W. H. Bennett

"Jehovah thy God will raise up unto thee a prophet from amongst thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him shall ye hearken."—Deut. xviii. 15.

"Jesus ... asked His disciples, saying, Who do men say that the Son of Man is? And they said, Some say John the Baptist; some, Elijah: and others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets."—Matt. xvi. 13, 14.

English feeling about Jeremiah has long ago been summed up and stereotyped in the single word "jeremiad." The contempt and dislike which this word implies are partly due to his supposed authorship of Lamentations; but, to say the least, the Book of Jeremiah is not sufficiently cheerful to remove the impression created by the linked wailing, long drawn out, which has been commonly regarded as an appendix to its prophecies. We can easily understand the unpopularity of the prophet of doom in modern Christendom. Such prophets are seldom acceptable, except to the enemies of the people whom they denounce; and even ardent modern advocates of Jew-baiting would not be entirely satisfied with Jeremiah—they would resent his patriotic sympathy with sinful and suffering Judah. Most modern Christians have ceased to regard the Jews as monsters of iniquity, whose chastisement should give profound satisfaction to every sincere believer. History has recorded but few of the crimes which provoked and justified our prophet's fierce indignation, and those of which we do read repel our interest by a certain lack of the picturesque, so that we do not take the trouble to realise their actual and intense wickedness. Ahab is a by-word, but how many people know anything about Ishmael ben Nethaniah? The cruelty of the nobles and the unctuous cant of their prophetic allies are forgotten in—nay, they seem almost atoned for by—the awful calamities that befell Judah and Jerusalem. Jeremiah's memory may even be said to have suffered from the speedy and complete fulfilment of his prophecies. The national ruin was a triumphant vindication of his teaching, and his disciples were eager to record every utterance in which he had foretold the coming doom. Probably the book, in its present form, gives an exaggerated impression of the stress which Jeremiah laid upon this topic.

Moreover, while the prophet's life is essentially tragic, its drama lacks an artistic close and climax. Again and again Jeremiah took his life in his hand, but the good confession which he witnessed for so long does not culminate in the crown of martyrdom. A final scene like the death of John the Baptist would have won our sympathy and conciliated our criticism.

We thus gather that the popular attitude towards Jeremiah rests on a superficial appreciation of his character and work; it is not difficult to discern that a careful examination of his history establishes important claims on the veneration and gratitude of the Christian Church.

For Judaism was not slow to pay her tribute of admiration and reverence to Jeremiah as to a Patron Saint and Confessor. His prophecy of the Restoration of Israel is appealed to in Ezra and Daniel; and the Hebrew Chronicler, who says as little as he can of Isaiah, adds to the references made by the Book of Kings to Jeremiah. We have already seen that apocryphal legends clustered round his honoured name. He was credited with having concealed the Tabernacle and the Ark in the caves of Sinai.[453] On the eve of a great victory, he appeared to Judas MaccabÆus, in a vision, as "a man distinguished by grey hairs, and a majestic appearance; but something wonderful and exceedingly magnificent was the grandeur about him," and was made known to Judas as a "lover of the brethren, who prayeth much for the people and for the holy city, to wit, Jeremiah the prophet of God. And Jeremiah stretching forth his right hand delivered over to Judas a sword of gold."[454] The Son of Sirach does not fail to include Jeremiah in his praise of famous men;[455] and there is an apocryphal epistle purporting to be written by our prophet.[456] It is noteworthy that in the New Testament Jeremiah is only mentioned by name in the Judaistic Gospel of St. Matthew.

In the Christian Church, notwithstanding the lack of popular sympathy, earnest students of the prophet's life and words have ranked him with some of the noblest characters of history. A modern writer enumerates as amongst those with whom he has been compared Cassandra, Phocion, Demosthenes, Dante, Milton, and Savonarola.[457] The list might easily be enlarged, but another parallel has been drawn which has supreme claims on our consideration. The Jews in New Testament times looked for the return of Elijah or Jeremiah to usher in Messiah's reign; and it seemed to some among them that the character and teaching of Jesus of Nazareth identified him with the ancient prophet who had been commissioned "to root out, pull down, destroy and throw down, to build and to plant." The suggested comparison has often been developed, but undue stress has been laid on such accidental and external circumstances as the prophet's celibacy and the statement that he was "sanctified from the womb." The discussion of such details does not greatly lend itself to edification. But it has also been pointed out that there is an essential resemblance between the circumstances and mission of Jeremiah and his Divine Successor, and to this some little space may be devoted.

Jeremiah and our Lord appeared at similar crises in the history of Israel and of revealed religion. The prophet foretold the end of the Jewish monarchy, the destruction of the First Temple and of ancient Jerusalem; Christ, in like manner, announced the end of the restored Israel, the destruction of the Second Temple and of the newer Jerusalem. In both cases the doom of the city was followed by the dispersion and captivity of the people. At both eras the religion of Jehovah was supposed to be indissolubly bound up with the Temple and its ritual; and, as we have seen, Jeremiah, like Stephen and Paul and our Lord Himself, was charged with blasphemy because he predicted its coming ruin. The prophet, like Christ, was at variance with the prevalent religious sentiment of his time and with what claimed to be orthodoxy. Both were regarded and treated by the great body of contemporary religious teachers as dangerous and intolerable heretics; and their heresy, as we have said, was practically one and the same. To the champions of the Temple, their teaching seemed purely destructive, an irreverent attack upon fundamental doctrines and indispensable institutions. But the very opposite was the truth; they destroyed nothing but what deserved to perish. Both in Jeremiah's time and in our Lord's, men tried to assure themselves of the permanence of erroneous dogmas and obsolete rites by proclaiming that these were of the essence of Divine Revelation. In either age to succeed in this effort would have been to plunge the world into spiritual darkness: the light of Hebrew prophecy would have been extinguished by the Captivity, or, again, the hope of the Messiah would have melted away like a mirage, when the legions of Titus and Hadrian dispelled so many Jewish dreams. But before the catastrophe came, Jeremiah had taught men that Jehovah's Temple and city were destroyed of His own set purpose, because of the sins of His people; there was no excuse for supposing that He was discredited by the ruin of the place where He had once chosen to set His Name. Thus the Captivity was not the final page in the history of Hebrew religion, but the opening of a new chapter. In like manner Christ and His Apostles, more especially Paul, finally dissociated Revelation from the Temple and its ritual, so that the light of Divine truth was not hidden under the bushel of Judaism, but shone forth upon the whole world from the many-branched candlestick of the Universal Church.

Again, in both cases, not only was ancient faith rescued from the ruin of human corruption and commentary, but the purging away of the old leaven made room for a positive statement of new teaching. Jeremiah announced a new covenant—that is, a formal and complete change in the conditions and method of man's service to God and God's beneficence to men. The ancient Church, with its sanctuary, its clergy, and its ritual, was to be superseded by a new order, without sanctuary, clergy, or ritual, wherein every man would enjoy immediate fellowship with his God. This great ideal was virtually ignored by the Jews of the Restoration, but it was set forth afresh by Christ and His Apostles. The "New Covenant" was declared to be ratified by His sacrifice, and was confirmed anew at every commemoration of His death. We read in John iv. 21-23: "The hour cometh, when neither in this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, shall ye worship the Father.... The hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and truth."

Thus when we confess that the Church is built upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles, we have to recognise that to this foundation Jeremiah's ministry supplied indispensable elements, alike by its positive and in its negative parts. This fact was manifest even to Renan, who fully shared the popular prejudices against Jeremiah. Nothing short of Christianity, according to him, is the realisation of the prophet's dream: "Il ajoute un facteur essentiel À l'oeuvre humaine; JÉrÉmie est, avant Jean-Baptiste, l'homme qui a le plus contribuÉ À la fondation du Christianisme; il doit compter, malgrÉ la distance des siÈcles, entre les prÉcurseurs immÉdiats de JÉsus."[458]

Printed by Hazell, Watson, & Viney, Ld., London and Aylesbury.

[1] For spelling see note, page 4[2] Cf. Preface.[3] We know little of Nebuchadnezzar's campaigns. In 2 Kings xxiv. 1 we are told that Nebuchadnezzar "came up" in the days of Jehoiakim, and Jehoiakim became his servant three years. It is not clear whether Nebuchadnezzar "came up" immediately after the battle of Carchemish, or at a later time after his return to Babylon. In either case the impression made by his hasty departure from Syria would be the same. Cf. Cheyne, Jeremiah (Men of the Bible), p. 132. I call the Chaldean king Nebuchadnezzar—not Nebuchadrezzar—because the former has been an English household word for centuries.[4] xi. 19.[5] xvi. 2.[6] 2 Kings xxiii. 30-32.[7] Cf. xxii. 26.[8] xxii. 10-12.[9] Ezek. xix. 3, 4.[10] The expression is curious; it usually means all the cities of Judah, except Jerusalem; the LXX. reading varies between "all the Jews" and "all Judah."[11] See especially the exposition of chaps. vii.-x., which are often supposed to be a reproduction of Jeremiah's utterance on this occasion.[12] The Hebrew apparently implies that the discourse was a repetition of former prophecies.[13] vii. 12-14. Even if chaps. vii.-x. are not a report of Jeremiah's discourse on this occasion, the few lines in xxvi. are evidently a mere summary, and vii. will best indicate the substance of his utterance. The verses quoted occur towards the beginning of vii.-x., but from the emphatic reference to Shiloh in the brief abstract in xxvi., Jeremiah must have dwelt on this topic, and the fact that the outburst followed his conclusion suggests that he reserved this subject for his peroration.[14] v. 31.[15] Acts xxi. 27-30.[16] 2 Kings xv. 35.[17] Mark xiv. 58.[18] Acts vi. 13, 14, vii. 48.[19] 2 Kings xviii. 4, xxiii.; Isa. xxxvi. 7.[20] vii. 4.[21] Micah iii. 12. As the quotation exactly agrees with the verse in our extant Book of Micah, we may suppose that the elders were acquainted with his prophecies in writing.[22] Psalm xxxi. 13-15, 18, 19. The Psalm is sometimes ascribed to Jeremiah, because it can be so readily applied to this incident. The reader will recognise his characteristic phrase "Terror on every side" (Magor-missabib).[23] This incident cannot be part of the speech of the elders; it would only have told against the point they were trying to make. The various phases—prophesy, persecution, flight, capture, and execution—must have taken some time, and can scarcely have preceded Jeremiah's utterance "at the beginning of the reign of King Jehoiakim."[24] Assuming his sympathy with Deuteronomy.[25] 2 Tim. iv. 3.[26] See Cheyne, Giesebrecht, Orelli, etc.[27] R.V. "against." The Hebrew is ambiguous.[28] So Septuagint. The Hebrew text has Israel, which is a less accurate description of the prophecies, and is less relevant to this particular occasion.[29] Jeremiah (Men of the Bible), p. 132.[30] Cf. Chap. V. on "Baruch."[31] Verses 5-8 seem to be a brief alternative account to 9-26.[32] 1 Chron. xx. i.[33] 'ACÛR: A.V., R.V., "shut up"; R.V. margin, "restrained." The term is used in xxxiii. 1, xxxix. 15, in the sense of "imprisoned," but here Jeremiah appears to be at liberty. The phrase 'AC?ÛR W AZÛBH, A.V. "shut up or left" (Deut. xxxii. 36, etc.), has been understood, those under the restraints imposed upon ceremonial uncleanness and those free from these restraints, i.e. everybody; the same meaning has been given to 'AC?ÛR here.[34] xxvi. 2.[35] So Cheyne; the Hebrew does not make it clear whether the title "scribe" refers to the father or the son. Giesebrecht understands it of Shaphan, who appears as scribe in 2 Kings xxii. 8. He points out that in verse 20 Elishama is called the scribe, but we cannot assume that the title was limited to a single officer of state.[36] Cf. xxvi. 10.[37] Isa. lviii. 3-8.[38] Micah vi. 6-8.[39] So Orelli, in loco.[40] Hebrew text "to Baruch," which LXX. omits.[41] In verse 18 the word "with ink" is not in the LXX., and may be an accidental repetition of the similar word for "his mouth."[42] The A.V. and R.V. "all the words" is misleading: it should rather be "everything"; the princes did not recite all the contents of the roll.[43] The English tenses "cut," "cast," are ambiguous, but the Hebrew implies that the "cutting" and "casting on the fire" were repeated again and again.[44] One is called Jerahmeel the son of Hammelech (A.V.), or "the king's son" (R.V.); if the latter is correct we must understand merely a prince of the blood-royal and not a son of Jehoiakim, who was only thirty.[45] For verses 29-31 see Chap. VI., where they are dealt with in connection with xxii. 13-19.[46] The supposition that Jeremiah had written notes of previous prophecies is not an impossible one, but it is a pure conjecture.[47] Cf. Orelli, in loco.[48] Num. vi. 2.[49] xix. 94.[50] Scott, Legend of Montrose, chap. xxii.[51] The term "house of the Rechabites" in verse 2 means "family" or "clan," and does not refer to a building.[52] Eight Jeremiahs occur in O.T.[53] Literally "sons of Hanan."[54] Jeremiah, according to this view, had no interview with the Rechabites, but made an imaginary incident a text for his discourse.[55] ii. 10, 11.[56] Matt. xi. 21, 22.[57] Ch. Hist., ii. 23.[58] Antt., x. 9, 1.[59] xxxvi. 26, 32.[60] In order of time, ch. xxxvi.[61] xxxii.[62] xliii.[63] Antt., x. 9, 1.[64] Bissell's Introduction to Baruch in Lange's Commentary.[65] So LXX., which here probably gives the true order.[66] The clause "I am weary with my groaning" also occurs in Psalm vi. 6.[67] The concluding clause of the verse is omitted by LXX., and is probably a gloss added to indicate that the ruin would not be confined to Judah, but would extend "over the whole earth." Cf. Kautzsch.[68] Hist. of Israel, iii., 293.[69] 2 Kings xxiii. 34-xxiv. 7.[70] iii. 274.[71] xxii. 30.[72] R.V., "Ah my brother! or Ah sister!... Ah lord! or Ah his glory!" The text is based on an emendation of Graetz, following the Syriac. (Giesebrecht.)[73] Chap. xiii.[74] Jude 9.[75] Apc. vi. 10.[76] xxii. 17. The exact meaning of the word translated "violence" (so A.V., R.V.) is very doubtful.[77] Hist., etc., iii. 266.[78] Rawlinson, Ancient Egypt (Story of the Nations).[79] Dan. iv. 30.[80] I have followed R.V., but the text is probably corrupt. Cheyne follows LXX. (A) in reading "because thou viest with Ahab": LXX. (B) has "Ahaz" (so Ewald). Giesebrecht proposes to neglect the accents and translate, "viest in cedar buildings with thy father" (i.e. Solomon).[81] According to Giesebrecht (cf. however the last note) this clause is an objection which the prophet puts into the mouth of the king. "My father enjoyed the good things of life—why should not I?" The prophet rejoins, "Nay, but he did judgment," etc.[82] Isa. lvii. (English Versions).[83] Macc. ii. 59, ix. 10.[84] iii. 269.[85] P. 142.[86] Also called Coniah and Jeconiah.[87] Considerable portions of chaps. i.-xx. are referred to the reigns of Jehoiakim and Jehoiachin: see previous volume on Jeremiah.[88] i. 18.[89] The Chronicler's account of Jehoiakim's end (2 Chron. xxviii. 6-8) is due to a misunderstanding of the older records. According to Chronicles Jehoiachin was only eight, but all our data indicate that Kings is right.[90] In LXX. of 2 Chron. xxxvi. 8, Jehoiakim, like Manasseh and Amon, was "buried in the garden of Uzza": B, GanozÆ; A, Ganozan. Cheyne is inclined to accept this statement, which he regards as derived from tradition.[91] xxxvi. 30.[92] So A. B. Davidson in Cambridge Bible, etc., by a slight conjectural emendation; there have been many other suggested corrections of the text. The Hebrew text as it stands would mean literally "he knew their widows" (R.V. margin); A.V., R.V., by a slight change, "he knew their (A.V. desolate) palaces."[93] Ezek. xix. 5-7.[94] 2 Kings xxiv. 8-17.[95] 2 Kings xxv. 27-30; Jer. lii. 31-34.[96] The Hebrew verbs are in 2 s. fem.; the person addressed is not named, but from analogy she can only be the "Daughter of Zion," i.e. Jerusalem personified.[97] Identified with the mountains of Moab.[98] R.V. margin, with LXX., Vulg., and Syr.[99] Milman's Latin Christianity, vi. 392.[100] 1 Chron. iii. 17 mentions the "sons" of Jeconiah, and in Matt. i. 12 Shealtiel is called his "son," but in Luke iii. 27 Shealtiel is called the son of Neri.[101] xxxvii. 2.[102] 2 Kings xxiv. 18-20.[103] 2 Chron. xxxvi. 10 makes Zedekiah the brother of Jehoiachin, possibly using the word in the general sense of "relation." Zedekiah's age shows that he cannot have been the son of Jehoiakim.[104] Ezek. xvii. 13, 14.[105] xxiv.[106] vii.-xi.[107] viii.[108] Gen. xlix. 24, J. from older source. Micah v. 5.[109] ix.-xi., xiii. 7-9.[110] Ezek. xxxiv. 2-5.[111] Zech. x. 3, xi. 5.[112] xxv. 34-38.[113] Froude, i. 205.[114] LXX. See R.V. margin.[115] Possibly, however, the insertion of this passage in one of the books may have been the work of an editor, and we cannot be sure that, in Jeremiah's time, collections entitled Isaiah and Micah both included this section.[116] xxvi. 20.[117] So LXX. and modern editors: see Giesebrecht, in loco. R.V. "What burden!"[118] vii. 14; but cf. R.V.; "I was," etc.[119] Zech. xiii. 2-5. Post-exilic, according to most critics (Driver's Introduction, in loco).[120] Froude, ii. 474.[121] The close connection between xxvii. and xxviii. shows that the date in xxviii. 1, "the fourth year of Zedekiah," covers both chapters. "Jehoiakim" in xxvii. 1 is a misreading for "Zedekiah": see R.V. margin.[122] 1 Kings xxii. 11.[123] The rest of this verse has apparently been inserted from xxvii. 6 by a scribe. It is omitted by the LXX.[124] xxii. 15-25.[125] Doubts have been expressed as to whether this verse originally formed part of Jeremiah's letter, or was ever written by him; but in view of his numerous references to a coming restoration those doubts are unnecessary.[126] The Hebrew Text inserts a paragraph (vv. 16-20) substantially identical with other portions of the book, especially xxiv. 8-10, announcing the approaching ruin and captivity of Zedekiah and the Jews still remaining in Judah. This section is omitted by the LXX., and breaks the obvious connection between verses 15 and 21.[127] Smith's Assurbanipal, p. 163.[128] 2 Macc. vii. 5.[129] lii. 24; 2 Kings xxv. 18.[130] Ecce Homo, xxi.[131] li. 59, Hebrew Text. According to the LXX., Zedekiah sent another embassy and did not go himself to Babylon. The section is apparently a late addition.[132] xvii. 15.[133] xxvi. 2.[134] Ezek. xxi. 21.[135] xxv. 1-7.[136] xxi. 1-10. The exact date of this section is not given, but it is closely parallel to xxxiv. 1-7, and seems to belong to the same period.[137] xxi. 1-10.[138] Deut. xv. 12. Cf. Exod. xxi. 2, xxiii. 10.[139] xxxiv. 14.[140] xxxiv. 13.[141] 2 Kings xxiii. 3.[142] xxxiv. 15.[143] xxxiv. 9.[144] Gen. xv.[145] xxxiv. 19.[146] Ezek. xvii. 17.[147] Hosea vi. 4.[148] Milman's Latin Christianity, viii. 255.[149] Cf. xxxii. 6-8.[150] xxxvii. 12; so R.V., Streane (Camb. Bible), Kautzsch, etc.[151] xxvi. 10.[152] xxxviii. 1.[153] Cf. Renan, iii. 333.[154] Gen. xxxvii. 22-24.[155] xxxix. 15-18.[156] So Giesebrecht, in loco; A.V., R.V., "third entry." In any case it will naturally be a passage from the palace to the Temple.[157] Chapter lii. = 2 Kings xxiv. 18-xxv. 30, and xxxix. 1-10 = lii. 4-16, in each case with minor variations which do not specially bear upon our subject. Cf. Driver, Introduction, in loco. The detailed treatment of this section belongs to the exposition of the Book of Kings.[158] Literally "the house"—either Jeremiah's or Gedaliah's, or possibly the royal palace.[159] lii. 6, 12.[160] Pulpit Commentary, in loco. Cf. the previous volume on Jeremiah in this series.[161] The sequence of verses 4 and 5 has been spoilt by some corruption of the text. The versions diverge variously from the Hebrew. Possibly the original text told how Jeremiah found himself unable to give an immediate answer, and Nebuzaradan, observing his hesitation, bade him return to Gedaliah and decide at his leisure.[162] 2 Macc. ii. 1-8.[163] Cf. Professor Adeney's Canticles and Lamentations in this series.[164] Cf. lii. 12, "fifth month," and xli. 1, "seventh month." Cheyne however points out that no year is specified in xli. 1, and holds that Gedaliah's governorship lasted for over four years, and that the deportation four years (lii. 30) after the destruction of the city was the prompt punishment of his murder.[165] The reading is doubtful; possibly the word (geruth) translated "caravanserai," or some similar word to be read instead of it, merely forms a compound proper name with Chimham.[166] 2 Sam. xix. 31-40.[167] Cf. chapter on "Baruch."[168] 1 Sam. xiii.[169] 1 Kings xxii.[170] lii. 30.[171] So Orelli, in loco.[172] For the prophecy against Egypt and its fulfilment see further chapter XVII.[173] Combined from verses 16, 17, and 25.[174] xv. 4.[175] As to the fulfilment of this prophecy see Chap. XVII.[176] MELEKHETH HASHSHAMAYIM. The Masoretic pointing seems to indicate a rendering "service" or work of heaven, probably in the sense of "host of heaven," i.e. the stars, ??????? being written defectively for ????????, but this translation is now pretty generally abandoned. Cf. C. J. Ball, Giesebrecht, Orelli, Cheyne, etc., on vii. 18, and especially Kuenen's treatise on the Queen of Heaven—in the Gesammelte Abhandlungen, translated by Budde—to which this section is largely indebted.[177] Ezek. viii.[178] The worship of Tammuz and of "creeping things and abominable beasts" etc.[179] Kuenen, 208.[180] Schrader (Whitehouse's translation), ii. 207.[181] Kuenen, 206.[182] Sayce, Higher Criticism, etc., 80.[183] So Giesebrecht on vii. 18. Kuenen argues for the identification of the Queen of Heaven with the planet Venus.[184] Kuenen, 211.[185] Doubts however have been raised as to whether any of the sections about Babylon are by Isaiah himself.[186] Doubts have been expressed as to the genuineness of the Damascus prophecy.[187] The Isaianic authorship of this prophecy (Isa. xxiii.) is rejected by very many critics.[188] Amos iii. 2.[189] So Giesebrecht, Orelli, etc.[190] Psammetichus had recently taken Ashdod, after a continuous siege of twenty-nine years.[191] The plural may refer to dependent chiefs or may be used for the sake of symmetry.[192] Lit. "the coasts" (i.e. islands and coastland) where the Phoenicians had planted their colonies.[193] See on xlix. 28-32.[194] xxv. 9.[195] xxvii. 8.[196] Sheshach (Sheshakh) for Babel also occurs in li. 41. This explanatory note is omitted by LXX.[197] As to Damascus cf. note on p. 213.[198] This line is somewhat paraphrased. Lit. "I will shatter you, and ye shall fall like an ornamental vessel" (KELI HEMDA).[199] Tacitus, History, v. 5.[200] Second edition, ii. 291, 292.[201] Meyer, Geschichte des alten Ägypten, 371, 373.[202] ii. 293.[203] Giesebrecht, with LXX.[204] Giesebrecht, Orelli, Kautzsch, with LXX., Syr., and Vulg., by an alteration of the pointing.[205] LXX. omits verse 26. Verses 27, 28 = xxx. 10, 11, and probably are an insertion here.[206] Ezek. xxix. 13-15.[207] Isa. xix. 25.[208] Herodotus, II. clxix.[209] xliv. 30.[210] xlvi. 25.[211] Referring to their ancient immigration from Caphtor, probably Crete.[212] Kautzsch, Giesebrecht, with LXX., reading 'Nqm for the Masoretic 'Mqm; Eng. Vers., "their valley."[213] Hosea vi. 1.[214] E.g. xlviii. 5, "For by the ascent of Luhith with continual weeping shall they go up; for in going down of Horonaim they have heard the distress of the cry of destruction," is almost identical with Isa. xv. 5. Cf. also xlviii. 29-34 with Isa. xv. 4, xvi. 6-11.[215] Verse 47 with the subscription, "Thus far is the judgment of Moab," is wanting in the LXX.[216] The exact date of the prophecy is uncertain, but it must have been written during the reign of Nebuchadnezzar.[217] Ezek. xxv. 9.[218] Some of the names, however, may be variants.[219] Josh. xiii. 15-28 (possibly on JE. basis).[220] xlix. 13, possibly this is not the Edomite Bozrah.[221] Deut. xxxii. 15.[222] Isa. xvi. 6.[223] ii. 10.[224] Kautzsch, Giesebrecht, with LXX.; A.V., R.V., with Hebrew Text, "their bottles."[225] Isa. xlviii. 10.[226] xlix. 3: A.V., "their king"; R.V., "Malcam," which here and in verse 1 is a form of Moloch.[227] Cf. the designation of Caleb "ben Jephunneh the Kenizzite," Num. xxxii. 12, etc., with the genealogies which trace the descent of Kenaz to Esau, Gen. xxxvi. 11, etc. Cf. also Expositor's Bible, Chronicles.[228] Cf. 1 Kings xxii. 47 with 2 Kings viii. 20.[229] Obadiah 11-15. The difference between A.V. and R.V. is more apparent than real. The prohibition which R.V. gives must have been based on experience. The short prophecy of Obadiah has very much in common with this section of Jeremiah: Obad. 1-6, 8, are almost identical with Jer. xlix. 14-16, 9, 10a, 7. The relation of the two passages is a matter of controversy, but probably both use a common original. Cf. Driver's Introduction on Obadiah.[230] Lit. "thy terror," i.e. the terror inspired by thy fate. A.V., R.V., "thy terribleness," suggests that Edom trusted in the terror felt for him by his enemies, but we can scarcely suppose that even the fiercest highlanders expected Nebuchadnezzar to be terrified at them.[231] Obad. 4: "Though thou set thy nest among the stars."[232] Hist. Nat., vi. 28. Orelli.[233] xxxiv. 1.[234] Verse 20.[235] Obadiah 21.[236] 2 Kings xvi. 9.[237] Ezek. xxvii. 18.[238] Joel iii. 4.[239] So Giesebrecht, with most of the ancient versions. A.V., R.V., with Masoretic Text, "not forsaken ... my joy," possibly meaning, "Why did not the inhabitants forsake the doomed city?"[240] Magor-missabib: cf. xlvi. 5.[241] I.e. cut off.[242] 1 Peter i. 10, 11.[243] See against the authenticity Driver's Introduction, in loco; and in support of it Speaker's Commentary, Streane (C.B.S.). Cf. also Sayce, Higher Criticism, etc., pp. 484-486.[244] In xxvii. 1 we must read, "In the beginning of the reign of Zedekiah," not Jehoiakim.[245] xxix. 4-14.[246] "Hitherward" seems to indicate that the writers local standpoint is that of Palestine.[247] l. 28, li. 11.[248] Cf. l. 8, li. 6, with Isa. xlviii. 20; l. 13 with xlix. 17; l. 41-43 with vi. 22-24; l. 44-46 with xlix. 19-21; li. 15-19 with x. 12-16.[249] Budde ap. Giesebrecht, in loco.[250] l. 3, 9, li. 41, 48.[251] l. 12, 13: cf. l. 39, 40, li. 26, 29, 37, 41-43.[252] li. 17, 18.[253] l. 28.[254] xxx., xxxi., and, in part, xxxiii.[255] Brief, in order not to trespass more than is absolutely necessary upon the ground covered by the previous Expositor's Bible volume on Jeremiah.[256] Characteristic Expressions (1), p. 269.[257] ????.[258] xx. 2, xxxvii. 15.[259] xxxvii., xxxviii.[260] xxvi. 20-24.[261] ii. 34, xix. 4, xxii. 17.[262] v. 25, vi. 6, vii. 5.[263] vi. 13.[264] ii. 34.[265] vii. 5-9.[266] xxiii. 14.[267] Characteristic Expressions (2), p. 269.[268] xxiii. 10, 14.[269] xxix. 23.[270] v. 21, quoted by Ezekiel, xii. 2. The verse is also the foundation of the description of Israel as "the blind people that have eyes, and the deaf that have ears," in Isa. xlii. 18 ff., xliii. 8. Cf. Giesebrecht on Jer. v. 21.[271] vii., xxvi.[272] xvi. 10.[273] xxxiv.[274] xxxii. 26-35: cf. p. 269, Characteristic Expressions (3).[275] Literally "copper and iron."[276] vi. 28.[277] xxxii. 26-35.[278] Hosea iv. 1, 2; also Hosea's general picture of the kingdom of Samaria.[279] The A.V. translation of xi. 12 ("Judah yet ruleth with God, and is faithful with the saints") must be set aside. The sense is obscure and the text doubtful.[280] Amos ii. 4-8.[281] Micah iii. 10, 11.