Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadPulpit Commentary - Jeremiah 2:1 - 2:37
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
It is always interesting to notice how later inspired writers hasten to do honor to their predecessors. Originality is not an object with the prophets, but rather the developing and adapting the truths long ago "delivered." The whole group of prophecies to which Jer_2:1-37. belongs contains numerous points of contact, in ideas or phraseology, with the song of Hoses (Deu_32:1-52.). The following have been indicated:—Cf. Jer_2:5 with Deu_32:4; Deu_32:11, Deu_32:12 with Deu_32:1, Deu_32:21; Deu_32:20 with Deu_32:15; Deu_32:26-28 with Deu_32:6, Deu_32:18, Deu_32:37, Deu_32:38; Deu_32:31 with Deu_32:5; Jer_3:19 with Deu_32:6; Jer_4:22 and Jer_5:21 with Deu_32:6; Jer_5:7 with Deu_32:15; Jer_5:14 with Deu_32:22; Jer_5:28 with Deu_32:15; Jer_6:11 with Deu_32:25; Jer_6:15 with Deu_32:35; Jer_6:19, Jer_6:30 with Deu_32:18, Deu_32:19.
Jer_2:1
Moreover; literally, and. The introductory formula agrees with Jer_1:4. We have as it were two parallel prophecies (Jer_1:4, etc; and Jer_2:1, etc.); both branching out of the original chronological statement in Jer_1:2 (see Introduction).
Jer_2:2
In the cars of Jerusalem. Presumably Jeremiah had received his call at Anathoth (comp. Jer_1:1). I remember thee, etc.; rather, I remember for thy good the kindness of thy youth. It is an open question whether the "kindness" spoken of is that of God towards the people, or of the people towards God. The usage of the Hebrew (khesed) admits of either acceptation; comp. for the first, Psa_5:7, Psa_36:5, and many other passages; for the second, Hos_6:4, Hos_6:6 (in Hos_6:6 rendering for "mercy," "goodness") and Isa_57:1 (rendering "men of piety"). But the context, which dwells so strongly on the oblivion into which the Divine benefits had been allowed to pass, is decidedly in favor of the first view. How beautiful is this condescending language! Jehovah's past feelings come Back to him; at least, so it appears to the believer, when God lets the light of his countenance shine forth again (comp. Jer_31:20; Hos_9:10). He even condescends to overlook the weakness and inconsistency of the Israel of antiquity. He idealizes it (i.e. Jeremiah is permitted to do so). This is in harmony with other prophetic passages (see Isa_1:26 ("as at the first"); Hos_11:1, Hos_11:3, Hos_11:4; Eze_16:6-14). The figure of the bride recurs constantly (see Hos_2:19, Hos_2:20; Isa_54:4, Isa_54:5; Eze_16:8). Thine espousals; rather, thy bridal state. When thou wentest after me (comp. Deu_8:2, "all the way which Jehovah thy God led thee these forty years in the wilderness").
Jer_2:3
Israel was holiness, etc. Israel was a consecrated people (comp. Exo_19:5, Exo_19:6; Deu_7:6; Deu_14:2; Deu_26:19). Isaiah, fond as he is of the phrase "Israel's Holy One," does not expressly enforce the correlative truth, as Jeremiah does here. The first-fruits of his increase; rather, his firstfruits of increase. Israel is compared to the firstfruits (reshith) of the land, which were devoted to the house of the Lord (Exo_23:19; Num_18:12, Num_18:13). So in Amo_6:1, the title given him is "the chief [margin, 'firstfruits'] of the nations" (in Jer_31:7, a synonymous and cognate word, rosh, takes the place of reshith for "chief"). All that devour him shall offend; rather, all that ate him incurred guilt, or became guilty of a trespass. Foreigners were forbidden to eat of consecrated things; by breaking this law they became guilty of a "trespass," having invaded the rights of Jehovah (Le 22:10, 15, 16). The word for "trespass" is the same as that rendered "guilt."
Jer_2:5
What iniquity, etc.; rather, what unrighteousness, etc. (comp. Deu_32:4, "a God of faithfulness, and without unrighteousness," alluding to the "covenant" between Jehovah and Israel). God's condescending grace (his 'anavah, Psa_18:36). As if he were under an obligation to Israel (comp. Mic_6:3, etc.; Isa_5:3). Vanity; i.e. the idols; literally, a breath (so Jer_10:15; Jer_14:22; Jer_16:19). Are become vain. The whole being of man is affected by the want of solid basis to his religion (comp. Jer_23:16; Psa_115:8); and the evident allusion to our passage in Rom_1:21. The clause is verbally repeated in 2Ki_17:15, with reference to the ten tribes.
Jer_2:6
Neither said they, etc.; as their children's children were forced by stress of trouble to say (Isa_63:11; see note). A land of desserts and of pits. The first phrase applied to the region through which the Israelites passed ("a wilderness") was vague, and might mean merely pasture-land. The remainder of the description, however, shows that "wilderness" is here meant, as often (e.g. Isa_35:1; Isa_50:2), in the sense of "desert." Though recent travelers have shown that the Sinaitie peninsula is not by any means universally a "desert," and that in ancient times it was still less so, it is not unnatural that an agricultural people should regard it as a most inhospitable region, and should even idealize its terrors (comp. Deu_8:15). "Pits," i.e. rents and fissures in the soil, in which the unwary traveler might lose his life (Jer_18:20, Jer_18:22).
Jer_2:7
A plentiful country. "A Carmel land," as it were (so Payne Smith). "Carmel" is strictly an appellative noun, meaning" garden-land," i.e; land planted with vines and other choice plants. So Jer_4:26; Isa_29:17; Isa_37:24.
Jer_2:8
The priests, etc. The blame principally falls on the three leading classes (as in Jer_2:26; Mic_3:11). First on the priests who "handle the Law," i.e. who have a traditional knowledge of the details of the Law, and teach the people accordingly (Deu_17:9-11; Deu_33:10; Jer_18:18; see also on Jer_8:8); next on the "pastors," or "shepherds" (in the Homeric sense), the civil and not the spiritual authorities; so generally in the Old Testament (see Jer_3:15; Jer_10:21; Jer_22:22; Jer_25:34; Zec_10:3; Zec_11:5, Zec_11:8, Zec_11:16; Isa_44:28); and lastly on the prophets, who sought their inspiration, not from Jehovah (comp. note on Jer_2:30), but from Baal. To prophesy by (by means of) Baal or rather, the Baal, implies that prophecy is due to an impulse from the supernatural world; that it is not an objectifying of the imaginations of the prophet himself. Even the Baal prophets yielded to an impulse from without, but how that impulse was produced the prophet does not tell us. We are told in 1Ki_22:19-23, that even prophets of Jehovah could be led astray by a "lying spirit;" much more presumably could prophets of the Baal. The Baal is here used as a representative of the idol-gods, in antithesis to Jehovah; sometimes "Baalim," or the Baals, is used instead (e.g. 1Ki_22:23; Jer_9:13), each town or city having its own Baal ("lord"). Things that do not profit. A synonym for idols (comp. Jer_16:19; Isa_44:9;. 1Sa_12:21). An enlightened regard for self-interest is encouraged by the religion of the Bible, at any rate educationally. Contrast Comtism.
Jer_2:9
I will yet plead, etc. Repeated acts of rebellion call forth repeated abjurations and punishments. With your children's children. For God "visits the iniquity of the fathers upon the children" (Exo_20:5).
Jer_2:10
Justification of Jehovah's judicial action towards Judah. Consider the heinousness of the offence. Pass over—rather, pass over to—the isles of Chittim; i.e. the islands and maritime countries of the West, represented by Cyprus (see on Gen_10:4). For the wide use of Chittim, comp. Num_24:24; Dan_11:30). Kedar, in the narrower sense, is a large tribe of Arabian origin, whose haunts were between Arabia Petraea and Babylonia. Here, however, it is used in a wider sense for the Arab tribes in general (so Jeremiah Tiler 28; Isa_21:16, Isa_21:17).
Jer_2:11
Hath a nation changed their gods? Has any heathen nation ever changed its idol-god for another? The prophet clearly implies a negative answer; and yet it must be admitted that the adoption of a new religion, under the pressure of conquest or a higher foreign civilization is not an unknown phenomenon in the ancient world. Glory; i.e. source of all outward prosperity (comp. Psa_3:3," my Glory, and the Lifter up Of my head"). Religion was, in fact, the root of national life in antiquity; contrast our own division between the sacred and the secular Jehovah elsewhere receives the title "the Pride of Israel"—Authorized Version, rather weakly, "the Excellency of Israel"—(Amo_8:7; Hos_5:5. Comp. the parallel passages, Psa_106:20; Rom_1:23).
Jer_2:12
Be astonished. "Be appalled" would more nearly express the force of the Hebrew (so Jer_18:16; Jer_19:8). Be ye very desolate; literally, become dry; i.e. not so much "shrivel and roll up" (on the analogy of Isa_34:4), as "become stiff with horror."
Jer_2:13
Two evils. Israel has not merely offended, like the heathen, by idolatry, but by deserting the only God who can satisfy the needs of human nature. The fountain of living waters. So Jer_17:13 (comp. Psa_36:9). Fountain; literally, tank or reservoir. Such reservoirs were "dug in the ground (see on Jer_6:7), and chiefly intended for storing living waters, i.e. those of springs and rivulets" (Payne Smith). Cisterns, broken cisterns. A cistern, by its very nature, will only hold a limited amount, and the water "collected from clay roofs or from marly soil, has the color of weak soapsuds, the taste of the earth or the stable." Who would prefer such an impure supply to the sweet, wholesome water of a fountain? But these cisterns cannot even be depended upon for this poor, turbid drink. They are "broken," like so many even of the best rock-hewn cisterns. How fine a description of the combined attractiveness and disappointingness of heathen religions, qualities the more striking in proportion to the scale on which the religions problem is realized (e.g. in Hinduism)!
Jer_2:14-19
Israel's punishment and its cause.
Jer_2:14
Is Israel a servant? The speaker is evidently the prophet, who exclaims in surprise at the view which his prophetic insight opens to him: "quasi de re nova et absurda sciscitatur" (Calvin). For Israel is a member of Jehovah's family; he is not a servant (except in the same high sense as in Isaiah 40-53, where "servant" is virtually equivalent to "representative"), but rather in the highest degree a free man, for he is Jehovah's "firstborn son" (Exo_4:22). How is it, then, that he is dragged away into captivity like a slave who has never known freedom? The view of some, that "servant" means "servant of Jehovah" (comp. Jer_30:10), and that the question therefore is to be answered in the affirmative, is less natural. "Servant," by itself, never has this turning; and there is a precisely similar term in the discourse at Jer_2:31, where the negative answer of the question does not admit of a doubt.
Jer_2:15
The young lions, etc. A fresh figure, and a most natural one in Judaea; already applied to the Assyrians by Isaiah (v. 29, 30). Burned; rather, made ruinous (comp. "ruinous heaps," 2Ki_19:25).
Jer_2:16
Also the children of Noph, etc. This is the climax of the calamity. Noph, called Moph in the Hebrew text of Hos_9:6, is generally identified with Memphis, which was called in the inscriptions Mennufr, or "the good abode," but may possibly be Napata, the Nap of the inscriptions, the residency of the Ethiopian dynasty (De Rouge'). Tahapanes. The Hebrew form is Takhpanes or Tahhpanhhes. This was a fortified frontier town on the Pelusiot arm of the Nile, called in Greek Daphnae (Herod; Hos_2:20), or Taphnae. Have broken, etc.; rather, shall break, or (for the pointing in the Hebrew Bible requires this change) shall feed off (or depasture). From this verse onwards, Judah is personified as a woman, as appears from the suffixes in the Hebrew. Baldness was a great mark of disgrace (2Ki_2:23; Jer_48:45). There is a striking parallel to this passage in Isa_7:18-20, where, in punishment of the negotiations of Ahaz with Assyria, the prophet threatens an invasion of Judah both by Assyria and by Egypt: and employs the very. same figure (see Isa_7:20). So here, the devastation threatened by Jeremiah is the punishment of the unhallowed coquetting with the Egyptian power of which the Jewish rulers had been recently guilty. The fact which corresponds to this prediction is the defeat of Josiah at Megiddo, and the consequent subjugation of Judah (2Ki_23:29). The abruptness with which verse 16 follows upon verse 15 suggests that some words have fallen out of the text.
Jer_2:17
Hast not thou procured this? rather, Is it not this that doth procure it unto thee (namely) that thou hast forsaken, etc.? or, Is it not thy forsaking Jehovah that pro. cureth thee this? When he led thee by the way. The prophet thinks, perhaps, of the rebellion of the forefathers of Israel, who too soon ceased to "go after" Jehovah (comp. Jer_2:2), and whose fickleness was imitated but too well by their descendants. This view is favored by the phraseology of Deu_1:33; Deu_8:2, Deu_8:15. But we may, if we prefer it, explain "by (or, rather, in) the way," on the analogy of the promise in Jer_31:9, "I will lead them … in a straight way," i.e. I will grant them an uninterrupted course of prosperity. The omission of the adjective in the present passage may be paralleled by Psa_25:8, "Therefore will he instruct sinners in the (right) way."
Jer_2:18
What hast thou to do in the way of Egypt? rather, with the way to Egypt. Isaiah (Isa_30:2-5; Isa_31:1) and Hosea (Hos_7:11, Hos_7:16) had already inveighed against an Egyptian alliance. The name given by Manasseh to his sen and successor (Amen) suggests that at one period in his reign an Egyptian policy was in the ascendant, which coincides with the tradition preserved in 2Ch_33:11, of an Assyrian captivity of Manasseh. Jehoiakim at a later period was a vassal of Egypt (2Ki_23:31, 2Ki_23:35). To drink the waters; taking up the idea of the second clause of verse 13. Sihor, or Shihor, occurs again in Isa_23:3, as a name of the Nile. It properly means, not so much "the black" as "the dark grey" (connected with shakhar, the morning grey), from the color of the water. Rosenmüller's contrast between the muddy waters of foreign streams and the "fountain of living waters" is uncalled for; besides, the Nile water has always been held in high esteem. The Septuagint has Γηών , i.e. Gihon, also a name of-the Nile according to Ecclesiasticus 24:27. The way of—rather, to—Assyria. It is true that Assyria was, to say the least, powerless to interfere for good or for evil, when these words were written. But in verse 5 the prophet has already warned us that his complaints are partly retrospective. It would seem that the Assyrian party from time to time gained the upper hand over the Egyptian in the councils of the State. Or perhaps the prophet may refer to the Quixotic fidelity to Assyria of Josiah (see below on verse 36). The river; i.e. the Euphrates, "the great river" (Gen_15:18). Babylonia it should be remembered, was in nominal subjection to Assyria; the Euphrates was the boundary between Syria and Palestine on the one hand, and Assyria—here the Assyrio-Babylonian region—on the other.
Jer_2:19
Shall correct … shall reprove; rather, chastise … punish. It is a constantly renewed punishment which follows the ever-repeated offence.
Jer_2:20
Here a new section begins. I have broken … burst. This is, grammatically, a possible rendering, but inconsistent with the second person in thou saidst, unless indeed (with Ewald) we suppose that something has fallen out of the text between the first and the second clauses of the verse. The best critics, except Ewald and Dr. Payne Smith, are agreed that we should follow the Septuagint and Vulgate in rendering "thou hast broken … (and) burst." This does not, strictly speaking, imply a new reading of the text, for ti was the old form of the suffix of the 2nd pers. fem, sing.; there is a precisely similar case in Mic_4:13. It is a true description of the history of Israel before the exile. It would almost seem as if there was a fusion of two races among the Israelites, and that the smaller but nobler stock supplied all the great men in the sphere of religion; just as in Florence, most of the men who have illustrated her annals bear names of Teutonic origin. So we might argue, if we wished to explain the Biblical history from purely natural causes. But God (to apply the Caliph Omar's words) "knoweth his own." Bands (see on Jer_5:5). I will not transgress. This is the translation of the marginal reading in the Hebrew Bible, which, though implied also in the Targum, is probably a conjecture of the Jewish critics. The text reading is, "I will not serve," (equivalent to "I will not be a slave any longer"). Obviously this does not harmonize with the rendering "I have broken," etc; in the first clause (unless, with Dr. Payne Smith, we explain "I will not serve" as virtually equivalent to "I will still serve my idol-gods"); hence the Jewish critics, by just adding a κέραια (Mat_5:18), changed "serve" into "transgress." They did not venture to alter the next clause, which, quite as much as the first, presupposes the reading "serve" (see next note). When—rather, for—upon every high hill, etc. Bare, treeless heights were favorite spots for sacrifices, especially for Baal; groves, and leafy trees, in general, for the lascivious rites of Asherah and Ashtoreth. The apparently extreme statement of the prophet is not to be minimized. Travelers still tell us of vestiges of ancient and doubtless pro-Christian idolaters worship still visible on almost every attractive spot in the open country in Palestine. Under every green tree. We have no single word to convey the "fluid" meaning of this expressive word. It combines, in fact, the senses of pliant, sappy, leafy (comp. note on Jer_11:16). Thou wanderest; rather, thou wast stretching thyself out.
Jer_2:21
A noble vine. Jeremiah means the choicest kind of Oriental vine, called sorek (from the dark-red color of its grapes), and mentioned again in Isa_5:2. The figure of the vine is one endeared to us by its association especially with our Lord; it was endeared to the Jews by the annual festivities of the vintage. The sacred writers are never afraid of its palling on the ear by repetition (comp. Jer_5:10; Jer_6:9; Jer_12:10; Isa_5:1-7; Isa_27:2, Isa_27:3; Eze_17:6; Psa_80:8-16). A right seed; i.e. a vine-shoot of the genuine sort. "Seed" for "shoot," as in Isa_17:11 (comp. Isa_17:10). The degenerate plant; rather, degenerate shoots (if at least the text is right).
Jer_2:22
Nitre does not mean the substance which now bears that name, but "natron," a mineral alkali, deposited on the shores and on the bed of certain lakes in Egypt, especially those in the Wady Nat-run (the ancient Nitria, whence came so large a store of precious Syriac manuscripts). In ancient times, this natron was collected to make lye from for washing purposes (comp. Pro_25:20). Sope; rather, potash; the corresponding vegetable alkali (comp. Isa_1:25). Thine iniquity is marked. So Kimchi and Gesenius (through a doubtful etymology); but the Aramaic use of the word favors the rendering stained, i.e. filthy. The word is in the participle, to indicate the permanence of the state (comp. "Will all great Neptune's ocean wash this blood," etc.? 'Macbeth').
Jer_2:23
How canst thou say, etc.? This is not a mere rhetorical fiction equivalent to "or if thou shouldst perhaps say," but probably represents an objection really made by the inhabitants of the kingdom of Judah. Their fault was not in neglecting the public worship of Jehovah in his appointed temple, but in superadding to this, idolatrous rites inconsistent with the spiritual religion taught by Jeremiah. The people did not, it seems, regard this as tantamount to "following Baalim," just as some converts to Christianity in our own foreign missions might exclaim against being accused of apostasy, because they secretly carry on certain heathen practices. The prophet, however, applies a more rigorous test to their conduct. Baalim; the plural of Baal, used for "other gods" (Jer_1:16; comp. on Jer_1:8). Thy way in the valley. The valley in this context can only be that of Hinnom (see on Jer_7:31), which from the time of Ahaz had been defiled with the rites of "Moloch, horrid king" (see ' Paradise Lost,' 1.392-396). Thou art a swift dromedary. Ewald would attach this half of the verse to verse 24; and there is something to be said for this plan. Swift dromedary is, properly speaking, in the vocative. The ardor of the people for idolatry is expressed by the comparison of it to the uncontrollable instinct of brute beasts. The word rendered "dromedary" is in the feminine gender; it means strictly the young she-camel which has not yet had a foal. Traversing her ways; rather, interlacing her ways; i.e. running backwards and forwards at the impulse of passion.
Jer_2:24
A wild ass, etc. The type of wildness and independence (comp. Gen_16:12; Job_39:5-8). That snuffeth up the wind; to cool the heat of her passion. In her occasion … in her month; i.e. at the pairing-time.
Jer_2:25
Withhold thy foot, etc. Hitzig, with unnecessary ingenuity, explains this with reference to the fatiguing practices of the heathen cultus, comparing 1Ki_18:26, where "vain repetitions" of "Baal, Baal," and (as he thinks) barefoot religious dances, are mentioned as parts of the worship of Baal. Umbreit's view, however, is far more natural. "God the true husband exhorts Israel not to run barefoot, and with parched throat, like a shameless adulteress, after strangers" (Payne Smith). There is no hops; i.e. the exhortation is in vain (so Jer_18:12).
Jer_2:26
Is … ashamed. It is the per-feet of prophetic certitude.
Jer_2:27
And to a stone, etc. Stone ('ebhen) is feminine in Hebrew, and therefore addressed as the mother.
Jer_2:28
According to the number of thy cities, etc. A remarkable statement, and one that well illustrates the superficial character of Hezekiah's reformation. True, Manasseh's reactionary reign had intervened, but his counter-movement would not have been so successful had it not been attended by the good wishes of the people; and besides, the last years of Manasseh, according to the tradition in 2Ch_33:12-16 were devoted to undoing the mischief of his former life. The force of the prophet's words is strikingly brought out by M. Renan (he led an expedition to Phoenicia), who has shown that every district and every town had a cultus of its own, which often only differed from the neighboring cultus by words and titles (nomina, numina); comp. Baal-Hamon, Baal-Hazor, eta Dr. Payne Smith well expresses the argument of Jeremiah: "When every city has its special deity, surely among so many there might be found one able to help his worshippers."
Jer_2:29
Wherefore will ye plead with me? How can ye be so brazen-faced as to attempt to justify yourselves?
Jer_2:30
Have I smitten your children. The cities and towns of Judah are represented as so many mothers, and the populations as their children. It would, no doubt, be more natural to take "children" literally; but then we must read the verb in the next clause, "Ye have received," as the Septuagint actually renders. In the former case the "smiting" will refer to all God's "sore judgments"—sword, drought, famine, pestilence; in the latter, to the loss of life in battle. Your own sword hath devoured your prophets. Manasseh's persecution (which extended, according to Josephus, especially to the prophets) may account for the preponderance of "false prophets" referred to in verse 8 (cf. Mat_23:29).
Jer_2:31
O generation, see ye. It is doubtful whether generation here means "contemporaries" (equivalent to "men of this generation"), or, like γενεά sometimes in the New Testament, a class of men united by moral affinity (comp. Psa_14:5; Psa_78:8). In the latter case we should rather attach the pronoun in "see ye" to "O generation," and render "O (evil) generation that ye are!" So Hitzig, Keil, and Payne Smith; Ewald and Delitzsch adopt the first rendering. Have I been a wilderness, etc.? "Have I not been the source of light and happiness to my people, and of all temporal blessings?" (comp. Jer_2:6). So the Divine speaker in Isa_45:19, "I said not unto the seed of Jacob, Seek ye me in vain," or more literally, "in chaos" (same word as in Gen_1:2); "chaos" and "the wilderness" are both images of that which is utterly unremunerative. A land of darkness. This is, of course, not literally accurate as a description of the Arabian desert. "Darkness" is here used as a synonym for "misery." Cloud and rain occupy precisely opposite places in the estimation of nomadic and agricultural peoples respectively. "The Bedouins," says an Arabic scholast, "always follow the rain and the places where raindrops fall;" whereas a townsman of Mecca calls himself "child of the sun." So Indra and Varuna, originally belonging to the cloudy and rainy sky, are in the Vedic hymns endowed with solar traits. It should be added here that it is an old problem, and too difficult a one for us to investigate, whether we should render "the darkness of Jah" (Jehovah) or (as Authorized Version) simply "darkness." The former rendering will mean very great darkness, such as Jehovah sends in judgment (e.g. to the Egyptians, Exo_10:21-23). On this question, see Dr. Ginsburg on Son_8:6 (where a similar doubt exists), Geiger's 'Urschrift und Uebersetzungen der Bibel,' p. 276; Ewald, 'Lehrbuch der Hebraischen Sprache,' § 270 e. We are lords; rather, we have broken loose. It is, however, a difficult word, which only occurs elsewhere in Gen_26:1-35 :40; Hos_12:1; Psa_55:3.
Jer_2:32
Or a bride her attire. The prophet perhaps means the magnificently adorned girdle which the bride wore on her wedding day (comp. Isa_49:18). But the word only occurs again in Isa_3:20, and its precise signification is uncertain.
Jer_2:33
Why trimmest thou thy way I rather, How well thou contrivest thy way, etc.? Therefore hast thou also taught, etc. The meaning which floated before our trans-labors seems to be this: "so utterly immoral is thy course of life, that even the worst of women ['wicked ones' is in the feminine] have been able to learn something from thee". But a more natural rendering is, "Therefore [i.e. to gain thine ends] thou hast accustomed thy ways to those evil things." Nemo repente fuit tupissimus. It required a deliberate "accustoming," or "training" (such is the literal meaning of limad), to produce such a habit ( ἕξις ) as is here rebuked.
Jer_2:34
Also in thy skirts, etc.; or, there is even found in thy skirts (or, perhaps, in thy sleeves—the wide sleeves of an Eastern mantle). The fact which follows is adduced as the crowning evidence of wickedness. Blood of the souls is explained by the statement in Le Jer_17:11, "The soul of the flesh [i.e. of the body] is in the blood;" hence the importance of the blood in the Mosaic sacrifices. The historical reference of this passage of Jeremiah may well be to the persecution of Manasseh, who is said to have "shed innocent blood very much" (2Ki_21:16). It is Judah, no doubt, who is addressed, but the prophets mostly assume the "solidarity" of king and people (analogous to that of a forefather and his posterity); Manasseh, moreover, probably had the support of a large section of the population, at any rate in so far as he favored the inveterate cultus of the high places or local sanctuaries. I have not found it by secret search; rather, thou hast not found them breaking through (houses). The phraseology agrees with that of Exo_22:2, the law against "breaking through;" it suggests that the houses of all but the highest class in ancient as well as often in modern Palestine, were made of mere sun-dried brick, which could be easily "dug into" (comp. Eze_12:5; Mat_6:19, Mat_6:20, in the Greek). [Lieut. Conder states, it is true, that in hilly districts of Palestine the houses of the villages are built of stone, but he adds that the stone is simply taken from the ruins of the ancient towns.] Burglars caught in the act might be killed (Exo_22:2), but the innocent victims of persecution could not be brought under this category, and hence those who slew them were really guilty of murder. But upon all these; rather, but because of all these things; i.e. not for any crime, but because of thine things," as in Jer_3:7); so Hitzig, Keil Payne Smith; less naturally De Dieu, "because of those false gods"
Jer_2:35
Because. This "because" is misleading; there is no argument, but the statement of a supposed fact. The particle so rendered merely serves to introduce the speech of the Jews (like ὅτι ). Shall turn; rather, hath turned. Judah had so long been undisturbed by any foreign power, that the people fancied the promises of Deuteronomy were being fulfilled, and that they, on their part, had pleased God by their formal obedience. I will plead with thee. Here, as in some other passages (e.g. Isa_66:16; Eze_38:22), the word includes the sense of punishing.
Jer_2:36
Why gaddest thou about so much—many render, Why runnest thou so quickly; but the verb simply means to go, and it is enough to refer to foreign embassies, such as are alluded to in this very chapter (Jer_2:18)—to change thy way? The "way" or policy of Judah was "changed," according as the party in power favored an Egyptian or an Assyrian alliance. Thou also shalt be ashamed of; rather, thou shalt also be brought to shame through. As thou art ashamed of Assyria (correct rendering as before). This is certainly difficult, for in the reign of Josiah it would appear that the political connection with Assyria still continued, Is it possible that Jeremiah, in these words, has in view rather the circumstances of Jehoiakim than those of Josiah? Does he not appear to look back upon Judah's final "putting to shame through Assyria" as a thing of the past? And to what event can this expression refer but to the overthrow of Josiah at Megiddo (so Graf)?
Jer_2:37
From him; i.e. from Egypt, personified as a man (so whenever a people is referred to; a laud is represented as a woman). Egypt was, in fact, the only great power capable of assisting Judah at this time (see Introduction); yet even Egypt, the prophet says, shall disappoint her Jewish allies, for Jehovah has rejected thy confidences (i.e. the objects of thy confidence). As a matter of fact, "the King of Egypt came not again any more out of his laud" after Necho's crushing defeat at Carehemish (2Ki_24:7; comp. Jer_37:5).
I. MANY OF US, LIKE THE JEWS, MAY BE REMINDED OF A HAPPY PAST. In years of deepening disappointment the sunny days of youth rise up to memory anal rebuke the cynical mood which sorrow is too ready to engender. In years of lessening spirituality the holy seasons of early devotion may be recalled to mind to startle us out of our self-complacency. It is well to reflect upon such a past history as that of the Jews.
1. This was marked by peculiar blessings on God's side.
(1) It was a time when God's love and kindness were felt with all the fresh receptiveness of youth; and
(2) it was memorable for remarkable Divine protection and blessing.
2. This was characterized by great fidelity on the side of Israel. In spite of frequent murmurings and rebellions, the age of the Exodus had been the heroic age of Israel's national and religious history.
(1) The people then followed God with affectionate devotion; they "went after him."
(2) They consecrated themselves in purity and in service; "Israel was consecrated unto the Lord."
(3) They were the earliest true servants of God—God's "firstfruits." Yet the first may become last (Mat_20:16).
(4) This devotion was witnessed under trying circumstances. It was "in the wilderness, in a land that was not sown." God's love is sometimes most manifest when outward circumstances are most distressing, and men are often more faithful to God in the wilderness than in the land flowing with milk and honey. What a strange irony of history is this, that though, while passing through the wilderness, the people looked forward to their happiness in the possession of the promised land, after they have had long possession of it they are led to look back on those early homeless wanderings as containing the most blessed age of their existence! But true happiness is ever found, not in external comfort, but in spiritual blessedness. Can we recollect early days when the battle of life was hard, and we longed for the ease which came with success, and now see that there, in that hard battle, our best days were lived, our true blessedness was realized? Such a memory must be full of pathetic suggestions.
II. THE RECOLLECTION OF A HAPPY PAST IS PROFITABLE.
1. God remembers the past. Not like the sour censor who remembers only our past faults, but rather like the kind parent who delights to call to mind the goodness of his children's early days, God makes no mention of the sins of the wilderness life, but dwells graciously on its happy features. God remembers our past for our good:
(1) as a link of affection after subsequent sin has driven us from him;
(2) as an ideal to which he would bring us back; and
(3)—still for our good—as a standard by which to measure our present condition, and a just ground for wholesome chastisement.
2. We are to recollect our happy past. Israel is reminded of his early days. If we have "lost our first love" it is well that we should know this:
(1) that we may see how far we have fallen, and repent (Rev_2:4, Rev_2:5);
(2) that the recollection of the blessedness of early devotion may revive the longing for its return;
(3) that the consciousness that this was once attained may encourage us to believe that it is a possibility, and therefore may be attained again, In conclusion, note:
1. It is foolish simply to regret the happy past. The use of memory is not to give to us profitless melancholy, but to lead us actively to do better for the future.
2. It is a mistake for us to seek simply to regain the lost past, because
(1) this is gone irrevocably,
(2) the new age requires new forms of life, and
(3) we should seek better things in the future. The second Adam is better than the first Adam before the fall. The kingdom of heaven is more glorious than the garden of Eden. The ripe Christian is higher in the spiritual life, though he may have fallen in the past, than the innocent child who has never known evil but has not experienced the discipline of life.
Jer_2:5-7
I. THE INGRATITUDE OF SIN IS SEEN IN THE FORGETFULNESS OF GOD'S SAVING MERCY. So the Israelites forget the glorious deliverance from Egypt, and preservation amidst the horrors of the wilderness (Jer_2:6). God is resorted to in distress only to be ignored, forsaken, insulted, directly rebelled against, when he has effected a deliverance.
II. THE INGRATITUDE OF SIN IS SEEN IN THE IGNORING OF THE PRESENT GOODNESS OF GOD. (Jer_2:7.) The Israelites were eating the fruit of the good land which God had given to them while they were rebelling against him. This is even worse than ingratitude for past blessings. Such ingratitude might attempt to plead the excuse of failure of memory; but ingratitude for present mercies can only arise from gross spiritual blindness or willful disregard of all claims of justice and affection.
III. THE INGRATITUDE OF SIN IS SEEN IN THE FALSE CHARACTER WHICH IS ASCRIBED TO GOD. God asks, "What unrighteousness have your fathers found in me?" The conduct of the Jews was a direct indictment of the character of God. They deliberately insulted him, and rejected him for heathen deities. Such conduct could only be justified by the discovery that he was not what he claimed to be. After God has revealed himself to men in myriad fold evidences of goodness, there are some who hold, if they do not confess to, such evil conceptions of his character as amount to the basest calumnies of heartless ingratitude.
IV. THE INGRATITUDE OF SIN IS SEEN IN THE CHARACTER OF THE GODS WHO ARE PREFERRED TO JEHOVAH. These are "false" gods. Jews who knew that converted religious worship into an unreality, and thus became themselves hollow and unreal. For this miserable result did they forsake the God of heaven and earth, their Savior and constant Benefactor! If they had found a rival with some pretensions to worth the insult would have been less. Herein is the grossness of the insult to God seen in all sin. What do men prefer to him? Transient pleasures, earthly dross. The pearl of great price is flung away, not for a smaller pearl, but for dust and ashes.
V. THE INGRATITUDE OF SIN IS SEEN IN THE ABUSE AND CORRUPTION OF GOD'S GIFTS. God gave the Israelites "garden-land," and they defiled it; they made God's heritage an abomination. When we sin we do so by employing the very powers which God has bestowed upon us. We insult him by turning his own gifts into weapons of rebellion. We blaspheme him with the tongue which he has made.
Jer_2:8
I. CONSIDER THE SIGNS OF WICKEDNESS IN LEADING MEN.
1. These are often unrecognized until the evil has wrought disastrous effects. For there are circumstances which make them difficult to detect, viz:
(1) External propriety. The priests still minister at the altar, the Law is still slavishly observed in ceremonial details, rulers still exercise authority, prophets still write and preach in orthodox language, and on the outside all things go on respectably, while there is rottenness hidden within. This was specially the case after the reformation of Josiah, when an outward respect for religious observances was established without any purification of heart or revival of spiritual life.
(2) Respect for authority. Many people are too subservient to question the character of their leaders. They would rather unite with their rulers in crucifying Christ than recognize his claims against the authority of these men. They do not judge of the character of their leaders by any standard of morals, but found their standard of morals on that character.
2. The signs of wickedness in leading men may be detected in its bearing on the special functions of their respective offices. The priests are the temple servants of Jehovah, yet they never seek their Master. They who are familiar with the precepts of the Law know nothing of the person and will of the Lawmaker. The civil rulers who are ruling under a theocracy directly transgress the Law of God. The prophets lend themselves to a corrupt source of inspiration. So now again we may see men abusing the powers of office, and sinning in the very exercise of the responsibilities which are entrusted to them for the sake of the maintenance of right and truth. Therefore we must be on our guard, and not simply follow those who claim to lead because of their rank or office. Men of leading are not always men of light. We must try the spirits (1Jn_4:1), and judge of the character of those who claim to lead us by their actions, "Ye shall know them by their fruits" (Mat_7:16).
II. CONSIDER THE PECULIAR GUILT OF WICKEDNESS IN LEADING.
1. It is contrary to knowledge. The priests handle the Law. Men of influence are usually in a position to learn what is wise and good. Teachers of religion may be presumed to know more than the average of men. How great, then, is their guilt when their conduct is corrupt (Rom_2:21-23)
2. It is contrary to profession. These leaders set themselves up as examples to others, and then even they go wrong. They who assume a high position should justify that position by manifesting a high character. More is expected of the professed Christian than of the confessed man of the world.
3. It is an abuse of great responsibility. If men willfully employ positions of trust as means of violating the very objects of those trusts, their guilt is proportionate to the privileges they have received and the honors they have accepted. He who uses a Christian pulpit to propagate doctrines subversive of Christianity is guilty of base treason.
III. CONSIDER THE INJURIOUS EFFECTS OF WICKEDNESS IN LEADING MEN. These will be great in proportion to the influence of the men, and will partake of the special characteristics of that influence, viz.:
1. Breadth. Leading men have a wide influence, and the seeds of evil which they sow will be widespread.
2. Depth. Leading men have power at their disposal. Their example is weighty.
3. Subtlety. Dignity, prestige, authority, disguise the evil which would be recognized if it were stripped of the pomp of price. Therefore:
(1) see that good men are chosen for posts of influence, and let the selection and education of civil and religious leaders be a matter of more prayer and thought on the part of the Church; and
(2) be not too ready to follow with blind obedience those who may be in high positions. Be independent and watchful. Follow the one infallible Leader, "the Good Shepherd," Christ.
Jer_2:13
1. This is natural. We are born with instincts which reach out to the unseen, and the worldly habits which deaden these instincts cannot utterly eradicate them. If they could, we should cease to be men and become merely rational brutes, for "man is a religious animal."
2. This is intensified by the presence of life. Thirst is increased by a heated atmosphere, hard work, disease, and special agents, e.g. salt water; so spiritual thirst is deepened by the heat and burden of life, by its toil and battle, by the fever of passion and the weariness of sorrow, by the poison of sin and the disappointment of delusive promises of satisfaction. How pathetic is this picture! If the living water is forsaken, cisterns—even poor, broken cisterns, with scant supply of foul water, are resorted to, for in some way the burning thirst of the soul must be quenched.
II. THEY WHO FORSAKE GOD INJURE THEIR OWN SOULS. Hitherto the prophet has spoken of the guilt of unfaithfulness. He now speaks of the loss this entails. It is right that we should first think of the simple sinfulness of our sin, for this is its most important feature. But it is profitable to consider also the folly of it, and the misery that it must bring upon us. This is not to be all relegated to the world of future punishments. It is to be felt now, and would be felt keenly if men were not blind to their own condition. As godliness has the promise of the life which now is as well as of that which is to come, so ungodliness brings present loss. This must not be looked for in the direction of material profit and loss, of bodily pain and pleasure, towards which the Jew was too much inclined to turn his attention. It is inward and spiritual, yet it is not the less real. For the spirit is the self. When the noise of the world is stilled, in silent watches of the night, in lonely hours of reflection, does not the poor homeless soul feel some sense of unrest, some vague thirst which no pleasure or possession has yet satisfied?
III. THE INJURY ARISING FROM FORSAKING GOD IS FOUND FIRST IN THE VERY LOSS OF GOD. God is more to us than all his gifts. The greatest loss of the prodigal son is not the food which he craves for in the land of famine, but the father whom he has forsaken. God is the chief source of the soul's refreshment. Men talk of the duty of religion. They should consider its blessings, and learn to sock God as they seek their bread and water—the first necessaries of life. God is a Fountain of living water.
1. His refreshing grace is ever flowing, and in great abundance, not limited in quantity as that of the largest cistern may be so that there is enough for all, and it may be had at all times.
2. It is fresh, like the mountain stream bubbling forth cool from the rock, not like the stale waters of the cistern. "He giveth more grace" (Jas_4:6), and "grace for grace" (Joh_1:16). The Christian does not have to go back to the grace of God in past ages. There is a fresh stream now flowing, and prayer opens to us fresh supplies of the love and help of God.
3. It is wholesome and invigorating, unlike the earthy waters of the cistern. How foolish, then, to turn aside from such a supply for anything! We need no better.
IV. THE INJURY ARISING FROM FORSAKING GOD IS INTENSIFIED BY THE UNSATISFACTORY NATURE OF THE SUBSTITUTES MEN TURN TO.
1. These are stir-made. God makes the fresh spring, man makes the cistern. Can our work equal God's?
2. They are limited in supply—reservoirs, not flowing streams.
3. They are often impure; the cistern soon gets impregnated with unwholesome matter.
4. They are imperfect of their kind. The cisterns are broken; what little unwholesome water they have leaks away. All these characteristics apply to the waters men turn to in preference to God—e.g. human religion, philosophy, public occupation, social distraction, pleasure; these all fail to slake the soul's thirst. "Cor nostrum inquistum est donec requiescat in te."
Jer_2:19
1. Sin reveals its evil character as it comes into existence, and is no sooner completed than it is regarded by its parent with disgust. The wicked action which looks attractive in desire is repulsive to reflect upon. The very sight and thought and memory of sin are bitter. The burden of guilt, the shame of an evil memory, the sin itself is thus its own chastisement.
2. Sin naturally produces its punishment. The penalty of sin is not arbitrarily adjudicated nor is it inflicted ab extra. It is the natural fruit of sin. It is reaping what we have sown (Gal_6:7, Gal_6:8). This fruit the guilty man must eat as his bread of sorrows (Pro_1:31). Thus intemperance naturally breeds disease, mental degradation, poverty, and dishonor. Greedy selfishness brings upon a man dislike and provokes retaliation. Unfaithfulness to God deprives us of the communion of his Spirit and the protection of his providence. We have to wait for no formal sentence, no executioner. The law within us carries its own sentence, and is its own executioner, and even as we do wrong we begin to bring upon ourselves the penalty of our conduct.
H. THE CHASTISEMENT OF SIN IS TO REPROVE AND CORRECT. The headache of the morning is a warning to the drunkard not to repeat the debauch of the night.
1. Chastisement corrects by bringing us to our right mind. It sobers a man, and thus helps him to look at his life in a true light.
2. Chastisement corrects by revealing the true character of sin. Its charms are all torn off, and the hideous monster is revealed in its naturally hateful shape. Then we see that all sin involves our forsaking God, and is due to the loss of respect for his will—the loss of the "fear of God" according to the Old Testament view, the loss of love to God according to the Christian view.
III. IT IS NOT WELL TO WAIT FOR THE CORRECTIVE INFLUENCE OF CHASTISEMENT BEFORE REPENTING OF SIN.
1. The chastisement may be a terrible experience from which we would fain shrink if we knew the nature of it.
2. Sin is evil in itself, and the sooner we stay our hand from it the better for ourselves, for the world, and for the honor of God. It is better not to fall than to fall and be restored.
3. God has provided a higher means than chastisement for delivering us from sin. This is an exercise of his goodness to lead us to repentance (Rom_2:4). The gospel shows us how Christ can save us from our sins by drawing us to himself and constraining us by his love to walk in his footsteps of holiness.
Jer_2:22
1. Sin leaves stains behind it. No man can have clean hands after touching it. These stains are of two classes:
(1) internal—the soiled imagination, the corrupted will, the vitiated habit which a single act of sin tends to produce; and
(2) external, in the form of guilt before God, and lowered reputation in the sight of men.
2. The stains of sin are not natural. They are no part of the true color of a man's character. They are all contracted by experience.
3. These stains are all evil things. They are not like marks of immature development or of the necessary imperfection of humanity. They are products of corruption.
II. NO MAN CAN WASH THE GUILT OF SIN FROM HIS CHARACTER. (Jer_13:23.) The Jews were attempting this by denying the offences charged against them or excusing them. They would not admit their apostasy; but in vain.
1. Sin cannot be undone. We cannot recall the past. History is unchangeable. What we have done we have done.
2. Sin cannot be hidden. We can never hide it from God, who searches the heart (1Jn_3:20). We cannot long or perfectly hide it from man. It will color our lives and reveal itself in action, in conversation, in countenance.
3. Sin cannot be excused. We may point to our training, our temptations, our natural weakness, our ignorance; and no doubt these facts are important as determining the degree of our guilt (Luk_23:34). But the sin itself, greater or less as it may be, cannot be explained away. Our sins are our own or they would not be sins.
4. Sin cannot be expiated by us. Sacrifice is of no real avail. That was only acceptable as a symbol and type of God's method of cleansing sin. Penance could only act as discipline for the future; for the past it is no better than a fruitless sacrifice. Future goodness cannot atone for the past; for that is required on its own account, and if it were perfect it would be no more than it ought to be—we should still be "unprofitable servants."
III. No MAN CAN WASH THE STAIN OF INDWELLING SIN FROM HIS LIFE. Men have tried all methods; but in vain.
1. Simple determination to conquer it. But he who commits sin is the slave of sin (Joh_8:34), and a slave who cannot emancipate himself. The worst effect of sin is seen in the corruption of the will. Hence we have not the power to reform until our will is renewed, i.e. until, in New Testament language, we are "born again."
2. Charge of external circumstances. This is a helpful accessory of more effectual means, but it is not sufficient in itself, because sin is internal, and no change of scene will effect a change of heart. A man may cross the Atlantic, but he will be the same being in America that he was in England. He may be lifted from the dunghill to a throne, but if he had a vicious nature in his low condition he will carry that with him to his new sphere. Base metal does not become gold by receiving the guinea's stamp. Sanitary arrangements, education, reforming influences, etc; are all helpful, but none are fundamental enough to effect the complete change. The stains are too ingrained for any such washing to remove them.
IV. IN THE GOSPEL OF CHRIST WE MAY SEE THE MEANS FOR CLEANSING BOTH THE GUILT OF CHARACTER AND THE STAIN OF INDWELLING SIN.
1. Guilt is shown to be removed by the free forgiveness of God in Christ, for no merits of our own, but for the sake of his work and sacrifice; by no effort of ours, but on condition of repentance and the faith which trusts him as our Savior, and submits to him as our Lord (Act_10:43).
2. The stain of indwelling sin is shown to be removed by the renewal of our nature, so that we are born "from above" and "of the Spirit" (Joh_3:3-8), and become new creatures in Christ by means of the same faith of trust and submission (2Co_5:17).
Jer_2:35-37
1. Assumed innocence. Israel says, "I am innocent;" "I have not sinned." This assumption may result from
(1) self-deception, or
(2) hypocrisy.
2. A claim to be favored by God. Israel says again, "His anger has turned from me." Present peace is taken as a warrant for expecting continued security, so that the very forbearance of God is converted into an excuse for presumption and indifference. Perhaps, too, pride comes in and aids the assumption that the guilty people are special favorites of Heaven and will be protected, whatever wrong they do. This was the mistake of the contemporaries of our Lord when they relied on the mere fact that they were Abraham's children (Joh_8:39).
3. T