Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.comKeil and Delitzsch Commentary - Jeremiah 3:7 - 3:7
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
And I said, sc. to myself, i.e., I thought. A speaking by the prophets (Rashi) is not to be thought of; for it is no summons, turn again to me, but only the thought, they will return. It is true that God caused backsliding Israel to be ever called again to repentance by the prophets, yet without effect. Meantime, however, no reference is made to what God did in this connection, only Israel's behaviour towards the Lord being here kept in view. The Chet. וַתִּרְאֶה is the later usage; the Keri substitutes the regular contracted form וַתֵּרֶא. The object, it (the whoredom of Israel), may be gathered from what precedes.
Jer 3:8
Many commentators have taken objection to the וָאֵרֶא, because the sentence, "I saw that I had therefore given Israel a bill of divorce," is as little intelligible as "and the faithless Judah saw it, and I saw it, for," etc. Thus e.g., Graf, who proposes with Ew. and Syr. to read וַתֵּרֶא, "and she saw," or with Jerome to omit the word from the text. Against both conjectures it is decisive that the lxx translates καὶ ει}don, and so must have read וָאֵרֶא. To this we may add, that either the change or the omission destroys the natural relation to one another of the clauses. In either case we would have this connection: "and the faithless one, her sister Judah, saw that, because the backslider Israel had committed adultery, I had put her away...yet the faithless one feared not." But thus the gist of the thing, what Judah saw, namely, the repudiation of Israel, would be related but cursorily in a subordinate clause, and the 7th verse would be shortened into a half verse; while, on the other hand, the 8th verse would be burdened with an unnaturally long protasis. Ros. is right in declaring any change to be unnecessary, provided the two halves of Jer 3:7 and Jer 3:8 are connected in this sense: vidi quod quum adulteram Israelitidem dimiseram, tamen non timeret ejus perfida soror Juda. If we compare Jer 3:7 and Jer 3:8 together, the correspondence between the two comes clearly out. In the first half of either verse Israel is spoken of, in the second Judah; while as to Israel, both verses state how God regarded the conduct of Israel, and as to Judah, how it observed and imitated Israel's conduct. וָאֵרֶא corresponds to וָאֹמַר in Jer 3:7. God thought the backsliding Israel will repent, and it did not, and this Judah saw. Thus, then, God saw that even the repudiation of the backsliding Israel for her adultery incited no fear in Judah, but Judah went and did whoredom like Israel. The true sense of Jer 3:8 is rendered obscure or difficult by the external co-ordination to one another of the two thoughts, that God has rejected Israel just because it has committed adultery, and, that Judah nevertheless feared not; the second thought being introduced by Vav. In reality, however, the first should be subordinated to the second thus: that although I had to reject Israel, Judah yet feared not. What God saw is not the adultery and rejection or divorce of Israel, but that Judah nevertheless had no fear in committing and persisting in the self-same sin. The כִּי belongs properly to לֹא יָֽרְאָה, but this relation is obscured by the length of the prefixed grounding clause, and so לֹא יָֽרְאָה is introduced by ,עַל־כָּל־אֹדֹות åגו' .וְ yb decud literally: that for all the reasons, because the backslider had committed adultery, I put her away and gave her a bill of divorce; yet the faithless Judah feared not. In plain English: that, in spite of all my putting away the backsliding Israel, and my giving her...because she had committed adultery, yet the faithless Judah feared not. On סֵפֶר כְּרִיתוּת, cf. Deu 24:1, Deu 24:3.
Jer 3:9
In Jer 3:9 Judah's fornication with the false gods is further described. Here מִקֹּל זְנåּתָהּ ereH is rather stumbling, since ob vocem scortationis cannot well be simply tantamount to ob famosam scortationem; for קֹול, voice, tone, sound, din, noise, is distinct from שֵׁם or שֶׁמַע, fame, rumour. All ancient translators have taken קֹל from קלל, as being formed analogously to עֹז ,תֹּם ,חֹם; and a Masoretic note finds in the defective spelling קֹל an indication of the meaning levitas. Yet we occasionally find קֹול, vox, written defectively, e.g., Exo 4:8; Gen 27:22; Gen 45:16. And the derivation from קלל gives no very suitable sense; neither lightness nor despisedness is a proper predicate for whoredom, by which the land is polluted; only shame or shameful would suit, as it is put by Ew. and Graf. But there is no evidence from the usage of the language that קֹל has the meaning of קָלֹון. Yet more inadmissible is the conjecture of J. D. Mich., adopted by Hitz., that of reading מַקֵּל gnidaer fo taht, stock, for מִקֹּל, a stock being the object of her unchastity; in support of which, reference is unfairly made to Hos 4:12. For there the matter in hand is rhabdomancy, with which the present passage has evidently nothing to do. The case standing thus, we adhere to the usual meaning of קֹל: for the noise or din of her whoredom, not, for her crying whoredom (de Wette). Jeremiah makes use of this epithet to point out the open riotous orgies of idolatry. תֶּחֱנַף is neither used in the active signification of desecrating, nor is it to be pointed וַתַּחֲנִף (Hiph.). On the last clause cf. Jer 2:27.
Jer 3:10
But even with all this, i.e., in spite of this deep degradation in idolatry, Judah returned not to God sincerely, but in hypocritical wise. "And yet with all this," Ros., following Rashi, refers to the judgment that had fallen on Israel (Jer 3:8); but this is too remote. The words can bear reference only to that which immediately precedes: even in view of all these sinful horrors the returning was not "from the whole heart," i.e., did not proceed from a sincere heart, but in falsehood and hypocrisy. For (the returning being that which began with the abolition of idolatrous public worship in Josiah's reformation) the people had returned outwardly to the worship of Jahveh in the temple, but at heart they still calve to the idols. Although Josiah had put an end to the idol-worship, and though the people too, in the enthusiasm for the service of Jahveh, awakened by the solemn celebration of the passover, had broken in pieces the images and altars of the false gods throughout the land, yet there was imminent danger that the people, alienated in heart from the living God, should take the suppression of open idolatry for a true return to God, and, vainly admiring themselves, should look upon themselves as righteous and pious. Against this delusion the prophet takes his stand.