,” by Blayney, is very tame
   and prosaic. The version of the Geneva Bible is, “Thou, therefore, trusse up
   thy loyns.” — Ed.

   [22] It is true that the primary meaning of the verb here used is, to be
   broken, or to be broken down, to be broken in pieces. It is applied to the
   breaking of a bow, and to the breaking down of images, 1 Samuel 2:4;
   Jeremiah 50:2; and to the breaking down of nations, (Isaiah 8:3; Isaiah
   30:31.) Such is its meaning when applied to what is material and visible;
   but when applied to the mind or spirit, it means to be dispirited, daunted,
   terrified, or dismayed, 2 Kings 19:26; Jeremiah 8:9. It is here first in a
   passive sense, and then in Hiphil, as in Job 31:34; and in Jeremiah 49:37,
   — Be not dismayed at them,
   Lest I cause thee to be dismayed before them. or, Be not terrified by them,
   Lest I terrify thee before them. Blayney gives to the verb first its
   secondary meaning, and then its primary, “Be not thou afraid of them, lest I
   should suffer thee to be crushed before them.” How crushed before them? By
   whom? And to say that there is no threat included in the last line is
   singular, as words could hardly be framed to express it more distinctly. The
   Targum expresses the meaning of the first line, “Restrain not thyself from
   rebuking them.” Grotius renders the last line, “Ne ego to perterrefaciam
   coram illis — lest I terrify thee before them;” which seems to be its best
   rendering. — Ed.

   [23] Cotton, the old translator, has rendered it very strikingly, “If thou
   quailest,” expressing the two words in one. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   PRAYER

   Grant, Almighty God, that as thou hast been once pleased to fortify thy
   servant Jeremiah with the invincible power of thy Spirit, — O grant that his
   doctrine may at this day make us humble, and that we may learn willingly to
   submit to thee, and so to receive and even cordially to accept what thou
   offerest to us by thy servant — to sustain us by thine hand, and that we,
   relying on thy power and protection, may fight against the world and against
   Satan, while each of us, in his vocation, so recumbs on thy power, as not to
   hesitate, whenever necessary, to expose our very life to dangers: and may we
   manfully fight and persevere in our warfare to the end, until having
   finished our course we shall at length come to that blessed rest which is
   reserved for us in heaven, through Christ our Lord. — Amen.

     _________________________________________________________________

   Lecture Fourth
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 1:18

   18. For, behold, I have made thee this day a defenced city, and an iron
   pillar, and brasen walls against the whole land, against the kings of Judah,
   against the princes thereof, against the priests thereof, and against the
   people of the land.

   18. Et ego, [24] ecce posui to hodie in urbem munitionis (vel, munitam) in
   columnam (vel, fulturam) ferream, et in murum aeneum, super totam terram,
   contra Reges Jehudah, contra principes ejus, contra sacerdotes ejus, contra
   populum terrae ipsius.


   God supplies here his servant with confidence; for courage was necessary in
   that state of trembling which we have observed. Jeremiah thought himself
   unfit to undertake a work so onerous; he had also to do and to contend with
   refractory men, and not a few in number; for the whole people had already,
   through their ungodly and wicked obstinacy, hardened themselves in the
   contempt of God. As, then, there was no more any care for religion, and no
   regard manifested by the people for heavenly truth, Jeremiah could not,
   diffident as he was, undertake so heavy a burden, without being supported by
   the hand of God. For this reason, then, God now declares that he would make
   him like a fortified city and an iron pillar [25] Indeed, the word prop
   would be more proper; for עמור omud, comes from the root עמד, omed; and the
   Prophet understands by it, not a pillar that is raised and stands by itself,
   but that which sustains a building or a wall. There is no ambiguity in the
   meaning; for God means that his servant would be invincible, and that
   whatever his enemies might devise against him, they would not yet prevail,
   as we find it said in the next verse.

   Now, though this was said formerly to Jeremiah, yet godly teachers may
   justly apply it to themselves, who are honestly conscious of their Divine
   call, and are fully persuaded that they do nothing presumptuously, but obey
   the bidding of God. All, then, who are thus confirmed in their legitimate
   call from God, can apply to themselves this promise — that they shall be
   made invincible against all the ungodly.

   But the particulars of this passage deserve to be noticed. It might have
   seemed enough that God called his servant a fortified city; but he compares
   him also to an iron pillar or column, and to a brazen wall This repetition
   only confirms what we have explained, — that Jeremiah would be victorious,
   and that though Satan might rouse many to assail him, yet the issue would be
   prosperous and joyful, as he would fight under the protection of God.

   It is at the same time added, Over the whole land God doubtless speaks not
   of the whole world, but of the land of Judah; for Jeremiah was chosen for
   this purpose, — that he might bestow his labor on the chosen people. It is
   then said that he would be a conqueror of the whole of Judea. It then
   follows, against the kings of Judah We know, indeed, that there was only one
   king in Judea; but God encourages his Prophet to be firm and persevering, as
   though he had said, that the course of his warfare would be long; and he
   said this, that he might not faint through weariness. The meaning then is,
   that the Prophet would not have to contend with one king only, but that as
   soon as one died, another would rise and oppose him; so that he was to know
   that there would be no hope of rest until that time had passed which God
   himself had appointed. We indeed know that those who are sincerely disposed
   to obey, do yet look for some definite period, when, like soldiers who have
   served their time, they may obtain a discharge; but God declares here to his
   Prophet, that when he had strenuously contended to the death of one king,
   his condition would be nothing better; for others would succeed, with whom
   he would have to fight, as the same wickedness and obstinacy would be still
   continued. To kings, he adds princes and priests; and, lastly, the whole
   people

   When a king forgets his office and rules tyrannically, it often happens that
   there are moderators who check his passions, when they cannot wholly
   restrain them: we indeed see, that the most cruel tyrants are sometimes
   softened by good counselors. But God here reminds his Prophet that the state
   of things in Judea would be so desperate, that ungodly and wicked kings
   would have counselors endued with the same disposition. When priests are
   added, it might seem still more monstrous; but the Scripture everywhere
   testifies, that the Levitical priests had almost all degenerated and become
   apostates, so that hardly one in a hundred shewed the least sign of
   religion. Since, then, that order had become thus corrupt, it is no wonder
   that Jeremiah had to declare war against the priests; and we shall hereafter
   see that this was done. Now the common people might have seemed to be
   excusable, as there was greater simplicity among them than among the higher
   orders; (for they who are elevated above others transgress through pride or
   cruelty, and often allow themselves too much liberty, relying on their own
   eminence; but the common people, as I have said, seemed apparently to have
   more modesty;) but God here declares that impiety had so greatly prevailed
   in Judea, that all, from the least to the greatest, were become perversely
   wicked. It was, therefore, necessary, as I have before stated, that the
   Prophet should be fully armed; for what could he have thought, had he not in
   time been warned, on finding afterwards such insolence, yea, such fury in
   high and low, as to constrain him to contend with God’s chosen people no
   otherwise than with devils? It afterwards follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [24] We find here nearly the same form or mode of speech as at the beginning
   of the previous verse, “And I, behold I have made thee,” etc.: and Blayney
   renders it so here, though not in the preceding instance. — Ed.

   [25] There is the preposition ל before “city,” “pillar,” and “wall.” It is
   an idiom. The full meaning is, “I have made thee to be for a fortified
   city.” The same idiom exists in Welsh, the preposition yn is used, which
   implies that the verb to be is understood. But it is not necessary to retain
   the preposition in a language in which a similar idiom does not exist. The
   Septuagint render the preposition by “hōs — as,” and Jun and Trem , by
   “velut — as,” or like. And such a word would be suitable in our language,
   — And I, behold I have made thee this day
   Like a city that is fortified,
   And like a pillar of iron,
   And like a wall of brass,
   With regard to the whole land,
   To the kings of Judah, to its princes,
   To its priests, and to the people of the land. “To” here means in opposition
   to-he was to stand opposed to the kings, etc., as a fortified city, etc.
   “Wall” is plural in the received text; but many MSS., the Septuagint, the
   Syriac, the Targum, and the Vulgate, have it in the singular number, which
   seems most suitable. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 1:19

   19. And they shall fight against thee; but they shall not prevail against
   thee; for I am with thee, saith the LORD, to deliver thee.

   19. Pugnabunt autem tecum (vel, praeliabuntur contra to,) sed non
   praevalebunt tibi, quia tecum ego (quia sum tecum,) dicit Jehova, ad to
   liberandum.


   God in this verse briefly reminds his servant, that though he would be
   supplied with invincible power, yet he would have great trials, so that his
   office would not be, according to a common saying, a mere play. He then
   shews for what purpose he would be made like a fortified city, an iron
   pillar, and a brazen wall, even that he might manfully fight, and not for
   the purpose of keeping away all dangers, and all fightings, and everything
   hard and grievous to the flesh. We, in short, see that the promise was given
   for this end, — that Jeremiah, relying on God’s aid, might not hesitate to
   set himself against all the Jews, and that whatever might be their fury, he
   might still be courageous.

   Now a profitable doctrine may be hence gathered, even this — that whenever
   God promises his servants victory over their enemies, they ought not to make
   this the occasion of fostering their torpidity or idleness, but, on the
   contrary, of gathering courage, so that they may proceed boldly and
   unweariedly in the course of their vocation. In short, God promises to be
   their deliverer, but at the same time exhorts them to resist all the
   assaults of their enemies.

   Hence he says, They shall fight with thee, but they shall not prevail, for I
   am with thee to deliver thee [26] From these words we see that Jeremiah was
   fully armed, that he might not fear on seeing dangers surrounding him; for
   God does not here declare that he would be like a wall to him to prevent him
   from being assaulted, but he says that he would deliver him; as though he
   had said, “Prepare thyself to suffer; for except I were thy deliverer, it
   would be all over with thee, and thou mightest perish a hundred times; but
   there is no reason for thee to fear any dangers amidst thousand deaths,
   since I am present with thee as thy deliverer.” Now follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [26] It ought to be, “For with thee will I be, to deliver thee;” for the
   verb to be, being understood, it must be put in the same tense with the
   other verbs in the passage: and such is the rendering of Blayney. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________
     _________________________________________________________________

   CHAPTER 2
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:1-2

   1. Moreover, the word of the LORD came to me, saying,

   1. Et fuit sermo Jehovae ad me, dicendo,

   2. Go and cry in the ears of Jerusalem, saying, Thus saith the LORD; I
   remember thee, the kindness of thy youth, the love of thine espousals, when
   thou wentest after me in the wilderness, in a land that was not sown.

   2. Vade et clama ad aures Jerusalem, dicendo, Sic dicit Jehova, Recordatus
   sum tui propter misericordiam adolescentiae tuae et dilectionem
   desponsationis tuae, quum me sequuta es (quum venisti post me, profecta es
   post me) in deserto, in terra non seminata.


   God now mentions to his servant the commands which he was to convey to the
   king and priests, and to the whole people; for by the ears of Jerusalem he
   means all its inhabitants. God here intimates that the Jews were unworthy of
   being cared for by him any more; but that he is induced by another reason
   not to reject them wholly, until he had found out by experience their
   irreclaimable wickedness. So then he makes this preface, I remember thee for
   the kindness of thy youth, and the love of thy espousals In these words he
   shews that he regarded not what the Jews deserved, nor acknowledged any
   worthiness in them, as the reason why he was solicitous for their salvation,
   and endeavored to bring them to the right way by the labors of his Prophet,
   but that this is to be ascribed to his former benefits.

   Some render the words, “I remember the piety or kindness of thy youth;” and
   לך lak, may be thus taken, as it is in other places. Others omit this word;
   while others consider a copulative to be understood, “I remember thee, and
   the kindness of thy youth.” But none, as I think, have attained to the
   meaning of the Prophet: there is yet no obscurity in the words, if a
   preposition be considered as being understood, so as to read thus, — that
   God remembered his people for the kindness which he had shewn to them, and
   for the love which he had manifested towards them from the beginning. Then
   the real meaning of the Prophet I think to be this, — that God here takes
   away every ground for pride and boasting from the Jews; as though he had
   said, that they were worthy, they had no reason to think; but that he was
   still their Father, and was therefore unwilling that the benefits he had
   formerly conferred upon them should be wholly lost. There is, in short,
   given here a reason why God sent Jeremiah after the other prophets; as
   though he had said, “It is a testimony to you of the paternal care which I
   shew to you, when I send my Prophet to give you a hope of pardon, if ye
   return to the right way and be reconciled to me. But how is it that I still
   shew a concern for you, as ye have forgotten me, and wholly disregarded my
   law? It is so, because I wish to continue my favors to you.” The kindness of
   thy youth he takes in a passive sense; for he does not mean that the Jews
   were kind or merciful, but that they had experienced the kindness of God.

   But the metaphor here used must be noticed. God compares himself here to a
   young bridegroom, who marries a youthful bride, in the flower of her age,
   and in the prime of her beauty: and it is a manner of speaking commonly
   adopted by the prophets. I will not now detain you with a long explanation,
   as the subject will be treated more at large in another place.

   As God, then, had espoused the people of Israel, when he redeemed and
   brought them out of Egypt, he says now, that he remembers the people on
   account of that kindness and love. He sets kindness or beneficence before
   love. The word חסר, chesad, properly means a gratuitous favor or kindness,
   which is shewn to the miserable, or beneficence. By the word love, God means
   in many other places the gratuitous election with which he had favored the
   whole people. The expression is indeed made clearer when kindness or
   gratuitous favor is placed first, and then love is added: though nothing new
   is added, yet the Prophet more fully shews that the people had been loved by
   God in no other way than through his kindness. [27]

   Now this is a remarkable passage; for God shews that his covenant, though
   perfidiously violated by the Jews, was yet firm and immutable: for though
   not all who derive their descent according to the flesh from Abraham, are
   true and legitimate Israelites, yet God ever remains true, and his calling,
   as Paul says, is without repentance. (Romans 11:29.) We may therefore learn
   this from the Prophet’s words, — that God was not content with one Prophet,
   but continued his favor, inasmuch as he would not render void his covenant.
   The Jews indeed had impiously departed from the covenant, and a vast number
   had deservedly perished, having been wholly repudiated; yet God designed
   really to shew that his grace depends not on the inconstancy of men, as Paul
   says in another place, for it would then presently fail, (Romans 3:4) and
   that were all men false and perfidious, God would yet remain true and fixed
   in his purpose. This we learn from the Prophet’s words, when it is said,
   that God remembered the people on account of the kindness of their youth.

   As to youth and espousals, we may hence learn that they had been anticipated
   by God’s kindness; for they became in no other way connected with God than
   by having been chosen by him: their espousal would not have been enjoyed by
   the people, had not God anticipated them. What was Abraham? and what were
   all his posterity? God then now shews, that the beginning of all blessings,
   and as it were the fountain, was this, — that it pleased him to choose the
   people for himself.

   And the same thing is confirmed in other words: When, he says, thou didst
   follow me in the desert, in a land not sown The people, we know, did not
   obey God as they ought to have done, even when he had redeemed them. Hence
   God does not so much in this place commend the people for any merits of
   their own, but especially confirms what I have already stated, — that he
   could not cast aside every care for a people whom he had once adopted, and
   whom he had led through the desert, that they might be a people separated
   from the rest of the world. He however concedes to them, according to his
   great goodness, the praise of obedience, because they followed God through
   rough ways, as though a tender young woman refused not to undergo hard and
   irksome toils from love to her bridegroom. He afterwards adds —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [27] Though most of modern commentators, Grotius, Gataker, Blayney, Scott,
   Adam Clarke, etc., give the same view of this verse with Calvin, yet the
   probability is, and something more than the probability, that the sense in
   which it was taken by the ancients is the correct one; which is the sense
   given in our version, and adopted by Henry. A literal rendering of the verse
   is sufficient to shew its meaning, — 2. Go and cry in the ears of Jerusalem,
   saying, Thus saith Jehovah, — I remember, with regard to thee, The kindness
   of thy youth, The love of thy espousals, Thy coming after me in the desert,
   Through a land not sown. “Thy coming, or, walking after me,“ stands in the
   same relation to “remember” as the two preceding words: this is plainly the
   construction; and this construction determines the meaning of the foregoing
   lines. Our version is quite wrong in rendering לך, “thee;” it ought ever to
   be rendered as above, when the verb, as here, is followed by an accusative
   case. See Leviticus 26:45; Psalm 79:8; Psalm 106:45 What has led
   commentators, no doubt, to divert this passage from its right meaning was
   their impression that more is here ascribed to Israel than their history
   warrants. But this is not the only instance in which their former conduct is
   contrasted with their latter conduct. This is done in Malachi 2:5, as to the
   priests. The object here is to set forth the difference between the people
   when brought out of Egypt, and following God’s guidance in the wilderness,
   and their conduct at the time of Jeremiah. They were indeed very far from
   being what they ought to have been in the first instance, but their
   deportment in Jeremiah’s age was incomparably worse. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:3

   3. Israel was holiness unto the LORD, and the firstfruits of his increase:
   all that devour him shall offend; evil shall come upon them, saith the LORD.

   3. Sanctitas Israel Jehovae, primitiae frugum ejus; quicunque comederint
   contrahent noxam (alii vertunt, peccabunt; sed ego potius ad poenam refero,)
   malun veniet super eos (exegetice additur hoc membrum) dicit Jehova.


   God here more clearly reprobates the ingratitude of the people: and first he
   enumerates his favors by which he had bound the people for ever to himself;
   and secondly, he shews how malignantly the people responded to the many
   blessings which they had received.

   In saying, then, that Israel was holy, he intends it not by way of honor. It
   was indeed in itself an illustrious testimony to their praise, that God had
   consecrated that people to himself, that he designed them to be the first
   — fruits of his increase: but we must remember that there is here an implied
   contrast between this great and incomparable favor of God, and the
   wickedness of the people, who afterwards fell away from that God who had
   been so liberal and gracious to them. According to this view, then, does
   Jeremiah say, that Israel was holiness to God; that is, that they were
   separated from all other nations, so that the glory of God shone only among
   them.

   He then adds, that they were the first-fruits of his produce For though
   whatever produce the earth may bring forth ought to be consecrated to God,
   by whose power it grows, yet we know that the first — fruits were gathered
   and set on the altar as a sacred food. As, then, God had commanded, under
   the law, the first-fruits to be offered to him, and then given to the
   priests, he says here, in accordance with that rite, that Israel were the
   first — fruits of his produce. For the nations, who then everywhere dwelt,
   were not removed from under God’s government (as he is the creator of all,
   and shews himself to all as the Father and supporter); but he passed by
   other nations, and chose the race of Abraham, and for this end, — that he
   might protect them by his power and aid. Since, then, God had so bound the
   nation to himself, how great and how strong was the obligation under which
   that people was to him? Hence the more base and the more detestable was
   their perfidy, when the people despised the singular favors which God had
   conferred on them. We now see why the Prophet says that Israel was holy to
   God, and the first — fruits of his increase.

   He also intimates that the time would come, when God would gather to himself
   other nations; for in the first-fruits the people dedicated and offered to
   God the whole produce of the year is included. So then Israel was like the
   first-fruits, because God afterwards took to himself other nations, which
   for many ages were deemed profane. But yet his special object was to shew
   that the guilt of the people was extreme, as they did not acknowledge the
   great favors which God had bestowed on them.

   He then adds, Whosoever will devour him shall be punished Of this meaning I
   approve, because the explanation immediately follows, evil shall come on
   them God then means not that they should be only guilty of a crime, who
   should devour the first-fruits, but refers rather to punishment; as though
   he had said, “The profane shall not be unpunished who shall devour the
   first-fruits which has been dedicated to me.” For if any had stolen the
   first- fruits, God would have executed a vengeance such as sacrilege
   deserved. If, however, any one prefers the other explanation, — that it
   would be a crime to injure Israel, or to do him any harm, because he was
   under God’s protection, I shall not oppose him: but the wording of the
   sentence leads me to the other view, that is, that those who would injure
   Israel would not only be guilty, but would not be able to escape God’s
   vengeance, — and why? because evil will come upon them, saith Jehovah [28]
   He afterwards explains more clearly the import of his doctrine —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [28] Blayney considers this verse as referring to Israel in ancient times,
   and as spoken by God: hence he renders the last words, “said Jehovah.” The
   first part seems to declare what Israel was, and the other appears to be the
   language of God respecting them, — Holy was Israel to Jehovah,
   The first-fruits of his produce:
   “All his devourers shall be deemed guilty,
   Evil shall come to them,” said Jehovah. The verb אשם is rendered
   “plēmmelēsousi — shall offend,” by the Septuagint, as in our version, and by
   Grotius; “trespass,” by Gataker; and, “guilty of a trespass,” by Blayney.
   The contradiction of guilt is what is meant, as the punishment is announced
   in the next words. See Psalm 105:14, 15. — Ed
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:4-5

   4. Hear ye the word of the LORD, O house of Jacob, and all the families of
   the house of Israel:

   4. Audite sermonem Jehovae domus Jacob, et omnes cognationes (vel, familiae)
   domus Israel:

   5. Thus saith the LORD, What iniquity have your fathers found in me, that
   they are gone far from me, and have walked after vanity, and are become
   vain?

   5. Sic dicit Jehova, Quid invenerunt patres vestri in me iniquitatis, quia
   alienati sunt a me, et ambulaverunt (vel, profecti sunt) post vanitatem, et
   facti sunt evanidi (vel, evanuerunt)?


   Here God explains why he had referred to what we have noticed, — that he had
   consecrated Israel to himself as a peculiar people, and as the first —
   fruits. God often mentions his favors to us, in order to encourage our hope,
   that we may be fully persuaded that whatever may happen we are ever safe,
   because we are under his protection, since he has chosen us. But in this
   place, and in many other places, God recounts the obligations under which
   the Israelites were to him, that thence their ingratitude might become more
   apparent.

   Hence he says, Hear ye the word of Jehovah By this preface he seeks to gain
   attention; for he intimates that he was going to address them on no common
   subject. Hear ye, then, O house of Jacob; hear all ye families of the house
   of Israel; as though Jeremiah had said, “Here I come forth boldly in the
   name of God, for I fear not that any defense can be brought forward by you
   to disprove the justice of God’s reproof; and I confidently wait for what ye
   may say, for I know you will be silent. I then loudly cry like a trumpet and
   with a clear voice, that I am come to condemn you; if there is anything
   which ye can answer, I give you full liberty to do so; but the truth will
   constrain you to be mute, for your guilt is extremely odious and capable of
   the fullest proof.” Hence it was that he exhorted them to hear attentively.

   Then follows the charge: What, iniquity have your fathers found in me, that
   having forsaken me they should walk after vanity and become vain? Here
   Jeremiah charges the people with two crimes, — that they had departed from
   the true God, whom they had found to be a deliverer, — and that they had
   become vain in their devices; or, in other words, that they were become for
   no reason apostates: for their sin was enhanced, because there had been no
   occasion given them to forsake God, and to alienate themselves from him. As
   then God had kindly treated them, and they themselves had shaken off the
   yoke, and as there was no one whom they could compare with God, they could
   not have said, “We have been deceived,” — how so? “For ye have, he says,
   followed vanity; and vanity alone was the reason why ye have departed from
   me.” [29] I wish I could proceed farther; but I have some business to which
   I was called even before the lecture.
     _________________________________________________________________

   [29] The literal rendering of this verse is as follows, — 5. Thus saith
   Jehovah, What have your fathers found in me? Oppression? For they have gone
   far from me, And have followed after vanity, And have become vain. The word
   שול, oppression, injustice, or tyranny, is so placed in the sentence that it
   cannot be construed with “what.” The word “vanity” means often an idol, and
   it is so considered here by the Targum, by Piscator, Grotius, Gataker, and
   others. It is often found in the plural, “vanities,” as it is here in the
   Septuagint; see Deuteronomy 32:21; 1 Kings 16:26; Psalm 31:6: but it is here
   the poetical singular. They “became vain,” that is, foolish, sottish, having
   no more sense or reason than their idols, as idolaters are represented in
   Psalm 115:8. Their senselessness is set forth in the next verse. An idol is
   especially called “vanity,” because it can do no good and avails nothing:
   deluded imagination alone gives it all its efficacy and power. Samuel gives
   a true account of idols, 1 Samuel 12:21. But as long as the devil deceives
   and deludes the world, idols and images will be in repute, though they are
   in themselves wholly useless and worthless, while yet they prove ruinous to
   the souls of men. — Ed
     _________________________________________________________________

   PRAYER

   Grant, Almighty God, that as thou continuest at this day, both morning and
   evening, to invite us to thyself, and assiduously exhortest us to repent,
   and testifiest that thou art ready to be reconciled to us, provided we flee
   to thy mercy, — O grant, that we may not close our ears and reject this thy
   great kindness, but that remembering thy gratuitous election, the chief of
   all the favors thou hast been pleased to shew us, we may strive so to devote
   ourselves to thee, that thy name may be glorified through our whole life:
   and should it be that we at any time turn aside from thee, may we quickly
   return to the right way, and become submissive to thy holy admonitions, that
   it may thus appear that we have been so chosen by thee and called as to
   desire to continue in the hope of that salvation, to which thou invitest us,
   and which is prepared for us in heaven, through Christ our Lord. — Amen.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Lecture Fifth

   WE heard yesterday God’s complaint, and his expostulation with his people.
   He said in short, that if they came before any judge there were reasons
   sufficient to condemn their ingratitude, and that they were without excuse,
   because they had gone after vanity and were become vain; or, in other words,
   that they had without a cause forsaken him, and were carried away only by
   their own intentions. It now follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:6-7

   6. Neither said they, Where is the LORD that brought us up out of the land
   of Egypt, that led us through the wilderness, through a land of deserts and
   of pits, through a land of drought, and of the shadow of death, through a
   land that no man passed through, and where no man dwelt?

   6. Et non dixerunt, (hoc est, non cogitarunt apud se,) Ubi est Jehova, qui
   eduxit nos e terra Egypti, et proficisci fecit nos per desertum in terra
   solitaria (vel, vasta) et squalida, in terra horribili et umbrae mortis; in
   terra per quam vir non transtit, et in qua non habitavit homo?

   7. And I brought you into a plentiful country, to eat the fruit thereof and
   the goodness thereof; but when ye entered, ye defiled my land, and made mine
   heritage an abomination.

   7. Et introduxi vos in terram fertilem, ad comedendos fructus ejus (vel, ad
   comedendum fructum ejus, in singulari,) et ubertatem ejus (ad verbum est, ad
   bonum ejus;) et ingressi estis et polluistis terram meam, et haereditatem
   meam posuistis in abominationem.


   The Prophet goes on with the same subject; for God adduces here no small
   crime against his people, as they had buried his favom’s in oblivion.
   Indeed, a redemption so wonderful was worthy of being celebrated in all
   ages, not only by one nation, but by all the nations of the earth. As then
   the Jews had thus buried the memory of a favor so remarkable and valuable,
   their base impiety appeared evident. Had they not experienced the power and
   kindness of God, or had they only witnessed them in an ordinary way, their
   guilt might have been extenuated; but as God had from heaven made an unusual
   display of his power, and as his majesty had been manifested before the eyes
   of the people, how great was their sottishness in afterwards forgetting
   their God, who had openly and with such proofs made himself known to them!

   We now then understand what the Prophet means by saying, they have not said:
   for God here sharply reproves the stupidity of the Jews, — that they did not
   consider that they were under perpetual obligations to him for his great
   kindness in delivering them in a manner so wonderful from the land of Egypt.
   By saying that they did not say, Where is Jehovah, he intimates that he was
   present with them and nigh them, but that they were blind, and that hence
   they were without an excuse for their ignorance, as he was not to be sought
   as one at a distance, or by means tedious and difficult. If then this only
   had come to their mind, “Did not God once redeem us?” they could not have
   departed after their vanities. How then was it that their error, or rather
   their madness, was so great that they followed idols? Even because they did
   not choose to make any effort, or to apply their minds to seek or to inquire
   after God.

   Here then the Prophet meets the objection of the hypocrites, who might have
   said, that they had been deceived, and had relapsed through ignorance; for
   they have ever some evasions ready at hand, when they are called to an
   account for their sins. But lest the Jews should make any pretense of this
   kind, the Prophet here shews that they had not been through a mistake
   deceived, but that they had followed after falsehood through a wicked
   disposition, for they had willfully despised God and refused to inquire
   respecting him, though he was sufficiently nigh them.

   This passage deserves to be especially noticed; for there is nothing more
   common than for the ungodly, when they are proved guilty, to have recourse
   to this subterfuge, — that they acted with good intention, when they gave
   themselves up to their own superstitions. The Prophet then takes off this
   mask, and shews that where God is once known, his name and his glory cannot
   be obliterated, except through the depravity of men, as they knowingly and
   willfully depart from him. Hence all apostates are by this one clause
   condemned, that they may no more dare to make evasions, as though they have
   been through more simplicity deceived: for when the matter is examined,
   their malignity and ingratitude are discovered, because they deign not to
   inquire, Where is Jehovah?

   And he afterwards adds what explains this sentence. I have said that other
   nations are not here condemned, but the Jews, who had known by clear
   experience that God was their father. As then God had, by many testimonies,
   made himself known to them, they had no pretext for their ignorance. Hence
   the Prophet says, that they did not consider where God was who brought them
   from the land of Egypt, and made them to pass through the desert He could
   not have stated this indiscriminately of all nations; but, as it has been
   said, the words are addressed particularly to the Jews, who had clearly
   witnessed the power of God; so that they could not have sinned except
   willfully, even by extinguishing, through their own malignity, the light
   presented to them, which shone before their eyes. And here, also, the
   Prophet amplifies their guilt by various circumstances: for he says, not
   simply that they had been brought out of Egypt, but intimates that God had
   been their constant guide for forty years; for this time is suggested by the
   word “desert.” The history was well known; hence a brief allusion was
   sufficient. He, at the same time, by mentioning the desert, greatly extols
   the glory of God.

   But the first thing to be observed is, that the Jews were inexcusable, who
   had not considered that their fathers had been wonderfully and in an unusual
   manner preserved by God’s hand for forty years; for they had no bread to
   eat, nor water to drink. God drew water for them from a rock, and satisfied
   them with heavenly bread; and their garments did not wear out during the
   whole time. We then see that all those circumstances enhanced their guilt.
   Then follows what I have referred to: the Prophet calls the desert a dry or
   a waste land, a dreary land, a horrible land, a land of deadly gloom, as
   though he had said, that the people had been preserved in the midst of
   death, yea in the midst of many deaths: for man was not wont to pass through
   that land, nor did any one dwell in it [30] “Whence then,” he says, “did
   salvation arise to you? from what condition? even from death itself: for
   what else was the desert but a horrible place, where you were surrounded,
   not only by one kind of death, but by a hundred? Since then God brought you
   out of Egypt by his incredible power, and fed you in a supernatural manner
   for forty years, what excuse can there be for so great a madness in now
   alienating yourselves from him?” Now this passage teaches us, that the more
   favors God confers on us, the more heinous the guilt if we forsake him, and
   less excusable will be our wickedness and ingratitude, especially when he
   has manifested his kindness to us for a long time and in various ways.

   He afterwards adds, And I brought you in, etc. Here Jeremiah introduces God
   as the speaker; for God had, as with his hand stretched forth, brought in
   the children of Abraham into the possession of the promised land, which they
   did not get, as it is said in Psalm 44:3, by their own power and by their
   own sword; for though they had to fight with many enemies, yet it was God
   that made them victorious. He could then truly say, that they did not
   otherwise enter the land than under his guidance; inasmuch as he had opened
   a way and passage for them, and subdued and put to flight their enemies,
   that they might possess the heritage promised to them. I brought you in, he
   says, into the land, into Carmel Some consider this to be the name of a
   place; and no doubt there was the mount Carmel, so called on account of its
   great fertility. As then its name was given to it because it was so fertile,
   it is nothing strange that Jeremiah compares the land of Israel to Carmel.
   Some will have the preposition כ, caph, to be understood, “I have brought
   you into a land like Carmel.” But there is no need laboriously to turn in
   all directions the Prophet’s words. It is, as I think, a common noun,
   meaning fruitful, and used here to shew that the Israelites had been brought
   by God’s hand into a fertile land; for its fertility is everywhere
   celebrated, both in the Law and in the Prophets. [31]

   That ye might eat its fruit and its abundance; that is, “I wished you to
   enjoy the large and rich produce of the land.” By these words God intimates
   that the Israelites ought to have been induced by such allurements cordially
   to serve him; for by such liberal treatment he kindly invited them to
   himself. The greater, then, the bounty of God towards the people, the
   greater was the indignity offered by their defection, when they despised the
   various and abounding blessings of God.

   Hence he adds, And ye have polluted my land, [32] and mine heritage have ye
   made an abomination; as though he had said, “This is the reward by which my
   bounty towards you has been compensated. I indeed gave you this land, but on
   this condition, that ye serve me faithfully in it: but ye have polluted
   it.” He calls it his own land, as though he had said, that he had so given
   the land to the Israelites, that he remained still the lord of it as a
   proprietor, though he granted the occupation of it to them. He hence shews
   that they impiously abused his bounty, in polluting that land which was
   sacred to his name. For the same purpose he calls it his heritage, as if he
   said that they possessed the land by an hereditary right, and yet the
   heritage belonged to their Father. They ought, therefore, to have
   considered, that they had entered into the land, because it had been given
   to Abraham and to his children for an heritage, — by whom? By God, who was
   the fountain of this bounty. The more detestable, then, was their
   ingratitude, when they made the heritage of God an abomination It follows
   —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [30] Though the general import of this verse is given, yet the version is
   not very accurate. I offer the following- And they have not said, “Where is
   Jehovah, Who brought us up from the land of Egypt, Who led us in the
   wilderness, Through a land of waste and of the pit, Through a land of
   drought and of the shadow of death, Through a land in which no man traveled,
   And no human being dwelt there?” The word “pit” is used poetically, the
   singular for the plural, and correctly rendered “pits” in our version. It is
   probably an allusion to the practice of digging pits and covering them over,
   in order to catch wild beasts; and the word is used here only to express
   hidden dangers. “The shadow of death” means a barren dreariness. After
   “land,” in the last line but one, אשר is supplied by three MSS., and by the
   Septuagint, though by no means in character with the Greek language; but the
   idiom of the Hebrew requires it, and is no doubt the true reading. I have
   rendered אדם in the last line, after Blayney, “human being.” The five last
   lines are thus given by the Septuagint, — Who conducted you in the
   wilderness,
   In a land unknown and inaccessible (abatō)
   In a land without water and barren (akarpō — fruitless)
   In a land through which no man passed,
   And no son of man inhabited there. The word “barren” is rendered more
   literally by Theodotion, “skias thanatou — of the shadow of death.” — Ed

   [31] That the word means a fruitful field or country is evident from Isaiah
   10:18; Isaiah 16:10; Jeremiah 4:26, etc. there was also a city bearing this
   name, situated in the tribe of Judah, Joshua 15:55, and also a mountain
   belonging to the tribe of Manasseh, Joshua 19:26. — Ed.

   [32] “And ye came” is left out. The same verb in a causative sense is used
   at the beginning of the verse, rendered, “I brought.” It would be more
   striking to retain the same verb, and not to use “but when” in the latter
   instance, as in our version, — And I caused you to come into a fruitful
   land, To eat its fruit and its rich produce; And ye came and polluted my
   land, And made mine heritage an abomination. The whole runs thus much
   better, and has the conciseness of poetry: and the idea intended to be
   conveyed is more apparent — God caused them to come, and they came. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:8

   8. The priests said not, Where is the LORD? and they that handle the law
   knew me not: the pastors also transgressed against me, and the prophets
   prophesied by Baal, and walked after things that do not profit.

   8. Sacerdotes non dixerunt, Ubi Jehova? et qui tenebant (vel, servabant)
   legem (ad verbum est, apprehendentes, vel, tenentes legem) non cognoverunt
   me: et pastores perfide egerunt mecum; et prophetae prophetarunt in Baal
   (hoc est, per Baal,) et post ea qua non prosunt ambulaverunt (vel, profecti
   sunt).


   God assails here especially the teachers and those to whom was committed the
   power of ruling the people. It often happens that the common people fall
   away, while yet some integrity remains in the rulers. But God shews here
   that such was the falling away among the whole community, that priests as
   well as prophets and all the chief men had departed from the true worship of
   God, and from all uprightness.

   Now, when Jeremiah thus rebukes the teachers and the priests and others, he
   does not excuse the common people, nor extenuate the crimes, which then
   prevailed everywhere, as we shall see from what follows. As many think that
   they set up a shield against God, when they pretend that they are not
   acquainted with so much learning as to distinguish between light and
   darkness, but that they are guided by their rulers, the Prophet, therefore,
   does not here cast the faults of the people upon their rulers, but, on the
   contrary, he amplifies the atrocity of their impiety, for they had, from the
   least to the greatest, rejected God and his Law. We now, then, understand
   the design of the Prophet. [33]

   We may learn from this passage how unwise and foolish are they who think
   that they are in part excusable when they can say, that they have proceeded
   in their simplicity and have been drawn into error by the faults of others;
   for it appears evident that the whole community was in a hopeless state when
   God gave up the priests and rulers unto a reprobate mind; and there is no
   doubt but that the people had provoked God’s vengeance, when every order,
   civil as well as religious, was thus corrupt. God then visited the people
   with deserved punishment, when he blinded the priests, the prophets, and the
   rulers.

   Hence Jeremiah now says, that the priests did not inquire where Jehovah was:
   and he adds, and they who keep the law, etc. The verb תפש taphesh, means to
   keep, to lay hold on, and sometimes to cover; so that there may be here a
   twofold meaning, — that the priests kept the law, — or, that they had it
   shut up as it were under their keeping. It would not, however, be in harmony
   with the passage to suppose that the law was suppressed by them; for God, by
   way of concession, speaks here honorably of them, thought he thereby shews
   that they were the more wicked, as they had no care for their office. He
   says, then, that they were the keepers of his law, not that they really kept
   the law, as though a genuine zeal for it prevailed among them, but because
   they professed this. They indeed wished to be thought the keepers of the
   law, who possessed the hidden treasure of celestial truth; for they wished
   to be consulted as though they were the organs of God’s Spirit. Since, then,
   they boasted that they kept and preserved the law, the Prophet now more
   sharply rebukes them, because they knew not God himself. And Paul seems to
   have taken from this place what he says in the second chapter of the Epistle
   to the Romans,

   “Thou who hast the form of the law — thou who preachest against adultery,
   committest adultery, and thou who condemnest idols art thyself guilty of
   sacrilege; for thou keepest the law, restest in it, boastest in God, and
   with thee is understanding and knowledge.”
   (Romans 2:20-22.)

   Paul in these words detects the wickedness of hypocrites; for the more
   detestable they were, as they were thus inflated with false glory; they
   profaned the name of God, while they pretended to be his heralds, and as it
   were his prophets. We now see that this second clause refers to the priests,
   and that they are called the keepers of the law, because they were so
   appointed, according to what we read in Malachi. [34]

   He afterwards adds, The pastors have dealt treacherously with God We may
   apply this to the counselors of the king as well as to the governors of
   cities. The Prophet, I have no doubt, included all those who possessed
   authority to rule the people of God; for kings and their counselors, as well
   as prophets, are in common called pastors.

   And he says, that the prophets prophesied by Baal The name of prophet is
   sacred; but Jeremiah in this place, as in other places, calls those prophets
   (contrary to the real fact) who were nothing but impostors; for God had
   taken from them all the light of divine truth. But as they were held still
   in esteem by the people, as though they were prophets, the Prophet concedes
   this title to them, derived from their office and vocation. We do the same
   in the present day; we call those bishops and prelates, and primates and
   fathers, who under the papacy boast that they possess the pastoral office,
   and yet we know that some of them are wolves, and some are dumb dogs. We
   concede to them these titles in which they take pride; and yet a twofold
   condemnation impends over their heads, as they thus impiously, and with
   sacrilegious audacity, claim for themselves sacred titles, and deprive God
   of the honor rightly due to him. So then Jeremiah, speaking of the prophets,
   does now point out those as impostors who at that time wickedly deceived the
   people.

   He says that they prophesied by Baal: they ascribed more authority to idols
   than to the true God. The name of Baal, we know, was then commonly known.
   The prophets often call idols Baalim, in the plural number; but when Baal
   signifies a patron, when the prophets speak either of Baal in the singular
   number, or of Baalim in the plural, they mean the inferior gods, who had
   then been heaped together by the Jews, as though God was not content with
   his own power alone, but had need of associates and helpers, according to
   what is done at this day by those under the papacy, who confess that there
   is but one true God; and yet they ascribe nothing more to him than to their
   own idols which they invent for themselves at their pleasure. The same vice
   then prevailed among the Jews, and indeed among all heathen nations; for it
   was the plain and real confession of all, that there is but one supreme
   Being; and yet they had gods without number, and these all were called
   Baalim. When, therefore, the Prophet says here, that the teachers were
   ministers of Baal, he sets this name in opposition to the only true God, as
   though he had said that the truth was corrupted by them, because they passed
   over its limits, and did not acquiesce in the pure doctrine of the law, but
   mingled with it corruptions derived from all quarters, even from those many
   gods which heathen nations had invented for themselves.

   Nor does the Prophet insist on a name; for it may have been that these false
   teachers pretended to profess the name of the eternal God, though falsely.
   But God is no sophist: there is then no reason for the Papists to think that
   they are at this day unlike these ancient impostors, because they profess
   the name of the only true God. It has always been so. Satan has not begun
   for the first time at this day to transform himself into an angel of light;
   but all his teachers in all ages have presented their poison, even all their
   errors and fallacies, in a golden cup. Though, then, these prophets boasted
   that they were sent from above, and confidently affirmed that they were the
   servants of the God of Abraham, it was yet all an empty profession; for they
   mingled with the truth those corruptions which they had derived from the
   ungodly errors of heathen nations.

   It follows, And after those who do not profit have they gone [35] He again,
   by an implied comparison, exaggerates their sin, because they had despised
   him whom they had known, by so many evidences, to be their Father and the
   author of salvation, whose infinite power they had as it were felt by their
   own hands, and then they followed their own inventions, though there was
   nothing in all their idols which could have justly allured the people of
   Israel. Since, then, they followed vain and profitless deceptions, the more
   heinous and inexcusable was their sin. It afterwards follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [33] It appears that the Prophet has already condemned the people in the
   foregoing portion of this chapter. In Jeremiah 1:18, we find the different
   classes thus arranged — kings and princes, priests, the people of the land.
   At the beginning of this chapter, he addresses the people-the whole
   community, and here he names the priests, and the pastors, i.e., in the
   state, including kings and princes. Thus he reverses the order according to
   the common usage of Scripture: but to these are added here, prophets,
   because they were the spiritual pastors, as kings and princes were the
   civil. — Ed.

   [34] Perhaps no better word can express the verb here used than that of our
   versions., “handle” —”they that handle the law,” that is explain and teach
   it. To “handle the harp,” is to play on it, Genesis 4:21; to “handle war,”
   is to carry it on, Numbers 31:27; to “handle the oar,” is to ply with it,
   Ezekiel 27:29; and to “handle the bow,” is either to use it, or to know how
   to use it, Amos 2:15. They who handled the law were evidently those who
   undertook to explain and teach it to others. To lay hold on, seems to be the
   primary meaning of the verb, and that either for a good or a bad purpose.
   “The Scribes,” observes Scott, “who undertook to expound the Scriptures, did
   not understand them.” — Ed.

   [35] Some say that idols are referred to; and others, as Calvin think that
   the false gods are intended: the meaning is the same; only the context seems
   more favorable to the latter idea. The Septuagint have a neuter adjective,
   “After what is profitless-anōphelous — have they gone.” The verb for profit
   is plural; and if we take לא only as a negative, both the antecedent and
   relative are omitted: but לא here, and in Jeremiah 2:11, and in other
   places, is evidently a noun or a pronoun, signifying none or nothing: and
   like neb, none, in Welsh, it is either singular or plural, according to the
   verb in connection with it. It precedes here a verb in the plural number,
   and in Jeremiah 2:11, in the singular. The relative is often understood both
   in Hebrew and in Welsh before future verbs, and in both languages especially
   when the present time or act is intended. In the present instance, both
   languages may be considered to be literally the same. The Hebrew, word for
   word, may be thus rendered in Welsh: Arol neb a lesant y rhodiasant. After
   none (who) profit have they walked. That is, After none who can do them good
   have they gone. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:9

   9. Wherefore I will yet plead with you, saith the LORD, and with your
   children’s children will I plead.

   9. Propterea adhuc contendam (vel, disceptabo) vobiscum, dicit Jehovah; et
   cum filiis filiorum vestrorum disceptabo.


   The particle עוד oud, yet, or still, is not without weight; for the Prophet
   intimates, that if God had already punished the perfidy and wickedness of
   the people, he still retained whole his right to do so, as though he had
   said, “Think not that you have suffered all your punishment, though I have
   already severely visited your fathers for their wickedness and obstinacy;
   for as ye proceed in the same course, and as there is no moderation nor
   limits to your sins, I will not desist from what I have a right to do, but
   will punish to the last both you and your children, and all succeeding
   generations.” We now then understand what the Prophet means.

   It is indeed usual with hypocrites foolishly to cast off all fear,
   especially after having been once chastised by the Lord; for they think it
   enough that they have suffered punishment for their sins; and they do not
   consider that God moderately punishes the sins of men to invite others to
   repentance, and that he is in such a way sharp and severe as yet to restrain
   himself, in order that there may be room for hope, and that they who have
   sinned, while waiting for pardon, may thus more readily and willingly return
   to the right way. This is what hypocrites do not consider; but they think
   that God on the first occasion expends all his rigor, and so they promise
   themselves impunity as to the future. As for instance, — When God chastises
   a city, or a country, with war, pestilence, or famine, while the evils
   continue there is dread and anxiety: most of those whom God thus afflicts
   sigh and groan, and even howl; but as soon as some relaxation takes place,
   they shake off the yoke, and having no concern for their wickedness, they
   return again as dogs to their vomit. It is hence necessary to declare to
   hypocrites what we see to have been done here by Jeremiah, — that God so
   visits men for their sins, that in future he ceases not to pursue the same
   course, when he sees men so refractory as not to profit under his scourges.

   Still, therefore, he says: this threat no doubt exasperated the minds of the
   nation: for as they dared to clamor against God, as we find in many places,
   and said that his ways were thorny, they spared not the prophets, and this
   we shall hereafter see: they indeed gave the prophets an odious character;
   and what? “These prophets,” they said, “chatter nothing else but burdens,
   burdens, as though God ever fulminated against us; it would be better to
   close our ears than to be continually frightened by their words.” It must
   then have been a severe thing to the Jews, when the Prophet said, Still God
   will contend with you But it was needful so to do.

   Let us then learn from this passage, that whenever God reproves us, not only
   in words, but in reality, and reminds us of our sins, we do not so suffer
   for one fault as to be free for the future, but that until we from the heart
   repent, he ever sounds in our ears these words, Still God will contend with
   you: and a real contention is meant; for Jeremiah speaks not of naked
   doctrine, but intimates that the Jews were to be led before God’s tribunal,
   because they ceased not to provoke his wrath: [36] and he declares the same
   thing respecting their children and the third generation. It afterwards
   follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [36] Gataker thinks that it was verbal pleading: “It is as if he had said,
   ‘I have argued the case with your forefathers already, let me debate the
   matter a little further with you, and let your posterity also consider well
   what I now say,‘ (see Deuteronomy 31:19, 21.) And so is the same word
   afterwards used for debating the case or pleading, verse 29 (Jeremiah
   2:29).” Henry, Adam Clarke, and Blayney, take the same view; but Scott seems
   to agree with Calvin The verb רוב, followed as it is here by את, ever means
   a verbal dispute or contention. See Numbers 20:13; Nehemiah 13:11, 17;
   Proverb 25:9; Isaiah 45:9. — Ed
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:10-11

   10. For pass over the isles of Chittim, and see; and send unto Kedar, and
   consider diligently, and see if there be such a thing.

   10. Nempe (vel, nam) transite ad insulas Chittim (Graeciae, hoc est, ad
   omnes regiones transmarinas,) et videte, et in Kedar (hoc est, in oppositam
   partem, nempe versus Aratbiam) mittite, et considerate diligenter, et
   videte, an factum sit sicut hoc (id est, an factum sit aliquid simile:)

   11. Hath a nation changed their gods, which are yet no gods? but my people
   have changed their glory for that which doth not profit,

   11. An mutaverit gens deos, et ipsi non sunt dii? et populus meus mutavit
   gloriam suam in id quod non prodest.


   Here, by a comparison, he amplifies the wickedness and ingratitude of his
   own nation, — that they had surpassed in levity all heathen nations; for he
   says that all nations so agreed in one religion, that each nation followed
   what it had received from its ancestors. How then was it that the God of
   Israel was repudiated and rejected by his own people? If there was such
   persistency in error, why did not truth secure credit among them who had
   been taught by the mouth of God himself, as though they had been even in
   heaven? This is the drift of the Prophet’s meaning, when he says, Go into
   the islands of Chittim, and send into Kedar

   He mentions Greece on one side, and the East on the other, and states a part
   for the whole. The Hebrews, as we have seen in Daniel, called the Greeks
   Chittim, though they indeed thought that the term belonged properly to the
   Macedonians; but the Prophet no doubt included in that term not only the
   whole of Greece and the islands of the Mediterranean, but also the whole of
   Europe, so as to take in those parts, the whole of France and Spain. There
   is indeed some difference made in the use of the word; but when taken
   generally, it was understood by the Hebrews, as I have said, to include
   France, Spain, Germany, as well as Greece; and they called those countries
   islands, though distant from the sea, because they carried on no commerce
   with remote nations: hence they thought the countries beyond the sea to be
   islands; and the Prophet spoke according to what was customary. [37]

   He then bids them to pass into the islands, southward as well as northward;
   and then he bids them, on the other hand, to send to explore the state of
   the East, Arabia as well as India, Persia, and other countries; for under
   the word Kedar he includes all the nations of the East; and as that people
   were more barbarous than others, he mentions them rather than the Persians
   or the Medes, or any other more celebrated nation, in order more fully to
   expose the disgraceful conduct of the Jews. Go then, or send, to all parts
   of the world, and see and diligently consider, see and see again; as though
   he said, that so great was the stupidity of the Jews, that they could not be
   awakened by a single word, or by one admonition. This then is the reason why
   he bids them carefully to inquire, though the thing itself was very plain
   and obvious. But this careful inquiry, as I have said, was enforced not on
   account of the obscurity of the subject, but for the purpose of reproving
   the sottishness of that perverse nation, which must have been conscious of
   its gross impiety, and yet indulged itself in its own vices.

   Hence he says, Yea, pass over unto the islands; and then he adds, see
   whether there is a thing like this; that is, such a monstrous and execrable
   thing can nowhere be found. An explanation follows, No nation has changed
   its gods, and yet they are no gods; that is, religion among all nations
   continues the same, so that they do not now and then change their gods, but
   worship those who have been as it were handed down to them by their fathers.
   And yet, he says, they are no gods If it had been only said, that no nation
   has changed its gods, the impiety of Israel would not have been so
   grievously exposed; but the Prophet takes it for granted, that all the
   nations were deceived and led away after fictitious gods, and yet remained
   constant in their delusions. Now, God does not set this forth as a virtue;
   he does not mean that the constancy of the nations was worthy of praise in
   not departing from their own superstitions; but, compared with the conduct
   of the chosen people, this constancy might however appear as laudable. We
   hence see that the whole is to be thus read connectively, — “Though no
   nation worships the true God, yet religion remains unchangeable among them
   all; and yet ye have perfidiously forsaken me, and you have not forsaken a
   mere phantom, but your glory.”

   He sets here the favor of God in opposition to the delusions of false gods,
   when he says, My people have changed their own glory For the people knew,
   not only through the teaching of the law, but also by sure evidences, that
   God was their glory; and yet they departed from him. It is then the same as
   though Jeremiah had said, that all the nations would condemn the Israelites
   at the last day, because their very persistency in error would prove the
   greater wickedness of the Jews, inasmuch as they were apostates from the
   true God, and from that God who had so clearly manifested to them his power.

   Now, if one asks, whether religion has been changed by any of the nations?
   First, we know that this principle prevailed everywhere, — that there was to
   be no innovation in the substance of religion: and Xenophon highly commends
   this oracle of Apollo, — that those gods were rightly worshipped who have
   been received by tradition from ancestors. The devil had thus bewitched all
   nations, — “No novelty can please God; but be ye content with the usual
   custom which has descended to you from your forefathers.” This principle
   then was held by the Greeks and the Asiatics, and also by Europeans. It was
   therefore for the most part true what the Prophet says here: and we know
   that when a comparison is made, it is enough if the illustration is for the
   most part, epi to polu, as Aristotle says, confirmed by custom and constant
   practice. We hence see that the charge of levity against the Jews was not
   unsuitably brought by Jeremiah, when he said, that no nation had changed its
   gods, but that God had been forsaken by his people whose glory he was; that
   is, to whom he had given abundant reasons for glorying. [38]
     _________________________________________________________________

   [37] Parkhurst doubts whether the word איים, rendered islands, has ever
   strictly that meaning. He renders the singular, אי, a settlement, a
   habitation, and refers to Job 22:30; Isaiah 20:6; and says, that the plural,
   in Isaiah 42:15, ought to be rendered “habitable places,” and not
   “islands,” as in our version. It may be rendered here, “countries,” as by
   Blarney. — Ed

   [38] “Their glory” are by some considered to be God himself, and not the
   glory, that is, the honor, dignity, and greatness which he bestowed on the
   people, as Calvin here intimates: but the latter is more consistent with
   what follows, which literally is, “for nothing that profits:” for the לא
   here, as in Jeremiah 2:8, is evidently a noun, or a pronoun. The comparison
   here is between what God gives and what false gods give; the comparison
   before was between God himself and the false gods. God gives glory, renders
   his people great and illustrious; but the false gods give nothing that
   profits, that really benefits, or does any good. — Ed
     _________________________________________________________________

   PRAYER

   Grant, Almighty God, that since thou hast made thyself known to us in so
   plain a manner, not only by thy law and prophets, but also by thine only —
   begotten Son, that the knowledge of thy truth ought to have already struck
   deep roots in us, — O grant, that we may continue firm and constant in thy
   holy vocation, and make continual progress in it, and ever hasten forward to
   the goal: and do thou so humble us under thy mighty hand, that we may know
   that we are paternally chastised by thee, and profit under thy discipline,
   until being at length purified from all our vices we shall come to enjoy
   that immortal life, which has been made known to us by Christ, when we shall
   be able fully to rejoice in thee. — Amen.

     _________________________________________________________________

   Lecture Sixth.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:12

   12. Be astonished, O ye heavens, at this, and be horribly afraid, be ye very
   desolate, saith the LORD.

   12. Obstupescite coeli super hoc, et expavescite, desolamini (vel, arescite)
   valde, dicit Jehova.


   When the Prophet saw that he had to do with besotted men, almost void of all
   reason, he turned to address the heavens: and it is a way of speaking,
   common in the Prophets, — that they address the heaven and the earth, which
   have no understanding, and leave men endued with reason and knowledge. This
   they were wont to do in hopeless cases, when they found no disposition to
   learn.

   Hence now the Prophet bids the heavens to be astonished and to be terrified
   and to be reduced as it were unto desolation; as though he had said, “This
   is a wonder, which almost confounds the whole order of nature; it is the
   same as though we were to see heaven and earth mixed together.” We now then
   perceive the meaning of the Prophet: for by this representation he intended
   to shew, how detestable was the impiety of the people, since the heavens,
   though destitute of reason, ought justly to dread such a monstrous thing.

   As to the words, some render them, “Be desolate, ye heavens,” and then
   repeat the same: but as שמם shemem, means to be astonished, the rendering I
   have given suits the present passage better, “Be astonished, ye heavens, for
   this,” and then, “be ye terrified and dried up;” for: חרב chareb, signifies
   to become dry, and sometimes, to be reduced to a solitude or a waste. [39]
   It afterwards follows: —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [39] Blarney, following the Septuagint, renders the verbs as in the third
   person plural. “The heavens are astonished,” etc.; but it is better to take
   them as being in the second person in the imperative mood, as both Aquila
   and Symmachus do. Similar passages are so construed, see Isaiah 1:2. There
   is alliteration in the two first words, as though we said in our language,
   “Heave, ye heavens:” and there is a gradation in the expressions — be
   astonished — be horrified — be wholly wasted, or consumed, or dried up, —
   Astonished be ye, the heavens, for this, And be horrified, Be ye wholly
   wasted, saith Jehovah. The alteration in the last verb, in accordance with
   the Syriac, חרדו, which means to “tremble,” instead of חרבו, though proposed
   by Secker and approved by Horsley, is by no means necessary, and
   countenanced by no MSS. Nor is the emendation of Blarney, in conformity with
   the Septuagint, to be at all approved. These alterations are not only
   unnecessary, but destroy the expressive and striking character of the
   passage. Learned men are sometimes led too much by an innovating spirit. —
   Ed
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:13

   13. For my people have committed two evils; they have forsaken me the
   fountain of living waters, and hewed them out cisterns, broken cisterns,
   that can hold no water.

   13. Certe (vel quia) duo mala fecit populus meus, Me dereliquerunt fontem
   aquarum viventium, ut foderent sibi puteos (vel, cisternas,) cisternas
   contritas (vel, confractas,) quae non continent aquas.


   If a reason is given here why the Prophet had bidden the heavens to be
   astonished and terrified, then we must render the words thus, “For two evils
   have my people done:” but I rather think that the preceding verse is
   connected with the former verses. The Prophet had said, “Go to the farthest
   lands, and see whether any nation has changed its gods, while yet they are
   mere inventions.” I think then the subject is closed with the exclamation in
   the preceding verse, when the Prophet says, “Be astonished, ye heavens.” It
   then follows, “Surely, two evils have my people done,” even these, — “they
   have forsaken me,” — and then, “they sought for themselves false gods.” When
   any one forsakes an old friend and connects himself with a new one, it is an
   iniquitous and a base conduct: but when there is no compensation, there is
   in it united together, folly, levity, and madness. If I despise what I know
   to be profitable to me, and embrace what I understand will be to my hurt,
   does not such a choice prove madness? This then is what the Prophet now
   means, when he says, that the people had sinned not only by departing from
   the true God, but also by going over, without any compensation, unto idols,
   which could confer no good on them.

   He says that they had done two evils: the first was, they had forsaken God;
   and the other, they had fallen away unto false and imaginary gods. But the
   more to amplify their sin, he makes use of a similitude, and says that God
   is a fountain of living waters; and he compares idols to perforated or
   broken cisterns, which hold no water [40] When one leaves a living fountain
   and seeks a cistern, it is a proof of great folly; for cisterns are dry
   except water comes elsewhere; but a fountain has its own spring; and
   further, where there is a vein perpetually flowing, and a perennial stream
   of waters, the water is more salubrious and much better. The waters which
   rain brings into cisterns are never so wholesome as those which flow from
   their own native vein: and when the very receptacles of water are full of
   chinks, what must they be but empty? Hence then God charges the people with
   madness, because he was forsaken, who was a fountain and a fountain of
   living waters; and further, because the people sought unprofitable things
   when they went after their idols. For what is to be found in idols? some
   likeness; for the superstitious think that they labor not in vain, when they
   worship false gods, and they hope to derive some benefit. There are then
   some resemblances to the true in false religions; and hence the Prophet
   compares false gods to wells, because they were made hollow, suitable to
   hold water; but there was not a drop of water in them, as they were broken
   cisterns.

   We now perceive what the Prophet meant, — that we cannot possibly be free
   from guilt when we leave the only true God, as in him is found for us a
   fullness of all blessings, and from him we may draw what may fully satisfy
   us. When therefore we despise the bounty of God, which is sufficient to make
   us in every way happy, how great must be our ingratitude and wickedness? Yet
   God remains ever like himself: as then he has called himself the fountain of
   living waters, we shall at this day find him to be so, except he is
   prevented by our wickedness and neglect. But the Prophet adds another crime;
   for when we fall away from God, our own conceits deceive us; and whatever
   may appear to us at the first view to be wells or fountains, yet when thirst
   shall come, we shall not find a drop of water in all our devices, they being
   nothing else but dry cavities. It follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [40] Blarney innovated here, because he seemed not rightly to distinguish
   between the two words that are here used. Both are rendered “cisterns” in
   our version; but they are two distinct words, though they are similar, and
   mean similar or the same things. The first is בארות, pits, and the other is
   בארת in our received text, but ought evidently to be ברות, or, as in one
   MS., בורת, which means “wells” or pools. The first is a feminine noun, the
   last is a masculine noun; and hence we find that the adjective added here to
   the last word is masculine, as in other places, see Deuteronomy 6:11; 2
   Chronicles 26:10; Nehemiah 9:25; while the first is accompanied with
   adjectives in the feminine gender. The verse may be thus rendered, — For two
   evils have my people done, — Me have they forsaken, the fountain of living
   waters; In order to dig for themselves pits, Broken wells, which cannot hold
   water. It is singular that Adam Clarke should say that these cisterns were
   “vessels in put together,” since they were pits dug in the ground to receive
   rain-water. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:14-17

   14 Is Israel a servant? is he a homeborn slave? why is he spoiled?

   14. An servus Israel? An (vel, si) genitus domi? (hoc est, an verna?
   accipiunt enim puerum, domi natum pro verna:) quare factus est in praedam?

   15. The young lions roared upon him, and yelled, and they made his land
   waste: his cities are burned without inhabitant.

   15. Super eum rugient (vel, rugiunt) leones (alii vertunt, catulos leonum,
   et soepe significat minores leones hoc nomen sed ubi adjungitur reliquis,
   ubi autem solum ponitur, ego semper interpretor generaliter pro leonibus,)
   miserunt vocem suam; posuerunt terram ejus in vastitatem; urbes ejus exustae
   sunt (vel, destructae, nam, צצץ tandem valet atque hoc loco) absque
   habitatore.

   16. Also the children of Noph and Tahapanes have broken the crown of thy
   head.

   16. Etiam filii Noph (hoc est, Mempheos, vocant enim Hebroei Noph urbem quae
   fuit olim metropolis Egypti) et Thaphanes (vel, Thaphis, ut vertunt Grraeci)
   frangent tibi verticem.

   17. Hast thou not procured this unto thyself, in that thou hast forsaken the
   LORD thy God, when he led thee by the way?

   17. An non hoc fuit tibi, deserere tuum, (hoc est, quod deserueris) Jehovam
   Deum tuum, quo tempore ducebat to per viam.


   These verses are to be read together; for the Prophet first shews that
   Israel was not as to his original condition miserable, but that this
   happened through a new cause, and then he mentions the cause. He then first
   asks, whether Israel was a servant or a slave? God had adopted them as his
   people, and had promised to be so bountiful to them as to render them in
   every way happy; and what was more, as a proof of their happiness, he said,
   In thee shall all nations be blessed. (Genesis 12:3; Genesis 22:18; Genesis
   26:4; Genesis 28:14.) We then see what was the original condition of Israel;
   they excelled all other nations, because they were God’s peculiar people,
   they were his heritage, they were a royal priesthood.

   Hence the Prophet, as though astonished at something new and strange, asks
   this question, Is Israel a servant? He was free beyond all nations; for he
   was the first — born son of God: it was therefore necessary to inquire for
   the cause why he was so miserable; for he says afterwards, that lions roared
   against him, and sent forth their voice; he says, that their cities were
   burnt, or destroyed; he says, that their land was reduced to desolation; and
   at length he adds, Has not this done these things to thee? This again is put
   as a question, but it is doubly affirmative, for it takes away every doubt:
   “What do you say is the cause why you are so miserable? for all are hostile
   to you, and you are exposed to the wrongs of all: whence can you say has all
   this proceeded, except from your own wickedness?” We now see what the
   Prophet means.

   But that what he says may be more clear, we must remember that he reminds
   the people, by way of reproach, of the benefits which God had conferred on
   them. As then the children of Abraham had been honored with so many singular
   favors that they had the preeminence over all the world, this dignity is now
   referred to, but only for the purpose of exposing their base conduct, as
   though he had said, “God did not deceive you, when he promised to be
   bountiful to you; his adoption is not deceptive nor in vain: hence you would
   have been happier than all other nations, had not your own wickedness
   rendered you miserable.” We now see for what end the Prophet asked, Is
   Israel a servant or a slave? They were indeed on an equality with other
   people, as they were by nature; but as they had been chosen by God, and as
   he had favored them with that peculiar privilege, the Prophet asks, whether
   they were servants, as though he had said, “What is it that prevents that
   blessedness to appear among you, which God has promised? for it was not
   God’s design to disappoint you: it then follows that you are miserable
   through your own fault.” [41]

   And by saying, Why is he become a prey, he intimates that except Israel had
   been deprived of God’s protection, they would not have been thus exposed to
   the caprice of their enemies. They were not then become a prey except for
   this reason, because God had forsaken them, according to what is said in the
   song of Moses,

   “How should one chase a thousand, and ten should put to flight as many
   thousands, except God had given us up as captives, except we had been shut
   up by his hand.”
   (Deuteronomy 32:30.)

   For Moses in that passage does also in an indirect manner remind the people
   how often and how wonderfully God had given them victories over their
   enemies, and thus he leaves it to their posterity, when in distress, to
   consider how the change came that one should chase a thousand; that is, how
   could it be, that they, possessing great forces, should yet be put to flight
   by their enemies; for they were not wont to turn their backs, but to conquer
   their enemies: it then follows, that they were made captives by God, and not
   by the men who chased them. So also here the Prophet shews, that Israel
   would not have been made a prey, had they not been deprived of God’s
   assistance.

   He afterwards adds, Over him roar the lions. The Prophet seems not simply to
   compare the enemies of Israel to lions on account of their cruelty, but also
   by way of contempt, as though he had said, that Israel found that not only
   men were incensed against them, but also wild beasts: and it is more
   degrading when God permits us to be torn by the beasts of the field. It is
   then the same, as though he had said, that Israel were so miserably treated,
   that they were not only slain by the hands of enemies, but were also exposed
   to the beasts of prey. And then he adds, they have sent forth their voice;
   which is the same as to say, that Israel, whom God was wont to protect by
   his powerful band, were become the food of wild beasts, and that lions, as
   it were in troops, were roaring against them.

   He then adds, without a metaphor, that his land was laid waste, and his
   cities burnt without an inhabitant This language cannot be suitably applied
   to lions or to any other wild beasts; but what he had figuratively said
   before, he now explains in a plain manner, and says, that the land was
   desolate, that the cities were cut off or burnt up. Now this, as we have
   said, could not have been the case, had not Israel departed from God, and
   had been on this account deprived of his help. [42]

   By way of amplification he adds, Also the sons of Noph and of Tephanes shall
   for thee break the head, or, the crown of the head. We shall hereafter see
   that the Israelites were wont to seek help from the Egyptians. The particle
   גם, gam, may be thus explained, “Not only those who have been hitherto
   professed enemies to thee, but even thy friends, in whose help thou didst
   confide, shall turn their power against thee and break for thee thy head.”
   Some think that their degradation is here enhanced, because the Egyptians
   were an unwarlike people; and ancient historians say that men there followed
   the occupations of women; but as this is not mentioned in Scripture, and as
   the Egyptians are not thus spoken of in it, I prefer to follow the usual
   explanation, that the Egyptians, though confederate with Israel, would yet
   be adverse to them, and had been so already. By the head, some understand
   the chief men among the people of Israel: but we may render it thus, they
   will break for thee the head, as we say in our language, Ils to romperont la
   tete, or, Ils to frotteront la tete; and this, in my judgment, is the real
   meaning. [43]

   Now follows the cause; the Prophet, after having shewn that Israel were
   forsaken by God, now mentions the reason why it so happened, Has not this
   done it for thee? Some read in the second person, “Hast thou not done this
   for thee?” but the meaning is still nearly the same. More probable, however,
   is the rendering which others have given, “Has not this happened to thee,
   because thou hast forsaken Jehovah thy God?” Jeremiah, in short, teaches us
   that the cause of all the evils was the defection of the people, as though
   he had said, “Thou hast concocted for thyself all this evil; then must thou
   swallow it, and know that the blame cannot be cast on God; for he would have
   been faithful to thee, except thine impiety had prevented him. God has not,
   indeed, chosen thee in vain, nor has he in vain preferred thee to other
   nations; but thou hast rejected his kindness. Thy condition then would have
   never been as it is, hadst thou not procured thine own ruin.” How so?
   “Because thou hast departed from thy God.”

   And he further exaggerates this sin by saying, At the time when he led thee
   in the way To lead in the way, is rightly to govern, so as to make people
   happy. The Prophet then shews, that the people’s perfidy and defection were
   without excuse in rejecting the worship of their God, for they were happy
   during the time they served him. Had they been in various ways tempted, or
   tried, they might have reigned some pretense. “We thought ourselves deceived
   in hoping in the true God, for he concealed his favor from us; we were
   therefore compelled by necessity. There ought at least some indulgence to be
   shewn to our levity; for we could have formed no other conjecture but that
   God had removed far from us.” The Prophet meets this objection, as he does
   in the fifth verse, “What iniquity have your fathers found in me?” and, as
   it is done in another place,

   “My people, what have I done to thee, or in what have I been troublesome to
   thee?”
   (Micah 6:4)

   for God in that passage shews that he was prepared to defend his own cause,
   and to clear himself from whatever the people might object to him. So also
   he does in this place, “I have led thee,” he says, “in the way;” that is,
   “Thou didst live happily under my government, and yet I could not retain
   thee by my goodness while I kindly treated thee; and thou knewest that
   nothing could be better for thee than to continue under my protection; but
   thou hast determined to go over into the service of idols. Now what excuse
   hast thou, or what pretense is left thee?” We hence see, that the sin of the
   people is greatly enhanced, for they were induced by no temptation or trial
   to forsake God, but through mere perfidy gave themselves up to idols: and a
   confirmation of this verse follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [41] The difficulty of understanding this passage has arisen from not
   considering the questions in a negative sense, as implying a strong
   denial-”Is Israel a servant (or, rather a slave)?” No, by no means. “Is he
   one begotten in the house,” that is, in a state of bondage? No, by no means.
   Then the following question comes naturally; since he is neither a purchased
   slave, nor a slave born in the house, “why has he become a prey?” That there
   were two sorts of slaves of this kind is evident from many parts of
   Scripture. See Genesis 17:12, Genesis 17:23, Genesis 17:27; Exodus 21:4;
   Leviticus 22: 11. This is the view taken evidently in our version, by Jun
   and Trem., Piscator, Gataker, Grotius, Henry, and Scott. Blarney renders the
   two first lines thus, — Is Israel a slave? or if a child of the household,
   Wherefore is he exposed to spoil? He considers “the child of the
   household” to be the son and the heir, as Isaac was, and refers to Galatians
   4:7. Horsley coincides with him. But the usus loquendi gives no countenance
   to this view, while it confirms the other. To refer to filiusfamilias in
   Latin is to no purpose. “The child of the house,” as the expression
   literally is, and similar phrases, ever mean in Scripture those who were
   born slaves in a family. — Ed.

   [42] The verse literally is as follows,- Over him shall young lions roar;
   They have uttered their voice,
   And have made his land a waste;
   His cities are grown over with grass,
   Without an inhabitant. The verb in the first line is future, the other verbs
   are in the past tense; and Blarney thinks that they are so put to denote the
   certainty of what is said, as it is often done by the prophets: and this is
   rendered probable by what is contained in Jeremiah 4:7, where the same
   judgment is spoken of. The verb נצתה, in the received text, ought evidently
   to be נצתו, according to the Keri and twenty MSS.; and so we find it in
   Jeremiah 9:10. Our version and Calvin give it the idea of “burning;” but
   according to Leigh and Parkhurst, its meaning is, to shoot forth, to produce
   grass, or to grow over with grass, as the case is with ruined cities; and
   the words connected with it here and in other places seem to favor this
   meaning. It is rendered in our version, “laid waste,“ in Jeremiah 4:7, and
   “desolate” in Jeremiah 46:19. — Ed

   [43] There have been many expositions of this latter clause, which may be
   seen in the Assembly’s Annotations, which were written, as to Isaiah and
   Jeremiah, by the learned Gataker. He gives the preference to the idea, that
   the crown of the head means the best and the principal part of the land, and
   to break the crown means the plunder of this portion. See Isaiah 28:4. This
   seems to correspond in meaning with the previous verse. It was the opinion
   of Blarney that an allusion is prophetically made to the slaying of Josiah
   by the Egyptians. The words literally are, — They shall break thee, the
   crown of the head. “The crown of the head” seems to be explanatory of
   “thee;” it might then be rendered, — They shall break thee, even the crown
   of thy head. The Septuagint mistook one letter for another, and took the
   verb to be, ידעוך, “they knew thee,” instead of ירעוך “they shall break
   thee;” but what they made the last word to be, it is hard to know, for they
   rendered it, “and searched thee.” The Vulgate has followed the Septuagint;
   and the idea is a very indecent one: and there is nothing in the context to
   favor it. The Targum’s paraphrase is this, “They shall slay thy brave men,
   and plunder thy riches;” which countenances the idea evidently conveyed by
   the figurative terms of the Hebrew. The next verse literally rendered is as
   follows, — Is not this what thou wilt do for thyself,
   By thy forsaking of Jehovah thy God,
   At the time he was leading thee in the way? The first verb is no doubt
   future, whether it be rendered in the second or third person. The sentence
   may be rendered in Welsh without “Is,” or the relative “what,” and word for
   word, — Ai nid hyn a wnai i’th hun? And the future is understood as the
   present. Blayney’s version is, — Shall not this be done unto thee,
   Because thou hast forsaken Jehovah thy God,
   At the time that he led thee in the way? — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:18

   18. And now what hast thou to do in the way of Egypt, to drink the waters of
   Sihor? or what hast thou to do in the way of Assyria, to drink the waters of
   the river?

   18. Et nunc quid tibi ad viam Egypti, ut bibas aquas Nili? et quid tibi ad
   viam Assur, ut bibas aquam fluminis? (Nempe, Eeuphratis.)


   As I have just stated, the Prophet confirms what I said, — that the people
   could not ascribe the cause of their evils to others; for they ought to have
   imputed to themselves whatever they suffered; and at the same time their sin
   was doubled, because they looked here and there for vain remedies, and thus
   accumulated for themselves new causes of misery; for they ought to have
   acknowledged no other remedy for their evils except reconciliation with God.
   If, for instance, any one being ill knew the cause of his disease, and
   instead of adopting the true remedy had recourse to some vain expedients
   injurious to his recovery, is he not deemed worthy to die for having
   willfully despised what might have healed him, and for indulging himself in
   what is deceptive and fallacious? The same thing does Jeremiah now reprove
   in the people of Israel. “If you carefully inquire,” saith God, “how it is
   that you are so miserable, you will find that this cannot be ascribed to me,
   but to your own sins. Now, then, what ought you to have done? what remedy
   ought you to have sought, except to reconcile yourselves to me, to seek
   pardon from me, and to strive to correct your wickedness? I would then have
   immediately healed you; and had you come to me, you would have found me the
   best physician. And why do you now act in a way quite contrary? for you run
   after vain helps; now you flee to Egypt, then you flee to Assyria; but you
   will gain nothing by these expedients.” We now understand the object of the
   Prophet. For after having proved the people to be guilty of impiety, and
   shewn that the evils which they suffered could be ascribed neither to God
   nor to chance, nor to any such causes, he now shews to them, that the one
   true remedy was to return into favor with God; but that it was an evidence
   of extreme madness to run now to Egypt, and then to Assyria.

   Now this reproof is supported by history; for the people had at one time the
   Assyrians as their enemies, and at another the Egyptians; and the changes
   were many. God employed different scourges to awaken the sottishness of the
   people; at one time, he whistled for the Egyptians, as we shall presently
   see; at another, he blew the trumpet in Assyria: so that the Israelites
   might know that they could never be safe without being under the government
   of God. But all these things being overlooked, such was the blindness of the
   people, that when they were assailed by the Assyrians, they fled to Egypt
   and sought aid from the Egyptians, and entered into a treaty with them;
   afterwards, when a change occurred, they sought a treaty with the Assyrians,
   and also bought it at a high price.

   This madness is what the Prophet now reprobates, when he says, What hast
   thou to do in the way of Egypt? that is, “What advantage dost thou gain? How
   great is thy folly, since thou knowest that God is angry with thee, and that
   thou art suffering many evils? God is adverse to thee, and yet thou thinkest
   nothing of reconciliation. Thy healing would be to flee to God and to be
   reconciled to him; but what dost thou now do? Thou fleest to the Assyrians
   and to the Egyptians. How wretched is thy condition, and how great is thy
   folly in thus wearying thyself without any advantage!”

   Now we may learn from this passage, that whenever God chastises us for our
   sins, we ought to seek a remedy, and not to rest in those vain comforts
   which Satan often suggests; for such charms introduce drowsiness, and
   healable diseases are by such means rendered fatal. What then ought we to
   do? We ought, as soon as we feel the scourges of God, to seek to return into
   favor with him; and not in vain shall be our effort. But if we look around
   us in all directions for help, our evils shall not be lessened but
   increased. To drink the waters of the Nile, and to drink the waters of
   Euphrates, is nothing else but to seek aids here and there.

   He indeed alludes to the legations which had been sent; for they who went to
   Egypt drank of the waters of the Nile, and others of Euphrates. He yet
   speaks metaphorically, as though he had said, “God was ready to help thee,
   hadst thou betaken thyself to his mercy as thine asylum; but having
   neglected him, thou thoughtest it more advantageous to have such aids as
   Egypt and Assyria could bring. Thou thus seekest drink in remote countries,
   while God could give thee waters.” And he seems to refer to the similitude
   which he had shortly before used: he had called God the fountain of living
   waters; as though he had said, “God is to thee a refreshing and perennial
   fountain, and there would be abundance of waters for thee wert thou
   satisfied with him; but thy desire is to drink the waters of the Nile, and
   the waters of the Euphrates.” [44] We now then perceive the meaning of the
   Prophet.

   He, no doubt, speaks of the waters of the Nile and of the Euphrates, because
   both those nations abounded apparently in wealth and power and in military
   forces. As, then, the people of Israel trusted in such auxiliaries, the
   Prophet here reproves their ingratitude, because they were not content with
   God’s help, though that was not so visible and conspicuous. God, indeed, has
   help sufficient for us; and were we content with him alone, no doubt an
   abundance of good things would to a full satisfaction be given to us; and as
   he is not wearied in doing good, he would supply us with whatever is
   desirable: but as we cannot see his beneficence with carnal eyes, we are
   therefore carried away after the allurements of the world. We may hence
   learn that we are not to seek drink either from the Nile or from the
   Euphrates, that is, from the enticing things of the world, which make a
   great shew and display; but that we are, on the contrary, to drink from the
   hidden fountain which is concealed from us, in order that we may seek it by
   faith. It now follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [44] No doubt this is the peculiar import of the passage, as though the
   Prophet had said, “What good to thee is to travel to Egypt to drink the
   waters of Sihor, a muddy river, (as the word imports;) and what good to thee
   is to travel to Assyria to drink the waters of the river, while thou hast at
   home a fountain of living, pure and perennial waters?” So Gataker considers
   the drift of the passage: — “To drink the water of Nilus in Egypt is put
   here for to seek help and relief there: but he delivereth it in these terms,
   as if he should say, that they could have nothing to do there, or no errand
   thither, unless it were to drink of the puddle water of that river, when
   they had, or might have had, as good, yea, far better than that, nearer at
   hand, at home. See Jeremiah 18:14; so 2 Kings 1:3.” Then the plainest
   version would be thus, — And now, what hast thou to do with a journey to
   Egypt, That thou mightest drink the waters of Sihor? And what hast thou to
   do with a journey to Assyria, That thou mightest drink the waters of the
   river? The comparison evidently is between the waters of Sihor and of the
   river Euphrates, and the living waters. As in other parts of Scripture the
   Euphrates is no doubt meant by the river, though here, as in Psalm 80:11,
   and Isaiah 7:20, the article ה is not prefixed to it. — Ed
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:19

   19. Thine own wickedness shall correct thee, and thy backslidings shall
   reprove thee: know therefore and see that it is an evil thing and bitter,
   that thou hast forsaken the LORD thy God, and that my fear is not in thee,
   saith the Lord GOD of hosts.

   19. Castigabit to malitia tua, et aversiones tuae, (vel, defectiones tuae)
   poenam de to exigent; et cognosces et scies, quod malum et amarum tuum
   derelinquere (ad verbum, hoc est, quod reliqueris) Jehovam Deum tuum, et
   quod timor meus super to non fuerit, dixit Dominus Jehova exeercitum.


   Here again, the Prophet confirms what I have before stated, — that the
   people would at length find, willing or unwilling, what it was to deport
   from God; as though he had said, “As thou hast not hitherto learnt by so
   many evidences, that thy perfidy is the cause of all thy evils, God will
   heap evils on evils, that thou mayest at length know, even against thy will,
   that thou receivest, a reward due to thy wickedness.” This is the sum of the
   whole.

   But he says first, chastise thee shall thy wickedness, as though he had
   said, that though God ascended not his tribunal, nor put forth his hand to
   punish the people, yet judgment would be evident in their very sins. And
   this is much more powerful, and has greater weight in it than if the Prophet
   had said only, that God would inflict on the people a just punishment; thy
   wickedness, he says, shall chastise thee; and a similar mode of speaking is
   adopted by Isaiah;

   “Stand;” he says, “against thee shall thy wickedness,”
   (Isaiah 3:9; Isaiah 59:12)

   as though God had said, “If I were even to be silent and not to take upon me
   the office of a judge, and if there were no other accuser, and no one to
   plead the cause, yet stand against thee will thy wickedness, and fill thee
   with shame.” To the same purpose is what is said here, thy wickedness [45]
   shall chastise thee

   But we must consider the reason why the Prophet said this. There were then,
   we know, complaints in the mouths of many, — that God was too rigid and
   severe. Since then they thus continually clamored against God; the Prophet
   repels such calumnies, and says that their wickedness was sufficient to
   account for the vengeance executed upon them. He says the same of their
   turnings aside; [46] but what he had said generally before, he now expresses
   more particularly, — that the people had withdrawn themselves from the
   worship of God and obedience to him. He therefore points out here the kind
   of wickedness of which they were guilty, as though he had said that there
   was no need of an accuser, of witnesses, or of a judge, but that the
   defections of the people alone would sufficiently avail to punish them.

   He afterwards adds, Thou shalt know and see how wicked and bitter it is to
   forsake Jehovah thy God These are words hard in their construction; but we
   have already explained the meaning; “Thy forsaking,” or thy defection,
   means, “that thou hast forsaken thy God.” And my fear was not on, or, in
   thee Here, again, the Prophet points out as by the finger the sins of the
   people. He had before spoken of their turnings aside; but he now mentions
   their defection, — that the people had plainly and openly departed from the
   true God. They, indeed, ever continued some kind of worship in the Temple:
   but as the whole of religion was corrupted by many superstitions, and as
   there was no fidelity, no sincerity; and as they mingled the worship of
   idols with that of the true God, they had dearly departed from God, who is
   jealous of his honor, according to what is in the law, and allows of no
   rivals. (Exodus 20:5; Exodus 34:14) We now then perceive the meaning of the
   Prophet.

   He says, Thou shalt know that it is an evil and a bitter thing, etc. This
   must be applied to punishment; and he repeats what he had said before, —
   that the evils which the people then suffered did not happen by chance, and
   that as they were overwhelmed with many bitter sorrows, the cause was not to
   be sought afar off, for their bitterness, and whatever calamities they
   endured, flowed from their impiety. Thou shalt then know by the reward
   itself; even experience will convince thee what it is to depart from God;
   and he says, from Jehovah thy God, or, to forsake Jehovah thy God. For, if
   God had not made known his grace to the Israelites, their perverseness would
   not have been so detestable; but since they had found God to be a Father to
   them, and since he had so bountifully treated them, having been pleased to
   enter into a covenant with them, their wickedness was inexcusable.

   And afterwards the person is changed, And my fear was not in thee Here at
   length the Prophet intimates, that they were destitute of every sense of
   religion; for by the fear of God is meant reverence for his name. Men often
   fall, we know, through mistake, and are deceived by the craft of Satan; and
   when made thus miserable they are to be pitied. But the Prophet shews here
   that the people were wholly undeserving of pardon. How so? Because there was
   no fear of God in them. “You cannot,” he says, “object and say, that you
   have been deceived, or make any pretense by which you may cover your
   wickedness: it is evident that you have acted shamelessly and basely in
   forsaking thy God, for there was no fear of God in you. [47] He subjoins at
   last, saith Jehovah of hosts: by which words the Prophet secures more
   authority to what he had announced; for what he had said must have been very
   bitter to the people: and many of them, no doubt, according to their usual
   manner, shook their heads; for we know how insolent were most of them. Hence
   the Prophet here openly declares, that he was not the author of what he had
   said, but only the proclaimer; that it proceeded from God, and that he had
   spoken nothing but what God himself had commanded.
     _________________________________________________________________

   [45] Blarney renders it “adversity.” That the word sometimes means that, is
   true, but most commonly wickedness; and this is the sense required by the
   context: it must be that which corresponds in character with the word that
   follows — apostasy, or turning aside. “Wickedness” is the meaning sanctioned
   by all the early versions, as well as modern. — Ed.

   [46] The word is singular in all the early versions. It is rendered
   “apostasy — apostasia,” by the Septuagint, and, “turning aside — aversio,”
   by the Vulgate Though there is no MS. in favor of the singular, yet the verb
   connected with it is in that number. The true reading no doubt is according
   to the versions, confirmed as it is by the number of the verb. — Ed

   [47] The verse literally is as follows, — 19. Chastise thee shall thy
   wickedness, And thy apostasy, it shall correct thee; Know then and see, That
   evil and bitter shall be Thy forsaking of Jehovah thy God; And my fear is
   not in thee, Saith the Lord, Jehovah of hosts. The future is spoken of. They
   were warned; they were to know and see, or consider, that the forsaking of
   God, “the apostasy,” would be afflictive and bitter: and then the cause of
   the “wickedness” first mentioned is stated, no “fear” of God. How
   “wickedness” was to chastise them, and “apostasy” to correct them, is
   signified, — they would turn out to be “evil” — afflictive — hurtful, and
   “bitter” — grievous — painfully distressing. Hence Grotfius’s exposition
   cannot be right —”Thy wickedness shall be a proof that thou art justly
   punished.” The reference is to the very evils and miseries to which their
   “wickedness” and “apostasy” would inevitably lead them. Their foreign
   alliances were eventually the means of their degradation and misery; and in
   seeking them, they forsook God as their protector; and by adopting idols,
   they forsook him as the object of their worship. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   PRAYER

   Grant, Almighty God, that as thou hast hitherto shewn to us so many favors,
   since the time thou hast been pleased to adopt us as thy people, — O grant,
   that we may not forget so great a kindness, nor be led away by the
   allurements of Satan, nor seek for ourselves inventions, which may at length
   turn to our ruin; but that we may continue fixed in our obedience to thee,
   and daily call on thee, and drink of the fullness of thy bounty, and at the
   same time strive to serve thee from the heart, and to glorify thy name, and
   thus to prove that we are wholly devoted to thee, according to the great
   obligations under which thou hast laid us, when it had pleased thee to adopt
   us in thine only — begotten Son. — Amen.

     _________________________________________________________________

   Lecture Seventh
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:20

   20. For of old time I have broken thy yoke, and burst thy bands; and thou
   saidst, I will not transgress; when upon every high hill and under every
   green tree thou wanderest, playing the harlot.

   20. Quia a seculo confregi, [48] jugum tuum, disrupi vincula tua; et
   dixisti, Non serviam (vel, non transgrediar, est enim duplex lectio;) quia
   super omnem collem excelsum, et super omnem arborem frondosam tu discurristi
   meretrix.


   As there are two readings in Hebrew, two meanings are given; for some think
   the verb to be, עבד obed, and others, עבר ober, the two letters being very
   similar. If we read, “I will not pass over,” or, I will not transgress, the
   sense is, “When I broke thy yoke;” that is, “When I delivered thee from the
   tyranny of Egypt, then thou didst pledge thy faith to me.” The covenant then
   made between God and the Israelites was mutual; for as God received them
   under his protection, when he became, as it were, their patron, so they, on
   the other hand, promised to submit to his authority. If we take this
   reading, the passage is an expostulation; as though God condemned here the
   people, for their ingratitude and perfidy. But the Prophet seems to mean
   another thing; and therefore I prefer the other reading, “I will not
   serve:” and yet I reject what interpreters have alleged; for this passage, I
   have no doubt, has been perverted. The prevailing exposition has been this,
   “I will not serve idols;” and they who seemed endued with some judgment did
   not see that this sense is unsuitable, and strained, or too far — fetched:
   and it may have been, and it seems to me probable, that for this reason the
   letter has been changed; for all gave this explanation, “Thou hast said, I
   will not serve idols:” but it is wholly a strained comment.

   Now, on the contrary, I think that God here complains that the liberty which
   he had given to his people was turned into licentiousness: and this view is
   exactly suitable, as it is evident from the context, — For from old time
   have I broken thy yoke and burst thy bonds: therefore thou hast said, (the
   ו here is an illative,) I will not serve; that is, “When thou oughtest to
   have devoted thyself to me, who had become thy Redeemer, thou thoughtest
   that liberty to do thine own will was granted thee.” And then the proof
   given of this is in every way appropriate, for on every high hill, and under
   every shady tree, didst thou run here and there like a harlot Then God shews
   that his redemption had been ill bestowed on the ungodly, who made a bad use
   of their privilege; for hence it was that they gave themselves up to all
   kinds of lasciviousness.

   If any one prefers the other reading, I will not contend with him; and then
   the sense is, “I have long ago shaken off thy yoke, and burst thy bands; and
   thou hast said, (he speaks of the people as of a woman, for the feminine
   gender is used; and this is done, because God sustained the character of a
   husband towards that people; and whenever he accused them of defection, it
   was as though a husband charged an unchaste wife with the crime of
   adultery,) thou hast then said to me, that is, promised to me that thou
   wouldest not transgress;” or, in other words, “thou hast promised to be
   faithful to me, and pledged mutual chastity.” Then the particle, כי, ki,
   which is commonly a causative, is to be taken here, according to its meaning
   in some other parts of Scripture, as an adversative, Yet on every high hill
   and under every shady tree, thou didst run here and there like harlots, who
   are seeking lovers.

   But as I have already said, it seems to me more probable that God is here
   expostulating with the people, because they availed themselves of the favor
   of liberty as an occasion for licentiousness and wantonness: and thus the
   whole passage reads well, and every clause is most suitable, consistent the
   one with the other.

   What God says, that he had broken the yoke and burst the bands, is confined
   by some to their first redemption: but I approve of what others say, — that
   the Prophet speaks here of many deliverances. We indeed know that the people
   were brought out of Egypt but once; but when they were afterwards oppressed,
   he stretched forth his hand to deliver them: God then had from old time, but
   at various periods, shaken off the yoke of the people; for this is evident
   from the book of Judges. As, then, the people were not made free, except
   through God’s kindness, who redeemed them, ought they not to have devoted
   themselves to the service of their Redeemer? For on this condition, and for
   this end, they were redeemed by God, — that they might consecrate themselves
   wholly to him. God then now condemns the people for their ingratitude,
   because they thought that the yoke was shaken off, that they might be, as we
   shall hereafter find, like untamable wild beasts.

   That what the Prophet means may be more evident to us, let us remember what
   Paul teaches us in the sixth chapter of his Epistle to the Romans (Romans
   6), — that while we serve sin we are free from righteousness; for we go
   astray after our lusts, and are restrained by no bridle: but when God really
   sets us free from the miserable bondage of sin, we begin to be his servants,
   and the servants of righteousness; for being freed from sin we become the
   servants of righteousness: and this is the end of our redemption. But many
   turn the favor of God into an occasion for licentiousness, and thus abandon
   themselves, as though there was no law and no rule for a holy and upright
   life. God complains that this was the case with the people of Israel: Thou
   hast said, I will not serve “It is base ingratitude, that thou hast not in
   the first place regarded me as thy Redeemer; and that in the second place
   thou hast not considered that I dealt so kindly with thee for this very
   purpose — that thou mightest be mine: for he who has been redeemed by
   another’s kindness is no longer his own.” God had redeemed that people; and
   redemption brought with it an obligation, by which the people were bound
   willingly to submit to God as their Ruler and King. Thou hast then said, I
   will not serve Thus God complains that his favor had been ill bestowed on
   the people, because they had abused their liberty, and turned it into
   lasciviousness. [49]

   And the reason that is subjoined more fully explains the meaning, for thou
   didst run here and there as a harlot, on every high hill and under every
   shady tree For we know that the Israelites, whenever they departed from God,
   had some particular places, on hills and under trees, as though greater
   sanctity were there than anywhere else. And at this day the case is the same
   with the Papists; for the devotion, or rather the diabolical madness, by
   which they are carried away, is of a similar kind. “O! this place, they say,
   “is more favorable to devotion than another; there is in it more
   sanctity.” Of the same opinion were the Israelites: for they thought that
   they were nearer heaven when they went up to a mountain; they also thought
   that they had a more familiar intercourse with God when concealed under
   shady trees. And we see that the same folly has ever bewitched all heathen
   nations: for they imagined that God was nigher them on hills, and thought
   that there was some hidden divinity in fountains and under the shades of
   trees. As, then, this superstition had long prevailed among the Israelites,
   God here reproves them, because they ran here and there

   But we must further notice the comparison: he says, that they were like
   harlots, who, having cast off all shame, run here and there, not only
   because they burn with insane lust, but are also carried away by their own
   avariciousness. Thou, harlot, he says, didst run here and there on all the
   high hills, and under all the shady trees; as though he had said, “This is
   what I have effected in delivering thee! thou thinkest that unbridled
   liberty has been granted thee! Hence, then, it is that thou art become so
   wanton as to follow thy base lusts.” It follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [48] On the authority of the Septuagint and of the Vulgate, Blarney has
   rendered this verb and the following in the second person, “thou hast
   broken,“ etc. There is no MS. that has this reading except one, and that as
   to the first verb only. The Targum and the Syriac retain the first person;
   but the Arabic the second. There is no necessity of a change, as Blarney
   intimates, arising from the usus loquendi; see Jeremiah 28:2; Isaiah 9:4.
   Jerome followed the Septuagint; but all modern versions have adopted the
   Hebrew text. Horsley gives this version, — 20. Verily of old time I broke
   thy yoke, I burst thy bands asunder; Yet thou saidst, I will not obey:
   Verily, upon every high hill, And under every green tree, Thou layest
   thyself along, playing the strumpet. Blarney having proposed to amend the
   last line, the Bishop justly says, “The text wants no correction.” The verb
   צעה found only here, and in Jeremiah 48:12, and in Isaiah 51:14; Isaiah
   63:1, means, according to Buxtorff and Leigh, to wander, to ramble, to
   travel up and down, and in a transitive sense, to cause to travel, or to
   migrate; but, according to Parkhurst, to stretch out, to lie along, and
   transitively to cause to be stretched out, that is, to throw down. The first
   meaning is more suitable to the passages referred to above. It is here a
   participle, preceded by a pronoun, “thou,” the way in which a present act is
   commonly expressed in Hebrew. The line may then be thus rendered, — Thou
   ramblest, playing the strumpet. The Targum gives the meaning, though not the
   right tense, “Thou didst worship idols.” — Ed.

   [49] The received Text has עבד, to serve, and the Keri, עבר, to transgress.
   In favor of the latter there are about 30 MSS., while the rest of those
   examined by Kennicott (in all 198, 71 examined throughout, and 127 on
   particular parts) retain the former verb, and also all the early versions,
   the Septuagint, the Syriac, the Arabic, and the Vulgate The Targum only has
   the latter. Piscator, Jun and Trem , Capellus, Blarney, and Horsley decide
   with Calvin in favor of the former; while Munster and Gataker side with our
   version and that of Geneva, in which the latter has been adopted. Clearly
   the former has the weight of authority: and the contrast, too, is striking,
   “I have broken thy bonds of slavery; but thou hast refused to serve or obey
   me.” The former part of this verse is of the same purport with Jeremiah 2:6,
   and the latter with Jeremiah 2:25. The verse begins with כי, rendered
   “for” in our version, by Calvin, and many others, but “surely” by Blarney,
   and “verily” by Horsley It is omitted in the Vulgate. Were it rendered
   “though,” the meaning would be more evident, — Though from old time I had
   broken thy yoke, I had burst thy bands asunder; Yet thou hast said, “I will
   not obey:” For on every high hill and under every green tree Thou ramblest,
   playing the strumpet. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:21

   21. Yet I had planted thee a noble vine, wholly a right seed: how then art
   thou turned into the degenerate plant of a strange vine unto me?

   21. Et ego plantavi to vineam electam (vineam nobilem, vel, exquisitam, hoc
   enim significat nomen, שורק,) totam fidele semen (hoc est, semen probum); et
   quomodo conversa es mihi degenerationes vitis alienae?


   God here confirms what is said in the last verse; for he condemned the
   Israelites for having perversely run here and there after their
   superstitions, when yet they had been redeemed for this end, — that they
   might be ruled by the hand of God. Hence he says, I planted thee as a choice
   vine; that is, “When I redeemed thee from thine enemies, I did not give thee
   permission thus to prostitute thyself without any restraint, without any
   shame; for I planted thee as a choice vine.”

   The metaphor is well known, and often occurs; for God frequently compares
   his Church to a vine. He calls it generally his heritage, or his land; but
   as vines excel other possessions, (for they are usually preferred to pasture
   lands, or to cultivated fields,) as then vines are the most valuable
   property, God hereby testifies how highly he values his Church; for he calls
   it his vine rather than his pasture or his field, when he speaks of it. So
   he does in this place, “I did not deliver thee from Egypt, that I might
   afterwards throw aside every care of thee; but my purpose was, that thou
   shouldest strike roots, and become an heritage precious to me, as an
   exquisite and a noble vine. I, therefore, planted thee a generous vine,
   שורק shurek, that thou mightest bring me forth fruit.”

   Then he says, a wholly right seed; [50] that is, “I planted thee for this
   end, — that thou mightest produce fruit acceptable and pleasant to me.” God
   regards here his own grace, and not the character of the people; for that
   people, as it is well known, was never a true seed: but God here shews the
   purpose for which he had redeemed the people, which was, that they might be
   like a choice vine. How then? he adds. God speaks here of their corruptions
   with wonder, for the indignity was such as was enough to astonish all men:
   how then art thou turned to me into degenerations! So I render סורום surim,
   though the word is not in common use in Latin: but it is enough for me if we
   understand the meaning of the Prophet. The word is derived from סור sur, to
   turn aside, or back. We ought to say then correctly, “into turnings
   aside.” But as this would be obscure, when the vine is spoken of, I have not
   hesitated to fix on another word: How then art thou turned to me into the
   degenerations of a strange vine! Some give this version, “into useless
   branches of grapes:” but I know not whence they have taken the words. I wish
   to keep to what is more genuine, — that the vine, which ought to have been
   fruitful, had so degenerated that it produced nothing, as we shall find in
   another place, but wild grapes. [51] And he calls them the turnings aside of
   a strange vine, which ceases to be the choice vine, שורק, shurek, and is
   turned to a wild vine, which produces nothing but sour or bitter fruit: and
   in the last place, as it brought forth nothing useful, God justly calls it a
   strange vine. It follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [50] The word means not only the seed of vegetables, but whatever forms that
   from which anything grows. It is applied as a verb to the planting of shoots
   or cuttings in Isaiah 17:10. The proper rendering here would be, — The whole
   of it a genuine plant (or shoot). What is rendered “choice vine,” שורק is
   the yellow vine; the best was so called, because it produced wine of that
   color. — Ed

   [51] Much difference exists as to the literal meaning of this clause, though
   the general meaning is quite evident. None of the early versions are the
   same. The word סורי is rendered, “into bitterness — eis pikrian,” by the
   Septuagint; “thou hast rebelled,” by the Syriac; “into what is corrupt — in
   pravurn,” by the Vulgate; “thou hast declined from my fear,” by the Targum
   Blarney takes it as a verb in the imperative mood, and renders the two lines
   thus, — Yet how I find thee changed! Depart, O vine of spurious growth. But
   there is a harshness and incongruity in this version that renders it
   inadmissible. Besides “vine of spurious growth” is not the meaning of the
   words used, for it is “a foreign vine,” that is, a heathen vine; which
   contains an allusion to the idolatry which had been imported from heathen
   nations. It is most probable that סורי, or in full, סורים, means degenerate
   shoots or branches, as Parkhurst thinks. To turn aside, to decline, to
   degenerate, seems to be the most common meaning of the verb. There would in
   this case be a congruity in the whole verse, — And I myself had planted thee
   a choice vine, The whole of it a genuine plant; How then art thou become to
   me The degenerate shoots of a foreign vine? The plant was of the best kind,
   but the shoots or the branches had become degenerated, such as a foreign or
   heathen vine produced. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:22

   22. For though thou wash thee with nitre, and take thee much soap, yet thine
   iniquity is marked before me, saith the Lord GOD.

   22. Etiam si lveris to nitro (ut vertunt,) et multiplicaveris tibi borith
   (alii exponunt, herbam fullonum; alii, saponem; quod ad rei summam spectat,
   nulla est ambiguitas, quoniam intelligit Deus nullo artificio, nullis herbis
   posse maculas populi purgari,) impressa est (vel, insculpta est, vel,
   signata, ut alii vertunt) iniquitas tua coram facie mea, dicit Dominus
   Jehova.


   We have already seen, and the Prophet will often repeat the same thing, —
   that the people were become so refractory that they would not willingly give
   way to any reproofs; for they were almost all of such a hard front, and so
   obdurate in their wickedness, that they dared insolently to raise objections
   against the prophets; whenever they severely reproved them: “What! Are not
   we God’s holy people? Has he not chosen us? Are we not the holy seed of
   Abraham?” It was therefore necessary for the prophets to apply a hard wedge
   to a hard knot, as they commonly say. As, then, the Israelites were like a
   knotty wood, it was necessary to strike hard their obstinacy.

   On this account Jeremiah now says, Even if thou wert to wash thyself with
   nitre, and multiply to thee borith, yet thine iniquity would be before me
   marked; that is, “Ye effect nothing when ye set forth various pretences for
   the sake of excusing your impiety: wash yourselves, but your iniquity
   remains marked before me.” The Prophet speaks in the person of God, that he
   might add more weight to the denunciation he pronounced on the Israelites,
   and by which he reduced to nothing their self — flatteries, according to
   what has been already stated.

   By nitre and borith they removed stains in cloth; and hence borith is often
   mentioned in connection with fullers. But there is no need of a laborious
   inquiry, whether it was an herb or dust, or something of that kind; for as
   to what is meant, it is generally agreed that the Prophet teaches us by this
   metaphor, — that hypocrites gain nothing by setting up their pretences, that
   they may escape, when God condemns them. Hence he says, that all their
   attempts would be vain and fruitless. How so? Because their iniquity
   remained unwashed; that is, because they could not remove by washing what is
   imprinted. Spots or stains can indeed be cleansed or washed away by soap or
   other things; but when the stain is inward, and imprinted within, washing
   will avail nothing, for the marks are so deep that some more efficacious
   remedy must be adopted. So now the Prophet says, that the stains were
   imprinted, and therefore could not be washed away or cleansed by soap or
   borith. [52]

   But the Prophet says, that the stains were marked, or stamped, before God;
   for it was a common thing with the Israelites to clear themselves from every
   blame; nay, so great was their audacity, that they openly opposed the
   prophets, as though some great wrong was done to them; and they called the
   prophets accusers and slanderers, Hence he says, Thine iniquity is stamped
   before me? [53] that is, “However thou mayest by self — flatteries deceive
   thyself, and hidest thy sins before the world, yet thou gainest nothing; for
   in my sight thine iniquity ever remains stamped.” He afterwards adds —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [52] What we call “nitre” is different from the “nitron” here mentioned. The
   verb, from which the noun is derived, means to loosen, to set free: and
   hence the article called nitron dissolves in water, and loosens and washes
   away spots and stains. Borith was an herb, which, being burnt, and its ashes
   dissolved in water, had a strong cleansing power. — Ed.

   [53] The verb rendered “stamped” is only found here in Niphel, but, as a
   participial noun, it seems to mean gold stamped or marked to shew its
   genuineness. See Psalm 45:9; Proverbs 25:12. A stain or spot is not what it
   signifies, as given by the Septuagint and the Vulgate, nor “blot,” according
   to Blarney; but it refers to the stamp or mark imprinted on a hard metal,
   such as gold: and this idea alone corresponds with the other parts of the
   verse. A stain, a spot, or a blot, might be cleansed by abstergents, but not
   a mark stamped on a metal, — But thou washest thyself with nitron, And
   multipliest for thyself fuller’s ashes: Stamped is thine iniquity before me,
   Saith the Lord Jehovah. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:23

   23. How canst thou say, I am not polluted, I have not gone after Baalim? see
   thy way in the valley, know what thou hast done: thou art a swift dromedary
   traversing her ways;

   23. Quomodo dices (hoc est, quomodo dicis; nam futurum tempus saepe
   accipitur apud Hebraeos pro acu continuo, quomodo igitur dicis) non sum
   polluta, post Baalim non profecta sum? Vide vias tuas in valle, cognosce
   quid feceris dromedaria velox corripiens vias suas (vel, circumiens, nam
   deducitur vox ista a corrigia calceamenti).


   Jeremiah goes on here with his reproof, and dissipates the clouds of
   hypocrites, under which they thought themselves to be sufficiently
   concealed: for hypocrites, when they allege their fallacious pretences,
   think themselves already hidden from the eyes of God and from the judgment
   of all men. Hence the Prophet here sharply condemns this supine self —
   security, and says, How darest thou to boast that thou art not polluted? How
   darest thou to say, that thou hast not walked after Baalim? that is, after
   strange gods. I have already said, that by this word were meant inferior
   gods: for though the Jews acknowledged one Supreme Being, yet they sought
   for themselves patrons; and hence arose, as it is usual, a great number of
   gods. The superstitious never lapsed into that degree of impiety and
   madness, but that they ever confessed that there is some supreme Deity; but
   they added some inferior gods. And thus they had their Baalim and patrons,
   like the Papists, who call their patrons saints, for they dare not in their
   delusions to call them gods. Such was the sophistry of the Jews.

   How then, he says, canst thou excuse thyself, and say, that thou hast not
   walked after Baalim? See, he adds, thy ways, see what thou hast done in the
   valley, and know at length that thou hast been like a swift dromedary The
   Prophet could not have fully expressed the furious passions which then raged
   in the Jews without comparing them to dromedaries: and as he addresses the
   people in the feminine gender, the female dromedary is mentioned. I consider
   that she is called swift, not only on account of the celerity of her course,
   but on account of her impetuous lust, as we shall presently see.

   Now this passage teaches us, that the people had become so hardened, that
   they insolently rejected all reproofs given them by the prophets. Their
   impiety was openly manifest, and yet they ever dared to allege excuses, for
   the purpose of shewing that the prophets unjustly condemned them. Nor are we
   to wonder that such contumacy prevailed in that ancient people, since at
   this day we find that the Papists, with no less perverseness, resist the
   clear light of truth. For however gross and shameful their idolatry appears,
   they yet think that they evade the charge by merely saying, that their
   statues and images are not idols, and that the people of Israel were,
   indeed, condemned for inventing statues for themselves, but that they did
   this, because they were prone to superstition. Hence they cry against us,
   and say, that the worship which prevails among them is unjustly calumniated.
   We see, and even children know, that under the Papacy every kind of
   superstition prevails; and yet they seek to appear innocent, and free from
   every blame. The same was the case formerly: and as the temple continued,
   and the people offered sacrifices there, and as some kind of religion
   remained, whenever the prophets reproved the impious corruptions, which were
   blended with and vitiated the pure worship of God, and which were called
   adulteries, as they everywhere declare, “What!” they said, “Do we not
   worship God?” This very perverseness is what the Prophet now condemns by
   saying, How darest thou to say, I am not polluted, I have not walked after
   Baalim? So the Papists say at this day, “Do we not believe in one God? Have
   we devised for ourselves various gods? Yet they rob God of all his power,
   and dishonor him in a thousand ways: and at the same time they assert
   against us, with a meretricious mouth and an iron front, that they worship
   the one true God. [54] The case was exactly the same with the Jews: but the
   Prophet here proves their boasting to be vain and grossly false, See, he
   says, thy ways in the valley; see what thou, a swift dromedary, hast done As
   they could not be overcome by reasons, their willfulness being so great, the
   Prophet compares them to wild animals: “Ye are,” he says, “like lascivious
   dromedaries, which are so carried away by lust, that they forget everything
   while pursuing their own courses.” It follows —

     _________________________________________________________________

   [54] “The Jews, it seems,” says Loath, “had found out distinctions, whereby
   to reconcile the worship of the true God with those religious rites which
   they paid to the deities of the heathen, called here Baalim. These, they
   pretended, were only inferior demons or spirits, or the souls of men
   departed, and might be worshipped in subordination to the supreme God.”
   Scott adds to this quotation this just remark, “This, and nothing better,
   can the Papists urge in excuse of their manifest idolatry in worshipping
   saints and angels” — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:24

   24. A wild ass used to the wilderness, that snuffeth up the wind at her
   pleasure; in her occasion who can turn her away? all they that seek her will
   not weary themselves; in her month they shall find her.

   24. Onager (sed adhuc retinet foemineum genus, foemina igitur onagri)
   assueta deserto, in appetitu animae sum (hoc est, pro desiderio, vel,
   cupidine animae suae colligens ventura occasionis suae (vel, occursus sui)
   quis inde reducet eam? Quisquis persequitur earn non fatigabitur, in mense
   suo inveniet eam.


   As Jeremiah had called the people a dromedary, so he now calls them a wild
   ass: “Thou,” he says, “art both a dromedary and a wild ass.” For when a wild
   ass has caught the wind according to her desire, that is, when she has
   pantingly sought it, and has caught the wind of her occasion, that is, such
   as may chance to be; for he meant to shew, by this expression, that there is
   no choice made by beasts, no judgment shewn, no moderation exercised; —
   when, therefore, she has caught the wind, wherever chance may take her, no
   one can restrain her from her impetuous course; and he who pursues her will
   in vain fatigue himself, until he finds her in her month

   By these words the Prophet intimates the untamable madness of the people,
   that they could not by any means be restrained, being like a wild ass, which
   cannot be tamed nor divested of its wildness, especially when she has caught
   the wind. For were she shut in, bolts might do something, so as to prevent
   her headlong course: but when a wild ass is free, and allowed to ramble over
   hill and dale, when she catches the wind, and catches it according to her
   desire; that is, when she can wander here and there, and nothing prevents
   her from rambling in all directions, — when such a liberty is allowed to
   wild animals that they catch the wind, and the wind of occasion; that is,
   any wind that may chance to be, there is no reason, as the Prophet seems to
   intimate, in wild beasts, nor do they keep within any due bounds. When any
   one of us undertakes a journey, he inquires how far he can go in one day, he
   avoids weariness, and provides against it as far as he can, and after having
   fixed the extent of his journey, he thinks of a resting — place; and he also
   makes inquiries as to the right way, and the best road. The case is
   different with wild animals; for when they begin to run, they go not to
   Lyons or to Lausanne, but abandon themselves to a blind impulse: and then
   when they are fatigued, they cease not to proceed in their course, for lust
   hurries them on. We now perceive the design of the Prophet.

   He then adds, Who can bring her back? As though he had said, that the people
   could not be stopped or brought back to anything like moderation, for a
   wildness, yea rather a complete madness, had taken an entire possession of
   them. [55]

   It afterwards follows, There is no reason for any one to weary himself, he
   will at length find her in her month All interpreters agree that this month
   is to be taken for the time of foaling. When the wild asses are in foal, and
   the time of parturition draws nigh, they are then restrained by their
   burden, and may be easily caught, as they retain not their previous
   swiftness, for they carry a burden. The Prophet then says, that the people
   were like wild asses, for they could be restrained by no instruction, and
   nothing could bridle their excesses; but that the time of parturition must
   be waited for.

   Let us now see how this similitude applies to the people. The verse contains
   two parts. The first shews, as I have already said, that the people could
   not be turned by any warnings, nor would they obey any counsels, but were
   carried away by their insane passions, as it were by the wind of occasion,
   or any wind that might blow. This is the first part. Now as the obstinacy of
   the people was so great, God here declares to hypocrites, that the time
   would come when he would put a restraint on them, and break down their
   impetuous infatuation. How? The time of parturition would come; that is,
   “when ye shall have done many iniquities, your burden will stop and restrain
   you.” And he intimates, that it would be the time of his judgment; as though
   he had said, “you must be dealt with not as sane men, endued with a sound
   mind; for ye are wild beasts which cannot be tamed.” What, then, remains to
   be done? As the wild ass is weighed down with her burden when the time of
   parturition approaches, so I will cause you at length to feel the burden of
   your iniquities, which will be by its weight intolerable; and though your
   perverseness is untamable, yet my hand will be sufficient to restrain you;
   for I shall break you down, as ye will not bend nor obey my instruction.” We
   now, then, understand the import of the similitude, and how applicable it
   was to the case of the people; the use of which ought to be learnt, also, by
   us in the present day. The rest tomorrow.
     _________________________________________________________________

   [55] The grammatical anomalies at the beginning of this verse are
   satisfactorily removed by Parkhurst, and what he has proposed is approved by
   Horsley. He considers פרה to be the female dromedary, he derives למד from
   מד, measure, or extent, with a ל prefixed, and regards נפשה as the true
   reading, being that of the Keri, and of the largest number of MSS. This
   verse and the preceding are to be thus connected, — 23. How canst thou say,
   “I have not been polluted, After Baalim have I not walked!” See thy way in
   the valley, Know what thou hast done, — Like a swift dromedary which winds
   about her courses, — 24. A female which, in the wide space of the
   wilderness, Through the desire of her natural instinct, Snuffs up the wind
   she meets with: Who can turn her back? All who seek her, Let them not weary
   themselves; In her month they shall find her. By “winding about her
   courses,” or tracks, or ways, is meant running in this and in that
   direction, and not in a straight course. The word, as a noun, denotes the
   string or latchet by which the ancients fastened their sandals, and which
   they twined round the feet. “The wind she meets with,” is literally, “the
   wind of her meeting.” The Septuagint and the early versions have departed
   widely from the original; the Vulgate comes nearest to it; nor is the Targum
   far off — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   PRAYER

   Grant, Almighty God, that, as it pleased thee, when thou didst deliver us
   from the tyranny of Satan, to lay on our necks thy yoke: — O grant, that we
   may be influenced by the spirit of docility, and of obedience, and of
   meekness, and willingly submit ourselves to thee through the whole course of
   our life, so that thou mayest gather from us the fruit of thy redemption:
   and may we so renounce sin that we may devote ourselves to thy service, and
   become the servants of righteousness, until having finished the course of
   our warfare, we shall be gathered into that blessed rest. which has been
   obtained for us by the blood of thine only — begotten Son. — Amen.

     _________________________________________________________________

   Lecture Eighth
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:25

   25. Withhold thy foot from being unshod, and thy throat from thirst: but
   thou saidst, There is no hope: no; for I have loved strangers, and after
   them will I go.

   25. Prohibe pedem tuum a discalceare (hoc est, ne discalceeris) et guttur
   tuum a siti (quanquam alii existimant esse nomen substantivum יחף, et mihi
   placet; ita vertendum erit, Prohibe pedem tuum a discalceatione et guttur
   tuum a siti;) et dixisti, Acturm est; non, quia dilexi alienos, et post
   illos ambulabo.


   The words of the Prophet, as they are concise, may appear at the first view
   obscure: but his meaning is simply this, — that the insane people could by
   no means be reformed, however much God might try to check that excess by
   which they were led away after idols and superstitions. In the first clause,
   God relates how he had dealt with the people. All the addresses of the
   prophets had this as their object — to make the people to rest contented
   under the protection of God. But he employs other words here, Keep thy foot,
   he says, from unshodding, and thy throat from thirst For whenever there was
   any danger they ran, now to Egypt, then to Assyria, as we have already seen.
   Hence God complains of their madness, because they obeyed not his wise and
   salutary counsels. Had God bidden them to run here and there, either to the
   east or to the west, they might have raised an objection, and say, that the
   journey would be irksome to them; but he only commanded them to remain still
   and quiet. How great, then, was their madness, that they would not with
   quietness wait for the help of God, but weary themselves, and that with no
   benefit? Isaiah says nearly the same thing, but in other words; for he
   expostulated with them, because they underwent every kind of weariness, when
   they might have been protected by God, and be in no way wearied.

   We now, then, comprehend the design of the Prophet: for God first shews that
   the people had been admonished, and that in time; but that they were so
   taken up with their own perverse counsels, that they could not endure the
   words of the prophets. It was the highest ingratitude in them, that they
   refused to remain quiet at home, but preferred to undergo great and severe
   labors without any advantage, according to what is said by Isaiah in another
   place,

   “This is your rest, but ye would not.” (Isaiah 30:15.)

   There is no one who desires not rest and peace; nay, all confess that it is
   the chief good, which all naturally seek. The Prophet says now, that it was
   rejected by the people of Israel. It hence follows, that they were wholly
   insane, for they had lost a desire which is by nature implanted in all men.
   The Prophet, then, does not here simply teach, but reminds the Jews of what
   they had before heard from Isaiah, and also from Micah, and from all the
   other prophets. For God had often exhorted them to remain quiet; and the
   Prophet now upbraids them with ingratitude, because they gave way to their
   own mad folly, and rejected the singular benefit offered them by God.

   Let us then know that the Prophet states here what others before him had
   taught, Keep back, he says, thy foot from unshodding. Some render the last
   word, “from nakedness,” because they wore out their shoes by long journeys;
   but this I think must be understood of what was commonly done, for they were
   wont to make journeys unshod: keep then thy foot from being unshod, [56] and
   thy throat from thirst We know that thirst is very grievous to men: hence
   the Prophet here reproves the madness of the people, — that they were so
   seized with the ardor of an impious passion, that they willfully exposed
   themselves to thirst even by long journeys. As then God required nothing
   from the people but to ask his counsel, their sin was doubled by their
   unwillingness to obey his salutary direction. A plausible excuse, as I have
   already said, might have been alleged, had God dealt in a hard and severe
   manner with the people; but as he was ready kindly and graciously to
   preserve them in a complete state of quietness, no kind of excuse remained
   for them.

   It then follows, Thou hast said, There is not a hope, no The Prophet shews
   here, as to the people, how perverse they were; for they obstinately
   rejected the kind and friendly admonitions which had been given them. They
   say first, There is not a hope, or, it is all over; for יאש iash, in Niphal,
   means to despair, or, to be out of hope. It may be rendered, “It is
   weariness;” and this would not be unsuitable, if taken in this sense, “I
   have thoughtlessly tormented myself more than enough, so that weariness
   itself induces me to rest.” No. The Prophet speaks concisely in order to
   express more strikingly the refractory conduct of the people. By saying,
   “There is not a hope,” it is the same as though he had said, that they
   spurned all exhortations; and then he adds, No. There is no verb put here;
   but an elliptical expression, as I have said, is more forcible to set forth
   the ferocity of the people. [57]

   Isaiah expostulated with them in another way, and blamed them, because they
   did not say, “There is not a hope.” (Isaiah 57:10.) Thus Isaiah and Jeremiah
   seem to be inconsistent; for our Prophet here reproves the people for
   saying, “There is not a hope;” and Isaiah, for not having said so. But when
   the Jews expressly answered, according to this passage, “There is not a
   hope,” they meant that the prophets spent their labor in vain, as they were
   determined to follow their own course to the last. Hence by this expression,
   “There is not a hope,” is set forth the extreme perverseness of the people;
   and he shews that no hope of repentance remained, since they said openly and
   without any evasion that it was all over. But Isaiah reproved the people for
   not saying, that there was not a hope, because they did not acknowledge
   after long experience that they were proved guilty of folly: for after
   having often run to Egypt and then to Assyria, and the Lord having really
   taught them how ill-advised they had been, they ought to have learnt from
   their very disappointments, that the Lord had frustrated their expectations
   in order to lead them to repentance. Justly then does Isaiah say, that the
   people were extremely besotted, because they ever went on in their blind
   obstinacy, and never perceived that God did set many obstacles in their way,
   in order to compel them to go back and to cast aside all their vain hopes,
   by which they deceived themselves. We hence see that there is a complete
   agreement between the two prophets, though their mode of speaking is
   different.

   Jeremiah then introduces the people here as saying expressly, and thus
   avowing their own perverseness, There is not a hope; as though they said,
   “Ye prophets do not cease to stun our ears, but vain and useless is your
   labor; for we have once for all made up our minds, and we can never be
   brought to revoke our resolution.” But what does Isaiah say? He reproves the
   madness of the people, that having been so often deceived by the Egyptians
   as well as by the Assyrians, they did not understand that they ought by such
   trials and experiments to have been brought back to the right way, but
   continued obstinately to follow their own wicked counsels. As to the passage
   before, we perceive what the Prophet means, — that God had kindly exhorted
   the Jews to rest quiet and dependent on his aid; but that they were not only
   stiff-necked, but also insolently rejected the kindness offered to them.

   It then follows, For I have loved strangers, and after them will I go Here
   he exaggerates the sin of the people, for they gave themselves up to
   strangers; and he retains the similitude which we have already observed. For
   as God had taken the people under his own protection, so the obligation was
   mutual: both parties were connected together as by a sacred bond, as the
   case is between a husband and his wife; as he pledges his faith to her, so
   she by the law of marriage is bound to him. Jeremiah here retains this
   similitude, and says that the people were like the basest strumpet, for they
   would not hear the voice of their husband, though he was willing and anxious
   to be reconciled to them. Now, a wife must be wholly irreclaimable when she
   spurns her own husband, who is ready to receive her into favor, and to
   forgive her all the wickedness she may have done. The Prophet then shews,
   that there was in the people so great and so hopeless an impiety, that they
   closed their ears against God who kindly exhorted them to repent; and worse
   still, they shamelessly boasted that they were resolved to worship idols and
   their own fictions, and to reject the only true God. It follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [56] That the word means to be barefooted, or without shoes, is clear from
   Isaiah 20:2-4, and also from 2 Samuel 15:30: and it is nowhere else found
   except here. It being here a noun, it signifies literally barefootedness.
   They are here exhorted not to travel for aid to foreign lands, so as to wear
   out their shoes and thus become barefooted. This was said in contempt, in
   order to pour ridicule on their folly in seeking foreign aid. — Ed.

   [57] It has been disputed whether the negative “no,” refers to the advice
   given at the beginning of the verse, or to the immediately preceding word.
   The latter is the most natural. The word נואש is a participle, as in Job
   6:26. The verse may be thus rendered, — 25. Keep thy foot from being bare
   And thy throat from thirst; But thou hast said, “Hopeless! No; For I have
   loved strangers, And after them will I go.” The first part implies that they
   were pursuing a useless course. The insolent answer was, “Is it hopeless? By
   no means.” The Septuagint omit the negative, and have only “andrioumai — I
   will act manfully;” and this version has been followed by the Syriac and
   Arabic The Vulgate has, “desperavi, nequaquam faciam — I have despaired, I
   will by no means do so.” The most literal rendering is given above, and
   affords the best and the most suitable meaning. To confess that it was a
   hopeless thing to attempt to reform them, is not so appropriate, as to deny
   it to be hopeless to have recourse to foreign alliances: which seems to be
   the import of the passage. This is the view which Gataker seemed most
   inclined to take; and he mentions this rendering, “Should I despair? No.” To
   the same purpose is the version of Jun. and Trem. But Grotius, Henry, and
   Adam Clarke, agree with the explanation of Calvin. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:26

   26. As the thief is ashamed when he is found, so is the house of Israel
   ashamed; they, their kings, their princes, and their priests, and their
   prophets,

   26. Sicut pudor (vel, probrum) furi, cum deprehensus est, ita pudefacti sunt
   domus Israel, reges eorum, principes eorum, et sacerdotes eorum et prophetae
   eorum.


   Some render the words in the future tense, “So ashamed shall be the house of
   Israel,” etc.; and they think that the Prophet is speaking here of the
   punishment which was impending over the people: but I explain the words as
   they are, — that the impiety of the people was so gross, that there was no
   need formally to prove it, as it was so very palpable. Hence the Prophet
   compares the Jews to open thieves, as though he had said, that hypocrites
   among that people gained nothing by their evasions and subterfuges, for
   their impiety was quite public: they were like a thief when caught, who
   cannot deny nor hide his crime. Hence he says that they were caught, as they
   say, in the very act; that is, their flagitious deeds were so conspicuous,
   that whatever objections they might raise, they could not clear themselves,
   but their baseness was known to all. We now then perceive what the Prophet
   means. We have before seen that the people had recourse to many excuses, but
   Jeremiah shews here, that they attained nothing by their evasions, except
   that they more fully discovered their own effrontery, for their dishonesty
   was evident to all; it was so manifest that they could not cover it by any
   cloaks and pretences. [58]

   Nor does he speak only of the common people; but he condemns kings, princes,
   priests, and prophets, as though he had said, that they were become so
   corrupt from the least to the greatest, that having cast off all shame, they
   openly shewed a manifest and gross contempt for God by following their own
   inventions and superstitions. And yet the Jews no doubt attempted by many
   excuses to defend themselves; but God here shakes off all those fallacious
   pretexts, by which they thought to cover their flagitious deeds, and says
   that they were notwithstanding manifestly thieves.

   The Prophet had said before, that the Jews made a different declaration; and
   now he condemns their effrontery: but there is no inconsistency as to the
   meaning. The Jews denied that they were apostates and guilty of perfidy, or
   that they had forsaken the worship of God; they denied this in words; but
   the Prophet, in now proclaiming their shamelessness, does not refer to
   words; for they had ready at hand their false pretensions, as it has been
   already stated: but the Prophet now takes the fact itself as granted, and
   says that they wickedly and perversely resisted God, so that their
   wickedness and obstinacy were past all remedy. It now follows —

     _________________________________________________________________

   [58] The verb rendered “is ashamed,” is in the past tense in Huphal, and
   means “made ashamed,” or, “confounded,” as rendered, by the Targum and the
   Vulgate. The Septuagint have converted it into the future tense, and so have
   the Syriac and the Arabic, which have been followed by most modern versions,
   and by commentators. If we rightly view the whole passage, we shall see
   reason to take this verb as we find it, in the past tense. The verse is an
   answer, as it were, to what is contained in the latter part of the previous
   verse, by a reference to what had already taken place as to the people of
   Judah; and the 30th verse (Jeremiah 2:30) countenances the past tense. This
   and the following verse may be thus rendered, — 26. As a thief is ashamed
   when he is found out, So made ashamed have been the house of Israel, They,
   their kings, their princes, Their priests and their prophets; 27. Who have
   said to the wood, “My father art thou,” And to the stone, “Thou hast
   begotten me.” Though they have turned to me the back and not the face; Yet
   in the time of their calamity, They say, “Arise and save us.” The
   participles in Hebrew are regulated as to their tense by the verbs in the
   passage. Hence אמרים in Jeremiah 2:27, is to be in the same tense with the
   previous verb. The future in the last line is to be in the present, as it
   expresses what was commonly done. Then what was usually said to them is
   mentioned in the following verse, — 28. But where are thy gods, which thou
   hast made for thyself? Let them arise, if they can save thee In the time of
   thy calamity: For according to the number of thy cities Have been thy gods,
   O Judah. Blayney has kept to the past tense as to the last line, and also as
   to the beginning of Jeremiah 2:26. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:27-28

   27. Saying to a stock, Thou art my father; and to a stone, Thou hast brought
   me forth: for they have turned their back unto me, and not their face: but
   in the time of their trouble they will say, Arise, and save us.

   27. Dicentes ligno, Pater meus tu (hoc est, tu es pater meus,) et lapidi, Tu
   genuisti me (si legamuss per י, si autem per ו, Tu genuisti nos;) quia
   verterunt mihi cervicem (dorsum, alii vertunt, vel, posteriora,) et non
   faciem: in tempore autem calamitatis suae dicent (hoc est, dicunt,) Surge et
   serva nos.

   28. But where are thy gods that thou hast made thee? let them arise, if they
   can save thee in the time of thy trouble: for according to the number of thy
   cities are thy gods, O Judah.

   28. Et ubi sunt dii tui, quos fecisti tibi? Surgant, an servent to tempore
   mali tui (hoc est, afflictionis tuae, sicuti prius;) quia secundum numerum
   urbium tuarum fuerunt dii tui, Jehudah.


   The Prophet here confirms what he had before said of the perverse wickedness
   of the people. He shews that he had not said without reason, that their sins
   were extremely gross, and could not be excused by any evasions: for they
   say, he adds, to the wood, Thou art my father, and to the stone, Thou hast
   begotten, me By these words the Prophet shews, that idolatry was so rampant
   among the people, that they openly ascribed to their statues, made of wood
   or stone, the honor due to the only true God.

   But the Prophet points out here what is especially to be detested in
   idolatry, and that is, the transferring of the honor, due to God, to
   statues, not only as to the external act by bending the knee before them,
   but by seeking salvation from them.

   And this is what we ought particularly to notice: for the Papists at this
   day, though they prostrate themselves before their pictures and statues, do
   not yet acknowledge themselves guilty of idolatry, when such a charge is
   brought against them. They say that they worship the statues, not with the
   honor due to God, but with such honor as a servant renders to his master.
   [59] They think that they thus exculpate themselves. But were we to grant
   what they allege, they yet cannot deny but that they address prayers and
   supplications to statues. As then they ask the very statues to save them,
   whatever sophistry they may adopt, it is altogether nugatory: for the
   prophets condemn not merely the outward gesture, the bowing down, and other
   ceremonious acts, as they are called, when they condemned idolaters. What
   then? They condemned them, because they said to statues, Thou art my Father;
   that is, because they ascribed the power, which belongs only to God, to
   statues made of wood or stone. It is indeed certain, that the Jews never
   sunk into so great a depth of sottishness as expressly to profess that gods
   of wood and stone were equal to the true God, and they never said any such
   thing. Yet the Prophet did not calumniate them, in ascribing what is here
   said to them: but as it is clearly evident from other places, the Prophet
   regarded their thoughts rather than their words: for the Jews professed the
   same thing as the Papists of the present day, when they prostrated
   themselves before their statues; they said that they worshipped the only
   true God and sought salvation from him; and yet they thought that the power
   of God was inherent in the statues themselves: hence they said, Thou art my
   father, Thou hast begotten me The case is the same with the Papists of the
   present day. When any one prostrates himself before the statue of Catherine
   or of Christopher, he says, “Our Father.” When he justifies himself in doing
   this, he says that it is done in honor to the one true God: and yet thou
   runnest blindly, now to one statue, and then to another, and muttcrest, “Our
   Father.” There is not the least doubt but that the superstition which now
   prevails under the Papacy, is even more gross than that which prevailed
   among the Jews. But to say nothing of the Papists, because they mutter, “Our
   Father,” before their statues, there is no doubt but that when they present
   their prayers to statues, they consider God’s power to be in them.

   We must now, then, bear in mind, that the Jews were not only condemned,
   because they burnt incense and offered sacrifices to idols, but because they
   transferred the glory of God to their statues, when they asked salvation
   from them. And as this was not done in express words, the Prophet here
   brings to light their impious thoughts; for they did not raise up their
   minds and thoughts to God, but turned them to their statues.

   It afterwards follows, They have turned to me the neck [60] and not the face
   In these words, God again confirms what he had before said, that the
   apostasy or defection of the people was more manifest than what could be
   disguised by any colorings. He then adds, Yet (the ו is to be taken here
   adversatively) in the time of their affliction, they will say, Arise, and
   save us God here complains that the Jews most strangely abused his kindness;
   for they came to him when any grievous calamity constrained them. “What have
   I to do with you?” he says, “Ye are wholly devoted to your idols, ye call
   them your fathers, and ascribe to them the glory of your salvation, when
   things go on peaceably with you; but when your idols in time of distress
   give you no aid, then ye return to me and say, Arise, and save us; but,
   since idols are your fathers, and ye expect salvation from them, I shall
   have nothing to do with you; be contented with your idols, and trouble me no
   more, for I have been forsaken by you.”

   And hence he adds, Where are your gods? Here God laughs to scorn the false
   confidence by which the Jews deceived themselves: Where are your gods, which
   you have made for yourselves? Let them arise, let us see whether they will
   help you in the time of your distress. We now understand what the Prophet
   means: for he shews that the people acted in a most strange manner; for they
   worshipped idols when they were in safety, and afterwards would have God to
   be bound to them; and yet they denied the true God when they fell away unto
   idols. He then shews that they could expect no aid from God; for they robbed
   him of his own power when they devised idols for themselves. But we must
   ever remember what he said, that false gods were counted as fathers and
   authors of salvation by the people.

   The same thing is, no doubt, done at this day under the Papacy; for the
   Papists have their patrons; and when they find that their foolish
   superstitions can do nothing for them, they would have God to help them, and
   yet they leave nothing to him: after having taken away all his glory, and
   divided it as a spoil among dead saints, they would then have God to be
   their helper. But we see what God’s answer to them is, “Where are your
   gods?” etc.

   Now this truth is of use to us; and we hence learn, that we are not to wait
   until we are really, and in the last state of despair, compelled to
   acknowledge that our labors have been useless, while we hoped and prayed for
   help from idols; but that we ought to come directly to God himself for aid
   in our distress.

   God proceeds farther with the sarcasm or the derision which he has employed,
   Where are thy gods? Let them now arise that they may help thee; that is, —
   let them try their utmost whether they can aid thee. According to the number
   of thy cities have been thy gods, O Judah As the people were not satisfied
   with one God, every city chose a patron for itself. “Since, then,
   innumerable gods are invoked by you, how comes it that they do not help
   you?” We hence see that the unbelief of the people is here sharply reproved;
   for they did not acquiesce in God alone, but sought to procure for
   themselves gods without number: there were many cities in the tribe of
   Judah, and there were as many patrons. The one true God would have been
   fully sufficient for them, and would have brought them complete deliverance
   whenever needed; but the one true God they despised, and every city devised
   a god for itself. “Since ye trust,” he says, “in such a multitude, let them
   now arise, that they may succor you; for I, who am one, am despised by
   you.” We now understand what the Prophet means also in this part. It
   afterwards follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [59] The words employed by Calvin are the technical terms, latria and dulia,
   the fictions of the Papists. The first means specifically worship, and the
   second, service, obedience. The verb douleuō in the New Testament is never
   used in the sense of worshipping or adoring, but of serving and obeying: but
   to bow to images or to kiss them, is an act of adoration, and not of
   service. — Ed

   [60] The “neck” here means evidently the hinder part, for it is in contrast
   with “face;” and the word generally means the hinder part. Hence it is
   properly rendered here “back” in our version and by Blayney, and so by the
   Targum and the early versions, except the Syriac, which retains the hinder
   part of the neck. We have no single word, except it be nape, which denotes
   the back part of the neck. There is one in Welsh, “gwegil,“ and so in Latin,
   “cervix,“ and in Greek, auchēn But the Septuagint have adopted here “nōta
   — backs.” — Ed
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:29

   29. Wherefore will ye plead with me? ye all have transgressed against me,
   saith the LORD.

   29. Cur litigatis mecum omnes impie agentes in me (vel, perfide)? dicit
   Jehova.


   Jeremiah concludes here his previous subject: he says that the Jews gained
   nothing by alleging against God that they were innocent, and by thinking
   that they could by mere words escape his judgment, and not only by doing so,
   but also by hurrying on to such a degree of presumption as to challenge God
   himself, and to seek to prove him guilty. But God answers them in one word,
   and says, that they were perfidious. The meaning then is, that the Jews ill
   consulted their own interest in hardening themselves in their obduracy; for
   God would hold them fully convicted of impiety, so that they in vain alleged
   this or that as an excuse. [61]

   Now this passage deserves especial notice: for we know how prone we are by
   nature to hypocrisy; and when God summons us to his tribunal, hardly one in
   a hundred will acknowledge his guilt and humbly pray for forgiveness; but
   the greater part complains, nay almost all murmur against God, and still
   more, they gather boldness, and proudly dare to challenge and defy God.
   Since, then, hypocrisy thus prevails in us and is deeply fixed in the hearts
   of almost all, and since hypocrisy generates insolence and pride against
   God, let us remember what the Prophet says here, — that all who dispute
   against God gain nothing by their excuses, because he will at length detect
   their defection and perfidy. It then follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [61] The verb rendered “plead” in our version, is followed by אל, against or
   in opposition to. There are two other instances, Judges 21:22; Job 33:13.
   Our version in Job is, “Why dost thou strive against him?” The most suitable
   rendering of this passage is, Why should ye contend against (or, with) me?
   Then follows a fact sufficient to put an end to all contention, — All of you
   have rebelled against me, Saith Jehovah. The primary idea of פשע is, to go,
   to pass, to march on. See Isaiah 28:4. Its meaning depends on the
   preposition which follows it. Followed by על, over, it means to transgress,
   it being a going or passing over the limits set by the law, Hosea 8:1, — by
   מ, to go from, to revolt, to apostatize, 2 Kings 8:22,-and by ב, to go
   against, to rebel, as in this passage. Hence the noun has attained various
   meanings-transgression, apostasy, and rebellion. Its precise meaning in any
   case is to be determined by the context. Gataker and Blayhey render the verb
   here the same, — All of you have rebelled against me, saith Jehovah. The
   early versions vary. The Septuagint have “ēsebēsate — ye have acted
   impiously,” the Syriac, “ye have denied me,” — the Arabic, “ye have sinned
   against me,”-and the Vulgate, “ye have forsaken me.” The general idea is the
   same, but the specific one is that of rebelling against God. — Ed
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:30

   30. In vain have I smitten your children; they received no correction: your
   own sword hath devoured your prophets, like a destroying lion.

   30. Frustra (vel, in vanum) castigavi filios tuos, correctionem non
   receperunt; voravit gladius vester prophetas vestros quasi leo vastator.


   Some expound the beginning of this verse as though the meaning were, — that
   God chastised the Jews on account of their folly, because they habituated
   themselves to falsehoods: but the latter clause does not correspond. There
   is therefore no doubt but that God here expostulates with the Jews, because
   he had tried to bring them to the right way and found them wholly
   irreclaimable. A similar expostulation is found in Isaiah,

   “In vain,” he says, “have I chastised you; for from the sole of the foot to
   the crown of the head there is no soundness.”
   (Isaiah 1:6)

   There God shews that he had tried every remedy, but that the Jews, being
   wholly refractory in their spirit, were wholly incurable. Jeremiah speaks
   now on the same subject: and God thus exaggerates the wickedness of the
   people; for he testifies that he had tried whether they would be taught, not
   only by words, but also by scourges and chastisements, but that his labor in
   both instances had been in vain. He spoke before of teaching, “Keep thy foot
   from being unshod, and thy throat from thirst.” The Prophets, then, had
   exhorted the Jews by God’s command to rest quietly. This teaching had been
   useless and unfruitful. God now adds, that he had tried in another way to
   bring them back to a right mind; but this effort had been also useless and
   in vain: In vain have I chastised you; for ye have not received correction

   But he speaks of children, in order to shew that the whole people were
   unteachable: for though lusts boil more in youth, yet their obduracy is not
   so great as in the old; as he who has through his whole life hardened
   himself in the contempt of God, can hardly be ever healed and be amended by
   correction; for old age is of itself morose and difficult to be pleased, and
   the old also think, that wrong is in a manner done them when they are
   reproved: but when the insolence and obduracy of the young are so great that
   they reject all correction, it is more strange and monstrous. The Prophet
   then shews that there was nothing sound or right in that people, since their
   very children refused correction. [62]

   We now perceive his object, — that, as God had sent his prophets, and as
   their labor availed nothing, he now shews, that not only the ears of the
   people had been deaf to wholesome teaching, but that they were hard — necked
   and untamable; for he had tried to correct them by scourges, but effected
   nothing. It follows, their sword has devoured the prophets But I cannot
   finish now.
     _________________________________________________________________

   [62] Blayney renders the word “instruction.” The Septuagint have “paideian
   — discipline: “the Syriac, Vulgate, and the Targum are the same; but the
   Arabic has “instruction — eruditionem.” The strict meaning of the word מוסר,
   is restraint, check, discipline, correction. Not to receive restraint or
   correction, is not to be thereby improved or reformed, but to proceed in the
   same course, see Jeremiah 5:3. The word has also a secondary meaning,
   instruction, as the effect of correction, see Zephaniah 3:7. But here it
   clearly means correction. — Ed
     _________________________________________________________________

   PRAYER

   Grant, Almighty God, that since thou, in thy paternal kindness, daily
   invitest us to thyself, we may not harden ourselves against thy holy and
   salutary admonitions: and whenever thou chastisest us with scourges, may we
   not become obdurate against thee, but learn humbly to submit to thy word,
   and receive thy chastisement, and so profit by both, that we may not be
   exposed to the extreme judgment which thou denouncest on the obstinate; but
   may we, on the contrary, open a way for thy paternal goodness, so that thou
   mayest kindly deal with us, until thou receivest us into that blessed rest
   which has been prepared for us in heaven, through Jesus Christ our Lord. —
   Amen.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Lecture Ninth

   IN yesterday’s lecture, God complained that he had spent labor in vain in
   chastising the children of Israel; for they were of a nature utterly
   untamable and refractory, incapable of being improved. Hence he says, “I
   have in vain endeavored by punishments to bring you back to the right
   way.” But he now exaggerates their crime of obduracy, as they not only had
   rejected wholesome instruction, but had also shed innocent blood, and
   persecuted as their enemies the prophets who had been sent to them from
   above, in order to promote their wellbeing. God then condemns them here not
   only for perverseness, but also for cruelty; for he says, that he had not
   gained his object in leading them to repentance, and also, that they had not
   only been refractory and incorrigible, but that they had besides cruelly
   raged against the prophets: and Jerusalem, we know, had been a slaughter —
   house where many of the prophets had been killed.

   Some explain the passage of false teachers, as though the Prophet had said,
   that it was to be ascribed to the wickedness of the people, that prophets,
   who were false and mendacious, suffered just punishment; and they lay hold
   on one word, even because they are called their prophets. Hence Jerome says,
   that they were said to be your, and not my prophets; as though God thus
   denied that he had given them any commission. But this view is forced and
   strained.

   We must, then, understand the meaning to be what I have stated, — that when
   God used means to heal the vices of the people, the very prophets, the
   ministers of salvation, were cruelly slain by the people. And this
   exposition best suits the expressions which follow, as a devouring lion For
   God says, that the Jews raged against the prophets, as though they had
   entered a forest full of lions. It now follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:31

   31. O generation, see ye the word of the LORD. Have I been a wilderness unto
   Israel? a land of darkness? wherefore say my people, We are lords; we will
   come no more unto thee?

   31. Generatio, vos vidite verbum Jehovae, an deserturn fui Israel? an terra
   caliginis? Quare dixerunt populus meus (hoc est, dixit, sed plurali utitur,
   quia est nomen collectivum) dominati sumus (alii, recessimus,) non veniemus
   amplius ad to.


   The prophet assumes the character, no doubt, of one in astonishment, that he
   might render the sin of the people more detestable: for he speaks as one
   astonished, generation! The word, דור, dur; as it is well known, means an
   age. It is then the same as if he had said, “On what time are we fallen? or
   in what an age do we now live?” We now then perceive the import of the word.
   Then he adds, See ye the word of Jehovah The word, see, seems not to be
   suitable; for he ought to have said, “Attend to, “or “hear.” But he bids
   them to see, and most appropriate is the term; for he does not require the
   people to hear, but, on the contrary, to know, as though he had said, “See
   ye yourselves what this is which the Lord declares.” And he emphatically
   says, אתם atem, “ye yourselves.” For the Jews might have been deservedly
   condemned by all nations, were they brought into judgment. But the Prophet
   shews, that however blind they were, they might see with their own eyes what
   the Lord now says. He does not refer to instruction, but to a fact, as
   though he had said, “The Lord by me expostulates with you; and though there
   should not be present any witnesses or a judge or an umpire, ye yourselves
   are able to understand and know the whole matter.” We hence see how fitly
   the Prophet speaks, when he bids them to see the word of Jehovah [63]

   For he immediately adds, Have I been a desert to Israel? He makes the Jews
   themselves the umpires and judges of the cause, whether they had not
   experienced the bounty of God and had forsaken him, according to his former
   complaint, when he said that God was the fountain of living waters, and that
   they had dug for themselves broken cisterns. Hence he says, “How has it
   happened that ye have departed from me? Have I in vain promised to be
   bountiful and kind to you? Did I disappoint you or your expectation, while
   ye served me? Since then I had not been to you a dark and a gloomy land, a
   land without the light of the sun; but as abundance of blessings had ever
   been found in me, how has it been that you have departed from me?”

   He afterwards mentions another crime, Why has my people said, We are lords
   The verb רדנו, redenu, is variously explained by interpreters. Some derive
   it from ידר, ired, to descend, and think that the י, iod, is supplied by a
   point. But these differ in their views: some refer to the calamities with
   which the Jews had been visited, and others to their apostasy. The first
   give this explanation, “We have descended;” that is, “We have been oppressed
   with calamities, what then can we gain by calling on God, since our affairs
   are in so hopeless a state?” The second draw forth another meaning, “We have
   gone back;” that is, “There is no reason for the prophets to stun our ears
   by their clamors, for we have once for all resolved never to return to God;
   we have wholly renounced him; away with him, let him begone together with
   his exhortations, for we will not attend to them.” Both these expounders
   think it to be the language of despair: but we perceive how they differ; the
   first apply “descend” to the calamities of the people, and the second to
   their perfidy, because they had bidden adieu, as it were, to God, and wished
   not to have any farther intercourse with him.

   But there are others who take the word more grammatically: for רדה, rede,
   and רוד, rud, signifies to be lord, or to rule. I therefore prefer the view
   of those who render the word, We are lords Some take the verb in a passive
   sense, but I know not for what reason: and the comment of others is very
   diluted, “We have kings and counselors.” I consider it to be the language of
   pride and of vain boasting: for the Jews thought themselves to be kings,
   according to what Paul says of the Corinthians,

   “Ye are rich, ye have reigned without us, and I would ye did reign.” (1
   Corinthians 4:8.)

   The Corinthians, being inflated with pride on account of the opulence of
   their city, despised the simplicity of the Gospel; they looked for refined
   things, and were much addicted to novelties. Hence Paul, seeing that they
   despised the grace of God, ironically reproved them, and said, that they
   wished to be rich and to be kings without him, to whom yet as an instrument
   they owed everything. The same vice is what Jeremiah now condemns in that
   people, We are lords, we will not come to thee; as though he had said, “Your
   happiness has hitherto proceeded from me; for whatever you have been, and
   whatever has been given you, ought to be ascribed to me and to my bounty:
   but now without me (for God himself speaks) ye are kings, but by what right
   and by what title? What have you as your own? Why then has my people said,
   We will come no more to thee?” We now understand the real meaning of the
   Prophet.

   As to the subject itself, he in the first place, as I have already said, is
   in a manner astonished at the wickedness of the people, as at something
   monstrous. Hence he exclaims, O generation! as though he had said, that what
   he saw was incredible. Then he immediately adds, see ye yourselves the word
   of Jehovah, This was much more severe, than if he had summoned them before
   God’s tribunal; for he thus proved that their wickedness was extremely
   gross; for they had, without any cause, nay, without any pretext, and
   without shame, renounced God, who had been so bountiful towards them. He
   also in an indirect manner reproved them, because they refused to be
   instructed; for he commanded them to look on the fact itself, inasmuch as
   they were deaf, or having ears they closed them against all instruction;
   for, as we have said, he calls away their attention from the word to the
   fact itself, and this is what interpreters have not observed.

   Then follows an upbraiding, — that God had not been a desert to them; but,
   as the Prophet had before shewed, abundance of all blessings had flowed to
   them so as fully to satisfy them. Since then God had enriched them through
   his blessing, their sin in departing from him was thereby more increased.

   In the last part of the verse God expostulates with them on their
   ingratitude, because they thought themselves to be lords. They were indeed a
   royal priesthood, but it was through God’s favor. They did not reign through
   their own right, they did not reign because they had attained power through
   their own valor or efforts, or through their own merits or their own good
   fortune; how then? only through the favor of another. Though then they were
   kings only on the condition of being subject to the supreme King, yet they
   wished to reign alone, that is, according to their own pleasure; and thus
   trod under their feet the favor of God. It is with this wickedness then that
   the Prophet charges them. And the end of the verse is of the same import, we
   will come no more to thee; as though they stood in no need of God’s aid; for
   they thought that they could supply themselves with whatever was necessary
   to support them. As then they were inflated with much pride, they despised
   the favor of God, as though they stood in no need of the aid of another. It
   follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [63] The beginning of this verse literally is “The age, ye,” that is, “Ye of
   this age,” or generation. He was speaking before more especially of the
   preceding age. He now appeals to the people of that generation, — Ye of this
   age, see, spoken hath Jehovah, — Have I been a wilderness to Israel, Or a
   land of darkness? Why have they said, even my people, “We have ruled, we
   will no more come to thee?” The above rendering of the latter part of the
   first line is favored by the Septuagint, “Hear ye the word of the Lord; thus
   saith the Lord.” The Arabic is the same. The Vulgate has, “See the word of
   the Lord,” — and the Syriac, “Hear the word of the Lord.” Blayney renders
   thus, “Behold ye the cause of Jehovah.” Gataker takes “see” in the sense of
   considering, “See,“ or seriously consider, “the word of the Lord.” The
   particle אם after ה, may be rendered “or,” as in the Syriac See Joshua 5:13.
   The word מאפליה is found in two MSS., מאפילה, which seems to be the true
   reading, countenanced by the Targum, and all the early versions, except the
   Vulgate, which has “serotina — lateward.” Darkness is a common metaphor for
   wretchedness and misery “We have ruled” is the literal rendering of רדנו,
   and there is no other reading. The Septuagint gives the same meaning, though
   the form is different, “We shall not be lorded over — ou
   kurieuthēsometha.” The Arabic is the same. It is the language of proud
   independence. The Targum, the Vulgate, and the Syriac have mistaken the verb
   for ירדנו, which means, to descend, to come down, to bring down. Blayney
   gives the correct idea, “We are our own masters, “which Horsley approves.
   The preterite in Hebrew often includes the present; so the full meaning is,
   “We have ruled and do rule.” — Ed
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:32

   32. Can a maid forget her ornaments, or a bride her attire? yet my people
   have forgotten me days without number.

   32. An obliviscetur puella ornamenti sui? Sponsa ligaminum suorum (ad
   verbum; alii vertunt, murenulas; alii, torques; sed nomen hoc deducitur a
   קשר, quod est ligare; apud nos possemus vertere tressures proprie?) populus
   autem meus (nam vau debet resolvi in adversativam particulam) oblitus est
   mei diebus innumeris (quibus non est numerus, ad verbum )


   God here confirms what is said in the last verse, and would make his people
   ashamed, because they valued him less than girls are wont to value their
   ornaments. The necklaces of young women are indeed nothing but mere trifles,
   and yet we see that girls are so taken with them through a foolish passion,
   that they value such trinkets more than their very life. “How then is it,
   “says God, “that my people have forgotten me? Is there to be found any such
   ornament? Can anything be found among the most valuable jewels and the most
   precious stones which can be compared with me?”

   God shews by this comparison how perverted the minds of the Jews were, when
   they renounced and rejected a benefit so invaluable as to have God as their
   Father, and to be prosperous under his dominion; for nothing necessary for a
   blessed life had been wanting to them as long as they continued the
   recipients of that paternal favor, which God had manifested towards them,
   and wished to shew to them to the end. As then they had found God to have
   been so bountiful, must they not have been more than mad, when they
   willfully rejected his favor? while yet young women commonly set their
   thoughts and affections strongly and permanently on such trifles as are of
   no value. [64] But the Prophet designedly used this similitude, that he
   might introduce what is contained in the next verse: his object was to
   compare the Jews to adulterous women, who being led away by unbridled lust,
   follow wanton lovers. As then he intended to bring this charge against the
   Jews, he spoke expressly of the ornaments of young women; and hence it
   follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [64] The second word, כלה, is rendered “sponsa — a bride,” in our version,
   by Calvin and Blayney, and so by the Vulgate, Syriac, and the Targum, but by
   the Septuagint, “parthenos — a virgin:” and Parkhurst says that it never
   means a bride. The version then ought to be, — Can a maid forget her
   ornaments,
   A virgin her bands? That the word קשרים means bands of some kind is evident,
   as the verb signifies to bind, to join closely. Bands or bandage for the
   breast — stēthodesmida, is the version of the Septuagint; the Arabic and the
   Vulgate are the same. Parkhurst considers that “head-bands” are meant. The
   word is found also in Isaiah 3:20; where the Septuagint render it
   “daktuliois-rings,” and the Targum, “murenulas — chains,” which were of
   gold, and worn around the neck. For any practical purpose it is only
   necessary to know that they were embellishments which young women delighted
   in: and women in every age are too fond of such things, and men too; but the
   case is introduced here only for the sake of illustration. — Ed
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:33

   33. Why trimmest thou thy way to seek love? therefore hast thou also taught
   the wicked ones thy ways.

   33. Cur bonificas (id est, paras, concinnas) vias tuas ad quaerendum amorem?
   itaque etiam pravitates docuisti in viis tuis.


   This verse is differently explained: but the Prophet simply means; that the
   Jews were like lascivious women, who not only despise their husbands at
   home, but ramble here and there in all directions, and also paint their
   faces and seek for themselves all the charms of wantonness. He says that the
   Jews had acted in this way; and hence he says that they made beautiful their
   ways The verb in Hebrew has a wide meaning: it means to prepare, to
   conciliate favor. But its import here is, as though the Prophet had said,
   “Why dost thou disguise and paint thyself like strumpets, who use many
   artifices to allure young men and to inflame their lusts? why then dost thou
   undertake so much labor to gain a meretricious hire?” We shall hereafter see
   why he says this; for he upbraids them for applying to the Assyrians and the
   Egyptians.

   It was a common thing with the Prophets to compare the people to lovers; for
   the Jews, while they ought to have been firmly attached to God, (like a
   chaste woman, who does not turn her eyes here and there, nor gad about, but
   has respect to her husband alone,) thought to seek safety now from the
   Assyrians, then from the Egyptians. This sinful disposition is then what the
   Prophet here condemns; and hence he speaks of them metaphorically as of an
   adulterous woman, who despises her husband and rambles after any she can
   find, and seeks wanton and silly young men in all places, and subjects
   herself to the gratification of all. We now then understand what the Prophet
   means.

   The words must be noticed: he says, Why makest thou fine thy ways? But he
   refers here to the care which a wanton woman takes to adorn her person, as
   though he had said, “Why dost thou thus prepare thyself? and why dost thou
   seek for thyself what is splendid and elegant, that thy appearance may
   deceive the eyes of the simple?” For the Jews might have remained safe and
   secure under God’s protection, and might have been so without any calamity.
   As a husband is content with the beauty of his wife, and seeks no
   adventitious and refined elegancies; so God required nothing from that
   people except fidelity, like a husband, who requires chastity in his wife.
   The meaning then is, — “As a wife, really attached to her husband, has no
   need to undergo much labor, for she knows that her own native beauty pleases
   him, nor does she labor much to gain the heart of her husband, for the best
   recommendation is her chastity; so ye might have lived without any trouble
   by only serving me and keeping my law: but now what is your chastity? ye are
   like wanton women, who labor to gain the hearts of adulterers; for as they
   burn with lust, so there is no end nor limits to their attempts to seek
   embellishments; and they torment themselves, only that they might attach
   adulterers to themselves. Such then are ye (says God;) for ye spend much
   care and labor in seeking for yourselves strange lovers.”

   He afterwards adds, Therefore thou hast also taught lewdnesses He alludes to
   the words he had before used, Thou hast made fine (or fair) thy ways: and
   now he says, thou hast also taught wickednesses by thy ways He declares that
   the Jews were worse than the Assyrians and the Egyptians, as a lascivious
   woman is far worse than all the adulterers whom she captivates as her
   paramours. For when a young man is not deceived, and the devil does not
   apply the fagot, he may continue chaste and pure; but when an impudent and
   wanton woman entices him, it is all over with him. The Prophet then says,
   that the Assyrians and the Egyptians were innocent when compared with his
   own nation. How so? “Because they have been led away,” he says, “by your
   allurements, like young men, who are destroyed by the fallacious ornaments
   of strumpets; for it is the same as though they had fallen into snares: the
   evil then has proceeded from you, and the fault lies with you. [65]

   We now understand the Prophet’s meaning: for he condemns the Jews, because
   they afforded an occasion of evil both to the Assyrians and to the
   Egyptians, while they of their own accord sought their favor. It now follows
   —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [65] The exposition of this verse is no doubt materially correct. The words
   have been variously rendered, On the first clause there is a general
   agreement, The verb “taught” in the second, is in the first person in the
   received text; and to this reading Blayney gives the preference, and thus
   renders the line, — Therefore also have I taught calamities thy ways. That
   is, “that God had directed calamities where to find them.” But this is
   rather a remote idea. In favor of the second person, “thou hast taught,“ are
   several MSS., all the early versions and the Targum; and it is what has been
   by most adopted. “The wicked ones” of our version is a rendering not
   countenanced by any of the ancient versions, nor by the Targum; all render
   it evil or evils or wickednesses. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:34

   34. Also in thy skirts is found the blood of the souls of the poor
   innocents: I have not found it by secret search, but upon all these.

   34. Etiam in alis tuis repertus est sanguis animarum pauperum innocentum;
   non in suffossione repertae erant, sed super omnibus his (alii vertunt quia
   in onmibus illis; et particula est causalis, sed tamen hic adversative debet
   resolvi, quemadmodum multis locis.)


   The Prophet repeats, as I think, what he had before said, — that the
   wickedness of his nation was incorrigible; for they repented not when
   warned, but on the contrary raged like wild beasts against the Prophets and
   religious teachers. Those interpreters are mistaken who think that the
   savage cruelty of the Jews in general is here condemned; and all are of this
   opinion. But the Prophet no doubt enhances this evil, by saying, that the
   Jews were not only obstinate in their vices, but also raged furiously
   against the Prophets. Hence he shews again, that God had used all remedies
   to heal the Jews, but without effect, for what better medicine could have
   been offered than for the Prophets to reprove the people and to shew to them
   how wickedly they had departed from God? God then wished thus to correct the
   vices of his own people; but so far was he from effecting anything, that at
   Jerusalem and through the whole of Judea, the Prophets were slaughtered, and
   the whole land was filled with and polluted by their blood.

   Hence he says, Even in thy wings has been found the blood of the souls of
   the poor innocents. He calls the borders of garments wings. He seems to say,
   that these slaughters were not hid, for the Jews were besprinkled with blood
   to the very extremities of their garment; as though he had said, “There is
   no cause for me to deal sharply with you in this instance; for your
   filthiness is most apparent: ye have not only been rebellious against my
   teaching, but ye have also cruelly murdered my prophets. If ye ask, Where
   these slaughters are to be found? Even in your wings, on the borders of your
   garments; so that your crimes are fully known.” We now perceive what the
   Prophet means.

   We must also notice the import of the particle גם, gam, also, or even. Their
   cruelty was worse and more nefarious, because they thus rose up against
   their own physicians; for the prophets, as it has been said, were the
   ministers of their safety. As then they thus raged against God’s favor so as
   to murder his prophets, it became still more evident, that they were utterly
   irreclaimable.

   He afterwards adds what serves for a confirmation. They have not been found
   in digging under Some give another explanation; but their opinion is right
   who think, that the Prophet alludes to what is said by Moses in Exodus 22:2,
   — that if a thief should be found in digging under, (or undermining,) he
   might be killed with impunity: for he who thus breaks through into the
   houses of others, is equal to a robber in audacity; and he ought to be
   counted not only a thief, but also as one guilty of manslaughter and felony.
   God then says, that the Prophets, who had been slain by the Jews, had not
   been found in digging up, that is, had not been found guilty of any crime,
   either of robbery or of murder: for he mentions a particular act, instead of
   the general crime. But it has been on account of all these things; that is,
   “because they boldly dared to reprove you, because they severely condemned
   your vices, because they discovered your baseness, because they were enemies
   to your perfidy and to your sins: as then the prophets had thus by the
   divine Spirit carried on war with your sins, they have on this account been
   murdered by you. [66]

   We see how well the whole passage reads, provided it be applied to the
   prophets only. It was not indeed the object of Jeremiah to condemn murders
   generally among the Jews, but to shew that they were the enemies of the
   prophets, because they were opposed to every good and sound counsel, and
   were incapable of receiving instruction. The mistake of other expounders is
   hereby made evident: for in the last clause they touch neither heaven nor
   earth. It follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [66] Our version of this text seems on the whole the best. “Blood,” דם, is
   to be taken here in a collective sense, as the verb to which it belongs is
   plural. Instead of “poor innocents, “it ought rather to be “the innocent
   poor,“ as the noun in Hebrew generally precedes its adjective. “Found” is in
   the first person, and there is no different reading, and it is so in the
   Septuagint, and the Vulgate, though the Syriac and Arabic give the second
   person, and the Targum the third person plural, as Calvin does. The last
   word is rendered “these” in the Vulgate and the Targum; but “oak” in the
   Septuagint, the Syriac, and the Arabic, and adopted by Blayney, but
   disapproved by Houbigant and Horsley As to the word, rendered in our
   version, “secret search,” the early versions have pit, pits, or ditches, and
   so the Targum Blayney renders it “a digged hole,“ of which Horsley approves;
   and he refers, as an illustration, to Leviticus 17:13, and to Ezekiel 24:7.
   The word means digging, and seems to be used here metaphorically for
   searching; there is no need of adding “secret” to it, — Also in thy skirts
   has been found
   The blood of the souls of the innocent poor:
   Not by searching have I found it,
   But upon all these (i.e., skirts.) The reference is to what is said in
   Jeremiah 2:30, where the Jews are charged with the killing the prophets. As
   to “the blood, “we find a similar passage in Ezekiel 24:7, 8. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:35

   35. Yet thou sayest, Because I am innocent, surely his anger shall turn from
   me. Behold, I will plead with thee, because thou sayest, I have not sinned.

   35. Et dixisti (hoc est, dixisti tamen; nam copula hic accipitur pro tamen,)
   certe (nam כי causalis particula hic audaciam notat, vel illam jactantiam
   plenam impudentiae, ut auderent asserere Iudaei se esse innoxios, certe) ego
   sum munda (ego sum innocens;) tantum recedat furor ejus a me: Ecce ego
   judico to (vel, contendam tecum in judicio,) quia dixisti, non peccavi.


   The Prophet here shews that the Jews were possessed of such a brazen front,
   that they could not be led by any admonitions to feel any shame. Though then
   they were like adulterous women, and though they gave meretricious hire to
   such as they ran to in all parts, and though also they had murdered the
   prophets and the pious ministers of God, yet they boasted, as persons
   conscious of no evil, that they were innocent.

   Thou hast yet said; that is, “How darest thou to pretend to be innocent,
   since thou art proved to be guilty, not by allegations, but by manifest and
   glaring proofs?” In short, the Prophet shews that the condition of the
   people was past remedy, for they would not receive any admonition; nay, they
   dared, as it were with the front of brass, obstinately to boast that they
   were innocent: Thou hast said, (he still speaks of a woman, in the feminine
   gender,) Thou hast yet said, surely I am clean Thus hypocrites not only
   excuse themselves, and allege vain pretences, but dare to come forth
   publicly, and to fly as it were above the clouds, elated by their own self
   — confidence. “Who will dare to allege anything against me?” Thus hypocrites
   willfully and impertinently challenge all the servants of God and seek by
   their own presumption to close the mouth of all. The Prophet now condemns
   this petulancy in the Jews; for though they were manifestly proved guilty,
   yet they boastingly asserted that they were innocent. Only (אך, ak, I take
   here to mean only) depart, etc. The Prophet upbraids the Jews with another
   crime, — that they said, that wrong was done to them by God in seeking to
   bring them to a right mind by punishment and by reproofs. For God, as it is
   well known, had inflicted many punishments on the Jews, and had also added
   serious reproofs. He tried by these means to find out whether they were
   capable of being healed. What did they say? “I am innocent; and God is angry
   with me without a cause. Let him remove his anger from me;” that is, “only
   let not God deal severely with us, nor use his supreme authority, and we
   shall be able to prove our innocency.” Thus ungodly men, when urged with
   severe warnings, vomit forth their blasphemies against God, — “O what can I
   do? I know that I am not able to resist; God fights with a shadow when he
   afflicts me; his violence I must indeed bear though he may overwhelm me; yet
   he doeth me wrong: but were he to deal justly and fairly with me, I could
   prove that I do not deserve these evils.” Such then was the language of the
   Jews, — only depart let his fury from me, we could then shew that we are
   just, or at least excusable.

   Now also in this part we perceive the design of the Prophet: it was to shew,
   that the Jews not only dared dishonestly and proudly to claim innocency for
   themselves, but hesitated not to contend with God, and to intimate that he
   with too much severity oppressed them, and did not treat them justly, but
   announced a cruel sentence for the purpose of overwhelming them.

   Behold, he says, I will judge thee, because thou hast said, I have not
   sinned Some give this version, “I judge, or, condemn thee.” But there is
   here no doubt a contrast between the fury of God and his judgment. The
   people said, that God was too rigorous; this was his fury: God now mentions
   his judgment. “There is no reason,” he says, “for you to allege such a
   pretext as this, as it will vanish into nothing; for I will in judgment
   contend with you;” that is, “I will really prove that I am a just judge and
   not a tyrant, that I execute just punishments and according to the law, and
   that I am not like a man in anger, who takes vengeance on his enemies and
   does so precipitantly and rashly: I will shew,” he says, “that I am a just
   judge.”

   We may hence gather a profitable instruction. Let it in the first place be
   observed, that nothing is so displeasing to God as this headstrong
   presumption, that is, when we seek to appear innocent, while our own
   conscience condemns us. Then in the second place observe, that all who thus
   perversely rebel and strive dishonestly and shamelessly to defend their own
   vices, contend at the same time with God: for false excuses have ever this
   tendency — to charge God with unjust severity. But we see what such men gain
   for themselves; for God shews that he will be at length their judge, and
   that he will openly discover the vices of those who thought that they could
   excuse themselves by evasions and by false charges against himself. They
   then who thus obstinately resist God, must at length, according to what the
   Prophet declares, come to this end, — that they will be constrained to
   acknowledge that God has not been too violently angry with them, but has
   only executed a just punishment. [67]
     _________________________________________________________________

   [67] The literal rendering of this verse is as follows: — 35. And thou hast
   said, “Verily I have been innocent; Surely turned away has he his anger from
   me:“ Behold I will contend in judgment with thee, On account of thy saying,
   “I have not sinned.” The Septuagint have rendered the second line, “Let his
   anger be turned away from me;” the Vulgate and the Arabic are the same. The
   Syriac is, “therefore he turns away his anger from me.” “Turned away is his
   anger,“ is the Targum, Piscator, Jun. and Trem. Blayney renders it, — Surely
   his wrath shall turn from me. There is no reason for construing the verb in
   the future tense, or in the imperative mood. It is in the past tense, and
   there is no other reading. The claim of innocency is made on the supposition
   that God had turned away his displeasure. Hence the declaration that follows
   — that God would contest the matter — would bring it as it were into trial,
   as the verb here when in Niphal means. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   PRAYER

   Grant, Almighty God, that since we are loaded with so many vices, and
   provoke thee so often, yea, daily and in ways innumerable, — O grant, that
   we may not at last become hardened against thy godly admonitions, but be
   teachable and submissive and in time repent, lest our wantonness and
   hardness should constrain thee to put forth thy powerful hand against us;
   but as we have hitherto experienced thy patental kindness, so may we in
   future be made partakers of it, and thus become more and more accustomed to
   bear thy yoke, until having at length completed our warfare, we shall come
   to that blessed rest, which has been provided for us in heaven, through
   Christ our Lord. — Amen.

     _________________________________________________________________

   Lecture Tenth
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:36

   36. Why gaddest thou about so much to change thy way? thou also shalt be
   ashamed of Egypt, as thou wast ashamed of Assyria.

   36. Quid discurris tantopere ad mutandum vias tuas? Etiam ab Egypto
   pudefies, sicuti pudefacta es ab Assur.


   The Prophet goes on with the same subject. He had said before that the
   people were like an unfaithful wife, who having left her husband rambles
   here and there to gratify her lusts. For this view he now gives the reason;
   for he might have appeared to treat the people too severely, had not the
   fact been pointed out as it were by the finger; and this he does now. He
   says, that they ran here and there, not in a common manner, but in a way to
   render evident their shameful levity, such as is seen in strumpets, who
   without any shame seek either adulterers or fornicators.

   But I have already briefly shewn what the Prophet means: When any danger was
   nigh, the Jews sought aid, now in Egypt, then in Assyria. Yet they knew that
   this was forbidden them; not that it was in itself an evil or a bad thing to
   seek help from neighbors; but because it was God’s will that the safety and
   security of that people should be dependent on him only; for he had taken
   them under his safeguard. As then the Jews were God’s dependents, they ought
   to have acquiesced in his protection. When they wandered here and there, it
   was an evidence of unbelief; and what they attributed to the Egyptians or to
   Assyrians, they took away from their own God, who had promised that their
   safety would be the object of his care. Hence he compares these movements to
   wanton levity; they were like those of strumpets, who ramble in all
   directions. Now a strumpet must be wholly shameless, when she thus seeks the
   gratification of her lust: for harlots often wait for the coming of lovers;
   but when they ramble everywhere, they are altogether abominable. This then
   is what the Prophet now means, that is, that the Jews ran here and there;
   and thus it was, that they changed their ways

   There remains indeed often in harlots some natural love; but it is a proof
   of a brutish, shameless, and monstrous lust, when a woman seeks the company
   of any one she may see, or when a man lusts after any woman he may meet
   with. When there is such a shamelessness as this, it appears that no modesty
   remains, nor even what is natural; for as I have already said, it ought to
   be deemed monstrous, when a woman is inflamed with lust at the sight of any
   one. And yet this lewdness is what the Prophet reprobates in the Jews when
   he says, that they ran here and there to change their ways: so that their
   love never continued, but they lusted after any they met with; nay, they
   went here and there to allure them. This subject is spoken of oftener and
   more at large by Ezekiel; and we shall find this comparison used also in
   other parts of this book. But it is enough for me to mention briefly the
   design of the Prophet. [68]

   He then adds, Ashamed shalt thou also be of the Egyptians, as ashamed thou
   hast been of the Assyrians Before the time of Hezekiah, the Jews had made a
   treaty with the Assyrians against the Syrians and the Israelites, as it is
   well known; and then against the Egyptians; for soon after a war arose
   between them and the Egyptians, who had been their confederates, and
   changing their policy, they went for help to Assyria. They afterwards
   reconciled themselves to their ancient enemies; but this second treaty also
   turned out unhappily. Hence the Prophet says, that the end would be the same
   with what they had before experienced. God had indeed chastised their
   ungodly defection when they went to Assyria. He now says, that no better
   success would attend the help of the Egyptians than what attended the help
   of the Assyrians. The Jews, we know, were ever subjected to plunder, and
   suffered more loss from their associates than from their open enemies. It
   was the just reward of their impiety and defection. God then declares that
   he would be the avenger of this second defection, as he had been of the
   former. It follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [68] The idea of gadding, or of running here and there, is not countenanced
   by any of the early versions. The notion of vileness or degradation is what
   the versions convey. The Vulgate is, — Quinn vilis factus es nimis, iterans
   vias tuas!
   How extremely worthless art thou become, iterating thy ways! The other
   versions are nearly of the same general import. Blayney’s version is, — Why
   wilt thou make thyself exceedingly vile, In repeating over again thy ways?
   Modern critics have considered the verb to be אזל, and not זל. It no doubt
   may be either. As shame is threatened at the end of the verse, the latter
   verb is the most suitable, — Why shouldest thou become wholly degraded By
   repeating thy course?
   Even by Egypt shalt thou be put to shame, As thou hast been put to shame by
   Assyria. “Course,” or way, means here a proceeding, and to repeat it is to
   pursue a course similar to what had been previously adopted. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 2:37

   37. Yea, thou shalt go forth from him, and thine hands upon thine head: for
   the LORD hath rejected thy confidences, and thou shalt not prosper in them.

   37. Et jam ab hoc (ab hac re, hoc est, propter hoc scelus) egredieris, et
   manus tuae super caput tuum, quia detestatur Jehova confidentias tuas, et in
   illis non prospere tibi succedet.


   He expresses more clearly what he had said of the shameful character of his
   own nation, — that the Jews, who thought that their safety would be secured
   by the Egyptians, were seeking their own entire ruin. This seemed to them
   indeed incredible; for as the Egyptians were neighbors, and as the Jews then
   only feared the Assyrians and Chaldeans, who were afar off, they thought
   that they had the best prospect: “What! our enemies are distant from us
   twenty or thirty days’ journey; and those who are prepared to help us will
   be soon with us at the shortest warning.” Hence the Jews thought, as we have
   said, that they were quite safe. But the Prophet here declares, that they
   were greatly mistaken; for on account of this wickedness, that is, because
   they trusted in their unlawful and accursed treaty, and promised themselves
   peace from their enemies, or thought that they could easily overcome them;
   on this account, he says, thou shalt go forth: but nothing could have been
   less credible to the Jews than what the Prophet said; for as the Egyptians
   opposed themselves as a wall against the Chaldeans, and were deemed
   unassailable, who could have otherwise thought but that the Jews would be
   preserved quiet in their own country? But he says, Go forth shalt thou, and
   thine hands on thy head [69]

   By this gesture he means extreme despair; for women did either strike or
   extend their arms when any great calamity happened, as we see it done often
   in the present day; for when a woman, not able to keep within due bounds,
   either loses a husband, or expects some very great calamity, she beats her
   breast, or raises up her hands, according to what is said here. Jeremiah
   then mentions this gesture as an evidence of extreme despair; as though he
   had said, “The treaty which fills the Jews with so much confidence shall be
   so far from being advantageous to them, that it will, on the contrary, bring
   on them utter ruin and disgrace. [70] But the reason which follows ought
   especially to be observed, because abhor does Jehovah thy confidences The
   Prophet here shews why he had spoken so severely. It might have appeared
   that he spoke hyperbolically when he said, that the people were like an
   abandoned harlot, who rambled here and there in all directions: but the
   reason here given ought to have been sufficient to take away all evasions,
   and that is, that they foolishly trusted in those fallacious helps which
   they knew were condemned by God. Had this been permitted by God, they would
   not have been so severely reprimanded; but as God had forbidden them to flee
   to the Egyptians, it was in the first place a disallowed confidence; and in
   the second place, they thus despised the aid of God, and cast aside, as it
   were, all his promises: for as their hearts were fixed on the Egyptians, and
   as they thought that their safety would be secured by them; so their prayer
   to God became not only cold, but almost wholly extinguished.

   We hence see that the Prophet did not exceed due limits when he spoke
   against the Jews with so much displeasure, and condemned them in such
   reproachful terms; for they had transferred the glory due to God to the
   Egyptians, when they considered them to be the authors of their safety; and
   they had thus despised the promises of God, so that there was no attention
   given to prayer: Abhor, then, does Jehovah thy confidences [71]

   He then adds, Thou shalt not prosper in them. It ought to be carefully
   observed, that whatever we resolve to do that is not approved by God, cannot
   possibly succeed; for God will subvert all our hopes. Let us then know that
   here is set before us the punishment of all unbelievers, who, being not
   content with God’s protection, wander after vain and false objects of trust,
   and prefer to have men propitious to them rather than God himself. Now
   follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [69] There are three other expositions of the words rendered by Calvin, “on
   this account.” One is that of our version, “from him;” the second is, “from
   hence,” i e , from Egypt, adopted by Piscator, Grotius, and Blayney; and the
   third is, “from here,” i e , from this place, their own land; which, as
   Gataker says, is probably “the genuine sense:” it is a threatening, that
   they were to be led into captivity. The rendering of the Septuagint is,
   “enteuthen — from hence,” or from this place; of the Vulgate, “ab ista —
   from that,” meaning, evidently Egypt; of the Syriac and Targum, “ex hoc —
   from this;” and of Arabic, “illinc — from thence.” The particle זה is
   “this,” and not “that.” — Ed

   [70] “The gesture” mentioned here, a striking example of, we find in 2
   Samuel 13:19. Many consider the ו here as having the meaning of “with,” and
   render the line as Blayney does, — With thy hands upon thy head. But more
   consistent with the genius of the language is to regard the auxiliary verb
   to be understood, — And thy hands shall be on thy head. There is a similar
   phrase in Isaiah 35:10, which ought to be rendered thus, — And everlasting
   joy shall be upon their heads. — Ed.

   [71] The verb for “abhor” is מאם, which means to reject, that is, with
   disdain and contempt; and the same when followed by ב, though often rendered
   “despise” in our version. It is rendered “reject, “without the ב, in 1
   Samuel 15:23; Jeremiah 7:29; and “despise” being followed by ב in Judges
   9:38; Jeremiah 4:30. The early versions and the Targum mostly differ, and
   none of them give the specific meaning of the verb, except that the
   Septuagint give its meaning when not followed by ב, “apōsato — has
   rejected.” The whole verse may be thus rendered, — 37. Also from this place
   shalt thou go forth, And thy hands shall be on thy head: For rejected has
   Jehovah those in whom thou trustest, And thou shalt not prosper by them. It
   is not correct to render מבטחיך, “thy confidences;” for the word means “thy
   confided ones,“ it being a Huphal participle. The Syriac renders it, “those
   who afford thee confidence — fiduciam tibi praebentibus.” Blayney’s version
   is, “the objects of thy trust;” and he translates the verb, “reprobated.”
   That this is its meaning when followed by ב is evident from Jeremiah 6:30.
   — Ed
     _________________________________________________________________
     _________________________________________________________________

   CHAPTER 3
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 3:1

   1. They say, If a man put away his wife, and she go from him, and become
   another man’s, shall he return unto her again? shall not that land be
   greatly polluted? but thou hast played the harlot with many lovers; yet
   return again to me, saith the LORD.

   l. Dicendo, si dimiserit vir uxorem suam, et profecta ab eo, fuepit viri
   alterius, (id est, transierit ad alium virum) an revertetur ad eam adhuc?
   Annon pollutione polluta est terra in hoc? et tu scortata es cum sociis
   multis; revertere tamen ad me, dicit Jehova.


   Many regard this verse as connected with the last, and thus read them
   connectedly, “God hates false confidences, because he says, “etc. But this
   seems not to me to be suitable; for Jeremiah brings before us here a new
   subject, — that God seeks to be reconciled to his people, according to what
   a husband does, who desires to receive into favor an unchaste wife, and is
   ready to grant her full pardon, and to take her again as a chaste and
   faithful wife. This verse, then, cannot be connected with the foregoing, in
   which, as we have seen, the people are condemned. The word לסמר lamer, means
   the same, as I think, as when we say in French, par maniere de dire, or as
   when it is commonly said, “Suppose a case.” For the Prophet does not here
   introduce God as the speaker, but lays before us a common subject, with this
   preface, לאמר, lamer, that is, “Be it so, that a man divorces his wife, and
   she becomes allied to another husband, can she again return to her first
   husband? This is not usually done; but I will surpass whatever kindness
   there may be among men, for I am ready to receive thee, provided thou wilt
   in future observe conjugal fidelity, and part with thy adulteries and
   adulterers.” [72]

   As to the main point, there is here no ambiguity: for God shews that he
   would be reconciled to the Jews, provided they proceeded not obstinately in
   their sinful courses. But in order to set forth more fully his mercy, he
   uses a comparison which must be a little more attentively considered. He had
   before said that he held the place of a husband, that the people occupied
   the station of a wife; and then he complained of the base perfidy of the
   people, who had forsaken him, and said that they had acted like a wife who,
   having despised her husband, prostituted herself to such adulterers as might
   happen to meet her: but he now adds, “Behold, if a man dismisses his wife,
   and she becomes the wife of another, he will never receive her again.” And
   this was forbidden by the law. “But I am ready, “he says, “to receive thee,
   though I had not given thee the usual divorce at my pleasure, as husbands
   are wont to do who repudiate their wives, when there is anything displeasing
   in them.” It is not a simple comparison, as many think; (I know not whether
   all think so, for I have not read any who seem to understand the true
   meaning;) for God does not simply compare himself to a husband who has
   repudiated his wife for adultery; but as I have already said, there are here
   two clauses. The Jews were then wont to divorce their wives even for slight
   causes, and for no cause at all.

   Now, God speaks thus by Isaiah,

   “Shew me the bill of your mother’s divorcement,”
   (Isaiah 50:1)

   as though he had said, “I have not repudiated your mother.” For if any one
   then departed from his wife, the law compelled him to take some blame on
   himself; for what was the bill of divorcement? It was a testimony to the
   wife’s chastity; for if any one was found guilty of adultery, there was no
   need of divorcement, as it was a capital crime. (Leviticus 20:10;
   Deuteronomy 22:22.) Hence adulteresses were not usually divorced; but if any
   woman had conducted herself faithfully towards her husband, and he wished to
   repudiate her, the law constrained him to give her the bill of divorcement:
   “I repudiate this wife, not because she hath broken or violated the bond of
   marriage, but because her manners are not agreeable, because her beauty does
   not please me.” Thus the husbands were then commanded to take some of the
   blame on themselves. Hence the Lord says by Isaiah,

   “Shew me the bill of your mother’s divorcement;”

   as though he had said, “She has departed from me; she has broken the bond of
   marriage by her fornications; I am not then in fault for being alienated
   from you.”

   God then does not mean in this place, that he had divorced the people; for
   this would have been wrong and unlawful, and could not have been consistent
   with the character of God. But as I have already said, there is here a
   twofold comparison. “Though a husband should fastidiously send away his
   wife, and she through his fault should be led to contract another marriage,
   and become the partner of another, as though in contempt of him, he could
   hardly ever bear that indignity, and become reconciled to her: but ye have
   not been repudiated by me, but are like a perfidious woman, who shamefully
   prostitutes herself to all whom she may meet with; and yet I am ready to
   receive you, and to forget all your base conduct.” We now then understand
   the import of the words.

   In the second clause there is a comparison made from the less to the
   greater. For the return into favor would have been easier, if the repudiated
   wife had afterwards become acceptable to him, though she had become the wife
   of another; but when an adulteress finds her husband so willing of himself,
   and ready to grant free pardon, it is certainly an example not found among
   mortals. Thus we see that God, by an argument from the less to the greater,
   enhances his goodness towards the people, in order to render the Jews the
   less excusable for rejecting so pertinaciously a favor freely offered to
   them.

   But it may be asked, why the Prophet says, By pollution shall not this land
   be polluted, or, through this? I shall speak first of the words, and then
   refer to the subject. Almost all give this version, “Is not that land by
   pollution polluted.” But I know not what sense we can elicit by such a
   rendering, except, it may be, that God compares a divorced wife to the land,
   or that he, by an abrupt transition, transfers to the land what he had said
   of a divorced wife, or rather that he explains the metaphor which had been
   used. If this sense be approved, then the copulative which follows must be
   rendered as a causative, which all have rendered adversatively, and rightly
   too, “But thou.” I then prefer to read ההיא, eeia, by itself, “by this;”
   that is, when a wife returns again to her first husband, after having
   married another; for the law, as we have said, forbad this; and the husband
   must have become an adulterer, if he took again the wife whom he had
   repudiated. Liberty was granted to women by divorce; not that divorce was by
   God allowed; but as the women were innocent, they were released, for God
   imputed the fault to the husbands. And when the repudiated wife married
   another man, this second marriage was considered legitimate. If, then, the
   first husband sought to recover the wife whom he had divorced, he violated
   the bond of the second marriage. For this reason, and according to this
   sense, the Prophet says, that the land would by this become polluted; as
   though he had said, “It is not lawful for husbands to take back their wives,
   however ready they may be to forgive them; but I require no other thing but
   your return to me.”

   As to the words, we now see that the Prophet does not say without reason,
   “By this;” that is, when a woman unites herself to one man, and then to
   another, and afterwards returns to her first husband; for society would thus
   be torn asunder, and also the sacred bond of marriage, the main thing in the
   preservation of social order, would be broken.

   It is added, But thou hast played the harlot with many companions [73] What
   we have before observed is here confirmed, — that the people had been
   guilty, not only of one act of adultery, but that they were become like
   common strumpets, who prostitute themselves to all without any difference;
   and this is what will be presently stated. Those whom he calls companions or
   friends were rivals. He says, Yet return to me, saith Jehovah: by which he
   intimated, — “Pardon is ready for thee, provided thou repentest.”

   An objection may, however, be here raised, — How could God do what he had
   forbidden in his law? The answer is obvious, — No other remedy could have
   been given to preserve order in society when men were allowed to repudiate
   their wives, except by adding this restraint, as a proof that God did not
   favor their levity and changeableness. It was thus necessary, for the
   interest of society, to punish such men as were too morose and rigid, by
   withholding from them the power of recovering the wives whom they had
   dismissed. It might otherwise have been, that one changed his love the third
   day, or in a month, or in a year, and demanded his wife. God then intended
   to put this restraint on divorce, so that no man, who had put away his wife,
   could take her again. But the case is very different as to God himself: it
   is therefore nothing strange that he claims for himself the right of being
   reconciled to the Jews on their repentance. It follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [72] The word at the beginning of this verse has puzzled most, the form
   being so unusual. It is left out by the Septuagint, the Syriac, and the
   Arabic The Vulgate has “vulgo dieitur — it is commonly said.” But ל means at
   times “according to;” and it may be so rendered here, — According to what is
   said, If a man sends away his wife, And she goes from him and becomes
   another man’s, Is he to return to her again? Polluted, shall it not be
   polluted, even that land? But thou hast played the harlot with many friends,
   Yet return to me, saith Jehovah. The particle הן in the first line is
   Chaldee for אם; it is so rendered by the Targun and the early versions. The
   pronoun ההיא after “land” cannot be rendered as Calvin proposes; it agrees
   in gender with “land.” It is singular that the Septuagint, the Vulgate, and
   the Arabic, have “woman” instead of “land;” yet the Syriac and Targum retain
   “land:“ but in them all this pronoun is construed with the noun. Gataker
   takes “land” here, and in Deuteronomy 24:4, as meaning “the state,“ the
   community, and refers to Numbers 35:33; Psalm 106:38; Isaiah 24:5. — Ed

   [73] The Septuagint, the Syriac, and the Arabic, have by a mistake rendered
   the word “pastors” or shepherds; but the Vulgate has “lovers,“ which our
   version and Blayney have adopted. But the word means companions, friends,
   intimates, neighbors. Gataker renders it “mates.” — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 3:2

   2. Lift up thine eyes unto the high places, and see where thou hast not been
   lien with. In the ways hast thou sat for them, as the Arabian in the
   wilderness; and thou hast polluted the land with thy whoredoms, and with thy
   wickedness.

   2. Tolle oculos tuos ad loca excelssa (hoc est, ad colles,) et vide ubi non
   scortata fueris; super vias (vel, juxta vias) sedisti illis (hoc est, ad
   illos captandos,) quemadmodum Arabs in deserto; et polluisti terraim
   scortationibus tuis et malitia tua.


   As the Prophet had charged the Jews with being wanton in a loose and
   promiscuous manner, as it is the case with abandoned women, after having
   cast away all shame, that they might not evade the charge and object, that
   they were not conscious of any crime, he makes them in a manner the judges
   themselves, Raise up, he says, thine eyes to the high places and see; that
   is, “I bring forward witnesses sufficiently known to thee; there is no hill
   in the land where thou hast not been connected with idols.” We have already
   said, and we shall find the same thing often mentioned by this Prophet, —
   that superstitions are deemed idolatries by God. But it was a customary
   thing with the Jews to ascend high places, as though they were there nearer
   to God. This is the reason why the Prophet bids them to turn their eyes to
   all the hills: See, he says, whether is there any hill free from thy
   fornications. For as strumpets seek hiding — places to perpetrate their
   obscenities, so the Jews sought hills as their brothels. And thus their
   impiety was the more execrable as they went forth openly, and especially as
   they wished their flagitious acts to be seen at a distance, ascending, as
   they did, elevated places; but strumpets, having found adulterers or
   paramours, are wont to seek some secret retreats. The Prophet then cuts off
   from the Jews every occasion for evading the charge, when he bids them to
   raise up their eyes to the high places; for when they prostrated themselves
   before their idols, it was the same as when strumpets commit acts of
   adultery.

   And he adds, that they sat by the ways, as the Arabian in the desert He
   again repeats what we have before observed, — that the Jews were not led
   away by the enticement of others to violate the conjugal pledge which they
   had given to God, but were, on the contrary, moved by their own wantonness,
   so that they of themselves sought base and filthy gratifications, he had
   before said, “Thou hast corrupted others by thy wickedness;” and now he
   confirms the same, “Thou hast sat, he says, “by all the ways.” This also is
   what is done by vile strumpets, who, as it has been said, have lost all
   shame. But the Prophet enhances this crime by another comparison, As an
   Arabian in the desert, who lies in wait for travelers, that he may rob and
   kill them: thus hast thou sat by the ways [74]

   We then see here a double comparison; one taken from strumpets, who having
   in time past made gain, when they find themselves neglected, besiege the
   ways, and offer themselves to any they may meet with. This is the first
   comparison; the other is, that they were like robbers, who lie in wait for
   travelers; as though he had said, that the Chaldeans and Egyptians were
   excusable when compared with the Jews, because they had been drawn by their
   wicked arts into illicit treaties, like a traveler who passing by is enticed
   by a robber, — “What art thou but a helpless man; but if thou joinest me,
   and engagest to be my companion, there is the best prospect of gain, and new
   spoils will fall into our hands daily.” Such a robber is twice and three
   times more wicked than the other. So also, the Prophet says of the Jews,
   that they were like old robbers, who had become hardened in intrigues, in
   plunders, and in every kind of wickedness, and had enticed to themselves
   both the Egyptians and the Assyrians. It afterwards follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [74] Gataker suggests another idea,-that the reference is made to the
   Arabian traders, who fix their tents in the wilderness to wait for the
   merchants. Blayney renders the lines differently, — Lift up thine eyes upon
   the open plains, and see; Where hast thou not been defiled in the highways?
   Thou hast sat waiting in them like an Arabian in the desert. To render שפים,
   “open plains,” is without authority; it means “craggy eminences,“ or
   elevated places. See Numbers 23:3; Isaiah 41:18; Jeremiah 14:6. The
   division, too, is arbitrary. “The ways,” or highways, connects better with
   the following verb; and להם is not “in them,“ but to or for them, that is,
   her lovers, mentioned in the preceding verse. Our version is the most
   suitable, with which that of Calvin corresponds. “Arabian” is rendered
   “crow” by the Septuagint, the Syriac, and the Arabic; “robber” by the
   Vulgate, but “Arabian” by the Targum. It is true that the word for a crow is
   from the same root, but the iod attached to it shews it to be a proper name.
   Where the Vulgate got the word “robber,“ it is hard to know. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 3:3

   3. Therefore the showers have been withholden, and there hath been no latter
   rain; and thou hadst a whore’s forehead, thou refusedst to be ashamed.

   3. Et prohibitae sunt pluviae, et serotina non fuit; et frons mulieris
   meretricis fuit tibi, recusasti erubescere.


   Jeremiah proceeds with his severe reproof, — that the Jews were wholly given
   to wickedness, for they had altogether devoted themselves to superstitions,
   and also to unlawful alliances, and had in both instances despised God. He
   now shews how great and how strong was their obstinacy. Restrained, he says,
   have been the rains, there has not been the latter rain; yet the front of a
   harlot has been thine; as though he had said, that the Jews had not in any
   degree been subdued by punishment. It was a most atrocious wickedness to
   give no ear to pious warnings, when the prophets continually cried to them,
   and endeavored to restore them to the right way. That they thus hardened
   themselves against the addresses of the prophets, was a proof of the
   greatest impiety. But God tried also to restore them to himself by
   punishments, and those very heavy. He punished them with sterility; and the
   drought of which the Prophet speaks was no doubt so uncommon, that the Jews
   might perceive, had they a particle of a sound mind, that God was at war
   with them. It often happens that not a drop of rain fails from heaven; for
   we see that many summers are hot and dry: there is no doubt but that God
   then reminds us of our sins and exhorts us to repent. But as familiarity
   makes us to overlook God’s judgments, he sometimes punishes us in a new and
   unusual manner. I doubt not then but that the Prophet, by saying, Restrained
   have been rains from them, refers to some extraordinary instance of God’s
   vengeance, whereby the Jews might have perceived, except they were extremely
   besotted, that God was opposed to and displeased with them. [75]

   The import of what is said is, — that the Jews had not only run here and
   there through a mad impulse, according to their own wills and inclinations,
   but that they had also been checked by evident judgments, since God had from
   heaven openly shewed himself to be the vindicator of his own glory, and as
   there had been so great a drought, that it appeared clear that the curse of
   the law had been fulfilled towards them,

   “I will make heaven iron to you, and the earth brass.”
   (Leviticus 26:19)

   As to the latter rain, we have said elsewhere that by this word is meant the
   rain which falls just before harvest; and it is called “latter” with
   reference to the harvest. For, as there is great heat in those eastern
   parts, they want rain before the harvest commences; the extreme heat of the
   sun would otherwise scorch up the grain. Hence, they especially look for the
   latter rain, which comes shortly before harvest — time. The other rain, in
   September and October, is called, on account of the sowing — time, a
   seasonable rain; for it soaks and moistens the seed, that it may strike
   roots and gather rigor and strength. The object is to shew, that God had
   from heaven given to the Jews manifest tokens of his displeasure, and yet
   without any benefit; for they had the front of a harlot, and felt no shame;
   that is, they were moved by no judgments of God, and could not bear to be
   corrected.
     _________________________________________________________________

   [75] It is usual to render the ו before “restrained,” “therefore;” but the
   sentence will read better, connected as it is with the latter part of the
   previous verse, by giving it its most common meaning, — And restrained have
   been the showers, And the latter rain has not been; Yet the front of a
   wanton woman hast thou had, Thou hast refused to be made ashamed. This last
   verb is in the Infinitive Huphal. It means in Hiphil, to make ashamed; and
   then in Huphal, to be made ashamed. The Targum expresses thus the general
   sense of the last line, “Thou hast been unwilling to humble thyself.” The
   rest of the verse is rendered almost literally. The Septuagint and the
   Arabic wander very far from the Hebrew. The Vulgate is a literal version,
   and the Syriac is nearly so, only it connects “wickedness, “in the last
   verse, with restrained, thus, — And for thy wickedness have been restrained
   the dews. And it is not improbable but that this was the original reading.
   — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   PRAYER

   Grant, Almighty God, that as thou hast been once pleased not only to adopt
   us as thy children, but also to unite us to thyself by the bond of marriage,
   and to give us a pledge of this sacred union in thine only — begotten Son,
   — O grant, that we may continue in the faith of thy Gospel, and so honestly
   keep the pledge given to thee, that thou mayest also shew thyself to us as a
   Husband and as a Father, and that we may to the end find in thee that
   merciful kindness which is needful to retain us in the holy fear of thy
   name, until we shall at length enjoy fellowship with thee in thy celestial
   kingdom, through Christ our Lord. — Amen.

     _________________________________________________________________

   Lecture Eleventh
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 3:4

   4. Wilt thou not from this time cry unto me, My father, thou art the guide
   of my youth?

   4. An non posthac clamabis ad me, Pater mi, dux adolescentiae meae tu es?


   God, after having set forth the wickedness of his people, and severely
   reproved them as they deserved, now kindly invites them to repentance, Wilt
   thou not say to me hereafter, he says, My Father! Some incorrectly render
   the words, “Wilt thou say to me, My Father,” as though God would reject what
   they said: and they give the meaning, — that the Jews would act dishonestly
   in thus glorying in God’s name, from whom they were so alienated. But very
   different is the meaning of the Prophet: for God mitigates the severity of
   the reproof which we have observed, and shews that he would be ready to be
   reconciled to them, if they repented: nay, he waits not for their
   repentance, but of his own accord meets and allures these perfidious
   apostates: “What!” says God, “shall there be no more any union between
   us?” For God expresses here the feeling of one grieving and lamenting, when
   he saw the people perishing; and he seems anxious, if possible, to restore
   them.

   It is with this design that he asks, “Will they not again call on me as
   their Father and the guide of their youth?” And by this periphrastic way of
   speaking, he intimates that he was the husband of that people; for most
   tender is that love which a youth has for a young virgin in the flower of
   her age. God, then, makes use now of this comparison, and says, that he
   still remembered the love which he had manifested towards his people. In
   short, he shews here that pardon was ready, if the people sought
   reconciliation; and he confirms the same thing when he adds —
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 3:5

   5. Will he reserve his anger for ever? will he keep it to the end? Behold,
   thou hast spoken and done evil things as thou couldest.

   5. An observabit in seculum? an custodiet in perpetuum? Ecce, loquuta es, et
   perpetrasti malitias (vel, scelera) et potuisti.


   God shews that it was the fault of the Jews, that he did not receive them
   into favor. And here he takes the argument from his own nature, and speaks
   of himself in the third person; and it is the same as though the Prophet had
   interposed this reasoning, “God is not inexorable, for he is as ready to
   forgive as he is long — suffering: now, then, what prevents you from living
   happily again under his government? for he will spare you, provided he finds
   in you genuine repentance.” We now then see, what the Prophet means here:
   for as God had kindly exhorted the people to repent, the Prophet speaks now
   generally of God’s own nature, — that he keeps not for ever, nor reserves
   perpetually

   These words, when put alone, mean that he does not cherish vengeance, and in
   our language we imitate the Hebrews, Il lui garde. This garde, when put
   without anything added to it, means, as I have said, that vengeance is
   cherished within. But nothing is more contrary than this to the nature of
   God. It hence follows, that the Jews had no obstacle in their way, except
   that they shunned God, and that being addicted to their own vices, they were
   unwilling to receive the pardon that was freely offered to them.

   As to the second clause, it admits of being explained in two ways. We may
   regard an adversative particle to be understood, “though thou hast spoken
   and hast done, “etc.; as if God had said, that he would be propitious to the
   Jews, however atrociously they might have sinned. But another view is more
   simple, — that God here complains that there was no hope of amendment, as
   they had become hardened in their vices, “Thou hast spoken,” he says, “thou
   hast done, and thou hast been able.” And interpreters further vary in their
   views: for the copulative is explained by some as a particle of comparison,
   in the sense of כאשר, keasher, “according to what thou wert able, thou hast
   done wickedness.” But others take the words more simply and more correctly,
   as I think, “Thou hast been very strong;” that is, thou hast exerted all thy
   power, so that thou hast put forth all thy strength in doing evil, as we say
   in Latin, pro virili, with all thy might; that is, as far as thy capacity
   extended, thou hast devoted thyself to wickedness. [76]

   I therefore give this explanation: God had before put on, as it were, the
   character of one in grief and sorrow, and kindly exhorted the people to
   repent, and testified that he would be ready to pardon them, and at the same
   time shewed in general that he would be propitious, as he is by nature
   inclined to mercy. After having set forth these things, he now adds, that he
   despaired of that people, because they gloried in their own wickedness: for
   to speak and to do means the same as if he had said, that the people were so
   impudent, that they boasted of their rebellion against God, and dared to
   call darkness light; for the superstitious, we know, glory against God
   without any shame. Now, such was the state of the people; for God, by his
   prophets, condemned this especially in them — that they had corrupted the
   pure worship of the law; but they with a meretricious front dared to set up
   against him their own devotions and good intentions, as they are commonly
   called. As then, they thus presumptuously defended their wicked deeds, God
   here complains that they were in no way healable, and so he leaves them as
   past remedy. This I regard as the real meaning of the Prophet: and of
   similar import is the verb תוכל, tucal; “thou hast put forth all thy
   might,” he says, that is, thou hast observed no limits in sinning, but, on
   the contrary, hast given thyself up to unbridled licentiousness. It now
   follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [76] This and the preceding verse have been variously explained. The view
   given by Calvin has been most commonly adopted; but it is hardly consistent
   with a literal rendering of the original, which I consider to be as follows,
   — 4. Hast thou not from this time called to me, “My Father, the guide of my
   youth art thou: 5. Will he reserve wrath for ever, Or keep it to the end?”
   Behold, thou hast so spoken, And hast done evils and persevered. “From this
   time,” that is, the time spoken of before, when the people followed
   idolatry. During this time, they called God their Father, and promised
   themselves the remittance of his displeasure. They said this, and yet
   followed their superstitions. This is the view which Gataker seemed most
   disposed to take. Horsley thus paraphrases the last line, — “Thou hast
   persisted incorrigibly in doing evil.” The Septuagint give “called,” in the
   past tense; the Vulgate, in the imperative, “voca — call;” the Syriac, the
   Arabic, and the Targum, in the future tense, “Wilt thou not call,” etc. The
   received text has קראתי, which is no doubt wrong; the iod is not found in
   very many MSS., and all the early versions agree in giving the verb in the
   second person. The same is to be said of דברתי, it ought to be דברת, though
   Horsley prefers the former; but neither the early versions nor the context
   favor it. The phrase מעתה is rendered by the Septuagint, “hōs oikon — as a
   house,” and by the Arabic, “ut filia — as a daughter.” How such mistakes
   could have been made, it is difficult to say. The Syriac has “hereafter;”
   and the Targum, “from this time.” — Ed
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 3:6-8

   6. The LORD said also unto me in the days of Josiah the king, Hast thou seen
   that which backsliding Israel hath done? she is gone up upon every high
   mountain and under every green tree, and there hath played the harlot.

   6. Et dixit Jehova ad me in diebus Josiae regis, An vidisti quid fecerit
   aversatrix (alii vertunt, rebellis) Israel? Profecta est ipsa super omnem
   montem excelsum, et subtus omnem arborem frondosam, et scortata est illic:

   7. And I said after she had done all these things, Turn thou unto me. But
   she returned not. And her treacherous sister Judah saw it

   7. Et dixi, Post facere ipsam (hoc est, postquam fecit omnia haec,) Ad me
   revertere (alii in tertia persona reddunt, Revertatur;) et non reversa est:
   et vidit perfida ejus soror Jehudah.

   8. And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed
   adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her
   treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.

   8. Et vidi, quod super his omnibus (hoc est, quod propter haec, nempe אדות
   significat occasiones vel causas,) quia scortata erat rebellis Israel,
   dimiserim ipsam (repudiaverim,) et dederim librum repudiorum ejus (repudii
   ejus) illi, et non timuit perfida Jehudah soror ejus, et scortata est etiam
   ipsa.


   Here the Prophet enters on a new discourse: he relates what God had
   committed to him, and mentions the time, even in the reign of Josiah. It is
   indeed well known, that the land was then cleansed from superstitions; for
   that pious king labored to restore the true worship of God, and to remove
   all the filth and defilements, by which the temple and the whole of religion
   had been corrupted. He strenuously exerted himself, and no doubt there was
   an improved appearance of religion throughout the land; but we shall see
   that a great portion of the people were under the influence of hypocrisy and
   deceit., as it is usually the case when rulers seek to support the pure
   worship of God, and to free it from all corruptions; for there are many
   hypocrites, who for a time dissemble, while the same antipathy to God still
   remains. Such was then the condition of the people.

   And this ought to be carefully observed; for Jeremiah might have appeared to
   have dealt somewhat too sharply and rigorously with his own nation, as
   reform was in the mouth of all, according to what we find to be the case
   with many now, who having left the superstitions of the Papacy, seemed at
   first to embrace the doctrines of the Gospel, but all now wish to be
   satisfied with any kind of reformation; at the same time, they shake off the
   yoke of Christ and can bear submission to no discipline: in short, their
   object, is to subvert all order; and yet they boldly claim to be the
   advocates of reformation, whenever their impiety is reproved. This was no
   doubt the contest which Jeremiah had to carry on, the same with that by
   which the Lord tries his servants at this day. He therefore says, that he
   received this commission in the days of Josiah, that is, when that king was
   laboring to establish the pure worship of God, and no one dared to oppose;
   for we find that God was then worshipped by the whole people without any
   external corruptions.

   But what is contained in this commission? Hast thou seen, he says, what
   apostate Israel hath done? God here compares the ten tribes with the tribe
   of Judah, with whom was united, as it is well known, the half tribe of
   Benjamin: he then compares Israel with the tribe of Judah, “Do you not see
   what rebellious Israel hath done?” But he introduces the kingdom of Israel,
   as well as the kingdom of Judah, under the character of women; for God, as
   it has already appeared, represents himself as the husband of his people. He
   then says that he had two wives, even Israel and Judah. God had indeed
   espoused to himself the whole seed of Abraham by one contract; but Jeremiah
   speaks here in a popular manner. Though the Israelites had departed from
   God, yet he had not wholly rejected them. The kingdom of Israel had then
   become adulterous; but God for a time bore with that sin, so that the
   covenant, in part, remained. For this reason he acknowledges as his wives
   both Israel and Judah. Hence he says, “Hast thou not seen what estranged
   Israel hath done?” The word משבה, meshibe, is derived from שוב, shub, which
   signifies, both to return and to depart; and Jerome everywhere renders it
   aversatrix, one who turns aside, or is estranged. [77] But some render it
   “rebellious;” we might say more correctly in French, debauchee She went, he
   says, on every high hill, and under every shady tree, and there played the
   harlot In short, God complains that the ten tribes had violated the sacred
   bond of marriage, when they prostituted themselves to idols, even on all
   high hills and under all shady trees: for as I have already said, they chose
   those places as though there was some holiness both on mountains and under
   shades of trees.

   He afterwards adds, Yet I said; God here states, that he had long suspended
   his judgment before he punished the people of Israel. He then extols here
   his patience, that he had not immediately visited the Israelites as they
   deserved, but bore with them and for a long time waited to see whether they
   could be reclaimed: I said, then, after she had done all these things,
   Return to me If we read in the third person, the sense will be the same, “I
   hoped indeed that they would return to the right way, though they had thus
   fallen away, yea though they had denied me by an impious defection, and had
   become alienated from the faith and from piety.” But I am more inclined to
   another view, — that God here records the fact, that he had recalled to
   himself the ten tribes by his servants the Prophets, though they had by
   their many crimes provoked his wrath. Here then God shews how perverse the
   Israelites had been; for he had tried to restore them, if possible, to
   himself, but had spent all his labor in vain. I thus explain, I said, of the
   prophetic instruction: “Though then the Israelites had plunged themselves
   into impieties, I yet ceased not to try whether they could be restored to
   me.” He intimates, in short, that he had been unlike those husbands, who
   will not be reconciled to their wives, burning with jealousy, because they
   see that they had been exposed to so much disgrace. God then shews that
   though the Israelites had departed from him, he yet sent his prophets, and
   of his own free will sought reconciliation with them, but that they had
   refused to return. [78]

   He then adds, See did she, that is, the whole kingdom of Judah, that, for
   al1 this, because the rebellious Israel had played the harlot, etc. We shall
   hereafter find the design of this comparison; for he amplifies the sin of
   the kingdom of Judah, inasmuch she had time enough to observe what he now
   relates, and was able to see it at a distance as it were from a watchtower;
   yet she saw it without any advantage. God then intended to shew how great
   was the hardness of the Jews, who had seen the defection of the ten tribes,
   and had seen how severely they had been reproved by the prophets.

   He then says, And I saw As he had said that the kingdom of Judah had seen
   what happened to Israel, so he now says, that he had seen both, See then did
   I Now, what does he declare that he had seen? Even that Judah had played the
   harlot; for he now speaks of Judah as of a woman. Then God says, that it was
   not a thing hid from him that Judah had surpassed the crimes of her sister,
   not through ignorance or deception, but through deliberate wickedness: See,
   he says, did I, that notwithstanding all these things, she played the harlot
   He thus explains more fully what he had briefly touched upon before. He had
   said, that Judah had seen, but this on account of its brevity might have
   appeared ambiguous: he therefore explains it more at large; “See did Judah
   that I gave a bill of divorcement to her sister, because she had played the
   harlot; and yet she feared not;” that. is, she thought not of repenting,
   when she had such a striking example of vengeance set before her eyes.

   But it may be here asked, how could it be said that a bill of divorce had
   been given to the Israelites, when he denies by the Prophet Isaiah that he
   had given it? (Isaiah 50:1.) But the Prophet here takes another view of the
   subject; for he does not speak here of the bills of divorce, such as were
   usually given, when a husband repudiated a wife who had been chaste and
   faithful; but he speaks of that lawful divorce, when a woman, convicted of
   adultery, is liable to a capital punishment. God then by his prophet Isaiah
   denies that he had given a bill of divorcement; but he says here that he had
   given it, because he had repudiated an adulterous woman. It was not indeed
   at that time customary among the Jews to divorce an adulteress, for she was
   led to execution. But we have seen at the beginning of the chapter that
   there is a difference between God and husbands. As then God did not deal, as
   he might have justly done, with the Israelites, and did not execute a
   capital punishment, as he might rightly have done, and what was usually
   done, he says that he had given a bill of divorce, that is, that he had
   repudiated that people. But by the bill of divorce he means exile; for when
   the ten tribes were banished, it was the same as though God openly shewed
   that he had no connection with that people: as long as they continued in the
   holy land and in the promised inheritance, some kind of union remained; but
   when they were dispersed here and there, and every sort of worship had
   ceased among them, and also when the very kingdom of Israel had no longer an
   existence, God had then divorced them.

   See then did her sister Judah, and she feared not It was indeed an instance
   of great insensibility, not to learn wisdom at the expense of others; and it
   is a complaint found everywhere in the prophets, — that the Jews were not
   stimulated to repentance, while God spared them, and at the same time set
   before them examples which ought in all reason to have terrified them. For
   what ought they to have considered, but that God would punish those many
   transgressions by which they provoked his wrath, since he had not spared
   their brethren? They saw that the kingdom of Israel had been abolished, and
   yet all of them derived their origin from the same father, even Abraham: how
   was it then that they so heedlessly despised God’s judgment, which had been
   for a long time before their eyes? Hence he complains that they feared not
   It now follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [77] It is correctly rendered as a noun, for had it been an adjective or a
   participle, it would have followed the word Israel. Literally it is, “the
   apostates,” — Hast thou seen what she did, the apostates Israel? Or, it may
   be rendered, “the backslider Israel,” though the word is deficient, having
   no feminine termination. — Ed.

   [78] The difficulty at the beginning of the eighth verse may be removed
   either by adopting ואראה, as in two MSS., and taking the verb to be in
   Hiphil, or ותרא, as in one MS., as a repetition of the former verb,
   according to the Syriac It is left out in the Vulgate But it is most
   suitable to the context to take the verb to be in Hiphil. Then the passage
   would read thus, — 6. Hast thou not seen what she did, the apostate Israel?
   Go did she on every high hill and under every green tree, And play there the
   harlot: 7. And I said, after she had done all these things, “To me
   return;” but she returned not: And see this did the hypocrite, her sister
   Judah: 8. And I caused her to see, that on all these accounts, As adultery
   the apostate Israel would commit, I dismissed her, and gave to her The bill
   of her divorcement; Yet fear not, did the hypocrite Judah, her sister, But
   went and played the harlot, even herself. “On all these accounts,” or, for
   all these reasons, refers to several things-the first apostasy — God’s
   invitation — and Israel’s refusal. God caused Judah to see these things by
   his prophets, but Judah feared not. The word בגדה, hypocrite, or the
   perfidious one, is a feminine participle, used as a noun. It is explained in
   the tenth verse by “feignedly” or falsely. Hypocrites would be the correct
   rendering. It is rendered by the Septuagint, “faithless — asunthetos,” — by
   the Vulgate, “prevaricatress — praevaricatrix, “and by the Targum,
   “falsifier” or cheat. — Ed
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 3:9

   9. And it came to pass through the lightness of her whoredom, that she
   defiled the land, and committed adultery with stones and with stocks.

   9. Et factum est a velocitate (vertunt tam Hieronymus quam alii interpretes,
   facilitatem; nomen deductum est a קלל, quod significat interdum esse
   velocem; hic levitas notatur, vel petulantia, factum est, igitur, a
   levitate, aut petulantia) scortationum ejus, ut pollueret terram (vel,
   contaminaret; alii vertunt, peccare faceret; sed Hieronymus ubique fere
   reddit hoc verbum per contaminare, neque male quadrat,) et scortata est cum
   lapide et cum ligno.


   Here the Prophet completes his charge, — that so far was it that the
   punishment which God had inflicted on the Israelites, had any effect on the
   tribe of Judah, that she surpassed by her levity and lustfulness the
   whoredomes of her sister. She has polluted, he says, the land, or made the
   land to sin, that is, rendered the land guilty. It is indeed what greatly
   exaggerates the crime, when it is said that the land became guilty or
   contaminated. The land, we know, was in itself pure, and could contract no
   pollution from the vices of men; but that the impiety of men might be
   exhibited the more detestable, the land is said to have been contaminated by
   them:

   Or, it may be said that the land was made guilty. How so? The reason why
   they are said to have contaminated the land or to have made it guilty or to
   have implicated it in their own vices, he gives in these words, she has
   played the harlot with stone and with wood [79] Of this metaphor of playing
   the harlot it is not necessary now to speak; for we have said already, that
   this similitude is often repeated, because God had united that people to
   himself and bound them to him, as it were, by the sacred bond of marriage.
   Hence whenever the people departed from the pure worship of God, they were
   justly said to have played the harlot, for they violated their pledged
   faith: as simplicity of faith is spiritual chastity, so apostasy is that
   shamelessness and perfidy, when a wife becomes unfaithful to her husband by
   following adulterers. It afterwards follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [79] This verse may be thus rendered, — And it was, that through the report
   of her fornication, She polluted the land; And she committed adultery with
   stone and wood. There is no instance of קל, in the sense of swiftness, etc.,
   being used as a noun. It is the Chaldee for קול, voice, fame, report.
   Gataker paraphrases the words thus, “by her notorious fornication.” The
   early versions and the Targum all differ. Excessive addiction to idolatry is
   evidently what is spoken of. — Ed
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 3:10

   10. And yet for all this her treacherous sister Judah hath not turned unto
   me with her whole heart, but feignedly, saith the LORD.

   10. Atque etiam in tote hoc (vel, in his onmibus) non reversa est ad me
   perfida (vel, fraudulenta: דגב est fraudare) sorer ejus Jehudah in toto
   corde suo, sed in mendacio, inquit Jehova.


   He goes on with the same subject, — that the Jews were not moved by any fear
   when they saw the dreadful vengeance executed on their brethren on account
   of their sins. Her perfidious sister, he says, returned not to me, that is,
   after so many warnings by the prophets and such an example of punishment. He
   however adds an explanation, — she turned not with her whole heart, but
   feignedly and falsely. [80]

   The Prophet anticipates here such objections as the Jews might have alleged,
   “What! thou deniest that we have returned! Is not the whole land cleansed
   from idolatries? Is not God worshipped according to the requirements of the
   law? Is there any more an altar seen under the shades of trees or on
   hills?” As then they might have thus evaded the charge as they usually did,
   the Prophet obviates such an evasion and says, “Though they have ill
   appearance given some tokens of repentance, yet they have only put on a
   disguise and have acted falsely towards God; for there is no integrity in
   them.” We now more clearly see why he had before specifically mentioned the
   time of Josiah; for the Jews then returned feignedly to God: there was in
   the king and in a few a right feeling, but in the rest dissimulation only.
   God then in a few words shews, that he cares not for that reformation which
   is false and feigned, but that he requires a genuine feeling within: hence
   he thus concludes —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [80] This verse stands connected, not with the preceding, but with the
   eighth, — Yea, even for all this, Return to me did not the hypocrite, Her
   sister Judah, with all her heart, But in falsehood, saith Jehovah. “In
   falsehood,” or, by dealing falsely, as it may be taken by a participle
   preceded by a preposition. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 3:11

   11. And the LORD said unto me, The backsliding Israel hath justified herself
   more than treacherous Judah.

   11. Et dixit Jehova ad me, justificavit animam suam aversatrix Israel prae
   fraudulenta Jehuda (vel, perfida, semper est בגדה.)


   We now see more clearly for what purpose Jeremiah compared the ten tribes
   with the kingdom of Judah; it was done in order to shew that the Jews, who
   wished to be deemed far more holy than others, were yet more perfidious and
   deserved a heavier punishment, because they acted so deceitfully with God.

   It may be here asked, why he pronounces the Jews worse than the Israelites,
   while they still continued in a sort of middle state of things. We indeed
   know that the kingdom of Judah was become so corrupt, that hardly any
   religion remained there; yet the temple was still standing and the
   priesthood still existed at Jerusalem. But the Prophet condemns the Jews
   more than the Israelites for other reasons, even because they ought to have
   become wise through the calamities of others, and they ought to have been
   confirmed in true religion when they saw their brethren falling away from
   the pure worship of God: these things they ought to have maturely
   considered. It was this supine sottishness that rendered them worse than all
   their brethren, and also their pride, the chief cause of their condemnation,
   for they boasted that they remained perfect, while the ten tribes had become
   degenerated. These were the reasons why he says that Israel, though a
   perfidious woman, was yet more righteous than her sister Judah.

   The language indeed is not to be strictly taken when it is said, that she
   justified her soul; for God does not here excuse the Israelites, nor does he
   free or absolve them from guilt, (for he had severely punished them;) but
   this way of speaking is commonly used by the prophets; — Sodom was righteous
   in comparison with Jerusalem; and Tyre and Sidon were just when compared
   with the Jews. (Ezekiel 16:47, 48.) Justified then has she her soul, [81]
   even the treacherous or the apostate Israel, in comparison with the
   perfidious Judah; that is, for the reasons which I have stated. The
   obstinacy of the Jews was greater and less excusable: the external worship
   of God, which they had retained, ought to have been a bridle to check them;
   and they had also seen how severe a judge God had been towards the ten
   tribes; but the judgments of God they despised, and derived no benefit from
   them.
     _________________________________________________________________

   [81] This is the literal expression, but the word נפש is often taken for
   oneself, and ought often to be so rendered. See Numbers 30:5; Job 18:4;
   Psalm 7:2; God is said to swear by his soul, that is, by himself, Amos 6:8
   — Then said Jehovah to me, — Justified herself hath apostate Israel, More
   than the hypocrite Judah. Manifest and open apostasy is more honest than the
   double dealing of hypocrites, who combine God’s worship with idolatry; nor
   is it so hateful to God. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   PRAYER

   Grant, Almighty God, that since thou hast deigned to adopt us as thy people,
   and to unite us to thyself in thine only — begotten Son, — O grant, that we
   may continue pure and chaste in our obedience to thy Gospel, and never turn
   aside to those corruptions which disunite that sacred bond of union, which
   has been confirmed between us by the blood of thy Son, but that we may so
   persevere in serving thee, that our whole life and all our actions may be
   evidences of that holy calling, by which is laid up for us the hope of
   eternal salvation, until we shall at length come into the possession of that
   kingdom which has been obtained for us by so great a price, and there enjoy
   the fruit of our faith, sincerity, and perseverance, through Christ our
   Lord. — Amen.

     _________________________________________________________________

   Lecture Twelfth
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 3:12

   12. Go and proclaim these words toward the north, and say, Return, thou
   backsliding Israel, saith the LORD; and I will not cause mine anger to fall
   upon you: for I am merciful, saith the LORD, and I will not keep anger for
   ever.

   12. Vade et clama (hoc est, cum clamore intona) sermones hos versus
   Aquilonem, et dic, Revertere rebellis Israel, dicit Jehova: non, non faciam
   incumbere (cadere, ad verbum) iram meam (alii vertunt, faciem meam; sed
   metaphorice slgnificat iram) in vos, quia clemens ego, dicit Jehova, non
   servabo in seculum.


   The Prophet, after having shewn that the tribe of Judah deserved a heavier
   punishment than the ten tribes, and having mentioned the cause, that they
   had seen their brethren severely chastised and were not moved, now turns his
   discourse to the Israelites themselves, or the ten tribes, and promises that
   God would be propitious to them. The kingdom of Israel had now been
   overthrown, and the people had been banished into Assyria, Persia, and
   Media. They had been scattered, and the name of the kingdom had been
   obliterated. The land had been often laid waste and the kingdom partly
   existed, as four tribes only were first driven to exile; but at, length the
   very name of a kingdom ceased to exist, and they were all, as I have said,
   led away into captivity. Hence the Prophet is bidden to address his words
   towards the north; for though the greater part of the people dwelt then in
   the east, yet as they had been banished by the Assyrians, God had a regard
   to the capital of the monarchy in bidding the Prophet to address those whom
   the enemies had led away to the north.

   Cry, then, not so much on account of the distance of the place, but that the
   Jews, who were deaf, might hear him crying; for the Prophet was bidden to
   speak not only for the sake of the Israelites, but that through them he
   might set before the Jews the mercy of God, if only they returned to a sound
   mind. Now the import of the whole is, — that though the Israelites had been
   rebellious and had turned away from God, yet pardon was ready for them, if
   they returned. What the Prophet means by the word return, we have already in
   part explained, and we shall have to speak on the subject more fully
   elsewhere. He then requires repentance, and promises that God would be
   propitious to them in case they returned to him.

   He afterwards adds, I will not make my face, or rather, my wrath, to fall
   upon you; for this latter meaning is the most appropriate. God had already
   severely punished their sins; for what can happen to a people more grievous
   than to be banished from their own country, and then to be oppressed by
   cruel tyranny? They yet suffered a heavier punishment; for the worship
   according to the Law had been taken away from them, they had been repudiated
   by God, they had lost that glory by which they thought that they excelled
   all other nations in having been chosen as God’s peculiar people. All these
   things had been entirely lost. In what sense then does God declare that he
   would not be angry with them? By this way of speaking the Prophet simply
   means, that God would not be irreconcilable, as though he had said, “My
   wrath shall not dwell, or shall not he upon you; but I will mitigate the
   punishment which I have inflicted.” Hence I do not disapprove of Jerome’s
   rendering, “I will not make steady,” (firmabo;) though when he adds “face,
   “he does not sufficiently set forth the meaning of the Prophet. But this may
   be admitted, “I will not make steady my wrath upon you;” that is, “My wrath
   shall not lie or dwell on your heads, so as wholly to overwhelm you.” God’s
   wrath had already fallen upon them, but in such a way that there was still
   some hope of deliverance. God then denies, that the calamities, by which he
   had chastised their sins, would be fatal, for he would withdraw his hand and
   not pursue them to the last extremity.

   The meaning then is, — that if the people returned to God they would obtain
   pardon, because God of his own free will invited them and promised that the
   punishment which he had inflicted on account of their sins, would be only
   for a time. [82]

   God further confirms this truth by mentioning what his nature is, for
   merciful am I, and I will not retain wrath for ever The promise was special
   in case the people returned; God now adds a general truth by way of
   confirmation, — that he was disposed to shew mercy, and that he would
   readily forgive for his mercy’s sake. Since God then is such, and cannot
   deny himself, there is no reason why a sinner should despair and thus close
   up the way, that he should not in his penitence implore God’s mercy.

   We may hence gather a profitable doctrine, — that whenever unbelief lays
   hold on our minds, so that we cannot apply to our benefit the promises of
   God, this should ever be remembered by us — that God is merciful. As God
   then is so gracious, that he reserves not wrath for ever, but that it is
   only for a time, we ought to entertain hope; and corresponding with this is
   what is said in the Psalms,

   “A moment is he in his wrath;
   and life is in his goodness and mercy,” (Psalm 30:5;)

   as though he had said, that God’s wrath soon passes away, provided we
   repent, but that he shews his mercy through all ages; for this is what is
   meant by the word “life.” He then goes on —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [82] 12. Go and proclaim these words towards the north, and say, — Return,
   apostate Israel, saith Jehovah; I will not cause my wrath to fall on you,
   For merciful am I, saith Jehovah; I will not reserve it for ever. That פני,
   commonly rendered “face,” means sometimes wrath or anger, is evident, see
   Psalm 21:9; Lamentations 4:16. God is said to have his face against the
   wicked, Psalm 34:16, and to make his face to shine on his people, Psalm
   80:3. This accounts for the word being taken sometimes, as it were, in a bad
   sense: He has an angry as well as a smiling face. The rendering of the
   Septuagint is, “I will not set firm (stēriō) my face upon you,” of the
   Vulgate, “I will not turn away my face from you,” of the Syriac and Arabic,
   “I will not harden my face against you,” and of the Targum, “I will not send
   my wrath upon you.” The last comes nearest to the Hebrew. Blayney’s version
   is a paraphrase, — I will not look down upon you with a lowering brow; and
   so is his version of the last line, — I will not keep displeasure in view
   for ever. Our version in both instances is much to be preferred. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 3:13

   13. Only acknowledge thine iniquity, that thou hast transgressed against the
   LORD thy God, and hast scattered thy ways to the strangers under every green
   tree, and ye have not obeyed my voice, saith the LORD.

   13. Tantnm modo (vel, atqui) cognosce iniquitatem tuam, quia adversus
   Jehovam Deum tuum scelerate egisti, et dispersisti (vel, dissipasti, aut,
   prostituisti) vias tuas alienis, sub omni arbore frondosa, et vocem meam non
   audivisti, inquit Jehova.


   God lays down here a condition, lest hypocrites, relying on his goodness,
   should become more and more hardened, and yet think that he is bound as it
   were to them; for they usually reason thus, — “God is so kind that he
   recalls us to himself, and of his own free will invites even sinners; we may
   therefore easily settle matters with him.” Thus hypocrites by false
   thoughts’ delude themselves, thinking that they can elude God, since he
   seeks nothing else but to restore sinners to himself. Hence with the promise
   of favor there ought ever to be connected an exhortation to repentance. God
   then reminds here the Israelites, that they were greatly deceived, if they
   thought they could without any difficulty obtain pardon.

   Hence he says, know thine iniquity The particle אך, ak, may be rendered
   only, or but, or yet. I prefer the second meaning, but; for an exception, as
   I have said, is here added, lest the Israelites slumbered in their vices, if
   they persuaded themselves that God was, as it, were, in their power and
   subject to their will. We hence see that the Prophet, modifying what he had
   said, introduces this sentence, “But in the meantime know thine iniquity,
   otherwise thou canst expect no peace with God.” Then these words follow,
   because thou hast acted wickedly against Jehovah thy God By these words the
   Prophet proves that the Israelites were guilty, lest they supposed that they
   could by evasions escape the wrath of God; for we know that often, even
   those who are conscious of their guilt, are not willing to confess their
   sins; and it is strange that men are so besotted as ever to contend with
   God. On this account the Prophets, when they exhorted the people to repent,
   at the same time brought to light their sins. Were there in men frankness
   and honesty, there would be no need thus to charge them; but as they either
   boldly deny their sins, or are so callous as to be moved by no fear, it is
   necessary to prick them sharply and even deeply to wound them. This is what
   the Prophet now does; Thou, he says, hast done wickedly against thy God; as
   though he had said, “I do not now in vain remind thee to own thy sins, for
   God himself condemns thee: think not thou that thou canst gain anything by
   thy subterfuges.”

   He mentions also particulars, that he might come into closer quarters with
   them, Thou hast dispersed, he says, or scattered, thy ways to strangers,
   under every shady tree He again compares the Israelites to strumpets, who
   commonly so prostitute themselves, that they ramble from one place to
   another, invite and allure all they meet with. The Prophet then says, that
   the Israelites had thus dispersed themselves. He speaks delicately on an
   indelicate subject. But what he means is, that the Israelites were not
   content with one kind of superstition or with one idol, but blended together
   as many superstitions as they could, and borrowed false notions from all
   quarters: they were like a rambling strumpet, who prostitutes herself to all
   men indifferently. And strangers he calls all their fictitious gods; for as
   I have often said, they ought to have regarded him as their husband. When
   therefore the Israelites turned away to other gods, they became like a
   woman, who leaves her husband and prostitutes herself to any she can find.
   It is indeed a most common thing for those who forsake the true worship of
   God to seek for themselves various errors from all quarters, and to abandon
   themselves unreservedly to all kinds of superstitions.

   He at length adds, And thou hast not hearkened to my voice By this fact the
   Prophet enhances their sin; for they had been instructed in the doctrine of
   the law, and understood the right way of salvation: how then was it that
   they thus polluted themselves with so many superstitions? It could not have
   been attributed to ignorance. It was then their manifest rebellion against
   God. The Prophet then shews that they had been disobedient and intractable,
   and that they had relapsed into idolatry and pernicious errors, because they
   had shaken off the yoke of God, and suffered not themselves to be ruled and
   guided by his word. [83]

   We now then perceive the meaning of this verse: God first requires a
   confession of sins from the Israelites; and thus he sets forth how available
   that return would be which he had previously mentioned; for until a sinner
   knows his sinfulness, he will never really and from the heart return to God,
   as the beginning of repentance is the confession of guilt. He then proves
   them to have been guilty, that he might cut off from them every pretense for
   evasion. He mentions in the third place specific sins, that he might hold
   them as it were fast bound, even that they had polluted themselves with
   superstitions, and that they had become, not only like an adulterous woman
   who follows another man, but also like filthy strumpets, who run here and
   there and make no difference between men known or unknown. He shews in the
   last place, that all this happened through mere obstinacy; for they had cast
   aside every regard for God, though he had given them his law, and sent the
   prophets as its faithful interpreters, so that they understood what God
   approved and what was just and right. The reason then why they went astray
   was, that they closed their ears to God’s word, and suffered not themselves
   to be ruled by it, but became wholly unteachable. Let us go on —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [83] But yet know thine iniquity, That against Jehovah thy God hast thou
   rebelled; For thou hast diversified thy ways for strangers, Under every
   green tree; And to my voice ye hearkened not, saith Jehovah. The word אך is
   rendered by the early versions and the Targum, But, or But yet, or
   Nevertheless, “Verum,” “Verumtamen.” The third line is thus explained by
   Parkhurst, “Thou hast run after various heathen nations in their several
   idolatries.” And this they did, while they refused to attend to the voice of
   God. To attend to, rather than to obey, is what is meant. So the Vulgate and
   the Syriac, “My voice ye heard not,” or, as the former, “thou didst not
   hear.” — Ed
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 3:14

   14. Turn, O backsliding children, saith the LORD; for I am married unto you:
   and I will take you one of a city, and two of a family, and I will bring you
   to Zion:

   14. Revertimini filii rebelles, dieit Jehova, quoniam ego maritus vester
   (vel, dominatus sum in vobis, ut alii vertunt; alii, taedio affectus sum in
   vobis; dicemus postea de hoc verbo,) et assumam vos, unum e civitate, et
   duos e familia (vel, cognatione, vel, tribu,) et addueam vos in Sion.


   Jeremiah repeats the same thing in other words; but God by so many words
   shews clearer how ready he would be to grant pardon, provided the Israelites
   really repented. It would have been enough for God to testify once, that he
   would be reconcilable, but seeing that they were slow and hard to believe,
   he proceeds in the same strain. It is a wonderful forbearance and kindness
   that God, finding his favor neglected, and as it were rejected through the
   sloth of men, should yet persevere, and invite them again and again. What
   man would thus patiently bear the loathing of his favor and kindness? But we
   see that God does not immediately reject the tardy and the slothful, but
   adds new stimulants that he might at length move them, though this may seem
   more than necessary. How great is our torpidity? Were not God daily to urge
   us, how little attention would any of us give to his admonitions? It is,
   therefore, no wonder that he, pardoning our tardiness, should again and
   again invite us to repentance; which we find is done continually in the
   Church.

   This, then, is the reason why the Prophet now repeats the same thing,
   Return, now, ye rebellious children; for he had said before, “Return, thou
   rebellious Israel.” He then adds, For I am a husband to you Some regard בעל
   bol, in the sense of being wearied, when found as here, בעלתי בכם bolti
   bekem, “I have been wearied by you:” but this meaning does not comport with
   this passage. [84] More correctly, then, have others rendered the words, “I
   am lord to you: “but this lord is not to be taken indefinitely as in Latin,
   for it properly means a husband, who is a lord to his wife. God, then, no
   doubt, continues the same comparison, that of a marriage, which has already
   been often mentioned; for he charges the Israelites with adultery, because
   they had departed from him. Hence it is that he says, I am your husband He
   had previously said, “Though a person, when he repudiates his wife, and she
   be married to another, will never again be reconciled to her; yet I am ready
   to forgive your perfidy and wantonness: only observe chastity hereafter, and
   I will deal kindly with you.” Similar is this passage, “I am your
   husband,” though I have repudiated you. He had, indeed, said, that he had
   given them a bill of divorce, and thus testified, as by a public document,
   that there was no longer any connection between him and that people, for
   exile was a kind of divorce; but he says now, “I am your husband; for though
   I have been grievously offended with you, because you have broken your
   pledged faith, I yet remain in the same mind, so as to be ready to be your
   husband.”

   We now, then, perceive the real meaning of the Prophet: despair might have
   laid hold on the Israelites so as to dread that access to which the Prophet
   had invited them; but that no terror might hinder them to repent, God here
   declares that he would become their husband, and that he had not forgotten
   that relationship with which he had once favored them. The sum of what he
   says is, “I have once embraced you with the love of a husband; ye have,
   indeed, become alienated from me, but return, and I am ready to forgive and
   to receive you, as though ye had always been faithful to me.”

   Again will I take you, he says; and then he adds, one from a city, two from
   a family Deserving of especial notice is this passage; for God shews that
   they were not to wait for one another, and also, that though the whole body
   of the people rotted in their sins, yet a few would return to him, and that
   he would be reconciled to them. This was a point most necessary to be
   taught; for God’s covenant was in common with the whole seed of Abraham;
   they might then have concluded that the covenant was extinct, except he
   gathered together the whole people; for he had not chosen one or two or a
   hundred or a thousand, but all the seed of Abraham. Since then the promise,
   without exception, was common, to all, any one might thus reason, “What
   connection have I with God, except as one born of the race of Abraham? but I
   am not alone, for we are all the children of Abraham: yet I see that none
   turn to God, so I must perish with the rest of the people.” Now, that this
   thought should not hinder the godly, he says, “I will take one from a city,
   two from a family;” [85] that is, “If one only come to me from a city he
   shall find an open door; if two only from a tribe come to me, I shall
   receive them.” We now apprehend the design of the Prophet.

   Interpreters, indeed, explain one from a city as meaning, that though the
   multitude should perish, yet God would not deny forgiveness to three or
   four; but they teach not what is especially worthy of notice, that two or
   three are mentioned, because this thought, as it has been said, might have
   perplexed them, that is, that they had been all in common chosen as a holy
   people.

   What is here taught may be useful to us in the present day. For we see many
   foolishly excluding themselves from the hope of salvation, and seeking no
   access to God, because they have a regard to one another, and the great mass
   hold them entangled. How is it under the Papacy, that so many pertinaciously
   resist God? even because they think themselves safely hid in the multitude.
   We also find among us that some are an hindrance to others. Let this truth
   be ever remembered, that when God stretches forth his arms, he is ready to
   receive, not only all, were they with one consent to come to him, but also
   two or three, even from one city, or from a whole people.

   He adds, I will cause you to come to Zion. This had been once said before:
   God intimates that their exile would be temporary, that the Israelites would
   again be made partakers of his inheritance, if they returned to God in
   sincerity and truth. It follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [84] Nor is there an instance of such a meaning. Literally it is, “For I
   have been married with (or to) thee.” When this verb is followed by כ, as in
   Jeremiah 31:32, this is its meaning; but when followed by ל, as in 1
   Chronicles 4:22, it means to rule, to exercise dominion. The Vulgate is,
   “For I am thy husband.” The Targum gives the meaning, “For I have chosen
   you.” The Septuagint went astray, “For I will rule over you.” — Ed

   [85] The word is taken sometimes in a limited sense, and means what we
   understand by family: but it has here evidently a more extended meaning, and
   signifies a tribe, a community; for it includes more than a city. Such is
   its meaning in Jeremiah 8:3; and in Amos 3:1, it comprehends the whole
   community of Israel. It is rendered “ek patrias, — from a tribe,” by the
   Septuagint, but improperly; “kindred,“ by the Vulgate and the Targum It no
   doubt means sometimes kindred, but not evidently in this place. — Ed
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 3:15

   15. And I will give you pastors according to mine heart, which shall feed
   you with knowledge and understanding.

   15. Et dabo vobis pastores secundum cor meurn, et pascent vos scientia et
   intelligentia (hoc est, scienter et prudenter).


   Here God promises that he would so provide for the salvation of his people
   after their return from exile, that they should not again perish. But the
   cause of God’s vengeance ought to be observed, which is expressed in the
   fifth chapter of Isaiah, “My people,” he says, “have been led captive,
   because they had no knowledge; therefore the grave has widened its soul or
   its throat. [86] He then says, that the cause of the people’s ruin was,
   because instruction had ceased among them, and pastors had become mute dogs
   or robbers. Here, on the other hand, God declares that he would give them
   faithful pastors, who would discharge in a befitting manner their office. I,
   indeed, allow, that under this term are included faithful and wise
   magistrates; but he especially refers to prophets and priests, whose office
   it is in particular to reform idolatry. [87]

   We hence learn that the Church cannot continue without having faithful
   pastors to shew the way of salvation. The wellbeing of the Church then is
   secured, when God raises up true and faithful teachers to proclaim his
   truth: but when the Church is deprived of sound teachers, all things soon
   fall into ruin. For God, no doubt, intimates by this promise that he would
   not only be the deliverer of his people, so as to restore them from exile,
   but that he would be also their perpetual guardian after the people had
   returned to their own country. It hence follows, that the Church of God is
   not only begotten by means of holy and godly pastors, but that its life is
   also cherished, nourished, and confirmed by them to the end. As it is not
   enough for civil order to be once set up, except the magistrates continue in
   their office, so nothing is more ruinous to the Church than for God to take
   away faithful pastors. It cannot indeed be, that people will return to God,
   unless prophets be first sent: but God speaks here of a continued course of
   instruction, and of a well regulated government in the Church, as though he
   had said, “I will not only give you prophets to lead you from your
   wanderings to me, and to restore you to the way of salvation, but I will
   also continually set over you sound and faithful teachers.” But we must
   notice, that those who preside cannot rightly discharge their office unless
   they are endued with wisdom. God also intimates his paternal love, when he
   says, that good pastors would be dear to him. It afterwards follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [86] Rather, “itself;” for the word often rendered soul, has sometimes this
   meaning. See [3]note on Jeremiah 3:11. — Ed.

   [87] Blayney, following the Targum, renders pastors “rulers,” and feed,
   “rule:” but this is to interpret and not to translate, as the words have
   never strictly these meanings, though what are sometimes to be understood by
   pastors are rulers, and by feeding, ruling or governing. But the
   interpretation in this instance seems not to be correct, and for the reason
   here assigned by Calvin It is indeed the opinion of Henry, Scott, Adam
   Clarke, and others, that both civil and ecclesiastical pastors are intended;
   and if so, “knowledge” may be applied to the latter, and “wisdom” to the
   former. The Septuagint have omitted “wisdom,” and retain only “knowledge.”
   The Targum has “knowledge and wisdom;” the Vulgate, “knowledge and
   doctrine;” the Syriac, “knowledge and prudence;” and Blayney, “knowledge and
   discretion.” The verb רעה means “to feed on,“ as in Isaiah 44:20, or, as
   here, to “feed with.” It means also to “feed itself” as a beast does, Isaiah
   11:7
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 3:16

   16. And it shall come to pass, when ye be multiplied and increased in the
   land, in those days, saith the LORD, they shall say no more, The ark of the
   covenant of the LORD: neither shall it come to mind: neither shall they
   remember it; neither shall they visit it, neither shall that be done any
   more.

   16. Et erit, cum multiplicati fueritis et fructificaveritis (vel,
   creveritis) in terra diebus illis, dicit Jehova, non dicent amplius, Arca
   foederis Jehovae, et non ascendet in cor, et non recordabuntur ejus, et non
   visitabunt, et non fiet amplius.


   Interpreters have perverted this verse, for none of them have understood the
   design of the Prophet. The Jews, for the most part, have adduced frigid and
   far — fetched glosses, — that they would no more bring out to battles the
   Ark of the Covenant, as no enemy would invade their land. They think then
   that a peaceable state is promised to the people, as they would be
   constrained by no hostile force to carry the Ark of the Covenant here and
   there. But we clearly see that the words mean no such thing: it is then a
   comment wholly foreign to the subject. Others say, that what is said must be
   applied to the time of the Messiah, and none even of the Jews deny this; for
   it afterwards follows, that the Israelites would return with the tribe of
   Judah. This had not yet been fulfilled; it hence follows, that the Prophet
   here predicts of the kingdom of Christ. But the Jews, while allowing this,
   do not understand that anything is said of the abrogation of legal
   ceremonies; it has yet been thought by almost all Christians, that the
   Prophet here teaches us, that when Christ should come, an end would be put
   to all the shadows of the law, so that there would be no more any Ark of the
   Covenant, as the fullness of the Godhead would dwell in Christ.

   This indeed is a view which seems plausible, but the meaning of the Prophet,
   as I think, is wholly different: for he refers here to that divorce or
   division which had for a long time existed between the kingdom of Judah and
   the kingdom of Israel. Though the kingdom of Israel, as to the number of its
   men, largeness of territory and wealth, was more flourishing and prosperous
   than the kingdom of Judah; yet there remained these advantages to the Jews,
   — that they had a Temple built according to God’s command, — that its place
   had been chosen by God, — that they had the Ark of the Covenant as a symbol
   of God’s presence. Hence there was contention between the kingdom of Judah
   and the ten tribes: the Israelites were elated on account of their number
   and their riches, and other temporal advantages; and the Jews gloried in
   their Temple and the Ark of the Covenant. And what now does the Prophet say?
   He declares that such would be the concord between the Israelites and the
   Jews, that the Jews would no more say, “The Ark of the Covenant,” “The
   Temple of God;” for God would be present with them all. And the Prophet
   proceeds to confirm more fully what I have just said: it is therefore
   necessary to add the two following verses. He then says —
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 3:17-18

   17. At that time they shall call Jerusalem the throne of the LORD; and all
   the nations shall be gathered unto it, to the name of the LORD, to
   Jerusalem: neither shall they walk any more after the imagination of their
   evil heart.

   17. Tempore illo vocabunt Jerusalem solium Jehovae, et congregabuntur ad eam
   omnes gentes ad nomen Jehovae, Jerusalem dico; et non ambulabunt posthac
   (vel, amplius) post duriciem (alii vertunt, obstinationem; est etiam
   interdum cogitatio, שררות, post duriciem) cordis sui malam.

   18. In those days the house of Judah shall walk with the house of Israel,
   and they shall come together out of the land of the north to the land that I
   have given for an inheritance unto your fathers.

   18. In diebus illis venient domus Jehudah cum domo Israel, venient simul e
   terra aquilonis ad terram, quam dedi in haereditatem patribus vestris (vel,
   quam dedi possidendam jure haereditario patribus vestris.)


   We now understand more clearly what I have already said, — that the Prophet
   promises here that there would be concord between the ten tribes and the
   kingdom of Judah, when both returned from exile; as though he had said, that
   their condition would be better than it ever had been; for the seed of
   Abraham had been torn as it were asunder; and the people whom God intended
   that they should continue in a holy union had become divided in the most
   shameful manner. We indeed know that there had been inveterate hatred
   between the Jews and the Israelites. As then there had been such disgraceful
   division for a long time between the children of Abraham, the Prophet now
   shews what would be the fruit of exile; for after having been for a time
   chastised by the Lord, they would return to their own country, not to
   entertain the same emulation as had existed, but to unite together in
   calling on God, in order that the Jews might be as brethren to the
   Israelites, and the Israelites might cultivate mutual concord with the tribe
   of Judah.
     _________________________________________________________________

   PRAYER

   Grant, Almighty God, that as thou at this day mercifully sparest us, when
   yet in various ways we provoke thy displeasure, — O grant, that we may not
   harden ourselves against thy chastisements, but that thy forbearance may
   lead us to repentance, and that also thy scourges may do us good, and that
   we may so truly turn to thee, that our whole life may testify that we are in
   our hearts changed; and may we also stimulate one another, that we may unite
   together in rendering obedience to thy word, and each of us strive to
   glorify thy name, through Christ Jesus our Lord. — Amen.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Lecture Thirteenth

   WE began yesterday to explain what the Prophet means, when he says, that
   there would be no more a remembrance of the Ark of the Covenant after the
   return of the Israelites into their country and their increase in it, even
   because there would be no discord among them as there had been before they
   were led into exile. For the ten tribes, we know, worshipped God after their
   own manner, as they had departed from the pure and simple teaching of the
   law. The Prophet then means, that they would all be the worshippers of the
   only true God, and that there would be among them such an unity of faith,
   that the Jew would not call God his God only, and that an Israelite would
   not desire for himself another God. Hence he adds, It shall not ascend on
   the heart; that is, such a thought shall no more come into their minds; and
   they shall not remember it; that is, no monuments of their ancient disunion
   shall exist any more among them; and they shall not visit it, which means,
   they shall no more come stealthily into Jerusalem who may wish to offer
   sacrifices to God; and in short, he says, No such thing shall be done [88]

   Then he says, At that time called shall be Jerusalem the throne of Jehovah
   The Prophet may appear inconsistent with himself by saying that Jerusalem
   would be the throne of God, and yet that the Jews would make no mention of
   the Ark of the Covenant: but the two clauses wholly agree, for he means that
   Jerusalem would be the seat and habitation of the eternal God, without any
   dispute being raised among them. The Israelites before their exile boasted
   that they retained the worship of the true God, and so magnificent was the
   display, and so great the pomp, that Jerusalem was quite obscure as to any
   external splendor. But the Prophet says that this distinction would no
   longer exist, and that the Israelites would no more contend with the Jews,
   for all would allow Jerusalem to be the sanctuary of God; as though he had
   said, “Pure religion shall flourish among them all without exception, such
   as had not done before.” And this passage he more clearly confirms by the
   words which follow: —

   Assemble into it shall all nations to the name of Jehovah; or, on account of
   the name of Jehovah (ל, lamed, is here instead of a causal particle) shall
   all nations assemble at Jerusalem. [89] We see that there is nothing
   doubtful in these words, for the Prophet distinctly declares, that the
   worship of God, such as the Law required, would attain such esteem, that all
   nations would be ready to embrace whatever would be taught by the Jews. But
   by all nations we are to understand strictly the ten tribes, as they are
   called many nations in several places. If any one prefers to extend the
   meaning, let him enjoy his own opinion.

   As I have said yesterday, the Jews think that the time of the Messiah is
   described here, because what Jeremiah promises has never been fulfilled; for
   there was no assembling of nations when the Jews returned from exile to
   their own country, as the Jews alone returned at that time. Hence they
   conclude that this passage can be explained in no other way than by
   referring it to the kingdom of Messiah; which, indeed, I confess to be true.
   But as that return and restoration of the people was a prelude of Christ’s
   kingdom, the prophets ever begin at that time whenever they prophesy of the
   Church being renewed. It is indeed true, that the restoration of the whole
   world was to be looked for through the coming of Christ; yet God began to
   restore his Church, when he stretched forth his hand to the Jews, and when
   they built the city and the temple; which was necessary to be done before
   Christ came forth. But as to this passage, whether by nations we understand
   the ten tribes, or both kingdoms, or all nations indiscriminately, the
   meaning of the Prophet is equally clear, which is this, — that the Church
   would become larger than before, when God restored the people, and that God
   would then cause true religion to flourish, unaccompanied with envy and
   strife.

   What follows confirms the opinion, that the passage is to be explained of
   the two kingdoms, Walk, he says, shall they no more after the evil hardness
   of their own heart [90] It was not usual to speak thus of heathen nations,
   who had ever been strangers to the teaching of the Law. As this, then, can
   only be specifically applied to the Jews and Israelites, that explanation is
   the most to be approved, which makes all nations to mean the ten tribes, or
   the whole people.

   Then is added, what is of the same meaning, In those days shall come the
   house of Judah with the house of Israel It hence appears, that the Prophet
   speaks of the posterity of Abraham and not of other nations; for he adds
   this verse as explanatory. It might, indeed, have been asked, “What does
   this mean, All nations shall come?” To this he answers, “The house of Israel
   shall unite with the house of Judah;” that is, there shall be no more hatred
   between these two nations, for they shall acknowledge one another as
   brethren, and know that they have arisen from the same source, and that they
   ought to be one people. In short, the Prophet explains in this verse what he
   had said before. And we ought especially to notice what he adds, Come shall
   they together from the land of the north into the land which I have given to
   be possessed by their fathers The Jews had not yet gone into exile; the
   Prophet said this to them while they were quiet, as it were, in their own
   nest at Jerusalem, and in the country around; nor could he convince them of
   what they afterwards found to be true to their great loss, — that an exile
   was nigh them, like that which they then saw had happened to their brethren,
   the Israelites. But yet the Prophet spoke of them, as though they had been
   exiled and dwelt like the Israelites in the north country; Come together ,
   he says, shall they from the land of the north [91]

   They might have objected and said, “We are as yet enjoying our own
   inheritance, and no one can drive us hence, for it cannot be that God shall
   be deprived of his own temple, as he has chosen for himself a perpetual
   habitation among us.” Such words were no doubt clamorously spoken by them.
   But the Prophet here repels their vain confidence, and says, that their only
   hope of deliverance was in looking forward to the restoration which the Lord
   would grant them after they had been for a time banished from their country.
   Now the Prophet here sets forth to them the benefit which would arise from
   exile, in order that they might bear with more submission the punishment
   they were to endure: for they might have a hundred times despaired, had they
   no hope that this exile would be only for a time, and that they would again
   be gathered together with their brethren the Israelites. It now follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [88] The literal rendering of this verse I conceive to be the following, —
   16. And it shall be, that ye shall multiply And be fruitful in the land. In
   those days, saith Jehovah, they shall no more say, — “The Ark of the
   Covenant of Jehovah;” And it shall not come to their mind, Nor shall they
   mention it, nor visit it; And not made shall it be any more. The two first
   lines seem connected with the former verse. There is a gradation in the
   three last lines, — It shall not be thought of, much less mentioned or
   named, as given by the Septuagint, — still less be visited, — and much less
   still, be made. This gradation is destroyed by Blayney by rendering the
   first line, Nor shall it be the delight of their heart; literally it is,
   “And it shall not ascend on the heart.” The “heart” means often in Hebrew
   the mind; and “to come to mind” is the idea; it would not be thought of. The
   phrase occurs in this book in two other places, Jeremiah 7:31; Jeremiah
   44:21; and, not to think, or, not to come to mind, is the most suitable
   meaning, as it is given in our version. The purpose of this kind of
   gradation is to render the thing more certain and indisputable, so that
   there might be no room for doubt. — Ed.

   [89] This seems to be the best rendering. Blayney leaves out the word
   “Jerusalem;” but for no sufficient reason. The whole verse is as follows:
   — In that day call shall they Jerusalem, “The throne of Jehovah;” And
   gathered into it shall be all the nations, For the name of Jehovah, even to
   Jerusalem; And they shall no more walk after the resolutions of their wicked
   heart. — Ed.

   [90] “Evil” is connected with “hardness;” but it belongs properly to “their
   heart.” The word rendered “hardness” is שררות a plural noun, found eight
   times in Jeremiah; here, and in Jeremiah 7:24; Jeremiah 9:14; Jeremiah 11:8;
   Jeremiah 13:10; Jeremiah 16:12; Jeremiah 18:12; Jeremiah 23:17; and twice
   elsewhere, Deuteronomy 29:19; Psalm 81:12. It is so variously rendered by
   the Septuagint, that they evidently did not understand its specific meaning;
   enthumēmata, thoughts, devices; ta aresta, things pleasing or agreeable;
   planē, wandering. These words are used for it in Jeremiah. The Vulgate ever
   renders it “pravitas — pravity — wickedness.” The Targum uniformly renders
   it “cogitatio — thought or imagination.” The latter word is used in our
   version, (except in Psalm 81:12, “lust,”) with a marginal reading
   “stubbornness.” The Syriac and Arabic vary as much as the Septuagint,
   “appetites, lusts, will,” etc. To “walk after” precedes it in most instances
   except in Jeremiah 18:12, where it is preceded by “doing.” Now to “do the
   hardness of the heart,” is no suitable expression; nor is “imagination” or
   “stubbornness” anything better. It can be derived from no verb which means
   to think or to imagine, or which has any connection with depravity or
   wickedness, or with appetites or lusts. Nor can we derive it from שרה, which
   those do who render it “stubbornness;” for that will suit the passage
   referred to in Jeremiah 18:12. It must then come from שר, to direct, to
   regulate, to rule, to exercise authority. It occurs three times in a
   reduplicate form; as a participial noun in Esther 1:22, and as a verb and a
   participle in Hithpael in Numbers 16:13, where it is applied in the sense of
   making oneself a prince or a tyrant. The literal meaning of the noun then
   is, in the plural number, predominances, domineerings, arbitraments; and it
   may be rendered determinations, resolutions, predominant influences or
   inclinations. “Walk shall they no more after the resolutions of their wicked
   heart.” It is used in Jeremiah 7:24, in apposition with “counsels,” being
   evidently a stronger word: it seems to mean resoluteness or resolvedness, a
   full determination, a willful decision. Parkhurst renders it, “the ruling
   principles.” — Ed

   [91] Calvin uses the verb “venient, “shall come, twice: but the first verb
   is to walk, and expresses the associating of Judah with Israel, or their
   union. The words are, — In those days walk will the house of Judah with the
   house of Israel, And come shall they together from the land of the north, To
   the land which I made their fathers to inherit. They would be first united,
   and then advance together to their own land. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 3:19

   19. But I said, How shall I put thee among the children, and give thee a
   pleasant land, a goodly heritage of the hosts of nations? and I said, Thou
   shalt call me, My father; and shalt not turn away from me.

   19. Et ego dixi, Quomodo ponam to in filios, et dabo tibi terram desiderii
   (hoc est, desiderabilem,) haereditatem cupiditatis [92] (hoc est, quae
   concupiscitur,) exercitus gentium? Et dixi, Pater mi, clamabis ad me, et a
   me non recedes (de post me, ad verbtum, מאחרי.)


   It is not my purpose to mention all the expositions of this verse; but it is
   enough to shew what seems to be the meaning of the Prophet. Whenever I touch
   on opinions which I disapprove, this I feel constrained to do, because when
   they present the appearance of truth, readers may be deceived by them: but
   when the truth itself is sufficiently conspicuous, I am not disposed to
   spend labor in refuting the opinions of others.

   What, then, the words of the Prophet mean is this, — God here asks, How was
   it possible that the race of Abraham could again be propagated since it was
   nearly dead? The answer is, It shall be, when thou wilt call me Father, and
   turn not away from me The question was asked, that the Jews might feel as
   though their condition was past remedy. And doubtless, since they had so
   greatly and so obstinately provoked God by their wickedness, they might have
   seemed to have become wholly lost. God then assumes here the character of
   one filled with astonishment, as though he had said, “Ye are, indeed, in a
   state of despair, there is no hope of your salvation; but yet, as it is my
   purpose again to restore you, I wish now to find out a way, by which your
   race may again be propagated.” How, then, is this to be done? He shews that
   the only thing required was, to call him Father, not with the mouth, but
   really with the heart.

   We now, then, perceive the meaning of the Prophet: for he humbles the
   Israelites by thus ascribing astonishment to God, as though it was a thing
   very difficult to be done; but at the same time he gives them hope, because
   salvation was prepared for them, provided they called on God with a sincere
   heart, and acknowledged him as their Father, and that perseveringly, without
   ever turning aside from him. In short, God intimates that the Israelites
   were like dead men, and that their salvation was hopeless, without a
   resurrection, he yet promises them salvation on this condition, — that they
   called on him and did this, not with a double heart, nor by a sudden
   impulse, such as soon vanishes away; for he says, Thou shalt not turn aside
   from me; that is, “Be always obedient to me, and I will prove that I shall
   not be called in vain a Father by you.” It follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [92] Calvin takes the word in its Chaldee meaning; צבי means in Hebrew,
   elation, splendor, glory; but in Chaldee, desire, what is desired; and this
   suits the passage best, “The inheritance of desire to hosts of nations;”
   that is, “The inheritance desired by hosts of nations;” This is the meaning
   preferred by Gataker I would render the whole verse thus, — 19. But I, said
   have I, “How shall I put thee among the children, And give thee the land of
   delight, The inheritance desired by hosts of nations?” Said have I also, “My
   Father shalt thou call me, And from me thou wilt not turn away.” When the
   pronouns are given before verbs in Hebrew, as אנכי I, here, they are ever
   emphatical. “But I,” or, “as for me,” or, “even I have said.” — Ed
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 3:20

   20. Surely as a wife treacherously departeth from her husband, so have ye
   dealt treacherously with me, O house of Israel, saith the LORD.

   20. Certe (subaudienda est particula sicut) perfideagit mulier a socio suo
   [93] (hoc est, perfide agit cum marito, ubi ab ipso discedit, vel, se
   alienat,) sic perfide egistis in me, domus Israel, inquit Jehovah.


   He confirms the first clause of the preceding verse: for he had said that it
   could hardly be that the Jews would recover what they had lost, and be
   formed again a new people; and he shews the reason, — because they were like
   an adulteress, as he had before stated. But he did not yet wish to take away
   every hope; only he insists on this, that they were seriously to consider
   their sins, in order that they might become displeased with themsalves, and
   flee to God’s mercy for refuge. Nor did he do this so much for their sake,
   as for the sake of the people among whom he dwelt. For he had respect, as it
   has been often stated, especially to the Jews, who had become so hardened in
   their vices as not to think that this example, by which God intended to
   terrify them, so as to bend their hard hearts to repentance, belonged to
   them. Hence it was for this reason that God so severely reproved Israel; for
   he had said before, that the Jews were still worse. He afterwards subjoins
   —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [93] Blayney, contrary to all the early versions, construes the word מרעה
   with woman, “a wicked woman.” “Friend,” or associate, or partner, is here
   evidently put for husband; a thing commonly done in other languages. Our
   common version of this verse is by no means correct: the preposition מ is
   not always “from,” but sometimes “with.” So here, — Surely, as a woman deals
   perfidiously with her partner,
   So perfidiously against me have ye dealt,
   O house of Israel, saith Jehovah. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 3:21

   21. A voice was heard upon the high places, weeping and supplications of the
   children of Israel: for they have perverted their way, and they have
   forgotten the LORD their God.

   21. Vox super excelsa audita est, fletus precationum filiorum Israel; quia
   perverterunt viam suam, obliti sunt Jehovae Dei sui.


   What I have stated becomes now more evident, — that the case of the
   Israelites is here set before the Jews, that the perverse, whom God had
   spared, might know that the same punishment impended over them, except they
   returned in due time to him: for the Prophet declares, that the Israelites
   were weeping and in tears, because they had departed from their God, and
   violated their faith pledged to him. For what purpose did he do this? That
   the Jews, who indulged themselves in their own pleasures, might be awakened,
   and be convinced, that except they anticipated God’s judgments, the same
   tears and the same weeping were prepared for them. The Israelites, indeed,
   did not as yet thus weep and shew signs of true repentance; for the Prophet
   does not here commend their feeling or their piety, but intimates, that they
   were thus severely afflicted, because they had forsaken their God.

   A voice, he says, was heard on high places, ‘that is, It was everywhere
   sufficiently known how cruelly the Israelites were oppressed by their
   enemies. Now they cried, then they called themselves the most wretched of
   men: why was this lamentation? Because they had perverted their ways It is,
   then, the same as though he had said, — that it was a monstrous perverseness
   in the Jews, that being warned by the punishment of their brethren, they did
   not repent: for the calamity which happened to the Israelites filled all men
   with terror. That kingdom had, indeed, flourished for a long time; but the
   land had been emptied of its inhabitants, and was occupied by wild beasts,
   until some were sent from Persia and other parts in the East to cultivate
   it. How could a land so pleasant and so fruitful have become like a desert?
   Even because God had so predicted:

   “Ye have neglected,” he says, “my Sabbaths, and your land shall rest, and it
   shall no more be wearied by you.”
   (Leviticus 26:34, 35.)

   It was an awful sight; and nations, far and wide, were able to see how great
   must have been the impiety of that people, on whom God had taken such
   dreadful vengeance. Were not the Jews, who had this solitude before their
   eyes, and this devastation of the land, extremely stupid in overlooking all
   this?

   We now see the design of the Prophet, when he says, A voice on high places
   was heard, as though the Israelites cried on the tops of mountains. And he
   adds, the weeping of the supplications, etc.: but he does not mean, that
   they were prayers which arose from faith; but simply that they were such
   lamentations as betokened misery and wretchedness. In giving a reason, the
   Prophet mentions not what the Israelites confessed, but only shews the cause
   why they so deeply deplored their calamities; it was, because they had
   perverted their ways, and forgotten Jehovah their God [94] He afterwards
   adds —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [94] The verse may be thus rendered, — 21. A voice on the high places! Heard
   is the weeping, the supplications Of the people of Israel; Because they had
   perverted their way, Had forgotten Jehovah their God. Instead of “high
   places,” Blayney has “plains;” but there is no satisfactory reason for the
   change. As the verb in Hebrew commonly precedes its nominative, the
   construction adopted above is the most suitable to the character of the
   language. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 3:22-23

   22. Return, ye backsliding children, and I will heal your backslidings.
   Behold, we come unto thee; for thou art the LORD our God.

   22. Revertimini, filii rebelles; sanabo transgressiones vestras. Ecce, nos
   venimus ad to, quia Jehova Deus noster.

   23. Truly in vain is salvation hoped for from the hills, and from the
   multitude of mountains: truly in the LORD our God is the salvation of
   Israel.

   23. Certe fallacia a collibus, multitudo montium; certe in Jehova Deo nostro
   sans Israel.


   God here exhorts the Israelites to repent, that by their example he might
   move the Jews. The benefit of what is here taught might indeed have reached
   to the miserable captives and exiles; but as Jeremiah was especially the
   teacher of his own nation, he labored chiefly no doubt for their advantage,
   as we have before stated. God then here declares, that he would be
   reconcilable to the Israelites, how grievously soever they had sinned, he
   afterwards introduces them as answering, Behold, we return, or we shall come
   to thee: for the Prophet speaks here of the future conversion of the ten
   tribes.

   It is then a dialogue between God and the Israelites. God himself freely
   invites them to repent: Return, he says, ye rebellious children; and then he
   promises to be a physician to heal their diseases: I will heal thy
   transgressions; that is, I will blot out thy sins, and absolve thee from
   guilt. God then undertakes to do these things; first, to stimulate the
   Israelites to repentance, and then to give them the hope of pardon: and he
   says that a remedy was provided for them, except they hardened themselves.
   Now, the Israelites, on the other hand, make this answer, Behold, we shall
   come to thee Here Jeremiah condemns the obstinacy of his own nation, by
   saying, that the Israelites, when thus kindly invited by God, would not be
   perverse, but would, on the contrary, be tractable and obedient. This indeed
   was not fulfilled, when a liberty to return was given to the people, except
   in the case of a few, who had a right feeling, and preferred the glory of
   God to their temporal advantages. But the number was small; nor was it a
   matter of surprise; for God had not previously said, without reason, that if
   one came from a city, and two from a tribe, he would be received, though
   others continued fixed in their perverseness. However this may have been,
   God here intimates that the Israelites would not be so refractory as not to
   obey his admonition when the hope of pardon and salvation would be presented
   to them: and this is mentioned, that the perverseness of the Jews might
   appear more detestable.

   But some think that the Israelites are here upbraided, because they
   hypocritically pretended that they always sought God. Hence they elicit this
   meaning, “Ye indeed say, Behold, we return to thee, thou art our God;” as
   though he condemned their hypocrisy, because they falsely alleged that they
   always sought him. But this view seems to me foreign to the intention of the
   Prophet. Hence I doubt not but that Jeremiah sets before the Jews, as in a
   picture, what ought to have constrained them not to persist so obstinately
   in their sinful courses: “Behold,” he says, “God is prepared to receive into
   favor your brethren, who are undone and past all hope; and when they shall
   hear God’s voice kindly and graciously inviting them to himself, they will
   doubtless return: why then do not ye obey?”

   And in the same sense is to be taken what follows, Surely, deceit is from
   the hills, and the multitude of mountains, or, from the multitude of
   mountains, as the letter מ is to be repeated. Here the Prophet more fully
   expresses the evidence of their repentance, as though he had said, “We have
   been deceived by the hills and the multitude of mountains; we thought that
   there would be more defense from a large number of gods than if we
   worshipped one God: this deception has led to ruin. Let then all these
   deceits be now discarded; for we shall be content with the only true God.”
   In short, the Israelites confess, in these words, that they had been drawn
   into ruin by the worst of errors, while they sought many gods, and did not
   acquiesce in the one true God.

   Then they add, for surely in Jehovah our God is salvation They set here the
   one true God in opposition to all their idols, as though they had said, that
   the cause of all their evils was, that they did not continue in the service
   of the one true God, but wandered after a multitude of Gods. We hence see
   that these two things cannot possibly be connected, — to worship the true
   God, — and to seek for ourselves various other gods, and to form vain hopes,
   as they do, who are not satisfied with the only true God. [95] It follows
   —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [95] The literal rendering of these two verses is the following:- 22.
   Return, ye apostate children, I will heal your apostasies. — Behold us! We
   come to thee; For thou art Jehovah our God: 23. Surely, in vain are the
   hills, The multitude of mountains; Surely, in (or through) Jehovah our God
   Is the salvation of Israel. The word rendered “apostate,” does not mean
   “rebellious,” but such as turn away, i.e., from God; and the word for
   “apostasies” means the same, being from the same root. The מ before the word
   for “hills,” is not a preposition, as it is commonly taken, but a formative:
   so it appears from all the versions. Blayney conjectures that it belongs to
   the former word, and makes it לשקרים; but then he does not account for the
   ל prefixed to it. There is no different reading. The Septuagint is, eis
   pseudos hēsan hoi zounoi — for a lie were the hills. The Vulgate, Syriac,
   and Arabic, are materially the same. — Ed
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 3:24

   24. For shame hath devoured the labour of our fathers from our youth; their
   flocks and their herds, their sons and their daughters.

   24. Et pudor (vel, probrum) voravit laborem patrum nostrorum a pueritia
   nostra, oves eorum et pecora eorum, filios eorum et filias eorum.


   They confirm more fully the same complaint, — That God had by manifest
   proofs shewed the sins of the nation; for he had consumed their labor, that
   is, whatever they had acquired by labor. He also adds sheep and cattle, and
   then sons and daughters He does not indeed ascribe this consumption to God;
   but the mode of speaking is more emphatic, when he says, Shame has consumed
   the labor of our fathers from our childhood: for by shame he understands
   wickedness, of which they ought to have been ashamed. The meaning then is,
   that all the evils they had endured could in no other way be accounted for,
   inasmuch as the whole was to be ascribed to their wickedness. Our shame,
   then, [96] that is, our wickedness, has consumed the labor of our fathers It
   follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [96] Rather, “And the shame,” i e , the idol-worship, referred to in the
   preceding verse; the article ה is prefixed to the noun. This is the view
   taken by Gataker and Blayney See Jeremiah 11:13; Hosea 9:10. — Ed
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 3:25

   25. We lie down in our shame, and our confusion covereth us: for we have
   sinned against the LORD our God, we and our fathers, from our youth even
   unto this day, and have not obeyed the voice of the LORD our God.

   25. Jacuimus in pudore nostro, et operuit nos ignomina nostra; quoniam cum
   Jehova Deo nostro scelerate egimus, nos et patres nostri, a pueritia nostra,
   et ad hunc diem usque; et non audivimus vocem Jehovae Dei nostri.


   As the Israelites say here nothing new, but continue the same subject, I
   propose only to touch briefly on the words, lest I should be too tedious.
   They say then that they were lying in their miseries; and why? because they
   had dealt wickedly with God We see that they are explaining what they had
   confessed, — even that the labor of their fathers had been consumed by their
   shame, that is, by their wickedness; and they ascribe to themselves what
   might have been put to the account of their fathers, because they knew that
   they were heirs to their iniquity. We have lain, they say, in our shame [97]
   They here shortly confess that they were deservedly miserable, that they
   could not accuse God of cruelty, as that he afflicted them too severely. How
   so? because they were lying in their own shame, and their own disgrace
   covered them; as though they said, that the cause of all their evils was to
   be found in their sins, and that it was not to be sought anywhere else.

   Because we and our fathers, they say, have done wickedly By these words they
   intimate that they had acted thus, not for a day only, but had been so
   perverse, that from early life they had imbibed the iniquity of their
   fathers, and thus added evils to evils. They had said before, that the labor
   of their fathers had been consumed from their childhood, thereby signifying
   the continuance of their punishment; for God had not for a day chastised
   them, but had often repeated his scourges, and yet without any benefit. Now
   they add, “As we have from our childhood dealt wickedly towards our God, so
   also he has warned us from our childhood to return to him; and it has been
   our fault that we have not returned, for he called us; but as we were
   obstinate, so also God has justly executed on us his vengeance.”

   They afterwards say, even to this day; by which they confirm what I have
   already stated, — that they had been so perverse as not to cease from their
   vices. At the same time he points out the source of all their wickedness:
   they hearkened not to the voice of Jehovah Had they gone astray, and had God
   been silent, their fault might have been extenuated; but as God had daily
   sent prophets to them, who never ceased to cry in their hearing, and yet
   they continued deaf, their perverseness in their sinful courses was
   inexcusable. We then see that their sin was increased by the circumstance,
   that they refused to hear the voice of God; as though he had said, that God
   had done his part in calling them back from the way of ruin, but that they
   had been so obstinate as to disregard his favor, and that they thus justly
   suffered, not only for their impiety, but also for their ingratitude and
   perverse wickedness.
     _________________________________________________________________

   [97] Calvin seems to have followed the Septuagint in rendering the verb in
   the past tense. The Vulgate and Syriac retain the future of the original;
   but the Targum gives the present, and rightly so, as the future in Hebrew is
   often to be so taken. It is the same in Welsh, the future conveys the
   meaning of the present. This distich might in that language be rendered
   exactly according to the Hebrew, and the future would be understood as
   expressing what the present state of things is, — Gorweddwn yn ein cywilydd,
   A gorchuddia ni ein gwarth. But in English the present must be used, as it
   is the confession of the penitent when returning to God, — We lie in our
   shame, And cover us does our disgrace, Because against Jehovah our God Have
   we sinned, we and our fathers, From our childhood even to this day; And we
   have not hearkened To the voice of Jehovah our God. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   PRAYER

   Grant, Almighty God, that as we cease not, though favored with many
   blessings, to provoke thee by our misdeeds, as though we avowedly carried on
   war against thee, — O grant, that we being at length warned by those
   examples, by which thou invitest us to repentance, may restrain our depraved
   nature, and in due time repent, and so devote ourselves to thy service, that
   thy name through us may be glorified, and that we may strive to bring into
   the way of salvation those who seem to be now lost, so that thy mercy may
   extend far and wide, and that thus thy salvation, obtained through Christ
   thine only — begotten Son, may be known and embraced by all nations. — Amen.
     _________________________________________________________________
     _________________________________________________________________

   CHAPTER 4
     _________________________________________________________________

   Lecture Fourteenth
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 4:1

   1. If thou wilt return, O Israel, saith the Lord, return unto me: and if
   thou wilt put away thine abominations out of my sight, then shalt thou not
   remove.

   1. Si reverteris Israel, dicit Jehova, ad me revertere (vel, apud me
   quiesce;) et si abstuleris abominationes tuas a facie mea, et non fueris
   vagus (alii, et non migrabis.)


   The Prophet no doubt requires here from the people a sincere return to God,
   inasmuch as they had often pretended to confess their sins, and had given
   many signs of repentance, while they were acting deceitfully with him. As
   then they had often dealt falsely with God and with his prophets, Jeremiah
   bids them to return to God without any disguise and in good faith. With
   regard to what is here substantially taught, this is the Prophet’s meaning;
   but there is some ambiguity in the words.

   Some read thus, “If thou returnest, Israel, to me, saith Jehovah,
   “connecting “to me, אלי, “with the first clause, then they read separately
   “תשוב, teshub, thou shalt rest;” and so they think that what follows is the
   repetition of the same thing, “If thou wilt take away thine abominations
   from before me, thou shalt not migrate;” that is, I will not cast thee out
   as I have threatened. Others take the verb תשוב, teshub, in the same sense,
   (for it is the same verb repeated,) “If thou wilt return, Israel, return to
   me.” The Prophet doubtless bids the Israelites to return to God in
   sincerity, and without any disguise, and not to act falsely with him, as
   they had often done.

   I have as yet mentioned only what others have thought; but, in my judgment,
   the most suitable rendering is, “If thou wilt return, Israel, rest in me,
   “arrete toi, as we say in French. Rest then in me; and then a definition is
   given, If thou wilt take away thine abominations (for the copulative is to
   be taken as expletive or explanatory) from my sight, and wilt not wander
   What some of those I have referred to have given as their rendering, “If
   thou wilt return to me, Israel, thou shalt rest,” I wholly reject, as it
   seems forced: but I allow this reading, “If thou wilt return, Israel, thou
   shalt rest in me;” or this, “If thou wilt return, Israel, return to me;” for
   the difference is not great. The Prophet here evidently condemns the
   hypocrisy which the Israelites had practiced; for they had often professed
   themselves as ready to render obedience to God, and afterwards proved that
   they had made a false profession. Since then deceit and emptiness had been
   so often found in them, the Prophet demands here, in the name and by the
   command of God, that they should in truth and sincerity return to him.

   If this reading be approved, “Israel, return to me,” the intimation is, that
   they ever took circuitous courses, that they might not return directly to
   God: for it is usual with hypocrites to make a great show of repentance and
   at the same time to shun God. If then we follow this reading, the Prophet
   means this, “Israel, there is no reason for thee hereafter to think that
   thou gainest anything by boasting with thy mouth of thy repentance; return
   to me; know that thou hast to do with God, who is not deceived, as he never
   deceives any: return then faithfully to me, and let thy conversion be
   sincere and in no way deceptive.”

   But if the verb, תשוב, teshub, be taken in the other sense, there would be
   no great difference in the meaning; “If thou wilt return, Israel, thou shalt
   rest in me;” that is, thou shalt hereafter have nothing to do with idols and
   with thy perverted ways. Thus the Prophet briefly shews that the return of
   Israel would be nothing, except they acquiesced in God alone, and wandered
   not after vain objects, as they had often done. And with this view
   corresponds what follows, “Even if thou takest away (for the copulative, as
   I have said, is to be taken as explanatory) thine abominations from my
   sight, and wilt wander no more, ולא תנוד, vela tanud.” For the vice which
   Jeremiah meant especially to condemn was this, — that Israel, while
   pretending a great show of religion, yet vacillated and did not devote
   themselves with all their heart to God, but were changeable in their
   purpose. This vice then is what Jeremiah justly condemns; and hence I am
   disposed to embrace this view “Israel, if thou wilt return, rest in me;”
   that is, continue constantly faithful to me: but how can this be done? “Even
   if thou wilt take away thy abominations, and if thou wilt not wander;” for
   thy levity and inconstancy hitherto has been well known. [98]

   Whatever view we may take, this passage deserves to be noticed as being
   against hypocrites, who dare not openly to reject prophetic warnings; but
   while they shew some tokens of repentance, they still by windings shun the
   presence of God. They indeed testify by their mouth that they seek God, but
   yet have recourse to subterfuges: and hence I have said that this passage is
   remarkably useful, so that we may know that God cannot be pacified by those
   fallacious trifles which hypocrites bring forward, but that he requires a
   sincere heart, and that he abominates all dissimulation. It is therefore
   expressly said, If thou wilt take away thy abominations from my sight For
   hypocrites ever regard display and seek to be approved by men, and are
   satisfied with their approbation; but God calls their attention to himself.
   It must at the same time be observed, that he cannot be deceived; for he is
   the searcher of hearts. It follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [98] The best rendering is that which connects “to me” with the former
   clause: the end of the verse, as Grotius observes, proves this. If they
   returned to God, they were to return from captivity; and if they cast away
   their abominations, they were not to be vagabonds or to wander any more.
   This seems to be the meaning. The ו before לא in the last clause is left out
   in ten MSS., and in the Vulgate, Targum, and Syriac. The verse then would be
   as follows, — 1. If thou wilt return, Israel, saith Jehovah, to me, Thou
   shalt be restored, (that is, from captivity:) If thou wilt remove thy
   abominations from my sight, Thou shalt not be a wanderer. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 4:2

   2 And thou shalt swear, The Lord liveth, in truth, in judgment, and in
   righteousness; and the nations shall bless themselves in him, and in him
   shall they glory.

   2. Et jurabis, vivit Jehova, in veritate, in judicio et in justitia; et
   benedicent se in eo gentes et in eo gloriabuntur.


   Here the Prophet goes on with the same subject; for he denudes these
   flatteries, by which they thought that God could be pacified: for when they
   had his name in their mouth, they thought it sufficient for their defense,
   — “What! do we not call upon God? do we not ascribe to him his due honor,
   when we swear by his name?” There is in the Prophet’s words a part given for
   the whole; for swearing is to be taken for the whole of God’s worship. When
   therefore the Israelites made a profession of God’s name, they thought
   themselves absolved from all guilt.

   Hence the Prophet says, Thou shalt swear truly in the name of God; that is,
   “Ye are indeed self — confident, because an external profession of religion
   seems to you to be a sort of expiation, whenever ye seek to contend with
   God: ye boast that you are Abraham’s seed, and swear by the name of God; but
   ye are sacrilegious, when ye thus falsely profess God’s name.” Swear then,
   he says, in truth

   We hence see how the words of the Prophet harmonize together: he had said,
   that Israel had hitherto dealt falsely with God, because they had not
   performed what in words they had promised, for they went astray; and now he
   adds, that it availed the Israelites nothing, that they openly called on God
   and shewed themselves to be his people by an external worship: this, he
   says, is nothing, except ye worship God in truth and in judgment and in
   righteousness

   Truth is no doubt to be taken here for integrity, as we shall see in the
   fifth chapter: it is the same as though he had said, that God is not rightly
   worshipped, except when the heart is free from all guile and deceit; in
   short, he means that there is no worship of God without sincerity of heart.
   But the truth, of which the Prophet speaks, is especially known by judgment
   and righteousness; that is, when men deal faithfully with one another, and
   render to all their right, and seek not their own gain at the expense of
   others. When therefore equity and uprightness are thus observed by men, then
   is fulfilled what is required here by the Prophet: for then they worship not
   God fallaciously, nor with vain words, but really shew that they do, without
   disguise, fear and reverence God.

   What follows is variously explained by interpreters; but the Prophet, I have
   no doubt, does here indirectly reprove the Israelites, because God’s name
   had been exposed to many reproaches and mockeries, when the heathens said,
   that there was no power in God to help the Israelites, and when the people
   themselves expostulated with God, as though they had a just cause for
   contending with him, — “What! God has promised that we should be models of
   his blessing; but we are exposed to the reproaches of the heathens: how can
   this be?” Since then the Israelites thus deplored their lot, and cast the
   blame on God, the Prophet gives this answer, Bless themselves shall the
   nations and glory in him Some refer this to the Israelites, but not
   correctly. It had indeed been said to Abraham, “In thy seed shall all
   nations be blessed,” or, shall bless themselves. But this blessing had its
   beginning, as it is here noticed by the Prophet. For we must look for the
   cause or the fountain of this blessing: how could the nations bless
   themselves through the seed or the children of Abraham, except God, the
   author of the blessing, manifested his favor towards the children of
   Abraham? Very aptly then does the Prophet say here, Then bless themselves in
   God shall all the nations, and in him shall they glory; that is, “Ye are to
   be blamed, that God’s curse is upon you and renders you objects of reproach
   to all people, and also, that heathens disdain and despise the name of God:
   for your impiety has constrained God to deal more severely with you than he
   wished; for he is ever ready to shew his paternal clemency. What then is the
   hindrance, that the nations bless not themselves in God and glory in him?
   that is, that pure religion does not flourish through the whole world, and
   that all nations do not come to you and unite in the worship of the only
   true God? The hindrance is your impiety and wickedness; this is the reason
   why God is not glorified, and why your felicity is not everywhere celebrated
   among the nations.” We now perceive the meaning of the Prophet, — that the
   Jews groundlessly imputed blame to God, because they were oppressed by so
   many evils; for they had procured for themselves all their calamities, and
   at the same time gave occasion to heathens to profane God’s name by their
   reproaches. [99] It follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [99] This is a very lucid and satisfactory exposition. The import of the
   passage is very clearly given. A simpler version may be made, and such as
   will exhibit the meaning more plainly. When two vaus occur, they may often
   be rendered, when and then: so here, — 2. When thou shalt swear, “Live does
   Jehovah,” In truth, in judgment, and in righteousness; Then call him blessed
   shall nations, And in him shall they glory. To swear is to avow Jehovah as
   our God. The verbs “bless” and “glory” are both in Hithpael, which has
   commonly a reciprocal sense, but not always. See Psalm 72:17; Psalm 105:3.
   This and the preceding verse belong to the last chapter. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 4:3

   3. For thus saith the LORD to the men of Judah and Jerusalem, Break up your
   fallow ground, and sow not among thorns.

   3. Quoniam sic dicit Jehova viro Jehudah (hoc est, Judaeis) et Jerosolymae,
   Novate vobis novale, et ne seminetis super spinas.


   The Prophet still pursues the same subject; for he reproves the hypocrisy of
   the Israelites, because they sought to discharge their duty towards God only
   by external ceremonies, while their hearts were full of deceits and of every
   kind of impiety and wickedness. Hence he says, that God required this from
   the Jews, — to plough again the fallow, and not to sow among thorns.

   It is a most suitable comparison; for Scripture often compares us to a
   field, when it represents us as God’s heritage; and we have been chosen by
   God as a peculiar people for this end — that he may gather fruit from us, as
   a husbandman gathers produce from his fields. We can indeed add nothing to
   what God is; but there is a fruit which he demands; so that our whole life
   is to be devoted to his glory. God then would not have us to be idle and
   fruitless, but to bring forth some fruit. But what is done by hypocrites?
   They sow; that is, they shew some concern, yea, they pretend great ardor,
   when God exhorts them to repent, or when he invites them. They then make a
   great bustle; yet they mar everything by their own mixtures, the same as
   though one scattered his seed among thorns: but it will be of no avail thus
   to cast seed among thorns; for the ground ought to be well cleared and
   prepared. Hence God laughs to scorn this preposterous care and diligence, in
   which hypocrites pride themselves, and says, that they busy themselves
   without any advantage; for it is the same, as though an husbandman had
   wholly lost his seed; for when the ground is full of briers and thorns, the
   seed, though it may grow for a time, cannot yet bring forth fruit. For this
   reason God bids the Israelites to plough the fallows; [100] as though he had
   said, that they were like a rough ground, which is full of thorns, and that
   therefore there was need of unusual and by no means a common cultivation;
   for when thorns and briers grow in a field, of what benefit will it be to
   cast seed there? Nay, a field cannot be well prepared by the plough alone,
   so that it may produce fruit; but much labor is also necessary, as is the
   case with fallow ground, which is called essarter in our language.

   The Prophet then intimates that the people had become hardened in their
   vices, and that they were not only full of vices, like a field left
   uncultivated for two years; but that their vices were so deep, that they
   could not be well cleared away by ploughing alone, except they were drawn up
   by the roots, as they were like thorns and brambles, which have been growing
   in a field for many years. We hence see, that not only impiety and contempt
   of God, and other sins of the people of Israel, are referred to by the
   Prophet, but also their perverseness; for they had so hardened themselves
   for many years in their vices, that there was need not only of the plough,
   but also of other instruments to tear up the thorns, to eradicate those
   vices which had formed deep roots. As then, he had before warned them, that
   they would labor in vain except they returned to God with sincerity of heart
   and acquiesced in him; so here he bids them to examine their life, that they
   might not cast away their seed, like hypocrites, who formally acknowledge
   their sins. Hence he bids them wholly to shake off their vices, which were
   hid within, according to what they do, who tear up thorns and briers in a
   field, which has been long neglected, and left without being cultivated. It
   now follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [100] Literally, “Plough for yourselves the ploughing,“ or, the plough-land;
   or, “Fallow for yourselves the fallow.” They were not to sow a land once
   ploughed; but they were to plough again. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 4:4

   4 Circumcise yourselves to the Lord, and take away the foreskins of your
   heart, ye men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem: lest my fury come forth
   like fire, and burn that none can quench it, because of the evil of your
   doings.

   4. Circumcidimini Jehovae, et auferte praeputia cordis vestri, viri Jehudah
   et incolae Jerusalem; ne egrediatur tanquam ignis furor meus, et accendatur,
   et nemo extinguat, propter (a facie, ad verbum) malitiam actionum vestrarum.


   The Prophet expresses here more clearly what he had before said
   metaphorically or by a figure; for he had bidden them to eradicate their
   vices, according to what is usually done by breaking up the fallow ground;
   but now dropping that figure, he clearly shews what was to be done, and yet
   the clause contains what is figurative. He calls their attention to
   circumcision, which was a symbol of renovation, as though he had said, —
   That they sufficiently understood what they were to do, except they were
   wholly unteachable; “For why, “he says, “has circumcision been enjoined?
   Does not God by this symbol shew, that if a man rightly aspires after true
   religion, he ought to begin by putting off all the evil propensities of his
   flesh? Is he not to deny himself, and to die as it were both to himself and
   to the world? for circumcision includes all this.” Then the Prophet shews
   that the Israelites had no excuse, that they went not astray through mistake
   or through ignorance; but they were acting perversely and deceitfully with
   God; for circumcision, by which they had been initiated into God’s service,
   sufficiently taught them, that God is not rightly nor faithfully served,
   except when men deny themselves.

   We now then see what the Prophet meant by these words, when he bids them to
   be circumcised to God, and to take away the foreskin of their heart: Be ye
   circumcised, he says, to Jehovah Circumcision was their great boast; but
   only before men; for nothing but ambition and vanity ruled in them, while
   they openly exulted and boasted that they were God’s holy and peculiar
   people. Hence the Prophet bids them not to value what was of no importance,
   but to become circumcised to Jehovah; that is, he bids them not to seek
   applause before the world, but seriously to consider that they had to do
   with God. And hence he adds, Take away the foreskin of your heart, as though
   he had said, “When God commanded the seed of Abraham to be circumcised,
   (Genesis 17:10-12,) it was not his object to have a small portion of skin
   cut off, but he had regard to something higher, even that ye should be
   circumcised in heart.”

   The Prophet, in short, teaches us here what Paul has more clearly explained,
   (Romans 2:29,) even this, — that the letter is of no value before God, but
   that the spirit is what he requires: for Paul in these words means, that the
   external sign is worthless, except accompanied by the reality within; for
   the literal circumcision mentioned by Paul is merely the external rite; in
   the same manner baptism with us may be called the letter, when there is no
   repentance and faith. But the spirit, or spiritual circumcision, is the
   denial of self; it is renovation, and in a word, that true conversion to
   God, of which the Prophet speaks here. Nor has Moses been silent on this
   point; for in the tenth chapter of Deuteronomy he shews that the Jews
   greatly deceived themselves, if they thought that they did all that God
   required, when they were circumcised in the flesh; “Circumcise, “he says,
   “your hearts to the Lord.” He indeed reminds us in another place, that this
   is altogether the work of God; but though God circumcises the heart, yet
   this exhortation, that men are to circumcise themselves, is not superfluous:
   and the same is the case with baptism; for when Paul exhorts the faithful to
   fear God and to lead a holy life, he refers to baptism. It is yet certain
   that men do not bestow on themselves what God signifies by the sign of
   baptism; but he counsels them to seek from God the grace of his Spirit, that
   they might not in vain be sealed by the external rite of baptism, while
   destitute of its reality. When therefore the Prophet bids the Israelites to
   take away the foreskin of their heart, it is the same as though he had said,
   that they were indeed liberal enough with regard to ceremonies and outward
   worship, but that these were empty masks unless preceded by a right
   disposition within.

   And he addresses the Jews, and also the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for they
   thought that they far excelled the Israelites, on whom God had inflicted so
   grievous a punishment. He then shews that the tribe of Judah, nay, that the
   very inhabitants and citizens of Jerusalem were not better than others, and
   that they could not be exempted, as it were, by privilege, except they
   returned to a right mind, except they seasonably and from the heart
   repented.

   He then adds, Lest my fury go forth like fire The Prophet here expressly
   declares, that the Jews were not to wait until God came forth as an avenger;
   for then, he says, if, would be too late to repent: in short, he bids them
   to anticipate in due time the judgment of God; for if once his fury went
   forth, it would burn like fire so as to consume them, and there would be no
   extinguishing of it. But if they repented, he holds forth to them the hope
   of pardon; for the fury of God had not yet gone forth.

   He afterwards subjoins, On account of the wickedness of your deeds [101] By
   these words the Prophet again reproves them sharply, and shews that they
   gained nothing by their evasions; for when God ascends his tribunal and
   begins to execute his vengeance, then all vain excuses will come to an end,
   such as, that they deserved no such thing, or, that the atrocity of their
   sins was not great: “God, “he says, “will, with his own hand, teach you how
   grievous has been the atrocity of your vices; he will not, then, deal with
   you in words.” It then follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [101] Rather, “On account of the evil of your doings.” Their doings were
   evil or wrong, both as to God and man. Impiety seems to be the special evil
   intended, as their defection from God had been more particularly referred
   to. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 4:5-6

   5. Declare ye in Judah, and publish in Jerusalem; and say, Blow ye the
   trumpet in the land: cry, gather together, and say, Assemble yourselves, and
   let us go into the defenced cities.

   5. Nuntiate (vel, promulgate) in Jehudah, et Jerusalem facite audire, (hoc
   est, publicate,) et dicite et clangite tuba in terra; vocate, colligite et
   dicite, Congregamini, et intremus civitates munitas.

   6. Set up the standard toward Zion: retire, stay not: for I will bring evil
   from the north, and a great destruction.

   6. Tollite signum (vel, vexilium) in Sion; congregamini (vel, confugite;
   alii vertunt, viriliter agite, deducunt enim hoc verbum ab עזז, sed plures
   sequuntur diversum sensum ab עזז, quod est fugere, vel, se colligere metus
   causa,) ne stetis (vel, non stabitis,) quoniam malum ego accerso (venire
   facio) ab aquilone, et contritionem magnam.


   Jeremiah treats his own people here with more severity, for he saw that they
   were refractory, and so obstinate in their vices, that they could not by
   wise counsels be restored to the way of safety. Hence he addresses them here
   as men wholly irreclaimable, and to whom instruction proved useless. But
   though according to the manner of the prophets, he sounds a trumpet for the
   sake of filling them with terror, he seems yet to speak tauntingly, when he
   bids them to proclaim in Judah, and to publish in Jerusalem; as though he
   had said, When distress shall seize you, you will then by experience
   perceive that God is angry with you: though to — day ye believe not my
   warnings; yet that God may not, indeed, by a violent hand, bring you back to
   himself, and as ye seek evasions for yourselves, ye shall sound the trumpet,
   and proclaim, “The enemies are coming, and are nigh at hand; let, therefore,
   every one flee to Jerusalem, and enter into the city, and resort unto Zion:
   “that is, “If we cannot secure our safety in the city, we shall at least be
   safe in the fortress of Sion.” But God, he says, brings an evil on you from
   the north; and whatever ye may think will be for your safety will be wholly
   useless. It is, however, proper, especially to regard the Prophet as God’s
   herald proclaiming war; and that though he exults over their perverseness,
   he yet declares that such would be everywhere the terror, that they would
   seek safety by flight.

   Sound, he says, in Judah, and publish, or proclaim, in Jerusalem, (הגידו,
   egidu, announce, literally.) He speaks not here for the same purpose as Joel
   did, (Joel 1:1, 15,) when he bade them to sound the trumpet; for the latter
   exhorted the people to repent; but Jeremiah, as I have already said,
   tauntingly reproves here the people for their obstinacy and perverseness; as
   though he had said, “I see what ye will do, when God’s vengeance shall come
   upon you, that ye may not even then repent; for ye will sound the trumpet
   through the whole land, ‘Let all resort to Sion;’ as though ye could resist
   there your enemies, and preserve your lives.” He does not, then, bid them to
   sound the trumpet, but, on the contrary, shews what they would do.

   Some improperly give this rendering, “Fulfill ye, “but the common version
   is, “Assemble yourselves.” But interpreters seem not to me to have regarded
   the etymology of the word; for it is of the same meaning in Hebrew as when
   we say, Amassez-vous, Gather yourselves. And say, Be ye assembled, and let
   us go into fortified cities It will, indeed, be announced to you to seek
   hiding — places to protect you from the assaults of your enemies; if so,
   Raise a banner in Sion, and flee; but God will at the same time bring evil
   on you from the north

   The words אל-תעמדו, al-tomedu, may be explained in two ways, — “Stand
   not,” that is, “Hasten quickly,” as it is the case with those in extreme
   fear; or, “Ye shall not stand,” that is, “Though ye may seek a firm position
   on Mount Sion, ye shall not yet be able to continue there.” The first
   exposition appears to me the best, as it is more suitable to the context.
   [102]
     _________________________________________________________________

   [102] These two verses contain a very spirited address, in a style truly
   poetical, — 5. Announce ye in Judah, And in Jerusalem publish, and say, —
   Yea, sound the trumpet in the land, Proclaim, do it fully, and say, — “Be
   assembled, and let us enter into fortified cities; 6. Raise a banner towards
   Sion; Hasten ye, stay not:“ For an evil am I bringing from the north, And a
   great destruction. The people of Judah were summoned to enter into fortified
   cities, and Mount Sion was to be the resort of the inhabitants of Jerusalem:
   “Hasten ye,“ speusate — hasten, Septuagint. This is the meaning of עז in
   Hiphil. See Exodus 9:19; Isaiah 10:31. In Jeremiah 6:1, it is translated
   “Gather yourselves to flee;” but “hasten,” or remove vigorously or quickly,
   would be the best rendering. — Ed
     _________________________________________________________________

   PRAYER

   Grant, Almighty God, that as we cease not daily to alienate ourselves from
   thee by our sins, and as thou yet kindly exhortest us to repent, and
   promisest to be appeasable and propitious to us, — O grant, that we may not
   perversely go on in our sins, and be ungrateful to thee for thy great
   kindness; but that we may so return to thee, that our whole life may testify
   that our repentance has been unfeigned, and that we may so acquiesce in thee
   alone, that the depraved lusts of our flesh may not draw us here and there,
   but that we may continue fixed and immovable in our purpose, and so labor to
   obey thee through the whole course of our life, that we may at length
   partake of the fruit of our obedience in thy celestial kingdom, through
   Jesus Christ our Lord. — Amen.

     _________________________________________________________________

   Lecture Fifteenth
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 4:7

   7. The lion is come up from his thicket, and the destroyer of the Gentiles
   is on his way; he is gone forth from his place to make thy land desolate;
   and thy cities shall be laid waste, without an inhabitant.

   7. Ascendit leo ex densitate sua (hoc est, ex oculto loco,) et vastator
   gentium profectus est; egressus est e loco sue ad ponendum (ut ponat) terram
   tuam in vastitatem, urbes tuae perdentur, ut non sit habitator.


   The Prophet more fully declares the import of the threatening which we
   briefly considered yesterday; for God said in the former verse, that he
   would bring an evil from the north; and the kind of evil it was to be he now
   describes, and compares the king of Babylon to a lion; and afterwards,
   without a figure, he calls him the destroyer of nations

   By the similitude of lion he means that the Israelites would not be able to
   resist; and when he adds that he would be the desolator of nations, he
   intimates that they would perish with the rest: for if Nebuchadnezzar was
   sufficiently able to destroy many nations, how could the Jews escape a
   similar calamity? He shall come, he says, the desolator of nations But he
   uses the past tense throughout, in order to shew the certainty of the
   prediction, and thus to shake secure men with fear, who had become torpid in
   their hypocrisy; for they would have otherwise deemed all threatenings as
   nothing: for as long as God spared them, they despised his judgment, and
   promised themselves impunity in their sins. Hence the Prophet, in order to
   awake them, set the matter before them, as though Nebuchadnezzar had already
   come with a strong and powerful army to lay waste Judea; for he says, that a
   lion had ascended from his hiding — places: but the term for the last word
   means an entangled density, as when trees are entwined together, or when a
   place is filled with thorns. [103]

   But the similitude is most suitable, because the Jews never thought that the
   king of Babylon would come forth from places so remote; for the passing
   through was difficult, and the expedition attended with great toil: yet the
   Prophet says, that the lion would come from his recesses, and that nothing
   would hinder him from breaking forth and coming to the open country. He at
   last concludes by saying, that the cities would be laid waste, [104] so as
   to be without an inhabitant It now follows —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [103] The word “thicket, “in our version, correctly expresses it; a tangled
   wood, where trees cross and entwine with each other. — Ed.

   [104] “Laid waste” is the Chaldee sense; but the verb means in Hebrew to
   germinate, to produce grass, to grow over with grass as ruined cities do.
   The words which follow, “without an inhabitant,“ shew that this meaning
   suits here, — Thy cities shall grow over with grass, without an inhabitant.
   The Targum is, Thy cities shall be desolate without an inhabitant. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 4:8

   8. For this gird you with sackcloth, lament and howl: for the fierce anger
   of the Lord is not turned back from us.

   8. Super hoc accingite vos saccis, plangite et ululate; quia non aversus est
   furor irae Jehovae a nobis.


   The Prophet seems not yet to exhort his own nation to repent: a more
   gracious doctrine will presently follow; but here he only reminds them that
   a most grievous mourning was nigh at hand; for he saw that they were
   hypocrites, immersed in their own delusions, and could not be assailed by
   any fear. Hence he says, that they were greatly mistaken, if they thought
   themselves safe while God was angry with them.

   Gird yourselves in sackcloth, he says, lament and howl; and then follows the
   reason, because the fury of God’s wrath was not turned away from them. We
   indeed know, that the ungodly are wont to make God subservient to
   themselves, as though they could by their perverseness turn aside or drive
   afar off his judgment, and restrain, as it were, his hand from acting. As,
   then, hypocrites are insolent towards God, the Prophet says expressly that
   the fury of his wrath was not turned away: and thus he warns them, that they
   would be in every way miserable until they were reconciled to God.

   We now understand the design of the Prophet; for he confirms what the last
   verse contains, when he said that a lion had come forth, and that a
   desolator was already nigh; yea, he confirms what he had said, for there was
   no hope to them without having God propitious, and he declares that God was
   angry. Hence it follows, that all things would prove infelicitous to them.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 4:9

   9. And it shall come to pass at that day, saith the LORD, that the heart of
   the king shall perish, and the heart of the princes; and the priests shall
   be astonished, and the prophets shall wonder.

   9. Et erit die illo, dicit Jehova, peribit cor Regis et cor procerum, et
   obstupescent sacerdotes, et prophetae mirabuntur (vel, attoniti erunt).


   As the royal dignity still continued with the Jews, though their power was
   greatly diminished, they, relying on that distinction, hoped that they had a
   sufficient protection: hence it was, that they were not moved by any
   denunciation; for the royal power, which remained not altogether secure, and
   yet so in some degree, was to them like a shield. We also know what pride
   filled the courtiers; for they extolled their kings, and thus made a show of
   their prudence and magnanimity. Since, then, this foolish notion of the
   chief men respecting their king, and their delusive boasting, deceived the
   Jews, the Prophet says, In that day perish shall the heart of the king, and
   the heart of the princes

   By heart he no doubt means the understanding or the mind, as the word is to
   be taken in many other places. Moses says,

   “God has not yet given you a heart to understand.”
   (Deuteronomy 29:4.)

   The Latins also call men “hearted” (cordatos) who excel in intelligence and
   wisdom. [105] So, then, the Prophet shews, that it was a vain and deceptive
   fancy for the people to expect that the king would be an invincible defense
   to them; for “the king, “he says, “shall then be deprived of understanding
   and reason; and the counselors, who lay claim to understanding, shall be
   found then to be wholly foolish: there is, then, no ground for that vain
   confidence which deceives you.” The Prophet briefly intended to shake off
   that false confidence, by which the Jews were inebriated, when they thought
   that there was a sure safety in the intelligence of the king and princes.

   He says the same thing respecting the priests as well as the prophets, as
   much glory belonged to the priestly order; for the tribe of Levi had not
   taken that honor to itself, but God himself had set priests over the people.
   Hence an opinion prevailed, that the priests could not be without
   understanding and wisdom. With regard to the prophets, Jeremiah no doubt
   conceded the name to impostors, who falsely professed the name of God; and
   this way of speaking is common in the writings of the prophets. He does not,
   then, mean those true and faithful ministers of God, who duly executed their
   office, but those who boasted of the name and title: and he says of these,
   that they would be astonished [106]

   He, in short, deprives the people of that false confidence, through which
   they hardened themselves, so as not to fear God’s judgment.

   But this passage is entitled to special notice, because it shews that God’s
   grace is not to be tied either to ranks of men or to titles. The prophetic
   office had always been in high repute; nor was the priestly without honor,
   for it was founded on God’s command; but Jeremiah nevertheless declares,
   that there would be no understanding in the priests and in the prophets,
   because they would become stupefied and astonished. And with regard to the
   king, we know that he was the representative of Christ; and yet he
   pronounces the same thing of the king, and also of his counselors, — that
   they would be made blind by the just vengeance of God, so as not to see
   anything. he afterwards adds —
     _________________________________________________________________

   [105] Though the most common meaning of לב, heart, is what is here stated,
   yet it means also strength, firmness, courage. See Deuteronomy 20:2, 3; 2
   Samuel 17:10; Psalm 22:14; Psalm 73:26. And this meaning is most suitable to
   this passage. — Ed

   [106] The verse is as follows, — And it shall be in that day, saith Jehovah,
   That perish shall the heart of the king And the heart of the princes, And
   confounded shall be the priests, And the prophets shall be astonished.
   “Confounded,” that is, like persons at their wit’s end, not knowing what to
   do, or what course to take. “Astonished,” or amazed, that is, at witnessing
   the reverse of what they had prophesied; being filled with stunning and
   stupefying amazement. — Ed.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Jeremiah 4:10

   10. Then said I, Ah, Lord God! surely thou hast greatly deceived this people
   and Jerusalem, saying, Ye shall have peace; whereas the sword reacheth unto
   the soul.

   10. Et dixi, Ha, ha, Domine Jehova, certe decipiendo decepisti populum hunc
   et Jerosolymam, dicendo, Pax erit vobis; et pertigit gladius usque ad animam
   (tamen pertigit, nam hic copula vice adversativae ponitur)


   Some so understand this passage as though the Prophet brought forward what
   was said by the people; for all the most wicked, when oppressed by God’s
   hand, usually cast the blame on him, and in their complaints contend and
   dispute with him. Hence they think that the Prophet here, not in his own
   person, but in that of the whole people, speaks thus: “O Lord, what can this
   be? thou surely hast deceived us.” Others give somewhat a looser
   explanation, that the Prophet here indirectly expostulates with God, because
   he had suffered the false prophets to flatter the people so as to stupefy
   the minds of all. But a different meaning is what I approve of: the Prophet,
   I think, tauntingly exposes those false adulations, by which the prophets
   had caused the ruin of the miserable Jews, by promising them God’s
   forgiveness, and by ever announcing favorable predictions.

   God no doubt rendered the Jews their just reward, when he suffered them to
   be deceived by impostors: we, indeed, know that the world is ever afflicted
   with this disease, — that they seek flatteries, as God upbraids them by
   Micah:

   “Ye seek prophets who promise to you an abundant harvest, an abundant
   vintage.”
   (Micah 2:11)

   Since, then, the Jews wished their vices to be spared, and not only disliked
   their faithful and severe reprovers, but also hated them, they had deserved
   to be thus dealt with: it was God’s will that many impostors should assume
   the prophetic name. Thus it happened, that the Jews thought that their
   peaceable condition would be perpetual; and this, as I have said, is usual
   with hypocrites. Now the Prophet, in a biting strain, exposes here these
   deceptions, and says, Ah, ah, Jehovah! surely thou hast deceived this
   people: for the Prophet does not speak in the person of the people, nor does
   he complain, that God permitted so much liberty to false prophets; but he
   derides these impostors as well as the people. And further, as they were all
   deaf, he turns to God, as though he had said, “Behold, Lord, worthy of this
   reward are they, who have sought flatteries, and have not attended to the
   holy warnings of thy servants: as, then, no kind of correction was what they
   could endure, let them now begin to learn that they have been deceived by
   others rather than by thee.” [107]

   We then see that the Prophet ridicules that stupidity in which the Jews had
   been so long asleep; and the simple meaning is, that he turned to God: I
   have said, O Lord Jehovah, surely thou hast deceived this people. “Surely”
   is to be taken in an ironical sense; that is, “It now really appears that
   they have been deceived; but by whom? They wish, indeed, to throw the blame
   on thee; but they are justly chargeable with foolish credulity, so that
   they, whom the false prophets have deceived, have been rightly dealt
   with.” What they said was, Peace shall be to you

   This never came from the mouth of God; for Jeremiah daily thundered and
   threatened approaching ruin; for he was like a celestial herald, who filled
   every place with terror; but he was not heard: a