Jeremiah Introduction - College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

The Bible Study Textbook Series

JEREMIAH
AND
LAMENTATIONS

By
James E. Smith

College Press, Joplin, Missouri
Copyright 1972
College Press

Reprint May 1974

Reprint January 1976

DEDICATION

To
Professor George Mark Elliott
Giant of the Faith,
Devoted Student of the Word,
Master Teacher
and Christian
Gentleman,

whose knowledge of and empathy with the prophets of Israel first kindled within the heart of the author an ever-increasing desire to know these men of God, this volume is humbly dedicated in full realization that it is but a feeble reflection of what he might have written.

MAPS AND CHARTS

Map: Jeremiah's World p. vi.
Chart: The Last Kings of Judah p. 26.
Chart: Chronological Outline of Jeremiah's Life pp. 73-74.
Chart: Verse Repetitions in Jeremiah p. 93.
Chart: Order of the Foreign Nation Oracles p. 101.
Chart: Chronological Notices in Jeremiah p. 109.
Chart: Structure of the Book of Jeremiah p. 112.
Map: Palestine in the Days of Josiah p. 144a.
Plate: The Babylonian Chronicle p. 144b.
Chart: The Parable of the Ruined Waistcloth p. 298.
Illustration: Cuneiform Business Documents p. 546.
Chart: Activities of Jeremiah During the Siege of Jerusalem p. 574.
Chart: Interviews Between Jeremiah and Zedekiah p. 622.
Map: Egypt p. 696a.
Plate: The Jaazaniah and Gedaliah Seals p. 696b.
Chart: Chronological Sequence of the Foreign Nation oracles p. 699.
Chart: The Two Seventy Year Periods p. 792a.
Plate: Jehoiachin Tablets p. 792a.
Chart: Structure of Lamentations p. 850.
Map: Moab p. 928

PREFACE

When the author was called upon in his twenty-eighth year to produce this volume his immediate reaction was that of Jeremiah to his prophetic call: Alas, I am only a youth. This work id not the fruit of long years of teaching the Book of Jeremiah in the college classroom. Indeed, at the time the project was undertaken the author had yet to lead a single student through a study of this prophetic book. That deficiency has since been remedied with three courses, one an undergraduate survey, one a graduate seminar, and one a course in Hebrew exegesis. This limited teaching experience coupled with the somewhat detailed study of the book in the classroom of Dr. Sheldon H. Blank of the Hebrew Union CollegeJewish Institution of Religion constitute the only academic credentials which the author can produce to justify his participation in this project.
One's general opinion about the Word of God colors every comment that he might make upon it. Many modern authors seem to be unaware of their preconceived a priori assumptions or else they fail to admit to them. It is most perturbing to pick up a volume purporting to be an objective analysis of Biblical materials only to find it shot through with theological bias. The present author's view of the Old Testament is the view generally acknowledged to have been that of Christ and the apostles viz., that the Scriptures are divinely authoritative, infallible and inerrant. No better summation of the Biblical doctrine of inspiration can be found than that to which every member of the Evangelical Theological Society must subscribe annually: The Bible alone, and the Bible in its entirety, is the Word of God written, and therefore inerrant in the autographs.

Numerous commentaries, treatises and articles on the Book of Jeremiah have been consulted in the preparation of this work. Among the older commentaries those of Keil and Streane were most helpful. Without question the greatest of the more recent English commentaries on Jeremiah is that of the Lutheran scholar Theodore Laetsch. The author found the brief comments of Bert Hall in the Wesleyan Bible Commentary particularly stimulating. John Bright's volume on Jeremiah in the Anchor Bible offered many insights particularly in the areas of archaeological research and linguistic analysis. Of the treatises on the man Jeremiah those of Skinner (Prophecy and Religion, 1922, 1963) and Blank (Jeremiah: Man and Prophet. 1961) have been extremely useful.

Since the literature on the Book of Jeremiah is so abundant the publication of another book on the subject might seem to be presumptuous. However a survey of the materials makes it clear that a Bible College textbook on Jeremiah is not currently available. Such study guides as have been produced, e.g., the volume in the Shield Bible Study Series, are too brief to be beneficial in a college classroom. The standard commentaries on the book are often too technical for the average reader and have the added disadvantage of not being arranged properly for classroom study. The present volume was prepared with the Bible College student and teacher in mind. It is intended to be something more than a study guide and something less than a technical and philological commentary.
The material in the Book of Jeremiah is not arranged according to strict chronological principles. The temptation was great to rearrange the units within the book in what would appear to be the correct sequence and to discuss the units in that order. This procedure, followed by several modern commentaries, is by no means without advantage. The chronological arrangement would have eliminated the frequent jumping ahead or backtracking which is so confusing to modern students of the book. The historical context of each oracle or sermon would be immediately apparent. But on the other hand commentaries and study guides arranged according to the chronological principle are extremely difficult to utilize when one is interested in consulting the comments on a particular passage. Furthermore the Book of Jeremiah is certainly no hodgepodge and the arrangement of the materials within it is not accidental. Part of the challenge of studying the Book of Jeremiah is in trying to ascertain the motives of the author in placing certain Chapter s in their present location within the book. For these reasons, then, the author elected to discuss the contents of Jeremiah as they stand in the, book.
In organizing the Chapter s of this volume the author has tried to follow the natural divisions of the Book of Jeremiah. At the same time the needs of those who teach have been kept in mind. The twenty-six Chapter s provide a convenient breakdown of the materials for two quarters of study in the local church. In the Bible college setting the book should provide more than enough discussion materials for a two semester hour course in Jeremiah. The review section found at the end of each chapter is designed to help the student recall the basic facts of the verses under discussion. Alongside the facts to master are the questions to ponder which are intended to provoke class discussion.
The translation of the text of Jeremiah is that of the author unless otherwise indicated. Naturally in producing this translation several English versions of the book were consulted. Where the author's translation differs significantly from the King James Version (KJV), the American Standard Version (ASVJ or the Revised Standard Version (RSV) the author has attempted to explain in simple terms the reason for the difference. Every effort has been made to preserve in the English translation of Jeremiah the emphasis which is often clearly indicated in the Hebrew except where doing so led to unwieldy English constructions.
The author would be remiss if he did not publicly express his appreciation to those who helped in the production of this volume. Misses Lyn Reed and Chris Bream and Mrs. Rachel Smith labored faithfully in typing the final manuscript. Miss Hope Wozniak, graduate student at The Cincinnati Bible Seminary, rendered invaluable aid in the production of the maps and charts.

James E. Smith

The Cincinnati Bible Seminary
February 4, 1972

PART ONE
CHAPTER ONE
THE WORLD OF JEREMIAH

One cannot understand the prophets of the Old Testament unless he thoroughly understands the history of the Old Testament. Those who find the prophetic books difficult and boring have probably never done their homework in the history of Israel. Trying to interpret a prophetic book without first mastering the historical background is like jumping into eight feet of water without, first learning to swim. One may survive the experience, but only with tremendous effort and little enjoyment. If the student will study the chart on the inside cover with great care he will be able to place Jeremiah within the proper historical context. Each diamond represents a major epoch of Old Testament history. Major characters are listed in the upper half of the diamond, major events in the lower half. On the outside of the diamond the arrow serves to indicate the approximate duration of the epoch. Read the chart vertically. Note particularly the tenth and eleventh periods of the history for this is the era during which Jeremiah conducted his ministry.

I. JUDAH UNDER ASSYRIAN DOMINATION

In 745 B.C. a king came to the throne of Assyria who was destined to influence the course of history in the ancient Near East for decades to come. His name was Tiglath-pileser III. For centuries the Assyrian monarchs had from time to time harassed the small states of Syria-Palestine. But these invasions of the western territories had been more in the nature of tribute-gathering raids. No effort was made to annex territory or permanently enslave people. A radical change of policy took place under Tiglath-pileser. He was interested in building an empire.

A. The Fall of the Northern Kingdom

During the years 733-732 B.C. Tiglath-pileser struck a decisive blow against Israel. All the lands in Galilee and Transjordan were overrun and portions of the population were deported (2 Kings 15:29). The Assyrian would undoubtedly have destroyed Israel entirely had not Hoshea, a pro-Assyrian, slain king Pekah (2 Kings 15:30). Hoshea immediately rendered tribute to Tiglath-pileser and was thereafter recognized as king of Israel by the Assyrian monarch. By the end of 732 B.C. Tiglath-pileser could consider Syria-Palestine subject to his rule. Most of the conquered territory was organized into provinces administered by Assyrian governors. Such kings as did remain were tribute-paying vassals. Hoshea of Israel and Ahaz of Judah were in this category.

Ahaz of Judah seems to have been content with his status as vassal. He was summoned to Damascus to appear before Tiglath-pileser and to pay homage to the Assyrian gods at a bronze altar there. Ahaz was so impressed by this pagan altar that he ordered a duplicate of it to be placed in the Temple at Jerusalem. This was but the first step in an apostasy which was to sweep the land of Judah. Images to the Baalim were erected throughout the land; incense was offered in high places; child sacrifice seems to have become common practice (2 Kings 16:3). The desperate religious situation was matched by equally desperate social and economic conditions. In order to meet his tribute obligations Ahaz had to empty his treasury and strip the Temple of its gold (2 Kings 16:8; 2 Kings 16:17).

Not long after Tiglath-pileser had been succeeded by his son Shalmaneser V, Hoshea of Israel decided to rebel against Assyria. Hoshea began to negotiate with a certain king So, one of the rival kings of Egypt. When a mutual defense pact had been arranged Hoshea withheld his annual tribute from Shalmaneser thus proclaiming his independence. Assyrian retaliation was swift in coming. In 724 B.C. Shalmaneser attacked Israel. The anticipated aid from Egypt did not materialize. Realizing his mistake and hoping to make peace with his overlord, Hoshea went out from Samaria to meet Shalmaneser. Hoshea was arrested and deported. The Assyrians occupied the territory of the Northern Kingdom except for Samaria itself which continued to withstand siege for nearly three years. Finally in 722 B.C. Samaria fell[1] and many of its inhabitants27,290 according to Assyrian recordswere deported to distant territories of the empire. With the fall of Samaria the history of Israel, the Northern Kingdom, comes to an end.

[1] Most scholars feel that Shalmaneser died during the siege and was succeeded by his commanding general Sargon. The latter would then be king at the time of the fall of Samaria. In several texts Sargon takes credit for the conquest of Samaria. However recently E. J. Young has put forward strong arguments in favor of the view that Shalmaneser was still ruling at the time Samaria capitulated. See his Book of Isaiah (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965), I, 18-19.

B. The Struggle for Independence

The southern kingdom of Judah continued to exist for about 135 years after the fall of Samaria and the collapse of the Northern Kingdom. Ahaz the apostate was succeeded on the throne by good king Hezekiah. Hezekiah instituted one of the most thorough-going religious reforms in the history of Judah (2 Chronicles 29-31). A reformation of these proportions had political implications. Hezekiah knew that his rejection of Assyrian paganism would be construed in Nineveh as rebellion against the Assyrian monarch. During these crucial years Hezekiah became desperately ill. The prophet of God, Isaiah, announced to him that he must set his house in order for he would shortly die. Hezekiah prayed that his life might be spared so that he might deal with the tremendous problems which his tiny nation was facing and help his people prepare for Assyrian retaliation. God heard that prayer and sent His prophet back to the king to announce that fifteen years had been added to his days. In confirmation of this divine response a miraculous sign was granted: the shadow on the royal sundial went backwards ten degrees! (Isaiah 38:1-8).

Visitors from far-off Babylon came to Jerusalem to congratulate king Hezekiah upon his recovery. This embassy came from Merodach-baladan, one of the most bitterly antagonistic anti-Assyrian kings of the day. Everyone except Hezekiah could see that Merodach-baladan was trying to flatter the Judean king in order to enlist him in one of his numerous rebellions against the Assyrian overlord. Overcome by the flattery Hezekiah made the foolish mistake of showing all his wealth and resources to the Chaldean emissaries. Because of this stupid act Isaiah the prophet revealed to Hezekiah that one day Judah would be destroyed by the Chaldeans (Isaiah 39:5-7).

In 705 B.C. a new Assyrian monarch, Sennacherib, came to the throne. The accession of a new king was usually the time for vassals to rebel and thus it is not surprising that in both the eastern and western parts of the empire Assyrian vassals withheld the annual tribute and declared themselves to be independent. Hezekiah was active in the rebellion and hastily made preparations to face the inevitable Assyrian invasion.
In 701 B.C. Sennacherib and a mighty host arrived in Syria-Palestine to punish the rebellious vassals. This campaign is especially interesting because, in addition to the Biblical account, the Assyrian records of the invasion have been discovered. In the Assyrian account Sennacherib claims to have captured forty-six fortified cities of Judah, deported 200,150 Judeans and shut up Hezekiah like a bird in a cage.[2] Harmonizing the Biblical data with the information contained in the Assyrian annals is not an easy task. Various reconstructions of the events are possible. Some scholars hold to a single invasion theory and attempt to fit all the events of 2 Kings 18-19 and Isaiah 36-37 to the year 701 B.C. Others feel that the Biblical data demand a second invasion of Judah by Sennacherib about 688 B.C. In either case the Assyrian effort to conquer Jerusalem failed. God intervened on behalf of his people and smote the Assyrian army and 185,000 of the enemy troops died in one night. This glorious deliverance was long remembered and even became the historical foundation for a false theology against which Jeremiah would constantly do battle. Apparently it was on the basis of this deliverance that the false prophets of the sixth century based their conviction that Jerusalem was inviolable.

[2] Documents from Old Testament Times, ed. D. Winton Thomas (New York: Harper Torchbook, 1961) p. 67.

C. Renewed Assyrian Vassalage

The independence for which Hezekiah had struggled so valiantly was short-lived. Upon taking the throne of Judah in 687 B.C. Manasseh declared himself a loyal vassal of the Assyrian king who was now Esarhaddon. Actually Manasseh had little choice in the matter for under Esarhaddon the Assyrian empire reached the zenith of its power. Esarhaddon was able to do what none of his predecessors could do viz., successfully invade Egypt. In the annals of this king Manasseh is listed among twenty-two kings required to send materials to Nineveh for his building projects. Asshurbanipal (669-672 B.C.), the next Assyrian king, also successfully invaded Egypt. He lists Manasseh as one of his vassals who assisted in the Egyptian campaign.[3]

[3] James Pritchard, ed., Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament (second edition; Princeton: University Press, 1955), pp. 291-94.

Without question Manasseh was the worst king to ever sit on the throne of David in Jerusalem. During his lengthy reign of fifty-five years all manner of heathen practices were tolerated and even encouraged. As an Assyrian vassal Manasseh was forced to render homage to the Assyrian deities and to erect altars to them in the Temple in Jerusalem. Local Yahweh shrines, suppressed by Hezekiah, were restored. Pagan cults and practices both native and foreign were allowed to flourish with all the apparatus of fertility religion. Sacred prostitution was tolerated even within the Temple precincts (2 Kings 21:7; Jeremiah 23:4-7). Divination and magic, so popular in Assyria, were in vogue in Jerusalem (2 Kings 21:6). The barbarous rite of human sacrifice again appeared (2 Kings 21:6). It is said that Manasseh repented of his wicked ways (2 Chronicles 33:15-17) but he must have been very old at the time. He was unable to stem the tide of apostasy and the abuses continued until the time of the reformation under king Josiah (2 Kings 23). During the reign of Manasseh the nation of Judah committed sins which could not be forgiven and the Lord God decreed that Judah must be punished (2 Kings 21:9-15; 2 Kings 24:3 f.).

Amon succeeded Manasseh on the throne of Judah but reigned only two years. He continued the pro-Assyrian foreign policy of his father. The national plunge into degradation continued. Amon was murdered in 640 B.C. by anti-Assyrian assassins. The assassins themselves were in turn executed by the people of the land, apparently an assembly of the landed gentry.

II. JUDAH AS AN INDEPENDENT STATE

Josiah was eight years old when he ascended the throne of his father Amon in 640 B.C. The sacred historian gives the highest commendation to this young man.

And like unto him was there no king before him that turned to the Lord with all his heart, and with all his soul and with all his might, according to the law of Moses; neither after him arose there any like him (2 Kings 23:25).

Josiah was able to wrest his tiny nation from the grip of Assyrian imperialism and steer it once again along an independent course.

A. The Deterioration of the Assyrian Empire

During the reign of Josiah the mighty Assyrian empire was beginning to crumble. Egypt was able to regain independence under Psammetichus I (663-609 B.C.) and Asshurbanipal was powerless to stop the defection. In 652 B.C. rebellion broke out at the opposite end of the empire led by Asshurbanipal's own brother, Shamash-shum-ukin. Asshurbanipal dissipated his strength in putting down this rebellion. In his later years the great Assyrian monarch seemed to lose interest in administrative and military affairs and turned his attention to cultural matters. After the death of Asshurbanipal in 627 B.C. his two rival sons led the nation in a suicidal civil war. About this time the Medes and the Babylonians were joining forces against their common enemy Assyria. Asshur fell to the Medo-Babylonian alliance in 614 B.C. Nineveh fell two years later. The Assyrian empire was in shambles.

As the Assyrian grip on the west gradually relaxed the tiny states of Syria-Palestine were able to make a bid for independence. Scripture declares that in his eighth year (632 B.C.) Josiah began to seek after the God of David (2 Chronicles 34:3). This would indicate that very early in his reign the decision had been made to make a bid for independence. By 628 B.C. it was clear that the Assyrians were in no position to interfere in the west. Josiah launched a campaign into the Assyrian provinces to the north in an effort to annex to his kingdom the old territory of the Northern Kingdom of Israel (2 Chronicles 34:6).

B. The Reformation of Josiah

Josiah led his now independent nation in one of the most thorough-going reforms of its history. The reform which began as early as the eighth year of his reign gained momentum in his twelfth year (628 B.C.). Josiah began to purge Judah and Jerusalem from the high places, and the groves, and carved images and molten images (2 Chronicles 34:3 b). The altars of the Baalim were ground into powder and thrown over the graves of those who worshiped them (2 Chronicles 34:4). At Bethel he slew the idolatrous priests and burned their bones upon the pagan altars (2 Kings 23:20).

In the eighteenth year of Josiah (621 B.C.) as the Levites were renovating the interior of the Temple, a law book was discovered. Hilkiah the high priest took the book to the king who, when he heard the sacred words of the text, rent his clothes (2 Kings 22:11). -In order to authenticate the discovery, the book was sent to the prophetess Huldah. Huldah declared that every threat contained in the newly discovered book would come to pass. Judah would be punished by God because of past unfaithfulness but the punishment would be delayed until after the death of good king Josiah (2 Kings 22:15-20). The king convoked an assembly of all the notables of the nation at the Temple in Jerusalem. A solemn covenant was made by all who were present that they would obey all the commandments which were contained in the book (2 Kings 23:1-3). An elaborate Passover was kept that year. Scripture records that there was no Passover like to that kept in Israel from the days of Samuel the prophet (2 Chronicles 35:18; cf. 2 Kings 23:22).

The discovery of the law book gave new impetus to the reformation effort. But since the Book of Kings lumps together the reforms of the twelfth and eighteenth years of Josiah it is impossible to determine precisely which reforms preceded and which followed the discovery of the law book. Nonetheless it is important to realize the extent of this reformation. The following facts should be noted:

1. All the vessels in the Temple which were associated with pagan cultic practice were burned outside Jerusalem and the ashes were carried away to Bethel (2 Kings 23:4).

2. Josiah removed the priests of the various pagan cults who had been appointed by his predecessors, Manasseh and Amon (2 Kings 23:5).

3. He removed the grove, the Asherah, from the Temple, burned it at the brook Kidron, beat it to dust and cast the dust on the graves of the people (2 Kings 23:6).

4. The houses of the sodomites which were in (or by) the Temple were torn down (2 Kings 23:7).

5. He defiled the high places where the Lord was worshiped illegitimately. He did permit the priests of these high places to come to Jerusalem to serve at the one legitimate altar. Most of these priests however elected to remain in the outlying area (2 Kings 23:8-9).

6. Josiah defiled the Topheth, the area within the valley of Hinnom where children were sacrificed to Molech (2 Kings 23:10).

7. A certain monument consisting of horses and chariots dedicated to the sun god was dismantled and burned (2 Kings 23:11).

8. Certain altars erected by his predecessors were broken down, ground up and the dust cast into the brook Kidron (2 Kings 23:12).

9. He destroyed the pagan shrines erected by Solomon in honor of the gods of the Zidonians, Moabites and Ammonites and defiled the areas by placing bones there (2 Kings 23:13-14).

10. Josiah removed those that had familiar spirits, the wizards and even the teraphim, the household idols (2 Kings 23:24).

Several factors made this extensive reformation possible. As the power of the mighty Assyrian empire began to wane the confidence of the people in the imported Mesopotamian deities was shaken. Furthermore the influence of the prophet Zephaniah cannot be ignored. This prophet of God was of royal ancestry, four generations removed from Hezekiah. He may have been the teacher of Josiah during his minority. Beginning with the thirteenth year of Josiah, Jeremiah was also on the scene with his threats of punishment and pleas for repentance, Hilkiah the high priest was in full sympathy with the reform movement and actively supported the king in this effort. The impact of the discovery of the lost law book upon the reformation effort cannot be measured but one must assume that its influence was considerable. It was the conjunction of these several factors that enabled Josiah to implement the great reformation of the seventh century.

III. JUDAH AS AN EGYPTIAN VASSAL STATE
A. The Death of Josiah

With the fall of Nineveh to the Medo-Babylonian coalition in 612 B.C. a refugee Assyrian government was established at Haran. In 610 B.C. Haran also fell to the Chaldean king Nabopolassor. Fearing that the international balance of power was about to be upset, Pharaoh Necho (609-593 B.C.) decided to intervene in the struggle on behalf of the tottering Assyrian kingdom. The King James and American Standard versions give the impression that Necho marched north to fight against the Assyrians. However a Babylonian text published by Wiseman in 1956 has made it clear that the purpose of Necho was to fight on behalf of the Assyrians.[4] The Hebrew preposition used in 2 Kings 23:29 and 2 Chronicles 35:20 can be translated either against or on behalf of. Here is a case where the texts from antiquity have actually aided modern scholars in producing a more accurate translation of the Hebrew Scriptures.

[4] The relevant portions of this text have been translated in Documents from Old Testament Times, op. cit., p. 17.

On his way to Carchemish on the Euphrates River, Pharaoh Necho had to go through the narrow pass at Megiddo in northern Palestine. For some unexplained reason Josiah stationed his army in that pass to confront Necho and prevent him from marching to Carchemish. Necho tried to avoid any confrontation with Josiah. Ambassadors were sent to the Judean king with assurances that Necho had no quarrel with Judah. Necho insisted that God had directed him to undertake this mission and that should Josiah persist in resisting the Egyptian advance he would be fighting against God. The author of Chronicles seems to concur that the action of Josiah was contrary to the will of God for he declares that Josiah hearkened not unto the words of Necho from the mouth of God (2 Chronicles 35:22). The battle was joined and Josiah was mortally wounded. Josiah was taken by chariot to Jerusalem where he died (2 Chronicles 35:23-24). Jeremiah seems to have led the nation in lamenting the death of this good king (2 Chronicles 35:25). For many years the anniversary of the death of Josiah was marked by weeping and lamentation.[5]

[5] Zechariah (Jeremiah 12:11) mentions the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddo. 1Es. 1:32 alludes to the practice of a national lamentation each year.

The death of Josiah marked the end of Judah's independence. Shallum, the second son of Josiah, was selected by the people of the land to succeed his father. Shallum, who took the throne name Jehoahaz, was only able to maintain himself on the throne for some three months (2 Kings 23:31). In September of 609 B.C. as Pharaoh Necho was returning from his wars in the north he summoned Jehoahaz to his military headquarters at Riblah. It is not clear why Jehoahaz answered the summons. Perhaps he hoped to enter into a vassal oath with the Pharaoh. But Necho had other plans. Jehoahaz was deposed and deported in chains to Egypt (2 Kings 23:33). Many Judeans confidently expected that Jehoahaz would soon return to Jerusalem to reclaim his throne. Jeremiah dashed those hopes when he prophesied:

Weep sore for him that goes away; for he shall return no more nor see his native country. For thus says the LORD concerning Shallum the son of Josiah who reigned instead of Josiah his father and who went forth out of this place: He shall not return thither any more; but in the place to which they have led him captive he shall die, and he shall see this land no more (Jeremiah 22:10-12).

B. Jehoiakim as an Egyptian Vassal

Pharaoh selected his own man for the throne of Judah. He chose Eliakim the elder brother of the deposed Shallum (Jehoahaz). Eliakim took the throne name Jehoiakim. From the outset Jehoiakim was under an enormous financial obligation to Egypt. But near national poverty did not deter this petty little king from extravagantly spending huge sums upon himself. In one of Jeremiah's blistering sermons he condemns Jehoiakim for building for himself a fancy new palace (Jeremiah 22:13-14). Jehoiakim was the villain of the closing years of Judah's history. He was everything that is despicable in a national leader. He was a spend-thrift, a bigot, an arrogant and irreverent tyrant who brooked no criticism, not even when that criticism came from a man of God. A prophet named Uriah was too bold in his denouncement of the king and paid for his boldness with his life (Jeremiah 26:21). Jeremiah himself was in danger on more than one occasion during the reign of this king.

Jehoiakim carefully watched the political developments on the Euphrates River to the north. From July 609 B.C. to June 605 B.C. the armies of the Babylonians and the Assyro-Egyptian coalition sparred. For the most part during these years the Babylonians were on the defensive. Finally the Babylonian army under the brilliant young crown prince Nebuchadnezzar was able to launch a mighty offensive which was to have world-wide significance. The focus of the attack was the fortress of Carchemish on the Euphrates. Nebuchadnezzar won a crushing victory. The Babylonian Chronicle[6] describes this historic confrontation as follows:

[6] Documents from Old Testament Times, op. cit., pp. 78, 79.

In the twenty-first year the king of Babylon staved in his own country while the crown-prince Nebuchadnezzar, his eldest son, took personal command of his troops and marched to Carchemish which lay on the bank of the river Euphrates. He crossed the river (to go) against the Egyptian army which was situated in Carchemish and. they fought with each other and the Egyptian army withdrew before him. He defeated them (smashing) them out of existence. As for the remnant of the Egyptian army which had escaped from the defeat so (hastily) that no weapon had touched them, the Babylonian army overtook and defeated them in the district of Hamath, so that not a single man (escaped) to his own country. At that time Nebuchadnezzar conquered the whole of the land of Hatti.

IV. JUDAH UNDER CHALDEAN DOMINATION

A. Jehoiakim as a Chaldean Vassal

The tattered Egyptian armies fled southward from Carchemish in disarray. Nebuchadnezzar was able to roam at will through Syria-Palestine, the Hatti-land as he calls it in his annals. A Chaldean assault against Jerusalem at this time is indicated in the opening verses of the Book of Daniel:

In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah came Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon unto Jerusalem and besieged it. And the Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand, with part of the vessels of the house of God; and he carried them into the land of Shinar to the house of his god: and he brought the vessels into the treasure-house of his god.

By the system of reckoning used in Daniel the third year of Jehoiakim would fall in the year 605 B.C.[7] It is not entirely clear from these verses whether or not Jehoiakim actually swore allegiance to Nebuchadnezzar at this time. It may be that Jehoiakim merely tried to bribe the Chaldean prince by sending to him some of the valuable temple vessels and some prize youth of the land viz., Daniel Shadrach, Meshach and Abed-nego.[8]

[7] By another system of reckoning, the so-called non-accession year method, Jeremiah dates the battle of Carchemish in the fourth year of Jehoiaklm (Jeremiah 46:2).

[8] The Hebrew names of Daniels-' three friends were Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah (Daniel 1:6).

Nebuchadnezzar's campaign in the Hatti-land was cut short by the death of his father, king Nabopolassor, on August 16, 605 B.C. Nebuchadnezzar hastened immediately back to Babylon where he was crowned on September 6, 605 B.C. An important piece of evidence regarding the activities of Nebuchadnezzar at this time is furnished by Berossus, a Babylonian priest of the third century B.C.

Meanwhile his father Nabopolassor sickened and died. Nabuchodonosor settled the affairs of Egypt and other countries. The prisonersJews, Phoenicians, Syrians, and those of Egyptian nationalitywere consigned to some of his friends with orders to conduct them to Babylonia, along with the heavy troops and the rest of the spoils; while he himself with a small escort pushed across the desert to Babylon.[9]

[9] Berossus is quoted by Josephus, Against Apion, I. 19. The names Nebuchadnezzar and Nabopolassor are spelled somewhat differently in the Greek writing of Josephus.

Berossus, then, mentions Jews among the captives who were taken to Babylon shortly after the battle of Carchemish. This testimony confirms the picture of the Book of Daniel that Jewish captives were taken to Babylon in 605 B.C.

Upon assuming the throne Nebuchadnezzar returned to the Hatti-land to continue his conquests but the records do not indicate precisely what cities he conquered. A third campaign to the Hatti-land took place in the late spring and early summer of 604 B.C. Nebuchadnezzar's official scribe declares that on this occasion all the kings of the Hatti-land came before him and he received their heavy tribute.[10] The Babylonian annals specifically mention the conquest of certain Philistine cities. This may well be the fulfillment of the prophecies made by Jeremiah against the Philistines (Jeremiah 47). It was probably at this time that Nebuchadnezzar bound king Jehoiakim to take him to Babylon (2 Chronicles 36:6). No evidence exists that Jehoiakim was actually taken to Babylon and so one must conclude that for some reason Nebuchadnezzar changed his mind about the matter. Perhaps Jehoiakim took a solemn and sacred oath of allegiance to the Great King and so Nebuchadnezzar decided to leave him on the throne in Jerusalem as his vassal.[11]

[10] Documents from Old Testament Times, op. cit., p. 79.

[11] Conservative scholars differ as to whether the episode of 2 Chronicles 36:6 should be assigned to the first, second or third Chaldean invasions of the Hatti-land.

B. Jehoiakim's Rebellion against Nebuchadnezzar

Jehoiakim had no intention of remaining permanently the vassal of Nebuchadnezzar. According to 2 Kings 24:1 Jehoiakim served Nebuchadnezzar for three years. If the sacred historian is counting the years of service from the time of the vassal oath and if the vassal oath was taken in the spring of 604 B.C. as set forth above then the three years of service would be from the spring of 604 to the spring of 601 B.C. It is no mere coincidence that Nebuchadnezzar suffered a stinging defeat on the borders of Egypt in the spring of 601 B.C. The Babylonian text relating to this setback has been published by Wiseman:

They smote the breast of each other and inflicted great havoc on each other. The king of Akkad and his troops turned back to Babylon.[12]

[12] D. J. Wiseman, ed., Chronicles of the Chaldean Kings (626-556 B.C.) in the British Museum (1956), p. 71.

Reading between the lines of this somewhat cryptic text one can see what really happened. Nebuchadnezzar apparently attempted to invade Egypt but was repulsed and was forced to retreat. Jehoiakim seized this Babylonian setback as an opportunity to revolt. From that day forward he refused to pay his annual tribute and, no doubt, publicly disavowed his vassal oath.

That Nebuchadnezzar had received a rather severe blow in his battle with the Egyptians in 601 B.C. is indicated by the fact that for some eighteen months he was unable to personally attend to his rebellious vassal in Jerusalem. In the meanwhile he sent bands of Edomites, Moabites and Ammonites and local contingents of Chaldean soldiers to harass the Judeans (2 Kings 24:2). Though these small units were probably unable to do much damage to the fortified cities of Judah, they did force the rural people to seek refuge in Jerusalem (Jeremiah 35:11). Jehoiakim died on December 9, 598 B.C. The circumstances of his death are not entirely clear. The Book of Kings reports simply that Jehoiakim slept with his fathers (2 Kings 24:6). However Jeremiah had a word to say about the death of this tyrant.

Therefore thus says the LORD concerning Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, king of Judah: They shall not lament for him, saying, Ah my brother! or Ah sister! They shall not lament for him, saying, Ah lord! or, Ah his glory! He shall be buried with the burial of an ass, drawn and cast forth beyond the gates of Jerusalem (Jeremiah 22:18-19).

These verses suggest that Jehoiakim was assassinated or at least that his body was dishonored after death. It is also possible that when the Chaldeans arrived in force at Jerusalem to punish the rebellious city they disinterred the corpse and exposed it to the indignities here described (cf. Jeremiah 8:1). Whether by violence or natural death Jehoiakim was dead when the Chaldeans arrived. His young son was left to face the wrath of the mighty Nebuchadnezzar.

C. The Deportation of 597 B.C.

On December 9, 598 B.C. Coniah or Jechoniaz succeeded his father as king of Judah under the throne name of Jehoiachin. He was eighteen[13] when he began to rule and his reign lasted three months and ten days. During most of that short reign the armies of Nebuchadnezzar were encamped about the walls of his capital.[14] Jerusalem was well fortified and could have withstood several months of siege. But Jehoiachin realized that further resistance would only bring upon his people incalculable hardship. Perhaps he hoped that if he surrendered Nebuchadnezzar would allow him to retain his throne as a vassal king. Whatever his motives, Jehoiachin and the leading citizens of Jerusalem walked through the gates of Jerusalem and surrendered to Nebuchadnezzar on March 16, 597 B.C.

[13] 2 Kings 24:8 gives the age of Jehoiachin as eighteen at the time of his accession but 2 Chronicles 36:9-10 gives his age as eight. In Hebrew the number eighteen is written with two words, the word for eight and the word for ten. In the process of copying the manuscript of Chronicles some scribe must have accidentally omitted the word for ten.

[14] The precise day on which the Chaldean forces arrived at Jerusalem cannot be determined. The annals of Nebuchadnezzar indicate that the siege began some time after December 18, 598 B.C.

Nebuchadnezzar did not allow Jehoiachin to become his vassal. Instead he deported the king, the royal family, the princes of the land and all the craftsmen and the smiths (2 Kings 24:14-15). In all, some ten thousand were carried away captive to Babylon, Ezekiel the prophet being among that number. Nebuchadnezzar appointed Mattaniah son of Josiah and uncle of Jehoiachin as his vassal in Jerusalem. Mattaniah took the throne name of Zedekiah (2 Kings 24:17).

D. The Jews in Babylon

Not a great deal is known about those Jews taken captive in 597 B.C. Prior to the fall of Jerusalem in 587 B.C. they seem to have been a very optimistic group. They firmly believed, as did their countrymen back in Palestine, that God would never allow Jerusalem to be destroyed. They believed that their stay in Babylon would be a short one for they were confident that Babylon would be overthrown within two years or so. False prophets appeared on the scene in Babylon boldly predicting such good fortune. On the other hand, Ezekiel labored through that decade before the fall of Jerusalem to smash this delusion and prepare the captives for the inevitable doom of Jerusalem. Jeremiah wrote a letter to the captives in Babylon, urging them to settle down there and prepare for a lengthy sojourn (Jeremiah 29). Some of the Babylonian prophets retaliated by firing back a letter to the high priest in Jerusalem demanding that he silence Jeremiah (Jeremiah 29:24-32).

one should not think of the Babylonian captivity in terms of the rigorous Egyptian bondage which the children of Israel suffered much earlier in their history. To be sure some of the captives like king Jehoiachin were confined for a while (2 Kings 25:27-29).[15] But for the most part the captives in Babylon enjoyed a rather substantial amount of freedom. They built their own houses and cultivated their own lands (Jeremiah 29:5). They were allowed to correspond with Jews in Palestine (Jeremiah 29:24-29). They were free to give their sons and daughters in marriage (Jeremiah 29:6). Apart from one attempt to force the Jews to worship a Babylonian god, (Daniel 3) the Jews also seem to have enjoyed religious freedom. Ezekiel, for example, seems to have been free to preach the word of God among the captives. The elders began to resume their ancient significance and look after the welfare of the people. These elders frequently visited with Ezekiel to discuss religious matters (Ezekiel 8:1; Ezekiel 14:1; Ezekiel 20:1). The priests who had been taken into exile doubtless spent much time instructing the people in the Torah, the written word of God. As a result the Jews in Babylon were more faithful to God than those who remained behind in Palestine, Of course the Jews did not enjoy unlimited religious freedom as certain prophets in Babylon discovered. Jeremiah predicted that two such renegade prophets who had been stirring up the captives with promises of immediate return would be slain by Nebuchadnezzar by being roasted in a fire (Jeremiah 29:21-23).

[15] After 587 B.C. King Zedekiah was taken to Babylon in chains and apparently lived the rest of his days as a prisoner (2 Kings 25:7; Jeremiah 52:11).

It would not be an overstatement to say that the Jews prospered in Babylon. The locations where they were placed by their captors (see Nehemiah 7) were among the most fertile regions in the land. Those Jews who were skilled craftsmen were used to help build and adorn the magnificent city of Babylon. To this Berossus[16] testifies:

[16] Quoted by Josephus, Antiquities xxi. l

.. he (i.e., Nebuchadnezzar) received the entire dominions of his father, and appointed, that when the captives came, they should be placed as colonies, in the most proper places of Babylonia; but then he adorned the temple of Belus, and the rest of the temples, in a magnificent manner, with the spoils he had taken in the war.

As time went on many of the captives became involved in mercantile life. Business documents bearing distinctive Jewish names have been found at various locations in Mesopotamia. Some Jews attained positions of prominence in the Babylon court and later in the Persian court as well. Daniel and his three friends, Ezra, Nehemiah and Mordecai are examples of Jews in high places during the exile. So prosperous had many Jews become by 539 B.C. that they rejected the opportunity to return home which had been granted to them by Cyrus the Great.[17]

[17] Josephus (Antiquities XI. i. 3) states: Yet did many of them stay at Babylon, as not willing to leave their possessions.

Nebuchadnezzar took special care of the young king Jehoiachin and his family. Cuneiform texts have been found which speak of the food stuffs distributed to the king and his five sons.[18] When Amel-Marduk, called in the Bible Evil-Merodach, succeeded his father on the throne, Jehoiachin was released. He was at that time fifty-five years old and had spent thirty-seven of his years, as a captive of Nebuchadnezzar. Josephus affirms that Jehoiachin was honored at this time above all the kings who were captive in Babylon.

[18] Documents from. Old Testament Times, op. cit., pp. 84-86.

He set Jeconiah at liberty and esteemed him amongst his most intimate friends. He also gave him many presents, and made him honorable above the rest of the kings that were in Babylon: for his father had not kept his faith with Jeconiah, when he voluntarily delivered up himself to him, with his wives and children and his whole kindred, for the sake of his country that it might not be taken by siege and utterly destroyed.[19]

[19] Josephus, Antiquities X. xi. 2.

Jehoiachin probably died before the year 538 B.C. when the conqueror of Babylon, Cyrus the Great, issued an edict allowing captive peoples to return to their native lands. Had Jehoiachin been alive at this time he would undoubtedly have been restored to the throne of Judah.

E. The Last King of Judah

The reign of Zedekiah was in many respects one of the most tragic in the history of the people of God. The territory of Judah was diminished and many of the cities of the land were severely damaged. The population had been drastically reduced through deportation, the upper classes being completely depleted. Zedekiah himself seems to have been at the mercy of his princes. The royal court was bent on rebellion. Jeremiah thundered forth against the folly of resistance against Babylon but still the political leaders clung to their suicidal course. A brief insurrection in Babylon sparked renewed hope in the western part of the empire. When a new pharaoh, Psamtik II, came to power in 594 B.C. the little states of Syria-Palestine began to make plans for a concerted effort against Babylon. Ambassadors from Edom, Moab, Ammon, Tyre and Sidon met in Jerusalem to plan the rebellion (Jeremiah 27:3 ff.). The plan must have been uncovered for that very year Zedekiah was summoned to Babylon to reaffirm his allegiance to Nebuchadnezzar (Jeremiah 51:59 ff.). Zedekiah's first major effort to break with Babylon was nipped in the bud.

A still more boastful and aggressive Pharaoh took the throne of Egypt in 588 B.C. Pharaoh Apries, Hophra as he is called in the Bible, actively encouraged a western coalition against Babylon. But the revolt does not seem to have been widespread in Syria-Palestine. So far as is known, only Tyre and Ammon seemed to have committed themselves. Edom and Philistia remained loyal to Babylon.[20] Zedekiah sent ambassadors to Egypt (Ezekiel 17:15) and entered whole-heartedly into the rebellion.

[20] John Bright, A History of Israel (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1959), p. 308.

F. The Siege of Jerusalem

On January 15, 588 B.C. the Babylonian army arrived at the gates of Jerusalem (2 Kings 25:1; Jeremiah 52:4). They blockaded Jerusalem and began to systematically eliminate the outlying strong points. The fortified towns of Lachish and Azekah were among the last to fall to the Chaldeans (Jeremiah 34:7). In 1935 eighteen ostraca which date to this very time were discovered in the ruins of the ancient fortress city of Lachish. For the most part the ostraca are letters, military communiques between a field commander by the name of Hoshayahu and his superior in Lachish whose name was Yaosh. It is not always easy to interpret the meaning of these ancient letters but they apparently reflect the desperate plight of the Judean armies in the face of the advancing armies of Nebuchadnezzar. One letter (Ostracon IV) seems to refer to the capture of the city of Azekah:

We are watching for the signals of Lachish, according to all the signs which my lord bath given, for we cannot see Azekah.

The importance of the Lachish Letters in Old Testament studies is considerable. One must consult the standard works on Biblical archaeology for a thorough discussion of these texts. Briefly the contribution of these documents can be summarized as follows:
1. These ostraca enable scholars to know with certainty the kind of Hebrew language and script Judeans were using in the age of Jeremiah.
2. The Lachish Letters are important for the study of the Hebrew epistolary style of which there are but a few examples in the Old Testament.
3. The Letters provide important information to those engaged in the meticulous work of Old Testament textual criticism. The irregular use of a dot as a word divider and the splitting of words at the end of a line are clues as to how certain scribal errors may have arisen in the standard Hebrew text.
4. The Lachish Letters provide the first external Is raelite witness for the full form of the Tetragrammaton, the name of God. The name YHWH (Yahweh) occurs at least ten times in these documents. In view of the later Jewish superstition about the use of this name for God this usage in ordinary military correspondence is note worthy.

5. The ostraca supply important external evidence for the use of military fire signals in ancient Israel. The same Hebrew word translated signal in Jeremiah 6:1 is used also in Ostracon IV of the Letters.

6. The names which are used in the Lachish Letters are similar to the names which are mentioned in the Book of Jeremiah. While the characters in the Letters are not to be identified with the characters in the book, nonethe less the similarity in names helps confirm the accuracy of Scripture in this respect.
7. These Letters furnish striking confirmation of the political situation that obtained during the last days of the Southern Kingdom, as portrayed by Jeremiah.
8. The Letters furnish the first occurrence in non-Biblical texts of the common Hebrew word for prophet.

The mention of the prophet in the Lachish Letters has fascinated students of Jeremiah. This unnamed prophet has been identified with Uriah whose flight to Egypt and subsequent execution by king Jehoiakim are recorded in Jeremiah 26:20-23. Others believe that the prophet in the Lachish Letters is none other than Jeremiah himself. As a matter of fact, however, the evidence is too ambiguous to allow any positive identification. All that can be deduced from the Lachish material is that this prophet acted as a messenger, carrying a letter (probably accompanied by a verbal message) from a court official, in Jerusalem to one of the officers in the field. There were many prophets contemporary with Jeremiah whose names are known[21] and doubtless many others whose names were not recorded. It is best to regard the prophet of the Lachish Letters as one of these anonymous prophets. The important point to note is that in the Lachish Letters a prophet is actively participating in a military situation even as on occasion prophets did in the Old Testament (2 Kings 3:6 ff.).

[21] E.g., Hananiah (Jeremiah 28:1 ff.), Zedekiah (Jeremiah 29:21), and Shemaiah (Jeremiah 29:31).

In the summer of 588 B.C. an Egyptian army marched northward toward Jerusalem. Pharaoh Hophra was trying to make good his commitment to the states of Syrian-Palestine to aid them if and when they were attacked by the Babylonians. Nebuchadnezzar was forced to temporarily lift the siege of Jerusalem in order to deal with the Egyptian threat although he apparently kept the pressure on the two remaining fortified cities of Judah (Jeremiah 34:7). As the inhabitants of Jerusalem saw the Babylonians break camp and withdraw from their city they must surely have thought that the siege was over. After the initial celebration the first official act was the revocation of the solemn covenant which they had made to release their Hebrew slaves (Jeremiah 34:8-11). Jeremiah, who had resolutely predicted a Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem, must have suffered immeasurable ridicule. It looked as though Jeremiah had been wrong and the political tacticians who had master-minded the rebellion had been right. Still the prophet did not relent., Nebuchadnezzar will return, the prophet declared, and king Zedekiah, along with all his princes, will be given into his hand (Jeremiah 34:17-22).

G. The Destruction of Jerusalem

On July 29, 587 B.C. after a siege of eighteen months, the Babylonians were able to make a breach in the walls of Jerusalem. Zedekiah could see the handwriting on the wall and tried to escape. He and some of his troops fled by night toward the Jordan apparently trying to reach one of the friendly lands beyond the river. He was intercepted by the Babylonian soldiers and taken to Riblah, Nebuchadnezzar's military headquarters for this campaign. There Zedekiah was forced to witness the execution of his sons. This turned out to be the last sight Zedekiah had on earth for the Babylonians blinded him in retaliation for his unfaithfulness to the vassal oath (2 Kings 25:3-7; Jeremiah 52:7-11). Zedekiah was then led away in chains to Babylon where he spent the remaining days of his life. Concerning the death of Zedekiah Jeremiah had predicted:

You shall die in peace; and with the burnings of your fathers, the former kings that were before you, so shall they make a burning for you; and they shall lament you, saying, Ah lord! (Jeremiah 34:5).

According to Josephus, Zedekiah was kept in prison until he died, and then received a royal burial.[22]

[22] Antiquities X. viii. 7.

On August 25, 587 B.C. Nebuzaradan, a high-ranking Babylonian officer, arrived with orders to burn and level Jerusalem (2 Kings 25:3-7; Jeremiah 52:7-11). The massive walls of the city were broken down. The once proud city was left a heap of shouldering ruins. The destruction of the city was followed by further executions at Riblah. The high-ranking priests, civil officers and military commanders were put to death (2 Kings 25:8-12; Jeremiah 52:12-16). At least 832, possibly more, were taken captive at this time (Jeremiah 52:29).

V. RELIGIOUS LIFE UNDER THE LAST FOUR KINGS OF JUDAH

The death of Josiah at Megiddo created a religious as well as political crisis in the laid of Judah. In the ensuing years Judah suffered one setback after another and each tragedy suffered seemed worse than the one before. Such periods of national calamity and crisis always have a dramatic effect on the religious thinking of a people. Several very different reactions to the political circumstances of the day are evident in the writings of Jeremiah and Ezekiel.

1. Some were actually saying that the reforms of king Josiah were the cause of all the misfortune. What we must do, said these people, is return to the pagan practices of Manasseh's day. When Josiah destroyed the pagan shrines he offended the gods. If we ever hope to have peace and prosperity we must win the approval of these offended deities. This attitude is most clearly expressed by the remnant of Jews who fled to Egypt after the death of Gedaliah (Jeremiah 44:15-20); but the attitude must surely have been present before the fall of Jerusalem. Ezekiel makes mention of women weeping for Tammuz at the gates of Jerusalem (Jeremiah 8:14) and of men worshiping the sun at the altar of the Lord (Jeremiah 8:16-18) and elders in dark chambers of the temple offering incense before animal figures (Jeremiah 8:7-13).

2. Others in Jerusalem were saying, The Lord has sent our misfortune. We must invent better ways of se curing His favor. Thus during these years the Temple was crowded with those anxious to offer sacrifices to the Lord (Jeremiah 6:20; Jeremiah 7:21; Jeremiah 14:12).

3. Another attitude that was prevalent was that the Lord had deserted the land. He does not know or care what is taking place (Ezekiel 9:9).

4. Some felt that the Lord was being unjust with the nation. They felt that they were being punished for something their fathers did. This belief was expressed in a popular proverb of the day: The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the teeth of the children have been set on edge (Jeremiah 31:29; Ezekiel 18:2). Some boldly were declaring that the ways of the Lord were not fair and just (Ezekiel 18:25).

5. In spite of the difficulties which the nation was experiencing, most of the inhabitants of Jerusalem and the captives in Babylon were optimistic. The Lord was on their side, He would not allow Jerusalem to be captured by the Babylonians and he certainly would not permit the Temple to be destroyed. Had not the Lord intervened to rescue Jerusalem from the armies of the Assyrian Sennacherib a century or so before? Surely, they thought, the present sufferings must be but a prelude to a glorious recovery. So in Babylon (Jeremiah 29:8-9; Jeremiah 29:21-32) as well as in Jerusalem (Jeremiah 28:1-4) false prophets were predicting that within two years the yoke of Babylon would be broken and the captives would be returning home. Even as late as 587 B.C., when the Babylonians were actually beginning the attack against Jerusalem, Zedekiah seems to have confidently expected some miraculous deliverance (Jeremiah 21:2).

6. Another attitude, that of Jeremiah, Ezekiel and a small minority of the populace, needs to be noted. These people were saying, We are getting just what we had coming. Things are not going to get better. Only a fundamental change of conduct and heart will prevent the fall of our nation (Jeremiah 36:2-3; Jeremiah 15:1-4).

VI. THE AFTERMATH OF 587 B.C.
A. The Administration of Gedaliah

Following the destruction of Jerusalem Nebuchadnezzar appointed a certain Gedaliah to govern the pitiful remnant of the nation. Gedaliah was the son of the powerful prince Ahikam who had once intervened in a public trial to save Jeremiah from death (Jeremiah 26:24). Judging from a seal found in the ruins of Lachish, Gedaliah himself had occupied the chief civil post in Judah during the reign of Zedekiah.[23] It is not unreasonable to assume that Gedaliah had been appointed to this high position by Nebuchadnezzar in 597 B.C. because of pro-Babylonian sympathies. If this hypothesis is correct then it becomes clear why Gedaliah was selected to govern the territory of Judah after the destruction of Jerusalem and the deportation of Zedekiah.

[23] Documents from Old Testament Times op. cit., p. 223.

Following the catastrophe of 587 B.C. Judah was a ravished country. Archaeological evidence has disproved the older critical contention that there was no drastic break in the continuity of life in Judah after 587 B.C. and that the exile only involved a few nobles. Albright has found no town in Palestine which was continually occupied during the exilic period.[24] Some towns like Beth-shemesh and Kiriath-sepher were never rebuilt after the destruction of 187 B.C. Since Jerusalem was in ruins, Gedaliah was forced to govern his province from the town of Mizpah. This town, located a few miles north of Jerusalem, had apparently been spared the destruction visited upon the capital.

[24] W. F. Albright, The Archeology of Palestine (Baltimore. 223. Penguin Books, 1960), pp. 141-42.

Judah was a humiliated country. Those who were left in the land were forced to purchase the bare necessities of life from their Babylonian conquerors (Lamentations 54). They had to seek their harvest at the peril of their lives from marauding Bedouins (Lamentations 5:9). To add to the misery, a famine came upon the land (Lamentations 5:10). All segments of the population had been put to shame. The women had been ravished, the leaders dishonored, the young men humiliated and the children oppressed (Lamentations 5:11-13). Wild animals began to move in and haunt the ruins of the once proud cities of Judah (Lamentations 5:18).

The territory over which Gedaliah was appointed governor was greatly reduced in size. Judah was no longer a kingdom; it was a Babylonian medinah or province. Since the Jews were scarcely in a position to defend their borders, neighboring peoples began to make encroachments upon their territory. The Samaritans pressed in on Judah from the north, the Philistine from the west and the Ammonites and Moabites from the east. The medinah no longer included the Negev region to the south which was now occupied by the Edomites. Hebron too seems to have fallen into the hands of the descendants of Esau. Beth-zur and Tekoah, roughly seventeen miles south of Jerusalem, seems to mark the limits of Jewish possession in the south.[25]

[25] Norman K. Gottwald, All Kingdoms of the Earth (New York: Harper & Row, 1959), p. 287.

After the Babylonian destruction Judah was also a depopulated country. Few of the nobility were left in the land (Jeremiah 41:10; Jeremiah 43:6; Lamentations 1:4; Lamentations 2:10). For the most part, only the poor farming class remained (Jeremiah 39:10; Jeremiah 40:10; Jeremiah 52:16; 2 Kings 25:12). Babylonian policy, unlike that of Assyria, did not provide for the repopulation of conquered areas. As the situation in Judah began to stabilize, many of the Jews who had taken refuge in surrounding lands began to filter back to Judah (Jeremiah 40:12). Most of these people seemed to have congregated around Mizpah, the provincial capital, where Gedaliah, with the aid of a small Babylonian garrison, was able to maintain some semblance of order.

B. The Assassination of Gedaliah

Gedaliah did not have the support of all of the remnant. The old desire for independence from Babylon had not been squelched when Jerusalem was destroyed. Gedaliah was warned by some of his associates that an ultra right wing patriot named Ishmael was plotting to assassinate him. This plot was backed, if not instigated, by the king of Ammon who no doubt had a covetous eye on the territory of Gedaliah (Jeremiah 40:13-16) Ishmael himself was of the royal line and perhaps had ambitions of proclaiming himself king.

For whatever reasons, Gedaliah chose to ignore the warning concerning the assassination plot. As Ishmael and ten other princes were sitting at the banquet of Gedaliah they rose up and slew him, the Jews with him and the Babylonian garrison as well. Josephus explains the ease with which the plot was executed by noting that those in attendance at the feast were drunk.[26] While the assassination of Gedaliah was still undiscovered Ishmael stained his hands with other blood. A band of eighty pilgrims on their way to the site of the ruined Temple was lured into Mizpah. Seventy of them were murdered for no apparent reason. Ten of the pilgrims were spared when they bribed Ishmael with treasures they had hidden in the fields (Jeremiah 41:4-9). Ishmael's bloody deed accomplished nothing for himself. On the other hand, at one stroke it wiped out the program of Judean reconstruction so ably begun under Gedaliah.

[26] Antiquities, X. ix. 4.

Having completed his dastardly deeds, Ishmael gathered up the rest of the people in Mizpah including the royal princesses and probably Jeremiah and fled toward Ammon (Jeremiah 41:10). Once again Ishmael's motives are obscure. Perhaps he planned to use these people as hostages. At any rate, when news reached Johanan, one of the loyal guerrilla captains in the field. he set out in hot pursuit of Ishmael and his band of cut-throats. Though not able to engage Ishmael in battle, Johanan was able to rescue the hostages (Jeremiah 41:11-18).

C. Emigration and Deportation

The Judean remnant was stunned and scared after the death of Gedaliah. They were fearful that the Babylonians would return to avenge the deaths of their governor and their garrison. Their first thought was to flee the land and they immediately started southward toward Egypt. At Bethlehem the remnant made camp. The leaders belatedly decided to consult with the prophet of God, Jeremiah, before continuing their journey. Jeremiah agreed to pray for a divine relegation concerning the fate of the group, and after ten anxious days he was prepared to speak unto them the word of the Lord. The remnant expected the Lord to rubber stamp their plans to emigrate to Egypt. Instead the prophet instructed them to remain in Judah in order that everything might be well with them. If they proceed to Egypt, there they will face the very violence at the hands of the Chaldeans from which they are fleeing. The scared remnant refused to listen. For some unexplained reason they accused Jeremiah of having been influenced by his scribe Baruch. Under the leadership of Johanan and the other guerilla captains a great portion of the people emigrated to Egypt and Jeremiah and Baruch were forced to accompany them.

In 582 B.C. the armies of Nebuchadnezzar did arrive in Judah. For the fourth time the great king deported Jews to Babylon, at least 745 persons on this particular occasion (Jeremiah 52:30). The province of Judah was then abolished and the territory was incorporated into the neighboring province of Samaria. At this time Nebuchadnezzar also terminated the monarchies of Ammon and Moab[27] and, according to Josephus, made an attack against Egypt. Concerning this campaign Josephus relates the following:[28]

[27] Yohanan Aharoni, The Land of the Bible, trans. A. F. Rainey (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1967), p. 354.

[28] Antiquities, X. ix. 7.

.. and when he had brought all these nations under subjection, he fell upon Egypt, in order to overthrow it; and he slew the king that then reigned, and set up another; and he took those Jews that were there captives, and led them away to Babylon.

It is most difficult to reconcile this Egyptian campaign of 582 B.C. with the prophecies of Jeremiah and the known history of Egypt. If an Egyptian invasion was undertaken at this time it certainly must have been of a very minor nature. Josephus is most certainly wrong in asserting that Nebuchadnezzar slew the king of Egypt and put his own vassal on the throne in 582 B.C. Most scholars believe that Josephus is confused on his dates. That Nebuchadnezzar did invade Egypt in his thirty-seventh year (568 B.C.) is an established fact. Perhaps Josephus has this later campaign in mind. It is also possible that Nebuchadnezzar made two campaigns against Egypt, one in 582 and one in 568 B.C.

How long had Gedaliah governed the land prior to his assassination? The question is not easily answered. The Scripture simply relates that the murder took place in the seventh month (Jeremiah 41:1). Some scholars argue that this is the seventh month of the eleventh year of Zedekiah (587 B.C.). According to this interpretation Gedaliah's term of office was about two months in duration. However there are certain bits of evidence in the narrative which would lead one to believe that the governorship of Gedaliah may have been somewhat longer than a matter of months. (1) The account states that the Jewish fugitives who returned to Palestine during the administration of Gedaliah settled down to agriculture and gathered wine and summer fruits plentifully (Jeremiah 40:12). This suggests a period at least from the fall of 587 B.C. to the summer harvest of 586 B.C. It would be hard to imagine an abundant harvest without the vines and fruit trees being tended through at least one season. (2) Gedaliah's confidence in the loyalty of his murderer may be more readily understood if some months and even years had passed during which Ishmael had faithfully served his governor. (3) It is difficult to resist connecting the murder of Gedaliah with the deportation of Judeans in 582 B.C. For these reasons it seems best to regard the governorship of Gedaliah as lasting some two or three years. Information concerning the Jewish settlements in Egypt is not nearly so extensive as one might wish. The Scriptures do relate that the fugitives settled in Tahpanhes and Pathros in southern Egypt and in Migdol near the famous city of Memphis (Jeremiah 44:1). Jeremiah continued to preach to the remnant. He warned them that since they had failed to obey the word of the Lord, calamity would overtake them in Egypt. More specifically he threatened that Nebuchadnezzar would come to Egypt, conquer it and deport some of the Jews to Babylon. As a sign that these things would come to pass, Jeremiah predicted that Pharaoh Hophra, whose protection they had sought, would fall into the hands of his enemies. History records that Hophra was defeated in 570 B.C. by a Greek colony of Libya in North Africa. He then faced a mutiny in his army led by Amasis. In the short civil war which ensued Amasis was able to defeat Hophra and take him captive. At first Amasis treated his royal prisoner kindly, but later handed him over to the fury of the populace. Hophra was slain in 568 B.C.[29] That same year Nebuchadnezzar launched a military campaign against Egypt. The details of this invasion and its outcome cannot be reconstructed from the fragmentary inscription which alludes to it.[30]

[29] Sir Alan Gardiner, Egypt of the Pharaohs (New York: Oxford University Press, 1966), pp. 361-2.

[30] Ancient Near Eastern Texts, op. cit., p. 308.

VII. THE FALL OF BABYLON

The glorious reign of Nebuchadnezzar came to an end in 562 B.C. His brilliant reign of forty-three years was followed by that of several inept successors. His son Amel-Marduk occupied the throne for two years before being assassinated. Neriglissar,[31] a son-in-law of Nebuchadnezzar showed great promise as a ruler but died unexpectedly after a reign of four years. Labashi-Marduk, his minor son, lasted only a few months before being assassinated. Nabonidus, a harmless scholar-type individual, was placed on the throne by the princes of the realm. By his devotion to the ancient moon god Sin, Nabonidus en; raged the powerful priesthood of Murduk, patron god of Babylon. In the seventh year of his reign for reasons unknown Nabonidus left Babylon for the oasis of Tema in the middle of the vast Arabian desert. He left affairs at home in the hands of Belshazzar who, in the absence of his father, was de facto king.

[31] The Babylonian prime Nergal-sharezer mentioned in Jeremiah 39:3; Jeremiah 39:13 has been identified with this Neriglissar.

While Nabonidus was puttering about in Tema, neglecting the affairs of empire, a vigorous new force appeared on the scene in the ancient Near East. Cyrus the Persian, a vassal king of Astyages king of Media, rebelled against his overlord. By 550 B.C. Cyrus had seized Ecbatana, dethroned Astyages and had taken control of the vast Median empire. In a series of brilliant military campaigns Cyrus swept across Upper Mesopotamia and Syria to attack the major ally of Nabonidus, Croesus of Lydia. In a daring mid-winter raid Cyrus surprised and subdued the Lydian capital of Sardis (546 B.C.). Babylon alone stood between Cyrus and world conquest. A showdown between the two powers was. inevitable.
The activities of Cyrus during the next five years are not clear. Doubtless he was consolidating his territorial gains and perhaps expanding his domain to the east. But in October 539 B.C. Cyrus began to make his move against Nabonidus. All of the details of the fall of Babylon are not clear. The cuneiform sources refer to a bloody battle at Opis on the Tigris river north of Babylon. Two weeks later Ugbaru, general of Cyrus-' army, entered Babylon without battle.[32] The seventy years of Babylonian world dominion prophesied by Jeremiah (Jeremiah 25:11-12; Jeremiah 29:10) had come to an end.

[32] Documents from Old Testament Times, op. cit., p. 82. Herodotus (I. 191) and Xenophon (Cyropaedia VII. 5), later Greek historians, relate a different version of the fall of Babylon. For a harmonization of these data see James E. Smith, The Fall of Babylon in History and Prophecy, unpublished B.D. Thesis, The Cincinnati Bible Seminary, 1963.

REVIEW OF CHAPTER ONE

I. Names to Remember.

The name of the Assyrian king who invaded Judah in the days of Hezekiah.

The name of the prophet who reassured Hezekiah during the time of the Assyrian invasion.

The name of the Babylonian king who sent an embassy to Hezekiah.

The name of the most wicked of all kings of Judah.

The name of the king who burned the bones upon pagan altars.

The name of the high priest in the days of Josiah.

The name of the prophetess who confirmed the authenticity of the newly discovered law book.

The name of the great prophet of God who began his ministry shortly before the reformation of Josiah.

The name of the Egyptian pharaoh who slew Josiah at the pass of Megiddo.

10.

Name the king deported to Egypt.

11.

The name of the son of Josiah placed on the throne of Judah by Pharaoh Necho.

12.

Name of the youthful king carried away to Babylon.

13.

Name of the Chaldean king who on a number of occasions deported Jews to Babylon.

14.

Name of the Chaldean officer who actually destroyed Jerusalem.

15.

Name of the king who was blinded by the Chaldeans and carried away in chains.

II. Important Numbers.

Number of Assyrians slain in one night.

Number of extra years of life granted to Hezekiah.

Number of major deportations to Babylon.

Number of months which Jerusalem endured the Chaldean siege.

Number of the sons of Josiah who ruled Judah.

6. Number of Jews deported to Babylon in 597 B.C.

III. Important Dates.

The date of Sennacherib's invasion against Hezekiah.

The date when the lost book was discovered in the Temple.

The date when Nineveh was captured by the Medes and Babylonians.

The date of the battle of Carchemish.

5. The date of the first deportation to Babylon.
6.

The date of the deportation of Jehoiachin and Ezekiel.

The date of the fall of Jerusalem.

IV. True and False. If the answer is false, correct it.

Gedaliah was appointed king by Nebuchadnezzar after the capture of Jerusalem.

Gedaliah was assassinated by Ishmael, who was of royal descent.

Gedaliah's capital appears to have been at Mizpah.

Nebuchadnezzar's final invasion of Palestine occurred in 587 B.C. when he captured Jerusalem.

There were at least four deportations of Jews by Nebuchadnezzar.

When the Jews fled to Egypt after the assassination of Gedaliah, Jeremiah was left behind.

There is some evidence that Nebuchadnezzar invaded and partially conquered Egypt.

There is evidence that while the Babylonian invasions destroyed Jerusalem, the other cities of Judah went unmolested.

For the most part the Jews in Babylonia were treated with extreme cruelty.

10.

Both Ezekiel and Daniel ministered to the captives in Babylonia.

11.

King Jehoiachin was released by Nebuchadnez zar's son Amel-Marduk (Evil-Merodach).

12.

As yet no record of Jehoiachin's captivity has been unearthed in Babylonia.

13.

For several years of his reign Nabonidus was absent from his capital.

14.

Cyrus began his rise to power by revolting against Astyages the Mede.

15.

The cuneiform sources state that Babylon was entered without battle.

CHAPTER TWO

JEREMIAH: THE MAN AND THE PROPHET

The year 627 was a crucial one in the history of redemption for that was the year that God ordained a timid young priest to the prophetic ministry. That young man was destined to become the dominant figure of redemptive history during that eventful half-century from 625-575 B.C. What kind of man did God choose to vocalize the final divine appeal to the condemned nation of Judah? How did God mold and shape the raw material which was Jeremiah of Anathoth?

I. JEREMIAH: THE MAN

In the opening verse of the Book of Jeremiah the author clearly identifies himself, his family, his lineage and his home town. This is about all that is known of Jeremiah prior to his call to the public office of a prophet. But these few notices can be amplified by deductions drawn from the totality of Jeremiah's writings. What then can be said about Jeremiah the man?

A. His Name

A great deal of importance was attached to names in the Old Testament periodmuch more importance than is generally the case today. Modern parents when naming the new born usually think in terms of the length of the name or euphonious sound; the ancients always considered the background and meaning of a name. The name was to reflect the personality, the accomplishments, the goals, the aspirations of a man. For this reason a man in antiquity might change his name at some critical juncture of his life.
On the meaning of the names of most of the important Bible characters scholars are in agreement. No such unanimity exists when it comes to the name of Jeremiah. The basic problem is in ascertaining the Hebrew root word from which the name Jeremiah has been constructed. Some scholars see as the basis of this name a Hebrew root (rum) which means to arise, elevate or exalt. According to this interpretation the name Jeremiah would mean the Lord exalts or exalted of the Lord or even the Lord establishes. Others suggest that the name is derived from a Hebrew root (ramah) which means to cast or hurl. The name Jeremiah would then mean the Lord throws down or perhaps the Lord hurls forth.[33]

[33] Still another interpretation of the name Jeremiah traces it back to an Assyrian root ramu meaning to loosen. The name would then mean the Lord loosens (the womb).

The famous prophet who is the subject of this study was not the only one to wear the name Jeremiah. Indeed the name seems to have been a common one and evidence of its use can be found in several periods of Old Testament history. At least seven other Jeremiahs are mentioned in Scripture. A Jeremiah was one of the leaders in the tribe of Manasseh (1 Chronicles 5:24). Three of David's mighty men bore this name (1 Chronicles 12:4; 1 Chronicles 12:10; 1 Chronicles 12:13). One of the fathers of the Rechabites was named Jeremiah (Jeremiah 35:3). A Jeremiah of Libnah was the maternal grandfather of Jehoahaz king of Judah (2 Kings 23:31). One of the leaders of the restoration community who signed a covenant to walk according to the law of Moses was called Jeremiah (Nehemiah 10:2).

B. His Family

What kind of family did Jeremiah have? Was he surrounded in those early, formative years by piety and godliness? Caution is in order when one goes beyond the explicit testimony of Scripture and the Word of God does not supply any specific information about Jeremiah's family life in Anathoth. Still it is best to think of Jeremiah as coming from a very devout family, one steeped in the religious traditions of Israel and committed unequivocally to the true God. In his sermons Jeremiah reflects the spirit of the great prophets who preceded him. The words of these men of God were part of the fabric of his personality. He surely had been instructed in the Scriptures in his most tender years.

His familiarity with the ideas of the older prophets, especially with those of Hosea, appears so soon after his call, and that call came to him so early in life, that we may safely assume that he had known the prophetic writings and assimilated the principles of their teaching before he had reached the age of manhood.[34]

[34] John Skinner, Prophecy and Religion (Cambridge: University Press, 1963), p. 21.

Since at the time of his call in the thirteenth year of Josiah (627 B.C.) he was still a very young man (Jeremiah 1:6), Jeremiah must have been born about the year of 645 B.C. This would fall near the end of the long but notorious reign of king Manasseh. Perhaps the name of his fatherHilkiahwas more than a mere name; perhaps it was the family credo. The name Hilkiah means the Lord is my portion. During the reign of Manasseh, when apostasy was the order of the day and Assyrian idolatry was rampant through the land, this family had taken its stand. Though others round about were chasing after the latest fad in deities this family had boldly declared the Lord is my portion. Hilkiah, like Joshua before him had proclaimed to the world as for me and my house, we shall serve the Lord (Joshua 24:15).

Is it mere coincidence that the high priest during the time of Josiah's reformationthe one who discovered the lost law bookbore the same name as Jeremiah's father? Is the father of Jeremiah the famous high priest Hilkiah? Scholars are practically unanimous in dismissing this identification. one cannot, of course, be dogmatic about the matter since the name Hilkiah seems to have been fairly common in this period (cf. Jeremiah 29:3). But ifand it must necessarily remain just thatif Jeremiah was the son of the high priest his ministry is placed in new perspective. One true prophet of God, Urijah, was executed during the reign of Jehoiakim (Jeremiah 26:23-24). Though Jeremiah had some narrow escapes in the reign of this king, he survived. What made the difference? Could it be because Jeremiah belonged to one of the most prominent families in the land? Jeremiah had friends in high places;[35] he was treated with respect (for the most part) by the successive rulers of Judah and the princes of Babylon. While it is impossible to say with certainly that Hilkiah the high priest was in fact the father of Jeremiah the thought is not impossible. As the son of a priestpossibly the high priestJeremiah no doubt frequently made the short trip to Jerusalem. There in the Temple he had opportunity to observe, to ponder, to meditate and to contemplate the day when he would enter the active priesthood. Perhaps it was a high view of the priesthood, formed during his boyhood days, that made Jeremiah so bitter against the worthless clergy of his adult years.

[35] Another interesting coincidence is that the uncle of Jeremiah (Jeremiah 32:7) and the husband of Huldah the prophetess (2 Kings 22:14) both were named Shallum. If these two Shallums are in fact one and the same person, Jeremiah is again linked through relatives to the Josian reformation.

A number of questions concerning the family of Jeremiah might be asked but it would be useless to speculate about the answers. One point is at least probable: Jeremiah's family must have been financially well off. This conclusion is based on the fact that Jeremiah was able to purchase the forfeited estate of a bankrupt kinsman (Jeremiah 32:1-15).[36] As it is hard to imagine Jeremiah receiving any wages for his prophetic ministry, his means must have come through inheritance.

[36] Gleason Archer, A Survey of Old Testament Introduction (Chicago: Moody, 1964), p. 348.

C. His Home Town

Jeremiah grew up in the town of Anathoth located about three miles northeast of Jerusalem. This town dates to pre-Israelite times and was named by the original Canaanite inhabitants after their goddess Anath. Following the Conquest under Joshua, Anathoth, along with thirteen other cities in the territories of Judah, Simeon and Benjamin, was set aside for priests (Joshua 21:13-19; 1 Chronicles 6:57-60). After the Temple was built by Solomon the priests would go up to Jerusalem at regular intervals to officiate in the religious ceremonies. Anathoth survives in the modern -Anata.

To Anathoth Solomon banished the high priest Abiathar (1 Kings 2:26). Abiathar was the last high priest of the line of Eli who had served in that office during the last days of the Judges when the Tabernacle was located at Shiloh. Now since Abiathar retired to Anathoth and since Jeremiah is said to have come from Anathoth (Jeremiah 1:1) some commentators have jumped to the conclusion that Jeremiah was a descendant of Abiathar. Since Abiathar came from the priestly family of Ithamar, and since Hilkiah, the high priest of the Josian reformation, was of the priestly family of Eleazer, Jeremiah's father could not have been the famous Hilkiah. This argument is based on the unproved assumption that only descendants of Ithamar lived in Anathoth. But is this assumption justified? Could not descendants of both Ithamar (Abiathar) and Eleazer (Hilkiah) have lived in this priestly town?

Like Paul the apostle to the Gentiles, Jeremiah the prophet to the nations (Gentiles) was a Benjaminite. It is repeatedly emphasized that Anathoth, though included in the kingdom of Judah and so close to its capital, was in the territory of Benjamin (Jeremiah 1:1, Jeremiah 32:8; Jeremiah 37:12). Ethnologically Benjamin belonged to Israel, the Northern Kingdom. Perhaps this helps to explain Jeremiah's undying affection for the Rachel-tribes of the north and his longing for the homecoming of their exiled children (Jeremiah 3:12 f; Jeremiah 31:4-6; Jeremiah 31:15-20).[37]

[37] Skinner, op. cit., p. 19.

In the rural setting of Anathoth Jeremiah was exposed to nature and profoundly influenced by it. His book reveals Jeremiah as a true outdoorsman. He observed and listened and learned from the animals and plants. He was familiar with the agricultural processes of his time and no doubt had spent many hard but happy days sowing, reaping and winnowing the grain as well as laboring in the vintage. Of course nature allusions can be found in other prophetic books; but Skinner is probably correct in his opinion that we may find in Jeremiah's poetry traces of a closer sympathy with the life of nature than in any other prophet.[38] An investigation of the nature metaphors and illustrations in the Book of Jeremiah tends to substantiate this evaluation.

[38] Ibid., p. 22.

Numerous allusions to animals are found in the Book of Jeremiah. The enemies of Judah are compared to lions (Jeremiah 2:15; Jeremiah 4:7; Jeremiah 5:6), wolves (Jeremiah 5:6), leopards, (Jeremiah 5:6) and serpents (Jeremiah 8:17). Jeremiah sees a picture of backsliding Judah in the young camel running helter-skelter in a trackless waste (Jeremiah 2:23) and in the wild ass in heat desperately searching for a mate (Jeremiah 2:24). Adulterers are compared to well-fed, lusty stallions neighing after the wives of their neighbors (Jeremiah 5:8). Riches accumulated by unjust means are as precarious as the eggs of the partridge which has so many natural enemies (Jeremiah 17:11). It is as impossible for Judah to change her disposition towards God as for a leopard to change his spots (Jeremiah 13:23). Judah, like a lion in the forest, has roared against God (Jeremiah 12:8) and thus God must bring judgment upon the nation. Judah has become a strange speckled bird which is about to be attacked by other birds of prey (Jeremiah 12:9). The beasts and birds will feed upon the carcasses of those who fall in battle (Jeremiah 7:33; Jeremiah 15:3). The land will become desolate, forsaken by birds and beasts alike (Jeremiah 4:25; Jeremiah 9:10). However the ruined cities of Judah will become a lair for jackals (Jeremiah 9:11; Jeremiah 10:22). Perhaps the most striking animal figure employed in the book is that of the tender hind forsaking her young and the wild ass desperately sniffing the air for the scent of water during a terrible famine (Jeremiah 14:5-6). Even nature suffers when mankind sins against God!

Jeremiah's allusions to plants and trees are almost as numerous as his mention of various animals. In several passages he pictures the withering of vegetation during periods of famine (e.g., Jeremiah 7:20). He compares those who put their trust in God to a tree planted by a stream of water (Jeremiah 17:6-7). Once Israel had been as a green olive tree; but shortly all the branches of that fair tree would be broken off and burned (Jeremiah 11:16). Jeremiah's favorite figure is that of the vine. Israel is God's vineyard (Jeremiah 12:10) in which once flourished a choice vine. But that vine has now become degenerate and worthless (Jeremiah 2:21). Hence the once-proud vine must be stripped of its branches (Jeremiah 5:10). The remnant which will survive the destruction of Judah is compared to the few miserable grapes overlooked by grape gatherers (Jeremiah 6:9; Jeremiah 8:13).

Jeremiah was also fond of metaphors and illustrations drawn from the area of agriculture. He pictures the consternation of farmers in the midst of a national drought (Jeremiah 14:4). The positive aspect of his ministry is compared to planting (Jeremiah 1:10). In several passages he emphasizes the contrast between the barren wilderness through which God had earlier led the Israelites and the plentiful land into which the Lord had brought his people (e.g., Jeremiah 2:6-7). Israel in the early days of her national history was looked upon by God with the same delight in which a farmer looks upon the first fruits of his increase (Jeremiah 2:3). Judah is shortly to reap the disappointing harvest of sin (Jeremiah 12:13). The tempest of divine judgment, unlike the gentle winnowing wind, will sweep down upon them (Jeremiah 4:11); the sinful people will be scattered like worthless stubble (Jeremiah 13:24). For this reason Jeremiah earnestly pleads with his people to break up their fallow groundto prepare the soil of their heartthat the seed of the word of God might take root in their lives (Jeremiah 4:3).

Still other striking nature figures are to be found in the Book of Jeremiah. In a figure reminiscent of Isaiah 53 the prophet compares himself to a gentle lamb being led to the slaughter (Jeremiah 11:9). He places in juxtaposition the contrariness of sinful man and the unfailing obedience of the migratory birds to the law of their creator (Jeremiah 8:7), Jeremiah makes a similar point when he refers to the perennial streams which flow down the sides of the snowcapped Lebanon mountains (Jeremiah 18:14.) and to the tumultuous oceans which do not pass beyond their appointed bounds (Jeremiah 5:22). Even inanimate nature complied fully with the will of the Creator. Of all the creation only man had the audacity to violate the God-ordained principles of conduct. Jeremiah pictures the wicked men of Judah as fowlers who set their trap to catch men (Jeremiah 5:26-27). The enemies of Judah are compared to fishers and hunters who will not allow any of their victims to escape (Jeremiah 16:16). In one of his most humorous figures Jeremiah compares the pagan idols to a harmless, lifeless scarecrow in the middle of a cucumber field (Jeremiah 10:5). On the other hand the God of Israel is the One who makes the vapors ascend from the earth and creates the lightning, wind and rain (Jeremiah 10:13).

D. His Times

In order to appreciate the ministry of Jeremiah one must thoroughly understand the times in which he lived. The public life of Jeremiah spans a period marked by political, social and religious changes of the utmost significance. This is particularly true of the years 627 to 587 B.C., years of black disaster which culminated in the greatest catastrophe which had as yet befallen the nation.

1. Political conditions

Jeremiah lived in a crucial period of ancient Near Eastern history. It was a period characterized by political instability. Judah in this period was but a petty state caught in the middle of the death struggle between the superpowers, Egypt to the south and Mesopotamia to the north. Jeremiah heard the news of the fall of Nineveh and watched as the great Assyrian colossus crumbled to the ground. He observed the rise of the Chaldean empire from its first defiance of Assyria until its smashing triumph at Carchemish in 605 B.C. He witnessed the desperate efforts of Pharaoh Necho to halt the inevitable Chaldean advance and saw the proud armies of Egypt flee in disarray before Nebuchadnezzar. He saw the armies of Chaldea smash through the feeble defenses of the land and force the surrender of the young monarch on the throne in Jerusalem. He saw thousands of his countrymenthe best citizens of the nationdeported to far-off Babylon. He saw the Chaldean battering rams systematically reduce the walls of Jerusalem to rubble. He saw the wrath of Nebuchadnezzar poured out on the faithless vassal king of Jerusalem as well as some of his officials. He saw a puppet government established in his land and then saw the government wiped out by ruthless extremists. The political turmoil and day to day uncertainty demanded the leadership of a man with unwavering confidence in the God of history. Jeremiah was that man.

2. Religious conditions

Religiously, Judah was bankrupt during the times of Jeremiah. Under Manasseh (686-642 B.C.) the Assyrian religion had invaded Judah and had been accepted by the large masses of the people. Idolatry was rampant (Jeremiah 2:10 f; Jeremiah 8:2; Jeremiah 10:2 ff.; Jeremiah 44:15-19); pagan rites corrupted the worship of God at the altars of the Temple (Jeremiah 7:30). The gallant effort of Josiah to bring about a reformation in the land did not have any effect on the hearts of the people. While the external signs of pagan worship were temporarily removed by royal decree, the king was unable to rekindle within his people a genuine and lasting love for the Lord. This is not to imply that the Jews ceased to perform the outward acts of worship to God. Throngs of people attended the great festivals at the Temple in Jerusalem. The altar there never lacked for sacrificial animals; the finest incense was utilized by the priests (Jeremiah 6:20, Jeremiah 7:21). On occasion the people even fasted and prayed (Jeremiah 14:12). But all of this was nothing more than mechanical ritual. To make matters worse, the people were living with the religious fictionpromoted by their professional theologiansthat they as the people of God were exempt from judgment and destruction. They had been repeatedly assured by their learned prophets and priests that the Lord would never allow Jerusalem much less His Temple to be destroyed. With his threats of divine retribution Jeremiah was the voice of one crying in the wilderness of theological delusion.

3. Moral conditions

Jeremiah lived in corrupt times. In Jeremiah 7:9 the prophet summarizes the vices of his day: stealing, murder, adultery and false swearing. The House of God had virtually become a den of robbers (Jeremiah 7:11). Human life was cheap. Infants were offered up as sacrifices in the valley of Hinnom (Jeremiah 7:31; Jeremiah 19:4-6). A faithful prophet of God was hunted down and executed by the tyrant Jehoiakim for no greater crime than preaching the word of the Lord (Jeremiah 26:20-23). The Baal cult with its lewd and licentious worship had taken its toll. When Jeremiah refers several times to the harlotry being committed on the hills and under the green trees he is referring to the sexual orgies which passed for the worship of Baal (e.g., Jeremiah 2:20; Jeremiah 3:6; Jeremiah 3:13). The men of Judah brazenly chased after the wives of their neighbors (Jeremiah 5:7-9; Jeremiah 9:2). Deceit and lying were so common that no one could be trusted, not even members of one's own family (Jeremiah 9:2-6). The people had completely lost their sense of sin (Jeremiah 2:27). Wickedness prevailed everywhere and the national leadership seemed unconcerned (Jeremiah 10:21).

4. Social conditions

Socially, Judah was in turmoil throughout the days of Jeremiah. The reformation of Josiah brought the first major upheaval to the society in which he lived. For over fifty years Judah had been a docile vassal state of the Assyrian empire. With the assassination of Amon in 640 B.C. a wave of nationalistic fervor swept over the land. As the reform movement got into high gear tremendous changes took place in Judah in a relatively short period of time. Idolatrous priests were executed (2 Kings 23:5). Other priests had their ministries restricted to the Temple in Jerusalem in compliance with the Mosaic law of the central sanctuary (2 Kings 23:8-9). Wizards and witches were driven from the land (2 Kings 23:24). While Josiah's actions were necessary and commendatory they were nonetheless divisive. Those who lost power or property or prestige during the reforms had their followers. No doubt the population was divided into camps of those who supported and those who opposed the royal reformation.

Another socio-economic upheaval took place when Pharaoh Necho placed a vassal king on the throne of Jerusalem in 609 B.C. As the appointee of the Pharaoh Jehoiakim was responsible for raising an enormous annual tribute (2 Chronicles 36:3; 2 Kings 23:35). Though there is no direct evidence of it, there can be little doubt that the Egyptian levies put a severe strain on the economy of the tiny country. Jehoiakim himself added to the misery of his people by his irresponsible building projects. He squandered the meager resources of his kingdom in erecting a magnificent but unnecessary new palace. When his funds were exhausted citizens were pressed into the royal service to work on the project without remuneration. Jeremiah had nothing but contempt for this petty tyrant (Jeremiah 22:13).

The deportation of 597 B.C. created yet another social upheaval in the ministry of Jeremiah. When the king, the queen mother, the high officials, leading citizens, together with an enormous booty, were taken by Babylon, the nation again faced social and economic chaos. It must have been very difficult for society to function normally after all the craftsmen and skilled laborers had been carried away to Babylon. The deportation created a dearth of leadership in the land. Zedekiah the vassal king was a weak, though seemly well-intentioned, character. But he could not or would not stand up to the princes who had become the real power in the kingdom. These royal advisers were men of small vision, low character and stubborn will.

The final great social upheaval came during and immediately after the Chaldean siege of Jerusalem in 588-587 B.C. Children were orphaned and wives made widows during the prolonged defense of the city (Lamentations 5:3). Faced with starvation and death mothers abandoned their children (Lamentations 2:11) or, even worse, ate them (Lamentations 2:20; Lamentations 4:10). When the city finally fell the women were humiliated (Lamentations 5:11). All class distinctions were abolished; elders, priests, princes and common people were treated with equal disrespect and cruelty (Lamentations 4:16; Lamentations 5:12). Young men were forced to push mill stones like animals; children staggered beneath loads of wood for the campfires of the enemy (Lamentations 5:13). The tattered survivors of Jerusalem's fall had to barter with the Chaldeans for water and wood for cooking fires (Lamentations 5:4). All the normal activities of Judaean society had to be suspended during those terrible days (Lamentations 5:14-15).

Throughout his ministry Jeremiah was concerned about the plight of the poor and helpless who were exploited by the powerful land owners as well as by the government. These men continued to enrich themselves by every unscrupulous means (Jeremiah 5:26-27). The poor were mistreated to the point of being physically abused. The agonizing cry of the suffering poor went up continually before the throne of God (Jeremiah 6:7).Relief could not be obtained from the courts for they were completely corrupt (Jeremiah 5:28). The poor, the fatherless, the widows and the foreign sojourners were completely at the mercy of these vicious men. Many were forced to sell themselves into slavery in order to pay their debts. The Mosaic law which clearly required a slave-holder to release his Hebrew slaves after seven years of service, was set aside (Jeremiah 34:12-16). Jeremiah's impassioned appeals for social justice went unheard and unheeded (Jeremiah 7:6; Jeremiah 22:3).

E. His Personality

In the opinion of A. B. Davidson the book of Jeremiah does not so much teach religious truths as present a religious personality.[39] More biographical material is available for Jeremiah than for any other of the so-called writing prophets. Then, too, unlike other prophets Jeremiah reveals the inmost recesses of his mind. These considerations make a character evaluation of this prophet of God something more than exercise in imagination. Four outstanding personality traits are worthy of note:

[39] Jeremiah the Prophet, A Dictionary of the Bible ed. James Hastings (New York: Scribner, 1909), II, 576.

1. Sensitivity was certainly one of Jeremiah's person ality traits. He was a gentle man. Though he personally would have preferred the quiet rural life of Anathoth, he was thrust by circumstances into the limelight. In those turbulent times he became the center of controversy, the object of nefarious schemes, the butt of ridicule; he was subjected to a constant barrage of slander and prosecution. While outwardly he stood in the face of this abuse like an iron pillar, inwardly he was a broken man. On occasion he sought to resign his prophetic ministry. Only the consciousness of having been predestined for his task, the sense of dedication, and the overpowering urge of God's Word within him, enabled him to rise to the heights of his call.[40]

[40] H. Freedman, Jeremiah, Soncino Books of the Bible (London: Soncino Press, 1949), p. xi.

2. A second quality, which in reality overlaps the first, is sympathy. How did a prophet of God feel when uttering threats of doom against his countrymen and against surrounding nations? Was he fierce, vindictive, even joyful as he contemplated the total destruction of sinners? Was he even self righteously exulting? Some would have it so. But certainly this picture of the Hebrew prophets belies the facts. It was with a heavy heart that Jeremiah predicted the doom of his beloved land; tears stained the manuscript when he penned his oracle of doom against Moab. Jeremiah did not desire to be the harbinger of evil (Jeremiah 17:15 f.); he laments for the people (Jeremiah 4:19 f.); he repeatedly displays his tenderness by fervently praying for his people (Jeremiah 8:21-22). He acknowledged the necessity of judgment, yet he prays that it might be tempered (Jeremiah 10:24); he pleads with God (Jeremiah 14:8). It was no moment of malicious jubilation for Jeremiah when he saw his dire predictions coming to pass. If it was with heavy heart that he uttered prophecies of doom it was with still heavier heart that he witnessed the fulfillment. He had sympathy with the condemned. It was because of his sensitivity to personal abuse and his sympathy with those doomed for divine judgment that Jeremiah has been called the weeping prophet. It is, however, important to remember that Jeremiah was no weeping willow; he was a stalwart oak of divine planting.[41]

[41] The Book of Jeremiah, The Wesleyan Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1969), p. 180.

3. Courage must be listed among the personality traits of this prophet. By nature he was shy and retiring; but when armed with divine courage he was a fortified city, an iron pillar, and a brazen wall against the whole land (Jeremiah 1:18). He braved the fury of the people, the princes and the crown. He vigorously denounced the moral and spiritual corruption in the land as well as the suicidal foreign policy of the kings of Judah. He did not flinch when threatened; he sealed the truth of his testimony by being willing to offer his life. While others who called themselves prophets adjusted their message to harmonize with the popular theology of the day, Jeremiah could not and did not. On numerous occasions only a slight shift in emphasis, a single word of conciliation would have brought Jeremiah release from physical suffering if not honor among his contemporaries. But he chose to speak the truth at all cost and the cost to Jeremiah in terms of his physical well-being was great.

4. Faith or conviction was another admirable trait of the prophet from Anathoth. He had an overwhelming and unshakable conviction that he had been called of God and that he spoke the word of God. While he was, for the most part, a prophet of doom, he also had faith in the future of his people. When Jerusalem was besieged and all looked hopeless Jeremiah demonstrated his faith by purchasing a field (Chapter 32). He could see beyond the tragedy of exile, he was certain of the ultimate restoration of Israel (Jeremiah 16:14 f.; Jeremiah 32:37 ff. etc.). When Jerusalem was in shambles and the faith of many faltered Jeremiah stood like a rock. Through his beautiful poetry, now incorporated into the Book of Lamentations, he gave expression to the agony of his suffering and theologically perplexed people while at the same time pointing out to them the direction of spiritual recovery.

As far as personality is concerned, Jeremiah was the heir of the great prophets that preceded him. Hertz describes the personality of Jeremiah by saying: He combines the tenderness of Hosea, the fearlessness of Amos, and the stern majesty of Isaiah.[42] Freedman[43] describes him as a realistic optimist. Jeremiah was realistic in the sense that he was not lulled into a false, and theologically unsound, sense of security; he was optimistic in that he could see beyond the darkness of the present hour the dawning of a new day. Naglesbach captured the paradox of this man of God when he wrote: He was like a brazen wall, and at the same time like soft wax.[44] He was like a brazen wall in that no power could shake him; he was soft like wax because of his gentle disposition and his broken heart.

[42] Cited by Freedman, op. cit., p. xiv.

[43] Ibid.

[44]C. W. Edward Naglesbach, Jeremiah, Commentary on the HOLY Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal and Homiletcal, ed. John Peter Lange (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, n.d.), p. 8.

II. JEREMIAH: THE PROPHET

Jeremiah was a prophet. Such a statement though it might seem trite and unnecessary, is essential to the understanding of both this man and his book. Many superlatives could be used and have been used about Jeremiah. His eloquence and unusual poetic gifts have been praised; his profound insight, driving courage, unwavering commitment and fervent proclamation of the word of God make him one of the truly outstanding heroes of Bible history. He was an honest manhonest enough to reveal to all succeeding generations his inner doubts, fears and frustrations. He was a gentle man who was filled with compassion for his countrymen. He was a statesman, the most outstanding statesman in Judah in those desperate days of the nation's dying agony. But as true as all these superlatives may be they add little to the understanding of Jeremiah. Jeremiah was first and foremost a prophet of God. He believed to the very depths of his soul that he was a spokesman for the living God. If one fails to recognize this conviction in the life of the priest from Anathoth or refuses to take this conviction seriously he will never understand Jeremiah.

A. The Beginning of His Ministry

In the thirteenth year of king Josiah, 627 B.C., Jeremiah was called by God to the prophetic ministry. The circumstances of his call are not known. Whether he was in the Temple or at home or meditating on a green hillside cannot be determined. It was not his privilege to see a vision of divine majesty such as Isaiah saw; nor did he see visions of mysterious living creatures and wheels as did Ezekiel. But his call experience brought to Jeremiah the inescapable awareness that God had a claim on his life and that he had been predestined to fill the prophetic office before he was born.
As in the case of other great men of God, Jeremiah did not receive his call with eagerness. In fact he sought to escape or at least postpone the divine summons by pleading that he was too young for such responsibility. The age of Jeremiah at the time of his call cannot be computed accurately. Estimates range from fourteen to twenty. Certainly, then, he was young; but was this the real reason he shrank back from the task? Perhaps Jeremiah was more a realist than most people are in their youth. Perhaps he could foresee what would befall him as God's messenger and he wanted no part of it. Jeremiah did not desire to be a prophet and through the early part of his ministry he had a most difficult time reconciling himself to his calling. But he did not quit; he could not quit. He knew that God had touched his lips, had given him a message. He had to preach!

B. The Dimensions of His Ministry

The ministry was multi-dimensional. He was a preacher, a writer, an intercessor, a statesman and a counselor.

1. Jeremiah the preacher

Jeremiah felt an uncontrollable urge to proclaim the message of God. When he tried to hold back the Word of God became a burning fire shut up in his bones (Jeremiah 20:8-9); he could not forbear. God was speaking through his lips. For this reason he could preface his sermons with thus says the Lord; for this reason he could use the first person when presenting the divine demands.

The purpose of Jeremiah's preaching ministry is succinctly stated in Jeremiah 1:10: God sent him to pluck up, break down, destroy and overthrow, but also to build and plant. The negative aspect of his ministry receives the greater emphasis in this verse. Jeremiah denounced sin and warned of judgment. But Jeremiah was not, as some critics have presented him, merely a prophet of doom. There was a genuine positive thrust to his preaching. He offered realistic encouragement to those of his countrymen who had been deported to Babylon (Chapter 29). His predictions regarding the coming Messiah-Prince (Jeremiah 23:1-8) and New Covenant Age (Chapter s 31-34) are among the grandest in the Old Testament.

Jeremiah seems to have begun his preaching ministry in his native home of Anathoth. His words so angered the men of that town that they ordered him not to prophesy again in the name of the Lord and threatened him with death if he did not cease preaching (Jeremiah 11:21). During the early years of his ministry Jeremiah may have commuted from Anathoth to Jerusalem to deliver his thundering denunciations and threats of doom. In the capital the prophet did not restrict his preaching to the Temple area (Jeremiah 7:2; Jeremiah 26:2); he preached in the city gates (Jeremiah 17:19); in prison (Jeremiah 32:2); in the king's house (Jeremiah 22:1; Jeremiah 37:17); at the city dump (Jeremiah 19:1). On one occasion he went into the streets throughout the land to proclaim his message (Jeremiah 11:6).

God spoke through what Jeremiah did and did not do. God spoke through his life as well as through his lips. It was almost unheard of in his day for a young man to remain unmarried yet Jeremiah never took a wife. His abstinence from marriage was intended to demonstrate how perilous were the times (Jeremiah 16:1-4). In view of the forthcoming national disaster Jeremiah could not think of marriage and children. He also refrained from attending parties and joyous festivities to dramatize the fact that shortly all the sounds of joy would cease from the land (Jeremiah 16:8-9). Nor did he attend funerals (Jeremiah 16:5-7). In the coming capture of Jerusalem so many would die that those who remained would not find time for the customary funeral rites. What a sad life it must have been. At God's command he denied himself wifely companionship and normal social intercourse in order to preach a sermon through his life.

Jeremiah used dramatic symbolic acts and visual aids to capture the attention of an audience and underscore the point of his message. No doubt Jeremiah would be accused today of sensationalism and melodramatics. Many of his actions even by standards of that day were bizarre. The accredited clergy of the day cast aspersion upon him and hinted that he was deranged (Jeremiah 29:26). It might be helpful and convenient to list Jeremiah's action parables, as they are sometimes called, in the order in which they occur in the book:

1. Jeremiah was instructed to get a linen girdle, wear it, bury it and then, after many days, to retrieve it. The marred and rotten garment was then used to symbolize the corruption and consequent worthlessness of Judah which had once been so very close to God (Jeremiah 13:1-11).

2. He was told to take an earthen vessel, go out to the city dump, and smash the bottle in the sight of the elders of the people. Thus would God smash Jerusalem because of the idolatry practiced there (Jeremiah 19:1-13).

3. Jeremiah was commanded to take a cup of wine representing the wrath of God and cause all the nations of Syria-Palestine to drink from it (Jeremiah 25:15-28).

4. Jeremiah appeared for some time in public wearing a wooden yoke such as was commonly worn by oxen (Jeremiah 27:2). It is possible that miniature yokes were given to the foreign ambassadors who had gathered in Jerusalem to be carried back to their respective lands (Jeremiah 27:3).The yoke-bars and thongs, the prophet declared, represented Nebuchadnezzar's right to rule by divine decree(Jeremiah 27:4-7). That yoke so enraged one of Jeremiah's adversaries that he ripped it from the neck of the prophet and smashed it in the Temple (Jeremiah 28:10).

5. When Jerusalem was under siege and Jeremiah was confined in the court of the prison the Lord instructed him to purchase a plot of ground from a relative (Jeremiah 32:6 ff). Jeremiah was careful to execute the purchase in the proper legal manner. This transaction was to demonstrate to the embattled populace of Jerusalem that Jeremiah had faith in the future of the land. After the destruction and deportation of the population, at some point in the future, houses and fields and vineyards would once again be bought and sold in the land of Judah.

6. The prophet took those teetotalers, the Rechabites. to the Temple and offered them wine to drink. In loyal obedience to the commandments of their ancestor the Rechabites refused to partake of the fruit of the vine. Their faithfulness to the instructions of their earthly father was used by the prophet to rebuke the unfaithfulness of Judah to the commands of their heavenly Father (Jeremiah 35:1-19).

7. The prophet in Egypt continued to use symbolic acts. He hid great stones beneath the brick pavement in front of the house of Pharaoh in Tahpanhes to mark the spot where Nebuchadnezzar would one day erect his royal pavilion (Jeremiah 43:8-11).

8. Jeremiah instructed a faithful follower to read a scroll in Babylon and then sink it in the Euphrates river (Jeremiah 51:61-64). By this act the ultimate overthrow of Babylon was dramatically portrayed.

Thus by his non-actions and by his actions Jeremiah dramatized the message. His unusual behavior attracted attention and created opportunities for formal oral discourse. Those who are attempting to bring the message of God to communities where men are indifferent, unconcerned and out-right hostile might well learn a lesson here: one must first capture the attention of an audience before he can effectively communicate the word of God. Some of the acts listed above have been interpreted as being simply visions translated into ordinary narrative. Others have suggested that these acts are altogether imaginary, that is, a recognized rhetorical fiction. These problems of interpretation will be treated in the comments on the individual accounts.

2. Jeremiah the writer

Jeremiah was not only a preacher; he was also a writer. He felt duty-bound to attempt to deal with some of the delusions of the Jewish captives in Babylon; so he wrote a letter to them (Jeremiah 29:1). This letter must have been widely circulated among the exiles for it created quite a stir. False prophets in Babylon fired a letter back to the high priest in Jerusalem demanding that Jeremiah be silenced (Jeremiah 29:24-29).

When Jeremiah was forbidden by the authorities to publicly preach his message of doom he committed his sermons to writing. A scroll dictated by Jeremiah to his faithful scribe got the prophet in trouble with king Jehoiakim. This scroll, which was in reality the first edition of the Book of Jeremiah, contained excerpts from the sermons of Jeremiah during his first two decades of preaching. When the scroll was read in his presence Jehoiakim slashed it to pieces and burned it upon a brazier. Jeremiah then produced a second copy of the scroll adding to the original contents many like words (Jeremiah 36:32). Eventually this scroll developed into what is today the canonical Book of Jeremiah.

Jeremiah also composed certain lamentations. He is said to have lamented the death of king Josiah (2 Chronicles 35:25) and this may imply that he composed a poetic lamentation over the death of that fine king. Tradition is consistent in assigning the Book of Lamentations to the prophet Jeremiah. In the oldest arrangements of the books of the Hebrew Bible the Book of Lamentations seems to have been part of the Book of Jeremiah. It is not possible to determine precisely just when Lamentations was separated from the Book of Jeremiah.

In addition to the Book of Jeremiah and Lamentations, Jeremiah may also have compiled the Book of Kings.[45] The Babylonian Talmud, Baba Batra 15a, states categorically that Jeremiah wrote the Book of Kings. In the light of the usage of the word wrote in this passage of Baba Batra the statement with regard to the Book of Kings is to be understood that the prophet was the editor thereof.[46]

[45] The two books of Kings of the English and Greek Old Testament are counted as one book in the Hebrew Bible.

[46] The same passage of Baba Batra asserts that Hezekiah and his associates wrote the books of Isaiah, Proverbs, Song of Solomon and Ecclesiastes; the men of the Great Synagogue wrote the books of Ezekiel, the twelve Minor Prophets, Daniel, and the Scroll of Esther.

Scholars have suggested that Jeremiah may have been the author of some of the Biblical psalms. Psalms 22:31, 40, 55, 69,, 71 are so permeated with the spirit of Jeremiah that they have been ascribed to the pen of this prophet. These psalms do contain certain circumstantial parallels to the life of Jeremiah. But none of the psalms ascribed to Jeremiah allude to his prophetic office or his conflict with false prophets. Figurative expressions like sinking in the mire and in the deep water (Psalms 69:2; Psalms 69:14) require no groundwork of literal biographical fact.[47] But most important of all is the fact that each of the psalms ascribed by modern critics to Jeremiah is attributed to David in the heading of the psalm. No good reason has yet been offered to deny that these psalms are in fact Davidic. The Ugaritic texts discovered in 1929 prove that poetic composition was a highly developed art centuries before David. In the light of this evidence the testimony of the psalm headings becomes even more compelling. The internal circumstantial similarity between these psalms and the life of Jeremiah is thus offset by other evidence. Jeremiah probably did not author any of the Biblical psalms.

[47] T. K. Cheyne Jeremiah, The Pulpit Commentary (New York: W Funk & Wagnalls, n.d.), p. xii.

The apocryphal and pseudepigraphic literature attributes at least three additional writings to Jeremiah. Two of these are worthy of note: (1) The so-called Epistle of Jeremiah is supposedly a letter written by the prophet to the Jews who were about to be led as captives to Babylon. In this letter the author warns his readers about the dangers of idolatry. This short book appears in the Roman Catholic Douay version of the Old Testament as the sixth chapter of the apocryphal Book of Baruch. This letter is a pseudepigraph (forged document) written many years after the death of Jeremiah (ca. 300-100 B.C.). (2) The Paralipomena of Jeremiah, also called the Rest of the Words of Baruch is chiefly concerned with Ebed-melech the Ethiopian who befriended Jeremiah in one of his darkest hours (Jeremiah 38:7-13). The writing appears to be even later than the former one with some passages obviously of Christian origin. Jeremiah could not have been responsible for either of these documents.

3. Jeremiah the intercessor

The Book of Jeremiah is rich with thought-provoking material on the subject of prayer. All of the great prophets were men of prayer. But Jeremiah is the only prophet whose prayers are on record in sufficient quantity to invite analysis. They are all but unique in prophetic literature.[48] Jeremiah's prayers on behalf of the nation fall into several categories: (1) In a prayer of complaint Jeremiah charges God with deceiving and misleading the people (Jeremiah 4:10). (2) In a prayer of perception Jeremiah acknowledges that God's disciplinary dealings with Judah have been fair and just (Jeremiah 5:3). (3) In the midst of a blistering attack against idolatry Jeremiah burst forth into a prayer of praise (Jeremiah 10:6-7). (4) In a prayer for clarification Jeremiah asks God to explain why he has been instructed to purchase a plot of ground in Judah when God had commissioned him to preach the total destruction of the nation (Jeremiah 32:16-25). It is however, (5) the prayer of intercession which merits closer attention.

[48] Sheldon H. Blank, Jeremiah, Man and Prophet (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press, 1961), p. 92.

One of the great ministries of the prophets was to engage in intercessory prayer on behalf of their people. Jeremiah was no exception. When on one occasion Jeremiah wished to call attention to the falsity of certain prophets of weal he pointed to the fact that these men did not engage in intercessory prayer for the nation (Jeremiah 27:18). Jeremiah apparently regarded the ministry of intercession as one of the hallmarks of a true prophet of God.

Many different Hebrew words for prayer are used in the Book of Jeremiah. Three of these are of particular importance in understanding the background of the Biblical concept of intercession. The verb palal means to pray but it has the overtones of argument, of presenting a logical case in defense of someone. The intercessor, then, is like a lawyer who pleads his case before the divine Judge. The expression to stand before is also used of prayer. This term comes from the vocabulary of the royal court. It means to wait upon in the sense of using one's influence with a king. Thus the intercessor is one who has access to the council chambers of God as it were, and uses his influence there for the well-being of the people he represents. The third Hebrew word, paga-', has the idea of an impassioned emotional appeal. The intercessor is one who pours out his heart as well as his mind on behalf of the people he loves.

Jeremiah prayed on behalf of his people. Several lines of evidence point in this direction: (1) On more than one occasion during his ministry individuals came to the prophet and requested that he pray on their behalf. Twice king Zedekiah sent messengers to Jeremiah requesting prayer (Jeremiah 21:2; Jeremiah 37:3). Following the assassination of Gedaliah the leaders of the remnant requested Jeremiah to pray on their behalf for divine guidance (Jeremiah 42:2; Jeremiah 42:20). (2) Three times the Lord instructed Jeremiah not to pray for the people of Judah (Jeremiah 7:16; Jeremiah 11:14; Jeremiah 14:11). A fourth passage has the force of a prohibition though it is not in the imperative mood (Jeremiah 15:1). (3) In one of his personal prayers Jeremiah alludes to his ministry of intercession:

Remember how I stood before You to speak good on their behalf, to turn away Your wrath from them (Jeremiah 18:20 b).

(4) The strongest evidence that Jeremiah prayed for his people is furnished by the fragments of his intercessory prayers which have been preserved in the book. In one of these prayers Jeremiah so completely identifies with his suffering people that he employs the singular pronoun me for the nation. It is as though the nation personified is speaking through the mouth of the prophet to God (Jeremiah 10:23-25). During a terrible drought Jeremiah, speaking as a member of the suffering nation, calls upon God to extend mercy to His people (Jeremiah 14:7-9). Perhaps the most beautiful of the fragments of intercession is found in Jeremiah 14:19-22. Here Jeremiah skillfully mingles a series of rhetorical questions with confessions of sin and appeals for divine mercy,

4. Jeremiah the statesman

In ancient Israel the functions of church and state could not be separated into neat compartments. Israel was a theocracy, a nation under the direct government of God. All areas of national life were to be directed by the word of God as revealed through His accredited messengers. For this reason Jeremiahand most of the other prophets for that matterbecame involved in what today would be classified as political activity. Jeremiah's political position basically can be summed up in one principle: Submit to Babylon.
The patriotism of Jeremiah has been called into question by more than one modern writer. Did not Jeremiah advocate capitulation to the Chaldeans? Did he not actively encourage the defenders of Jerusalem to desert to the enemy during those last desperate days before Jerusalem was captured? Such conduct would certainly be considered treason today! If a government fully commits itself to a definite and irrevocable policy, patriotism would demand at least silent acquiescence. Was Jeremiah then a traitor? In defense of Jeremiah it is important to make several observations:
1. Jeremiah was no coward. Though he advised others to desert to the enemy he did not follow his own advice. He was convinced that Jerusalem would fall to the Chal deans and be destroyed yet he chose to remain within the city. Strange traitor, this man who refused to desert a sinking ship.
2. Jeremiah was not an hireling. When Jerusalem fell the Chaldeans wished to reward this prophet who for so many years had advocated capitulation to Babylon.

Some have even gone so far as to suggest that Jeremiah was a fifth columnist on the Chaldean pay roll and that his job was to wage psychological warfare within the walls of Jerusalem. But if this prophet was an hireling it is most strange that he pointedly refused to accept a life of luxury and ease in Babylon. He chose rather to cast his lot with the tattered remnant who remained in the land after the disaster of 587 B.C. Strange traitor, this man who refused to take reward for his treason.

3. Jeremiah was not malevolent. He took no delight in the message of doom he was compelled to preach to his countrymen. Earnestly he prayed on their behalf. He was not anti-Judah. He loved his nation and wanted it to survive as a nation. He could not comprehend why God must utterly destroy Judah and he did not hesitate to confess this lack of understanding to his Creator. Strange traitor, this man who so earnestly prayed for the survival of his nation.

4. Jeremiah was no prophet of doom, at least in the sense that this epithet is usually used. True, he did fore cast the defeat of his nation at the hands of an enemy force. But Jeremiah believed firmly in the future of his people (Jeremiah 31:31-34). He demonstrated that belief by purchasing a plot of ground at the very time when the Chaldean armies were sweeping through the land (Jeremiah 32:6-15). Jeremiah persisted to the end in a heaven-born assurance of the immortality and spiritual regeneration of his people.[49] Strange traitor, this man who had such confidence in the future of his nation.

[49] Cheyne, op. cit., p. xi.

5. Jeremiah was no political theoretician. His counsel to yield to Babylon without a struggle was not politically motivated or dictated by mere prudence. In denouncing revolution against Babylon Jeremiah was running counter to the opinions of the best statesmen of most of the countries of Syria-Palestine including Judah. It was not the mere fact that resistance was suicidal that caused him to call for surrender and submission. Furthermore, it should be pointed out that Jeremiah had no admiration for the Babylonian imperial system. In fact he boldly predicted that after the divinely assigned period of world supremacy Babylon too would taste of the wrath of God. Strange traitor, this man who was so outspoken against the enemy of his people.

6. Jeremiah was no pacifist. Though he opposed resistance to the Chaldeans he did not oppose war as such. As a matter of fact Jeremiah preached that the impending conflict was ordained by God. God was involved in the struggle (Jeremiah 21:5) but He was fighting on the side of the Chaldeans. Those who would equate pacifism with treason certainly cannot question the patriotism of Jeremiah on these grounds.

In Jeremiah one can see what John Bright calls patriotism on a deeper level.[50] The religious idea with which he was inspired was higher and broader than conventional ideas of patriotism. Israel had a divinely appropriated work to do; if Israel failed to perform that mission, it had no further right to exist. To state the matter another way, Judah was a theocracy in rebellion against its divine King. Jeremiah was the inspired spokesman for God to that rebellious people. The God who knows the future had revealed to Jeremiah what the future course of political events in the ancient Near East would be. This prophet did not formulate his advice to his countrymen on the basis of political or personal expediency. He knew whereof he spoke and history has vindicated his position.

[50] Bright, op. cit., p. cix.

5. Jeremiah the counselor

Jeremiah was not only concerned with crowds, oratory and national policy; he was concerned as well for individuals. Zedekiah the king had many agonizing decisions to make during the last days of the kingdom of Judah. On more than one occasion he sought out Jeremiah to ask his inspired counsel (Jeremiah 37:17; Jeremiah 38:14 ff.). Jeremiah was not a practitioner of the non-directive technique in counseling. He clearly spelled out for Zedekiah the alternative courses of action and the consequences of each. If Zedekiah would surrender to Nebuchadnezzar the city would be saved; if he did not, the city was doomed. When Zedekiah expressed fear over his personal fate should he surrender, Jeremiah reassured him that his fears were unfounded. He tried to help the king see that selfish considerations must be secondary to that of the well-being of his people. Thousands would suffer if the king persisted in resisting Babylon. Jeremiah's private conversations with Zedekiah reveal the consistency and frank honesty of this man of God. He did not succumb to the temptation to tailor God's word to fit the individual but rather sought to bring the individual into harmony with the will of God.

The weeping prophet knew personal agony and despondency and thus could have empathy with those who suffered. To Baruch, a frustrated and discouraged disciple, Jeremiah spoke a tender word from the Lord. His message to Baruch in chapter 45 when properly understood is a masterpiece of counseling technique. By revealing to Baruch the genuine and unparalleled suffering of God Jeremiah helps that scribe to place his own predicament in proper perspective.

Equally tender and pertinent is Jeremiah's brief word for Ebed-melech (Jeremiah 39:15-18). This Ethiopian servant was terrified at the prospect of falling into the hand of the Chaldean soldiers who were attacking Jerusalem. Doubtless he feared that all the servants of king Zedekiah would be slain when the enemy stormed into the city. The God who loved individuals as much as He loved nations sent His prophet to that noble Negro slave with a comforting word. Ebed-melech would not fall into the hands of those whom he feared.

Whether dealing with the paralyzing indecision of Zedekiah, the gloomy despondency of Baruch or the terrifying fear of Ebed-melech Jeremiah was the master counselor. He did not always wait for the distressed to seek him out; he went to them. He was straight-forward and honest, yet tender and compassionate as he dealt with the needs of individuals.

C. The Chronology of His Ministry

The reconstruction of the life and career of Jeremiah is not an easy task. For the period following 609 B.C. an abundance of dated biographical material from the book can be utilized. When this material is placed in chronological order one has a fairly complete outline of the latter part of the prophet's career. But for information about the pre-609 B.C. career of the prophet one must depend upon undated oracles and sermons. For this reason the greatest caution needs to be exercised in reconstructing the early phases of the ministry of Jeremiah. Some modern scholars have even questioned whether or not Jeremiah had a ministry prior to 609 B.C. May and Hyatt,[51] for example, believe that Jeremiah did not begin to prophesy until after the reformation of Josiahnear the end of Josiah's reign or beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim (ca. 609 B.C.). Not allowing for genuine predictive prophecy, these scholars insist that the foe from the north in Chapter s 1-6 must be explained against the background of the emerging Chaldean menace. But for those who accept the testimony of the book itself the matter of dating is at once settled by the clear statements of Jeremiah 1:2 and Jeremiah 25:3. The ministry of Jeremiah commenced in the thirteenth year of Josiah, 627 B.C.

[51] H. G. May, The Chronology of Jeremiah's Oracles, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 4 (1945) 217-27; 2. P. Hyatt, Jeremiah and Deuteronomy, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 1 (1942) 156-73; J. P. Hyatt, The Foe From the North in Jeremiah, Journal of Biblical Literature, 59 (1940) 499-513.

The prophetic career of Jeremiah can be divided into five distinct periods: (1) The pre-reformation period, 627-621 B.C.; (2) The post-reformation period, 621-605 B.C.; (3) The middle period, 605-597 B.C.; (4) The pre-destruction period, 597-587 B.C. and (5) The post-destruction period, 587 B.C. to his death.

1. The pre-reformation period, 627-621 B.C.

The early phase of his ministry extends from the divine call in 627 B.C. to the reformation under Josiah in 621 B.C. During this five-year period the energetic Jeremiah joined forces with Zephaniah in thundering forth denunciations of apostasy. But intermingled with these verbal assaults against the national sin are impassioned pleas for repentance (Jeremiah 3:19 to Jeremiah 4:2). One can scarcely doubt that the powerful preaching of Zephaniah and Jeremiah helped pave the way for the reforms of king Josiah.

2. The post-reformation period, 621-605 B.C.

The second period of the ministry of Jeremiah extends from 621 B.C. to 605 B.C. The years following the reformation of Josiah and prior to the battle of Carchemish are practically a blank as far as the career of Jeremiah is concerned. Scholars are in disagreement about the attitude of Jeremiah towards the reforms of king Josiah. Some picture the prophet as bitterly opposed to the reform; others think he actively supported the efforts of the young king; still others argue that Jeremiah supported the aims of the reformation but took no active part in it. Most scholars believe that following the reformation of 621 B.C. Jeremiah entered into a period of silence.

It is most difficult to believe that Jeremiah could do anything other than applaud the efforts of king Josiah to reinforce the law of God. Two pieces of evidence seem to indicate Jeremiah's sympathy with the Josian reform: For one thing, Jeremiah publicly expressed almost unbounded admiration for Josiah (Jeremiah 22:15 f.). This would be most strange if Jeremiah felt that his reform efforts were inappropriate, inadequate or futile. Then, too, those who stood up for Jeremiah during his controversial ministry and who intervened to save his life were themselves leaders in the reform effort or came from families which were instrumental in the reform. Ahikam son of Shaphan (Jeremiah 26:24) was among the delegation which took the lost book of the law to Huldah the prophetess for identification. Gemariah son of Shaphan (Jeremiah 36:10; Jeremiah 36:25) must have been a brother of Ahikam. Elnathan, another prince who defended the writing of Jeremiah (Jeremiah 36:12; Jeremiah 36:25), was the son of Achbor who had been active in the Josian reform (cf. 2 Kings 22:12). It is unlikely that Jeremiah would have received the support of these families if he had opposed the reforms of Josiah.

Scripture affirms that Josiah began to seek the Lord while he was yet young in the eighth year of his reign. He began to purge Judah and Jerusalem of all of idolatrous paraphernalia in the twelfth year of his reign (11 Chronicles Jeremiah 34:3). Jeremiah was called to the prophetic ministry in the thirteenth year of Josiah (Jeremiah 1:2) one year after the reform got started and five years before the discovery of the lost law book. It is important to note that the discovery of the lost book was the result of the reformation and not the cause of it. The preaching of Jeremiah during the five years between the beginning of the reformation and the discovery of the law book must surely have helped pave the way for further reforms. Some have interpreted Jeremiah 11:6 to mean that Jeremiah got involved in the reformation efforts and went about the countryside as its chief advocate. But if Jeremiah was a supporter of the reforms of the king why did Josiah consult Huldah the prophetess concerning the newly discovered law book instead of Jeremiah? Does this not indicate that the king regarded Jeremiah as unsympathetic to the cause? Not necessarily. Jeremiah was still young and relatively unknown. Perhaps he had not yet left the rural areas to begin his ministry in the capital.

3. The middle period, 605-597 B.C.

The year 605 B.C. was a milestone in the ministry of Jeremiah for with the battle of Carchemish the prophet commences a new phase of his ministry. That great clash between the Egyptians and Assyrians on the one hand and the Chaldeans on the other, marked a turning point in the life of Jeremiah as well as in world history. From that time Jeremiah explicitly named Babylon as the chosen agent of destruction of Judah. Babylon was to Jeremiah what Nineveh had been to Isaiah. The prophet foresaw and announced the prophetic program of God for the next seventy years. God had allocated to Babylonian world supremacy a period of seventy years. During that period any nation which refused to submit to the yoke of Babylon would be destroyed. The year 605 B.C. was important to Jeremiah from the standpoint of the form as well as the content of his message. It was in 605 B.C. that Jeremiah received instruction from the Lord to commit his prophecies to writing, apparently for the first time (chapter 36).

4. The fire-destruction period, 597-587 B.C.

The year 597 B.C. in which several thousand Jews including the royal household were taken to Babylon marked another milestone in the ministry of Jeremiah. A strong note of hope appears in the message of Jeremiah following the deportation of 597 B.C. Jeremiah believed that those captives in Babylon were the real hope of the nation. All hope for the deliverance of Jerusalem from destruction seems to have vanished. Jeremiah was looking beyond the tragedy of 587 B.C. to a new community which the Lord would establish. During this phase of his ministry Jeremiah appears in the role of counselor to the king. But since the counsel of Jeremiah ran counter to that of the powerful young princes who seemed to control king Zedekiah, Jeremiah suffered immeasurably during this decade.

5. The post-destruction period, 587 B.C. and after

The final phase of the ministry of Jeremiah begins in 587 B.C., the year in which Jerusalem fell to Nebuchadnezzar. Jeremiah was broken in body but not in spirit. While the old man could have closed out his life in luxury and ease in Babylon, he chose to cast his lot with the tattered remnant which remained in Palestine. After the assassination of Gedaliah Jeremiah was forced to accompany the terrified remnant to Egypt. His last recorded sermons were delivered on foreign soil. Though well into his sixties Jeremiah had lost none of his fervor or fire. He still cried out against idolatry and predicted divine judgment upon those who refused to turn to the Lord with all their heart. In that foreign land Jeremiah ended his prophetic ministry; there in all probability he was buried.

CHRONOLOGICAL OUTLINE OF THE LIFE OF JEREMIAH

REFERENCE

DESCRIPTION OF EVENT

DATE

ch l

The Call

13 yr of Josiah

Jeremiah 11:18-23

A plot against the Prophet by the men of Anathoth

Late Josiah (Payne) or Early Jehoiakim (White)

Jeremiah 16:1-9

Three Prohibitions

Late Josiah (Payne) or Early Jehoiakim (White)

Jeremiah 18:18

A plot Against Jeremiah by National leaders

Late Josiah (Payne) or Early Jehoiakim (White)

Jeremiah 19:14 to Jeremiah 20:6

Jeremiah scourged and put in stocks

Late Josiah (Payne) or Early Jehoiakim (White)

Jeremiah 26:1-24

Jeremiah on trial for his life

Beginning of Jehoiakim

ch 36

Publication of First Edition of Jeremiah

4th & 5th year of Jehoiakim

ch 35

Episode of the Rechabites

Late Jehoiakim (c. 598)

ch 29

A letter to Babylon

Beginning of Zedekiah

Jeremiah 28:1-17

Confrontation with Hananiah

Beginning of Zedekiah

ch 27

Jeremiah sends yokes to foreign ambassadors

Beginning of Zedekiah

Jeremiah 51:59-64

A scroll to Babylon

4th year of Zedekiah

ch 21

A delegation sent to Jeremiah from the king

Early part of the siege (588)

Jeremiah 34:1-7

Jeremiah brings a message to Zedekiah

Early part of the siege (588)

Jeremiah 32:1-15

Jeremiah in the court of the guard, Purchased land

Early part of the siege. (Note: most commentators place this after ch. 37 on the basis of Jeremiah 37:4.)

Jeremiah 34:8-22

Jeremiah condemns the princes for breaking an oath

During lull in the siege (summer)

Jeremiah 37:1-10

Second delegation sent from the king

During the lull v. 4, 5

Jeremiah 37:11-15

Jeremiah arrested, put in Jonathan's pit

During the lull

Jeremiah 37:16-21

Secret meeting with Zedekiah Placed in court of the guard

Last part of the siege

Jeremiah 38:1-13

Jeremiah thrown in Dungeon Rescued by Ebed-Melech

Last part of the siege

Jeremiah 38:14-28

Another secret meeting with Zedekiah

Last part of the siege

Jeremiah 39:11-14

Jeremiah committed to Gedaliah

After the fall of Jerusalem

Jeremiah 40:1-6

Jeremiah accidentally arrested by the Chaldeans

After the fall of Jerusalem

ch 42

Jeremiah consulted by the remnant

After death of Gedaliah

ch 43, 44

Jeremiah's ministry in Egypt

After death of Gedaliah

D. The Vicissitudes of His Ministry

The life and ministry of Jeremiah were filled with discouragement and danger. To preach to a people over a long period of time and realize no tangible results places a great burden on the heart of a minister. So it was with Jeremiah. He preached powerfully, eloquently and passionately but no one seemed to listen. This constant failure to get through to the people had a wearing effect on the man. He suffered intense personal pain as he watched the nation advancing step by step on the road to ruin. When he saw that the spirit of disobedience and rebellion in his countrymen was seemingly past remedy he still prayed that they might be spared. Finally when God forbade him to offer any more intercessory prayers on behalf of Judah, Jeremiah realized that the doom of his people was inevitable and irreversible. Only the complete overthrow of the nation could effect a cure for the malignancy of transgression which had permeated the land.
Jeremiah shed many tears over the impending doom of his people. He could see so clearly in his mind's eye the bloodshed and death and carnage which would accompany the assault by the enemy from the north. Frequently he burst forth in lamentation of the most bitter sort.[52] Once he cried out, Oh that my head were waters, and my eyes a fountain of tears, that I might weep day and night for the slain of the daughter of my people (Jeremiah 9:1). In one of his sermons following a particularly eloquent appeal for repentance Jeremiah added: But if you will not hear it, my soul shall weep in secret for your pride; and my eye shall weep sore and run down with tears, because the flock of the LORD is taken captive (Jeremiah 13:17). The burden of Jeremiah's suffering was somewhat increased by the restrictions placed upon his life and ministry by the Lord. He was forbidden to marry (Jeremiah 16:2) and hence had to bear his suffering without the solace afforded by wifely companionship. He was forbidden to attend social gatherings, even funerals (Jeremiah 16:18). While these prohibitions served a wise and useful purpose they nonetheless added to the personal agony of this broken-hearted man.

[52] See Jeremiah 4:19-21; Jeremiah 8:1, Jeremiah 9:1; Jeremiah 9:10; Jeremiah 10:19; and Jeremiah 14:17-18.

Add to the discouragement of this prophet the danger which he constantly faced in his ministry and the biography of Jeremiah becomes truly pathetic. Almost daily he suffered hostility and abuse from the people he was trying to help, Early in his ministry the men of his own home town plotted against him (Jeremiah 11:9 ff.). On one occasion he was arrested by the chief officer of the Temple, flogged, and forced to endure the pain and humiliation of exposure in the public stocks (Jeremiah 20:1 f.). Following one of his mighty sermons in the Temple he was seized by a mob and hastily put on trial for his life (Jeremiah 26:11 ff.). For a time Jeremiah was declared to be persona non grata and was restrained from entering the Temple area (Jeremiah 36:5). His first literary production was ruthlessly destroyed by a tyrant king (Jeremiah 36:23 ff.). For a time he was forced to go into hiding to escape the wrath of this same king (Jeremiah 36:26). Back in circulation again he was assaulted by a rival prophet (Jeremiah 28:10 f.). A letter from Babylon urged further violence against Jeremiah (Jeremiah 29:24 ff.). While attempting to leave Jerusalem on a private business matter the prophet was arrested and accused of treasonous desertion to the enemy (Jeremiah 37:11 ff.). Confinement in prison threatened the health of the prophet (Jeremiah 37:20). He was lowered into an empty but damp cistern and left to die without food or water (Jeremiah 38:6). Delivered from that danger he yet remained under arrest (Jeremiah 38:13). Jeremiah was released from custody when the Chaldeans captured Jerusalem, but then through the blunder of some junior officer was again put in chains to be carried away to Babylon (Jeremiah 40:1). Released b the Chaldean commanding general, Jeremiah chose to cast his lot with the tattered remnant of his people. His suffering was not yet at an end, however. Shortly the old man of God was abducted to Egypt where he spent his last years in forced exile from his beloved home land (Jeremiah 43:5 f.). His whole life, says one writer, is a series of dramatic rescues at the hand of unexpected people.[53]

[53] Norman C. Habel, Jeremiah, Concordia Commentary (St. Louis: Concordia, 1968), p. 13.

The biographical picture of Jeremiah is not entirely black. Here and there a friend can be found among the hostile crowd; once in a while a triumph of sorts is recorded. Though it might have seemed to Jeremiah that every hand was against him, he was not altogether friendless. The elders of the land defended Jeremiah at his trial and a certain prince named Ahikam used his influence to get the prophet acquitted. Baruch was a faithful friend. He joined Jeremiah in hiding, wrote his first book for him, read it in public and apparently remained with his master until the end in Egypt. Numbered among his friends are the court officials who saw to it that king Jehoiakim got a chance to hear the words written in Jeremiah's scroll and who protested when that scroll was destroyed by the king. A Temple official by the name of Zephaniah came under personal attack for allowing Jeremiah to preach in the Temple. Ebed-melech, the Ethiopian servant of king Zedekiah, risked his own life to rescue Jeremiah from a foul pit. Even king Zedekiah himself on certain occasions befriended the prophet. Finally there was Gedaliah with whom Jeremiah would have spent his last days had this governor not been struck down by the blow of an assassin. There were occasional triumphs in his ministry. Jeremiah's defense of his prophetic preaching was vindicated when he was on trial for his life. When Nebuchadnezzar lifted the siege of Jerusalem to deal with an attack by Egyptian forces, Jeremiah alone correctly assessed the situation. In a matter of weeks his confident assertion that the Chaldean would return to the siege of the city was vindicated. Twice the king sought him out to ask his counsel. The remnant came to him to seek his guidance following the death of Gedaliah. Nevertheless these friends and moments of triumph are not the dominant theme in the biography of Jeremiah.
It is on the background of this intense personal pain and persecution that the so-called confessions of Jeremiah must be interpreted. In these prayers, which all appear in the second ten Chapter s of the book, Jeremiah asks for justice. Standing before the Judge of all the earth Jeremiah presents the case for himself and against his adversaries. In defense of his own conduct the prophet points to his tireless efforts to persuade the people of Judah to repent. He has to the best of his ability carried out the divine commission which had been given to him (Jeremiah 17:16). He has said and done only that which God had authorized. He had animosity for no one and had offended neither his people or his God (Jeremiah 15:10). He had actually prayed for the salvation of his nation (Jeremiah 18:20; Jeremiah 15:11). why then is his life so turbulent? (Jeremiah 15:15-17). Why does he suffer SO? (Jeremiah 18:20). In narrative prayer Jeremiah tells God the tragic story of his life and ministry. But he does something more. He seeks to disparage the activities of his adversaries. He vividly describes in these prayers the vicious behavior of those who had pitted themselves against him. They cursed (Jeremiah 15:10), taunted (Jeremiah 17:15) and ridiculed (Jeremiah 20:8) God's duly appointed representative. They have openly blasphemed God as well (Jeremiah 12:2; Jeremiah 12:4). They are hypocritical (Jeremiah 12:6) and treacherous (Jeremiah 20:10). They were actually plotting the death of the prophet from Anathoth (Jeremiah 18:18; Jeremiah 11:21). By placing his innocence in juxtaposition with the guilt of his enemies Jeremiah was calling the attention of God to the injustice of the whole situation and setting the stage for his plea.

After Jeremiah presented his case before God he made his appeal. At times his plea was direct and unambiguous. He prays that God will vindicate His prophet and pour out vengeance upon his enemies (Jeremiah 15:15; Jeremiah 17:17-18). In some of his prayers he calls down in dreadful detail the wrath of God upon his adversaries (Jeremiah 17:18; Jeremiah 18:21-23; Jeremiah 12:3). These imprecations are perhaps the most difficult passages in the book to comprehend. Are they to be interpreted as a sudden ebullition of natural anger? Jeremiah did not desire the destruction of his people and in fact prayed for their deliverance (Jeremiah 17:16; Jeremiah 18:20; Jeremiah 15:11). Those upon whom Jeremiah calls down the wrath of the Almighty are the religious leaders who had so beguiled the people and persecuted the prophet. They had spurned the appointed representatives of the God of Israel; they had hindered the word of God. When Jeremiah calls upon God to destroy these wicked men he does not speak with vindictive enmity. He speaks rather as the official representative of God. God's cause was being hindered; God's honor was at stake. It was his zeal for God and desire for the triumph of righteousness that caused Jeremiah to pray for the destruction of these sinners. The so-called imprecations are in reality pronouncements of judgment. They are not unlike the woes which Jesus pronounced against the religious leaders of His generation (see Matthew 23).

Sometimes the plea in Jeremiah's personal prayers is less direct, taking the form of accusation or of a bold rhetorical question. Jeremiah accuses God of enticing him and forcing him into the ministry (Jeremiah 20:7) and filling him with gloom (Jeremiah 15:17). Perhaps his most bitter accusation is found in Jeremiah 15:18 b: You are indeed to me as a deceitful brook, as waters that fail! He is accusing God of being unfaithful and unreliable. These accusations against God amount to an appeal. The prophet is asking for release from a situation which he views as intolerable. The rhetorical questions in his prayers amount to the same thing. Shall evil be rewarded for good? the troubled prophet asks God (Jeremiah 18:2 C)a). Again he asks, Why is my pain perpetual and my wound incurable? (Jeremiah 15:18 a). In Jeremiah 12:1 b he asks the question suffering men have asked as far back as one can trace the literary records of the human race: Why does the way of the wicked prosper? Why are all they at ease that deal very treacherously? Each of these questions implies that something has gone wrong in the world. Righteous men suffer; wicked men prosper. Jeremiah knows that God is just and it is to His justice that Jeremiah appeals in both his accusations and his rhetorical questions.

E. The Importance of His Ministry

Only God knows to what degree the ministry of a man has been a success or a failure. As the world evaluates such things Jeremiah was a failure. No one, it seems, paid any attention to his dire predictions; no one gave heed to his appeals for repentance. He was powerless to stop the suicidal national policy. Yet in a very real way Jeremiah was the hero of the last days of Judah. More than any other single individual he enabled the people to survive the calamity of 587 B.C. Philip Schaff has referred to Jeremiah as the most prominent personage in a period of deepest distress and humiliation of the Jewish theocracy.[54]

[54] In the preface to the commentary on Jeremiah in Commentary on the Holy Scriptures,. Critical, Doctrinal and Homiletical, ed. John Peter Lange (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, n.d.), p. i.

The destruction of Jerusalem and the deportation to Babylon was a severe spiritual as well as political blow to the people of Judah. The religious establishment had said for yearssince the days of king Hezekiahthat such a calamity could not befall the Holy City. God would never allow Jerusalem and the Temple to be destroyed. The notion of the inviolability of Zion seems to have hardened into an unquestioned assumption in the days of Jeremiah. It was heresy and blasphemy to challenge this dogma and those who attempted to refute it did so at the peril of their lives.

When the disaster of 587 B.C. became a reality the official religious leaders were at a loss to explain how it could have come about. The entire structure of faith in the Lord was dangerously close to toppling to ruins because one dogmaand it false to begin withhad proven to be unsound. Many were questioning the justice of God (Jeremiah 31:29; Ezekiel 18:2; Ezekiel 18:25; Lamentations 5:7). The temptation was strong to render homage to the gods of the conquering Chaldeans. Those who retained their faith were plunged into hopeless despair feeling that God had utterly and completely cast off his people (Ezekiel 33:10; Ezekiel 37:11). During and shortly after 587 B.C. the very survival of Israel's faith was hanging in the balance. Had there been no Jeremiah in Palestine and no Ezekiel in Babylon during these years to warn of tragedy and to interpret it when it struck, the Israelite people probably would have faired no better than the other peoples conquered by Babylon. That the faith of Israel survived 587 B.C. is due in no small measure to the preaching of Jeremiah. Herein lies the paradox of Jeremiah's ministry: By preaching judgment he was in fact providing the basis of salvation for his people. Again and again Jeremiah emphasized that the destruction of Jerusalem was of the Lord. He underscored the fact that the judgment was just because of the enormous transgression of the people. The desperately confused Jews in 587 B.C. clung to the words of Jeremiah as the only viable explanation of what happened. Thus Jeremiah was able to fit the tragedy of 587 B.C. into the framework of faith.

Jeremiah made another equally important contribution to the ongoing of his people. This prophet laid the foundations and prepared the way for the New Israel which would one day rise out of the ruins of the old. Jeremiah believed in the indestructibility of Israel (Jeremiah 30:11; Jeremiah 29:11). The nation must go into captivity; but the day for return would come at the conclusion of the seventy years of servitude to Babylon (Jeremiah 16:18; Jeremiah 25:11-12). That grand exodus from Babylon which would eclipse the memory of the exodus from Egypt (Jeremiah 16:14 ff.) would be a restoration for Israel as well as for Judah (Jeremiah 30:10). Replacing the worthless kings who had disgraced the throne of David, God would raise up for them in that day an ideal king, a righteous Branch, the Messiah (Jeremiah 23:5-6; Jeremiah 30:9). Out of the ruins of the old city of Jerusalem a new city, a spiritual city would arise which would wear the same name as the King who rules over it (Jeremiah 33:11; Jeremiah 33:16). Replacing the old covenant which had been written upon stone would be a new covenant written upon the tables of the heart, an inward, spiritual, everlasting covenant of pardon and grace (Jeremiah 31:33 f.; Jeremiah 32:39 f.; Jeremiah 33:8), The old ark of the covenant, symbolic of God's presence, would no longer be needed or even desired in the new age for God Himself would dwell in the midst of the people (Jeremiah 3:16 f.). Through faith and obedience Gentiles would be incorporated into that New Israel (Jeremiah 3:17; Jeremiah 16:19; Jeremiah 12:16). These and similar predictions of a glorious future on the other side of the valley of despair sustained the people of God through the agonizing spiritual ordeal of the exile. Because of his Messianic predictions Jeremiah stands forever as a strong cornerstone in that foundation of the prophets upon which is reared the majestic building of the Church of Christ, the New Israel of God.[55]

[55] A. F. Kirkpatrick, The Doctrine of the Prophets (third edition; London: Macmillan, 1923), p. 325.

Considerations of space will not permit a lengthy discussion of the importance of Jeremiah in Jewish tradition. Ginzberg in his monumental work, The Legends of the Jews[56] records dozens of legends that grew up about this prophet. Legend would have it that Jeremiah was born circumcised; that he was weeping at his birth and that shortly thereafter he could speak; that the prophet concealed the Temple vessels and heavenly fire when Jerusalem fell to the Chaldeans; that Jeremiah and Nebuchadnezzar were friends in their childhood; that one of the prayers of this prophet caused the crocodiles to disappear; that Jeremiah entered paradise alive; that he would be one of two witnesses to return to earth in the future. It was probably this last tradition which explains why some Jews thought Jesus was Jeremiah.[57]

[56] Louis Ginzberg, The Legends of the Jews (Philadelphia Jewish Publication Society, 1938). See index vol., pp. 253-54 for references.

[57] Matthew 16:14. The prophet in John 1:21; John 6:14 and John 7:40 is also a reference to Jeremiah.

REVIEW OF CHAPTER TWO

I. Facts to Master

The meaning of the name Jeremiah

The name of Jeremiah's father

The name of Jeremiah's home town

The date Jeremiah received his call to the prophetic ministry

The major periods of Jeremiah's ministry II.

Questions to Ponder

In what ways did Jeremiah's early home life help to shape his ministry? To what degree is a man influenced for good or evil by his home environment?

To what extent does the preaching of Jeremiah reflect the influence of nature? What can a man learn about God from His creation?

What was there about Jeremiah that qualified him to deal with the political, religious, social and moral situation of his day?

Why did Jeremiah not receive the call of God with eagerness? What factors should a man consider before answering the divine call to specialized Christian service?

What lessons could a young preacher learn from Jeremiah?

To what extent did Jeremiah use action parables or symbolic acts in his ministry? Could Jeremiah be accused of sensationalism? Would such actions be appropriate today?

In what ways was Jeremiah's life a living sermon?

What role did prayer play in the life of this prophet? How could Jeremiah preach judgment and yet pray for the salvation of his people? Why did God instruct Jeremiah to desist from prayer on behalf of the nation? Should a Christian ever stop praying for a lost man?

Was Jeremiah a traitor to his country? What are the limits to which a Christian can go in supporting the government?

10.

Why is Jeremiah called the weeping prophet? Did Jeremiah weep over his own misfortune or over the condition of his people? Was the weeping of Jeremiah a public or a private matter?

11.

Why was the ministry of Jeremiah so important in the history of redemption?

CHAPTER THREE
JEREMIAH: THE BOOK

The Book of Jeremiah in the standard English editions contains fifty-two Chapter s, among the prophets second only to the sixty-six Chapter s of Isaiah. By actual word count Jeremiah is the longest prophetic book in the Bible. This book is not the easiest one to understand and appreciate. As a matter of fact Jeremiah makes extremely difficult reading even for those who might be somewhat more advanced in the area of Biblical studies. This booklike the other prophetic booksalludes to persons, situations and events which are unfamiliar to the modern reader. The figures of speech seem often to be crude and inappropriate or altogether obscure. Yet those who pick up this book should realize that they are studying a document which is more than twenty-five hundred years old. Such difficulties are to be expected when one reads any literature from antiquity. But if one succeeds in bridging the culture gap between the twentieth century A.D. and the sixth century B.C. he will be richly rewarded by what he discovers in the Book of Jeremiah.

1. THE WRITING OF THE BOOK A.
Authorship

The heading of the Book of Jeremiah (Jeremiah 1:1) claims that the Chapter s which follow right up to (but not including) chapter 52 are the work of Jeremiah son of Hilkiah who lived in the late seventh and early sixth centuries before Christ. With this agrees the statement in Jeremiah 51:64, Thus far are the words of Jeremiah. Internal evidence supports the contention of the superscription and subscription of the book. In Jeremiah 36:1-2 Jeremiah is told to record in a scroll his oral messages from the first half of his ministry. When the prophet complied with that command the first edition of the Book of Jeremiah came into being. As regards the matter of authorship three questions need probing: What was the role of Baruch in the production of the Book of Jeremiah? Is there any extraneous material in the book? Who is responsible for the historical appendix which is contained in chapter 52?

1. The role of Baruch

Baruch the son of Neriah is mentioned several times in the Book of Jeremiah. Chronologically his first appearance is in chapter 36 where he wrote a scroll at the dictation of Jeremiah and then publicly read the document. Jeremiah was commissioned to utter a special oracle pertaining to Baruch in that same year (chapter 45). Sixteen years later Baruch again appears in the capacity of an assistant to Jeremiah when the latter was performing one of the most dramatic action parables of his career (Jeremiah 32:12 f.). When last mentioned in the book Baruch was accused of influencing Jeremiah to denounce the plans of the remnant to emigrate to Egypt. Subsequently both the prophet and Baruch were forced to accompany the refugees in their flight from Judah (Jeremiah 43:3; Jeremiah 43:6).

Opinions differ as to the extent of Baruch's influence in the publication of the Book of Jeremiah. On one extreme there are scholars who believe that Baruch was involved only in the writing of the scroll of 605-604 B.C. According to this view Baruch was nothing more than a public scribe employed for a very limited task. On the other extreme are those scholars who believe Baruch on his own initiative published a biography of Jeremiah. At a later date Baruch combined Jeremiah's work with his own, recasting some of Jeremiah's sermons in his own pedestrian style. Both of these positions with regard to the role of Baruch are unacceptable. The first positionthat of Mowinckelis a priori unlikely in view of the close association between Baruch and Jeremiah subsequent to 604 B.C. As for the second position, Baruch appears to be too pious and serious a man to have tampered in any way with the speeches of his master.[58]

[58] E. J. Young, An Introduction to the Old Testament (Grand Rapids Eerdmans, 1960), p. 244.

What then was the role of Baruch in the publication of the Book of Jeremiah? His initial role as the scribe who recorded verbatim the sermons dictated to him by Jeremiah is clearly indicated in chapter 36. It is quite possible and even probable that in the latter half of his ministry Jeremiah used Baruch in a similar capacity. In the twilight years of the prophet's life Baruch probably gathered and edited all of Jeremiah's prophecies. But whatever he did in the way of editing was doubtless at Jeremiah's direction. Even the arrangement of the prophecies may be due to the suggestion of Jeremiah.[59] Thus Jeremiah is the author of the book which bears his name and Baruch's contribution was purely technical and mechanical.

[59] The view adopted here regarding the role of Baruch is that of E. J. Young, op. cit., pp. 243-45.

2. Alleged non-Jeremian material

Negative critical scholars do not feel obligated to accept the claims of any Old Testament book with regard to its authorship. They believe that they have at their disposal modern tools by which they can confidently separate the actual words of Jeremiah from later intrusions. Robert Pfeiffer, for example, believes that the Book of Jeremiah consists of three groups of writings: (1) words dictated or written by Jeremiah himself; (2) biography of the prophet probably written by Baruch; and (3) miscellaneous contributions from the hands of redactors and later authors. It is this third category of materials which is most disturbing. How is one to distinguish between the inspired and authentic words of Jeremiah the prophet and the words of redactors and later authors? The critical scholars begin by setting up categories of what they believe a prophet of that period could or would have said. Any verses in the book which do not fall into those categories are declared to be spurious. Since these critics, for the most part, do not believe in the possibility of long-range, pin-point predictive prophecy, all such passages can be taken away from the prophet and assigned to some anonymous person who actually lived after the event which is predicted. According to some of the more radical critics, Messianic prophecy prior to the return from captivity in 538 B.C. is impossible; therefore all passages predicting the coming of a personal Messiah in the books of Isaiah, Micah, Jeremiah and the other pre-exilic prophets must be assigned to some author living after 538 B.C. Now this methodology is so ridiculous that one is prone to dismiss it with a humorous chuckle. Yet this is the type of scholarship to which young people are exposed in most universities and theological training schools today!

It is not possible nor would it be profitable to deal here with all the disputed passages in Jeremiah. One recent and highly respected introduction to the Old Testament has taken the position that 533 verses, roughly thirty-nine per cent of the Book of Jeremiah, were written neither by Jeremiah nor by Baruch.[60] One cannot, of course, find unanimity among the critics as to which specific passages in the book are spurious. Since their methodology is so subjective, agreement among these critics is not to be expected. Where significant objections have been raised as to the genuineness of a verse, rebuttal will be offered in the comments on that verse. It will suffice here to note the various categories of passages which the negative critics tend to deny to the prophet Jeremiah. In general they question the following types of passages: (1) Passages which are verbally parallel with those in other Old Testament books; (2) verses which are repetitions from earlier within the Book of Jeremiah; (3) passages which predict doom for Babylon; and (4) Messianic prophecies.

[60] Georg Fohrer, Introduction to the Old Testament trans. David E. Green (Nashville: Abingdon, 1968), pp. 399-400.

3. The authorship of Jeremiah 52

The concluding words of chapter 51, Thus far are the words of Jeremiah, seem to imply that what follows in chapter 52 was not written by the prophet. In spite of this explicit statement some insist that Jeremiah is still to be regarded as the author of the last chapter of the book. Their argument goes like this: Jeremiah 52 has been copied from II Kings and Jeremiah wrote 2 Kings; therefore Jeremiah wrote chapter 52. There are in this argument two basic assumptions: (1) that the Jewish tradition ascribing the authorship of Kings to Jeremiah is reliable; and (2) that Jeremiah 52 was copied from II Kings. The latter assumption would appear to be unjustified in view of the fact that Jeremiah 52 contains information not contained in II Kings (see Jeremiah 52:10; Jeremiah 52:19-23; Jeremiah 52:28-30). Furthermore certain words are spelled differently in the two sources. While most of these spelling differences are obvious only in the Hebrew at least one is clear in the English text. In 2 Kings 24:18 the name of the king of Babylon is spelled Nebuchadnezzar while in Jeremiah 52 the spelling Nebuchadnezzar is used.

The last seven verses of chapter 52 would seem to require authorship by someone other than Jeremiah. For one thing Jeremiah would have been close to ninety years of age when Jehoiachin was released from Babylonian imprisonment (Jeremiah 52:31). While not rendering Jeremian authorship of these verses impossible this age factor would certainly render it improbable. Furthermore in these verses the next to the last king of Judah is called Jehoiachin while in the body of the Book of Jeremiah this king goes by the name Coniah (Jeremiah 37:1; Jeremiah 22:24; Jeremiah 22:28) or Jeconiah (Jeremiah 27:20; Jeremiah 28:4; Jeremiah 24:1). Finally these last seven verses use the Babylonian or accession year method of computing the regnal years of Nebuchadnezzar while in the body of the Book of Jeremiah, in Jeremiah 52:12 and in the Book of Kings the Palestinian system is employed. It would be most difficult to imagine one author using two different dating systems for the same king.

If Jeremiah did not write chapter 52, who did? Various suggestions have been made. Most likely Baruch added this chapter and clearly indicated that he was doing so by inserting the editorial note at the end of chapter 51. It is possible that chapter 52 (or at least most of it) was included at the suggestion of Jeremiah himself.[61]

[61] Young, op. cit., p. 244. For further discussion of the value and purpose of this chapter see the introductory material preceding the comments on chapter 52.

The position taken in this study of the Book of Jeremiah is that the entire work belongs to Jeremiah and his amanuensis, Baruch. The poetic oracles[62] and prose sermons no doubt were dictated by Jeremiah to Baruch or, in some cases, recorded by Baruch as they were preached. The biographical materials were likely written by Baruch and were based on his own observations or conversations with Jeremiah. The prophet himself was ultimately responsible for all the material in the book with the possible exception of chapter 52.

[62] An oracle is a Divine utterance which the prophet as the spokes man and messenger of God announces publicly in the name of God. Generally an oracle is introduced by the formula Thus says the Lord and concluded by oracle of the Lord.

B. The Style of Writing

A careful study of the prophetic books of the Old Testament reveals that each of the inspired authors wrote in his own distinctive style. Much has been written on the style of Jeremiah, some of it complementary, much of it derogatory. The present writer finds it impossible to make pronouncements on whether Jeremiah's style is good or bad, or whether it is superior or inferior to that of other prophets. Jeremiah is Jeremiah. He has his own distinctive style of writing. His book has profoundly influenced the course of Jewish and Christian thought. Long after the subjective evaluations of literary critics are forgotten the Book of Jeremiah will continue to be studied and appreciated. Another point needs to be made as well: the fact that certain sections of Jeremiah strike modern scholars as stylistically inferiore.g., the prose sectionsdoes not mean that his contemporaries regarded it as bad Hebrew. Thus modern students of the book should be very cautious in passing value judgments on the style of this ancient document. Nevertheless as one reads the Book of Jeremiah he cannot help but notice certain rather prominent stylistic characteristics:

1. Absence of ornament

Cheyne describes the style of Jeremiah as one of unpretending simplicity.[63] One does not find in Jeremiah the glowing language and vivacity which characterizes the Book of Isaiah; he is not the artist in words as was his predecessor. This is not to say that Jeremiah was inferior to Isaiah; such an evaluation would be grossly unfair. The men lived in different ages; they spoke to and wrote for different audiences and most important, they had different personalities. Jeremiah was preeminently a man of sorrows; perhaps this accounts for his unadorned simplicity. In the desperate times in which he lived flowery oratory would have been entirely out of place. The times called for clear, lucid, direct, concise and easily understood discourse. When placed within the proper historical context the style of Jeremiah has a beauty of its own.

[63] Cheyne, op. cit., p. xiv.

Perhaps one should not speak of a Jeremian style, for actually variations of style can be detected within the book. One's style of writing or speaking is determined in large measure by external factors. Those whose ministry extends over several decades may be shocked in later years to read what was written in their youth. In the case of Jeremiah the earlier oracles display a calmness and uniformity of tone; his later oracles show traces of his personal suffering.

2. Frequent repetition

Jeremiah's ministry was quite lengthy and his message throughout was basically the same. Given these circumstances repetition is to be expected. What modern preacher does not on occasion repeat himself? The repetitions in Jeremiah may be categorized under the following headings:

a) Certain figures of speech are repeated in the book. Among these are the figures of the brazen wall (Jeremiah 1:18; Jeremiah 15:20), the turned back (Jeremiah 2:27; Jeremiah 7:24; Jeremiah 32:33), fury that burns like fire (Jeremiah 4:4; Jeremiah 21:12), the water of gall (Jeremiah 7:14; Jeremiah 9:15; Jeremiah 23:15), the incurable wound (Jeremiah 15:18; Jeremiah 30:12) and rotten figs (Jeremiah 24:8; Jeremiah 29:17). The favorite figure employed by the prophet is that of the travailing woman (Jeremiah 4:31; Jeremiah 6:24; Jeremiah 13:21; Jeremiah 22:23; Jeremiah 30; Jeremiah 6). Another prominent figure is that of carcasses being given over to the fowl of the heavens (Jeremiah 7:33; Jeremiah 19:7; Jeremiah 16:4; Jeremiah 34:20).

b) The prophet uses stereotyped formulae through out the book. He uses the expression rising up early at least a dozen times to express the idea of earnestness. Other favorite expressions are: walking in the stubborn ness of the heart (7 times); the voice of mirth and the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride (4 times); sword, famine, pestilence (18 times); and fear on every side (4 times).
c) Entire verses are repeated. At least fourteen[64] examples of such repetition can be observed in the book as the following chart illustrates.

[64] Several other examples of virtual repetition could be cited, e.g., Jeremiah 15:13-14 and Jeremiah 17:3-4; Jeremiah 4:5 and Jeremiah 8:14; Jeremiah 8:15 and Jeremiah 14:19; and Jeremiah 49:19-21 and Jeremiah 50:44-46.

VERSE REPETITIONS IN THE BOOK OF JEREMIAH

(1) Jeremiah 1:18-19 and Jeremiah 15:20

(9) Jeremiah 11:20 and Jeremiah 20:12

(2) Jeremiah 2:28 and Jeremiah 11:13

(10) Jeremiah 15:2 and Jeremiah 48:11

(3) Jeremiah 5:9; Jeremiah 5:29 and Jeremiah 9:9

(11) Jeremiah 16:14-15 and Jeremiah 23:7-8

(4) Jeremiah 6:13-15 and Jeremiah 8:10-12

(12) Jeremiah 17:25 and Jeremiah 22:4

(5) Jeremiah 6:22-24 and Jeremiah 50:41-43

(13) Jeremiah 23:19-20 and Jeremiah 30:23-24

(6) Jeremiah 7:14 and Jeremiah 26:6

(14) Jeremiah 30:11 and Jeremiah 46:28

(7) Jeremiah 7:31-33 and Jeremiah 19:5-7; Jeremiah 32:35

(15) Jeremiah 31:35-36 and Jeremiah 33:25-26

(8) Jeremiah 10:12-16 and 61:16-19

As far as literary form is concerned the repetitions in Jeremiah fall into no clear pattern. Poetic sayings are repeated in similar, or sometimes quite different, connections; the same is true of the prose sayings. The two parts of the doublet may differ in literary form. One may be prose and the other poetry; one may be part of a prose sermon, and the other part of the biographical narrative.

3. Influences of earlier writers

Jeremiah was influenced in no small measure by his predecessors. On account of quoting so frequently from other prophets Jeremiah has been charged with a lack of originality. But the truth of the matter is that this man was so saturated with the word of God that he unconsciously utilized the language of the great spiritual giants of Israel's past. It may even be at times that he deliberately quoted the earlier prophets in order to vindicate himself by showing a continuity between what he was preaching and what the prophets of God had always preached viz., that idolatry and disobedience to the covenant would lead to national overthrow. However Jeremiah never allowed himself to become the slave of another man's style. The imprint of his own personality is upon all of his prophecies.[65]

[65] Clyde T. Francisco, Introducing the Old Testament (Nashville: Broadman, 1950), p. 142.

Jeremiah was especially fond of quoting the two great prophets of the eighth century, Isaiah and Hosea. The influence of Isaiah is clearly present in at least six passages of the Book of Jeremiah[66] and because of the similarities in language and thought Hosea has been called by one scholar the Jeremiah of the Northern Kingdom. A parallel listing of some of the similar passages in the writings of these two men of God will clearly indicate the influence which Hosea exerted on Jeremiah.

[66] Compare Isaiah 4:2; Isaiah 11:1 and Jeremiah 23:5-6; Jeremiah 33:15; Isaiah 13, 47 and Jeremiah 50-51; Isaiah 16 and Jeremiah 48; Jeremiah 6; Jeremiah 33:15;Isaiah 40:19-20 and Jeremiah 10:3-5: Isaiah 42:16 and Jeremiah 31:9.

Hosea 14:1; Hosea 14:4

Jeremiah 3:22

O Israel, return unto the LORD your God; for you have fallen by your iniquity. I will heal their backsliding.

Return, you backsliding children, I will heal your backsliding.

Hosea 10:12

Jeremiah 4:3

Sow to yourselves in righteousness, reap according to kindness; break up your fallow ground. .

Break up your fallow ground, and sow not among thorns.

Hosea 6:10

Jeremiah 5:30

In the house of Israel I have seen thing a horrible thing: there whoredom is found in Ephraim, Israel is defiled.

an astonishing and horrible is come to pass in the land.

Jeremiah 18:13

.. the virgin of Israel has done a very horrible thing.

Jeremiah 23:14

In the prophets of Jerusalem also I have seen a horrible thing: they commit adultery, and walk in lies. .

Hosea 4:2

Jeremiah 7:9

There is nought but swearing and breaking faith, and killing, and stealing, and committing adultery. .

Will you steal, murder, and commit adultery, and swear falsely, and burn incense unto Baal. .

Hosea 14:9

Jeremiah 9:12

Who is wise, that he may under stand these things? prudent that he may know them?

Who is the wise man, that may understand this? and who is he to whom the mouth of the LORD has spoken, that he may declare it?

Hosea 8:13

Jeremiah 14:10

but the LORD accepts them not: now will He remember their iniquity and visit their sins. .

.. therefore the LORD does not accept them,; now will he remember their iniquities, and visit their sins.

Hosea 9:9

.. he will remember their iniquity, he will visit their sins.

Hosea 3:5

Jeremiah 30:9

Afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek the LORD their God, and David their king. .

But they shall serve the LORD their God, and David their king, whom I will raise up unto them.

Hosea 2:23

Jeremiah 30:22

.. and I will say to them that were not My people, You are My people; and they shall say, you are my God.

And you shall be My people, and I will be your God.

4. The mixture of prose and poetry

The Book of Jeremiah contains prose and poetry in nearly equal proportions. While the literary critics may be correct in evaluating the poetry of Jeremiah as artistically inferior to that of the eighth century prophets, Jeremiah's poetry is nonetheless outstanding. His poetry combines pathos with picturesque imagery.[67] Jeremiah wrote some of the most sympathetic pages of the Old Testament.[68] But whatever his literary merits or demerits Jeremiah deserves the highest honor for his conscientiousness. Cheyne has correctly observed: his greatest poem is his life.[69]

[67] Freedman, op. cit., p. xxi.

[68] Cheyne, op. cit., p. xv.

[69] Ibid.

5. Use of numerous figures of speech

Jeremiah uses numerous images and figures of speech. He is particularly fond of similes drawn from the realm of nature (Jeremiah 2:23; Jeremiah 8:7, etc.) and from the scenes of everyday life (Jeremiah 6:29 f.; Jeremiah 18:2 ff). Frequently the figures are only partially developed as the prophet jumps back and forth from figurative to concrete description.[70]

[70] To this point the discussion of the style of Jeremiah has been developed along lines suggested by A. Streane, The Book of the Prophet Jeremiah Together with Lamentations (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges. Cambridge: University Press, 1903), pp. xxviii-xxx.

6. Preoccupation with mourning and funeral rites

The Weeping Prophet has a great deal to say about mourning and lamentation. In several passages he calls upon others to lament the destruction of the nation (Jeremiah 4:8; Jeremiah 9:17-18; Jeremiah 9:20) or her lovers (Jeremiah 22:20). In one passage Jeremiah discourages further weeping over the death of Josiah and instructs the people rather to mourn over the banishment of king Jehoahaz (Jeremiah 22:10-11). He calls upon the shepherds of the nation to lament the impending slaughter of the flock (Jeremiah 25:34). In his oracles concerning Moab and Ammon he rhetorically calls upon these Gentiles to mourn (Jeremiah 48:20; Jeremiah 49:3). There are numerous descriptions of and allusions to lamentation in the book in addition to these direct exhortations. He vividly describes the lamentation and consternation caused by a terrible drought (Jeremiah 14:2-3) and the wail of shepherds when their pasture has been destroyed (Jeremiah 25:36). He places a lament on the lips of the captives in Babylon (Jeremiah 8:19) and visualizes a day when rebellious Israel would return to God with bitter tears of shame and remorse (Jeremiah 3:21; Jeremiah 31:9; Jeremiah 50:4). Jeremiah refers to the cry of lamentation which would arise over the destruction of foreign nations (Jeremiah 46:12; Jeremiah 47:2; Jeremiah 48:4 -J; Jeremiah 49:21; Jeremiah 50:46). When Jeremiah contemplated the disaster which was about to befall the peoples of Syria-Palestine he was overcome by grief. He mourned bitterly for his own people (Jeremiah 4:19-21; Jeremiah 8:18 to Jeremiah 9:1; Jeremiah 9:10; Jeremiah 10:19; Jeremiah 13:17; Jeremiah 14:17-18); but he shed tears as well for the people of Moab (Jeremiah 48:31-32; Jeremiah 48:36). This preoccupation with lamentation is one of the unique characteristics of the Book of Jeremiah. The mind of this prophet was set on a minor key, and his temper was elegiac.[71]

[71] Davidson, op. tit., p. 576.

7. The use of the rhetorical question

The Book of Jeremiah is filled with rhetorical questions and the use of this device must be regarded as characteristic of the literary and oratorical style of this prophet. At times God uses rhetorical questions in speaking to Jeremiah (Jeremiah 3:6; Jeremiah 7:17; Jeremiah 12:5). Jeremiah uses this device to rebuke and exhort the people of Judah. At least ten verses in chapter 2 alone contain rhetorical questions. Sometimes such questions are placed on the lips of the people.[72] Rhetorical questions are also used by Jeremiah in his prayers (e.g., Jeremiah 15:18; Jeremiah 18:20).

[72] Jeremiah 8:19; Jeremiah 13:22; Jeremiah 16:20; Jeremiah 21:13; Jeremiah 22:8.

8. Use of quotations

Another favorite technique of Jeremiah is the use of quotations. In at least three verses God quotes Himself (Jeremiah 7:23; Jeremiah 11:4; Jeremiah 11:7). Jeremiah frequently quotes the words of the people to whom he was preaching. Such quotes reveal the rebellion (Jeremiah 6:16-17; Jeremiah 5:12), hypocrisy (Jeremiah 5:2, Jeremiah 7:4; Jeremiah 7:10) and hostility (Jeremiah 11:19; Jeremiah 11:21) of the people of his day. In at least one passage Jeremiah quotes the religious leaders of the nation (1 A: 1 A). Finally there is what might be called the projected quotation where Jeremiah anticipated what the people will be saying once God's judgment has been poured out upon them (Jeremiah 5:19; Jeremiah 8:14-15; Jeremiah 8:19).

II. THE HISTORY OF THE BOOK
A. Early Editions of Jeremiah

Considering the turbulence of the times it is indeed remarkable that any records written during the early sixth century have survived.[73] It is nothing short of a miracle of God's providence that men can have access to the writings of this great prophet.[74] Perhaps more is known about the process of producing the Book of Jeremiah than any other book in the Old Testament. It seems clear from internal evidence that the book went through at least three distinct stages before reaching its present form.

[73] H. T. Kuist, Jeremiah, Layman's Bible Commentary (Richmond: John Knox, 1960), pp. 12, 13.

[74] C. Paul Gray, The Book of the Prophet Jeremiah, Beacon Bible Commentary (Kansas City: Beacon Hill, 1966), p. 311.

1. The original roll

The first edition of the Book of Jeremiah appeared in 604 B.C. At the command of the Lord, Jeremiah dictated to his scribe Baruch portions of the sermons he had been preaching for some twenty-three years. Nearly everyone who has written a commentary or introduction to the Book of Jeremiah has attempted to reconstruct the contents of that original document. Such efforts are really futile, virtually amounting to nothing more than guesswork. The following cautious conclusions about the original roll are based upon what is said about it in chapter 36: (a) The scroll contained a selection from or a digest of the sermons of the prophet preached between 627 and 605 B.C. It is unlikely that it contained any narratives or reports of incidents in the prophet's life. (b) The sermons in the scroll must have been exclusively or at least primarily of a threatening character. (c) These messages were directed against foreign nations as well as against Judah and Jerusalem. (d) In comparison to the length of the present book the first edition must have been relatively brief for it was read three times in a single day (Jeremiah 36:10; Jeremiah 36:15; Jeremiah 36:21) with significant intervals between each reading. The first edition of Jeremiah was literally destroyed by the tyrant king Jehoiakim but was reproduced in an expanded form that very same year. In addition to the material contained in the roll which Jehoiakim destroyed this second roll contained many like words (Jeremiah 36:32).

2. Subsequent editions

The history of the Book of Jeremiah after 604 B.C. is obscure. At least one (possibly more) edition of the book preceded the final form of the text as it has been preserved in the Hebrew Bible. Probably an edition of the book was published by Baruch in Egypt after the death of Jeremiah. This Egyptian edition of Jeremiah would have been considerably larger than the scroll which was destroyed and reproduced in 604 B.C. It would have contained in addition to the earlier material all the accounts of the life and ministry of Jeremiah subsequent to 604 B.C. These accounts cover the last twenty years of the prophet's ministry. If this edition of Jeremiah contained chapter 52and this appears likelythen a clue is available as to the date of its publication. The Book of Jeremiah closes with an account of the release of king Jehoiachin from imprisonment in Babylon in 560 B.C. The Egyptian edition of Jeremiah must have been published shortly after this.

When Baruch decided to leave Egypt the Jews there must have made a hasty copy of the Book of Jeremiah to retain in their own possession. Baruch seems to have emigrated to Babylon. There he issued the final, completed form of the Book of Jeremiah. Baruch may have re arranged the material in the Egyptian edition and may possibly have added some new Jeremian material (e.g., Jeremiah 33:14-26). It is this Babylonian edition of Jeremiah which appears in the Hebrew Bible and which has been translated in the standard English versions of the Old Testament. Thus at the time of Baruch's death two editions of the Book of Jeremiah were in circulation, a shorter and incomplete edition in Egypt and the comprehensive and final edition in Babylonia.

B. The Problem of the Septuagint

The Greek translation of Jeremiah is peculiar in several respects. It differs from the standard Hebrew Book of Jeremiah in both content and form. To be specific the Septuagint (abbreviated LXX) differs from the Hebrew in at least four ways:
1. The Septuagint is about one-eighth shorter than the Hebrew text. This means that about twenty-seven hundred words which are found in the Hebrew text are not represented in the Greek version.[75] These omissions range in length from a word or two up to an entire section (e.g., Jeremiah 33:14-26). Most of the omissions in the Greek text are trifling. Some, perhaps many, of them may be attributed to the caprice, ignorance or carelessness of those who translated Jeremiah into Greek.[76] But some of the omissions appear to be systematic and deliberate.[77] This would suggest that the Septuagint translators had before them a different Hebrew copy of Jeremiah, one which was considerably shorter than the Hebrew copy that has survived. It is interesting that among the Dead Sea scrolls, texts of Jeremiah were found which support the shorter version of the book as well as the longer.[78]

[75] Giesebrecht cited by Bright, op. cit., p. cxxiii. The Septuagint also adds about one hundred words that are not represented in the Hebrew text.

[76] Naglesbach, op. cit., p. 14.

[77] For example, doublets are systematically eliminated in their second occurrence.
[78] Fohrer, op. cit., p. 400.

2. The Greek version of Jeremiah has a different arrangement of sections within the book. The section of oracles against foreign nations which is placed at the end of the book in the standard Hebrew text (Chapter s 46-51) is placed in the middle of the book in the Septuagint (after Jeremiah 25:13).

3. Even within the various sections of the book the Greek version sometimes arranges the material in a different order. In the Septuagint the oracles against the foreign nations are not in the same order in which they appear in the Hebrew text. The following chart illustrates the differences between the Hebrew and Greek arrangements of these oracles.

THE ORDER OF THE ORACLES AGAINST FOREIGN NATIONS

Hebrew

Greek

Position Arrangement Reference

Arrangement Reference

Egypt

Chap. 46

Elam

Jeremiah 25:15-20

Philistia

Chap. 47

Egypt

Chap. 26

Moab

Chap. 48

Babylon

Chaps. 26-28

Ammon

Jeremiah 49:1-6

Philistia

Jeremiah 29:1-7

Edom

49:-7-22

Edom

Damascus

Ammon

Kedar

Kedar

Elam

Damascus

Babylon

Chaps. 50-51 Moab

Chap. 31

4. Some blocks of materials (e.g., Jeremiah 33:14-16) which are found in the Hebrew text are absent from the Greek version.

No entirely satisfactory explanation of the differences between the Hebrew and Greek texts of Jeremiah has yet been put forward. This much is clear: The Greek version must have been translated from a Hebrew manuscript which differed markedly from the standard Hebrew manuscripts of the book, Since the Septuagint was translated in Alexandria Egypt the translators must have used the text of Jeremiah which was most popular in that area. That text would be the hastily copied scroll of Jeremiah which was made when Baruch emigrated to Babylon. This abbreviated form of the Book of Jeremiah became the basis of the Septuagint translation. Some have held that the Septuagint actually represents a superior text of the book. On the whole, however, the Hebrew text is superior.[79]

[79] Young, op. cit., p, 250.

The arrangement of the materials within the Hebrew text is also superior to that of the Septuagint. The Alexandria translators apparently took great liberty in rearranging the materials in what they considered to be a more logical order.[80] Perhaps the oracles against foreign nations were inserted in the middle of chapter 25 in order to make the Book of Jeremiah conform in structure to the books of Isaiah and Ezekiel. In any case the placement of these oracles between Jeremiah 25:13 and Jeremiah 25:15 is quite unnatural, for the Chapter s should certainly have followed and not preceded the enumeration of nations in Jeremiah 25:15-26 to which they refer.[81] The principle followed by the Septuagint translators in revising the order of the oracles against the nations can no longer be determined. Perhaps they were influenced by the political situation of their own day. In the mid-third century when the Book of Jeremiah was translated into Greek the Parthian empire had taken over the ancient territory of Elam and had given evidence that they were a power to be reckoned with. Babylonia was one of the major possessions of the Seleucid empire and Egypt was the center of the powerful Ptolemies. Because of their prestige and political importance Elam, Egypt and Babylon may have been placed first in the list by the Septuagint translators. What principle was followed in arranging the other six oracles is unclear. Be that as it may the order in the Hebrew text corresponds in the main to that of the nations enumerated in Jeremiah 25:15-26 and has all the marks of originality.[82]

[80] Ibid.

[81]A. B. Davidson, Jeremiah the Prophet, A Dictionary of the Bible, ed. James Hastings (New York: Scribner, 1909), II, 574.

[82] Davidson, loc. cit.

C. Canonicity of the Book

The term canonicity refers to the recognition of a writing as inspired and authoritative Scripture. In the case of the Book of Jeremiah such recognition must have come shortly after the publication of the book. History had vindicated the predictions of Jeremiah; no one could question any longer that he was a man of God. The earliest reference to the actual use of the Book of Jeremiah is recorded in Daniel 9:2. Just after the fall of Babylon, in the first year of Darius the Mede, Daniel was studying Jeremiah's famous seventy years prophecy. It was during his meditation upon this prophecy that Daniel himself received a revelation of the first magnitude, his famous seventy weeks revelation. The Book of Chronicles, probably compiled and written by Ezra the priest and scribe, furnishes evidence of the second use of Jeremiah. In the closing chapter of Chronicles a reference is made again to the seventy years prophecy (2 Chronicles 36:21). Thus the Chronicler as well as Daniel recognized that Jeremiah spoke the word of the Lord and he made use of the writing of that prophet.

The earliest testimony to the canonicity of the Book of Jeremiah outside the Old Testament is found in the apocryphal book of Ecclesiastics (Jeremiah 49:6-7). Here Ben Sira, the author of this important book, states that the fall of Jerusalem in 587 B.C. was a fulfillment of the predictions of Jeremiah. Ben Sira, then, in ca. 280 B.C.[83] recognized Jeremiah as a prophet of God and consequently must have regarded the Book of Jeremiah as inspired Scripture. Since Ben Sira obviously speaks as a well-educated and pious man, one must conclude that his attitude toward Jeremiah was the attitude prevalent among the Jews of his day.

[83] Ben Sira is usually dated at about 180 B.C. However, when all the evidence is sifted a date for the book at 280 B.C. is certainly possible if not probable.

D. Placement of the Book

Probably every Sunday School child in memorizing the books of the Bible has learned that the five books of Major Prophets are Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel and Daniel. This arrangement of the books is based upon that of the ancient Greek version of the Old Testament, the so-called Septuagint version. A Jewish child memorizing the books of the Hebrew Bible would learn that the Latter Prophets consists of four books: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and the Twelve. Under this system of counting the Minor Prophets are lumped together as one book. Daniel and Lamentations are not found among the prophets in the Hebrew Bible; they are counted among the so-called Kethubim or Writings.

In both ancient and modern Bibles, in the Hebrew, Greek and English arrangements of Old Testament books, Jeremiah stands alongside Isaiah and Ezekiel. But while these three booksIsaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekielhave always stood together, they have not always stood in that order. Certain evidence exists that the Book of Jeremiah once stood at the head of the Major Prophets. In the Talmud listing of Old Testament books Jeremiah is named immediately after Kings. Furthermore, a large number of Hebrew manuscripts place Jeremiah in the initial position.[84]

[84] H. E. Ryle, The Canon Of the Old Testament (second edition; London: Macmillan, 1895), p. 237.

E. Jeremiah in the New Testament

For the Christian, the attitude of Jesus Christ toward the Old Testament is of supreme importance. No one can question the fact that the Lord and His apostles regarded the Book of Jeremiah as inspired Scripture and an integral part of that group of sacred writings known collectively as the Old Testament. There are, according to one estimate, ninety-six allusions in the New Testament to the Book of Jeremiah.[85] Four passages from Jeremiah are directly quoted in the New Testament:

[85] United Bible Society Greek New Testament. The Nestle Greek New Testament lists fifty-five allusions. More than thirty of the allusions are in the Book of Revelation.

a) Commenting on the death of the innocents in Bethlehem Matthew quoted Jeremiah 31:15.

Then was fulfilled that which was spoken through Jeremiah the prophet, saying, A voice was heard in Ramah, weeping and mourning, Rachel weeping for her children; and she would not be comforted, because they are not (Matthew 2:17).

b) When Jesus drove the money-changers from the Temple He quoted with an authoritative formula Jeremiah 7:11.

And He said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called a house of prayer; but you are making it a den of robbers (Matthew 21:13).[86]

[86] Also found in Mark 11:17 and Luke 19:46.

C) Using that same formula, it is written the Apostle Paul gives an interpretive quotation or paraphrase of Jeremiah 9:24: He that glories, let him glory in the Lord (1 Corinthians 1:31).

d) The writer of Hebrews quotes at length from Jeremiah 31:31-34 in two passages (Hebrews 8:8-10; Hebrews 10:16-17) and attributes the words directly to God. Here is the inspired interpretation of the important New Covenant passage in Jeremiah.

In one passage Matthew quotes Zechariah 11:12-13 and attributes the quotation to Jeremiah the prophet.

Then was fulfilled that which was spoken through Jeremiah the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was priced whom certain of the children of Israel did price; and they gave them for the potter's field, as the Lord appointed me (Matthew 27:9-10).

Many different solutions have been proposed for this difficulty. Some think that a scribe has inserted the name of Jeremiah into the Matthew passage. Others think that Jeremiah actually spoke the words here attributed to him and then they were subsequently written down by Zechariah. However the simplest solution is that Matthew is quoting a section of the Old Testament rather than a book. Jeremiah originally stood first among the prophetic books, What Matthew meant was that the relevant passage was found in that section of the Old Testament which had Jeremiah at its head.[87]

[87] During the course of his debate with the atheist Robert Owen, an anonymous questioner submitted in writing a number of questions to Alexander Campbell among which was one question pertaining to the quote here under discussion. Mr. Campbell's answer on that occasion was essentially the same as the answer here proposed. See The Evidences of Christianity (Cincinnati Standard, n. d.), pp. 359-60.

III. THE CONTENTS OF THE BOOK
A. Types of Literature

Four basic types of material are to be found in the Book of Jeremiah: poetic sayings, the confessions, biographical prose, and prose discourses. The four types of literature are found commingled through the various parts of the book. Even though the recognition of these literary types is not a key to the arrangement of materials in Jeremiah it is nonetheless a useful tool in understanding the book.
The greater part of the poetry in Jeremiah belongs to the first literary type, the poetic saying or prophetic oracle. Most of the material found in the pre-exilic prophetic books falls into this category. In this type of utterance the prophet speaks as the mouthpiece of the Lord. He uses throughout the first person but the I is the Lord, not the prophet. Such an oracle is usually introduced by a formula such as Thus says the Lord or Hear the word of the Lord. These oracles come from all periods of the prophet's public ministry with the heaviest incidence coming in the reign of king Jehoiakim.

The second type of literature in Jeremiah is virtually unique in prophetic books. It is called by some autobiography; by others, documents of self-revelation; by still others the confessions. Here the prophet lays bare his most intimate feelings. In these passages Jeremiah uses the first person but the I is not the Lord; it is the prophet himself. It is most difficult to imagine that these lines of self-revelation were ever publicly spoken. At some state of the writing of Jeremiahprobably in the second edition of the bookthese verses were skillfully interwoven with the oracles of judgment against Judah. Jeremiah records for subsequent generations his thundering denunciations and threats of destruction. At the same time he reveals the personal agony which he experienced all the while he was publicly preaching doom. The material which falls into the second literary type may be further sub-divided into (1) the confessions or complaints (Jeremiah 11:18 to Jeremiah 12:6; Jeremiah 15:10 f., Jeremiah 15:15-21; Jeremiah 17:14-18; Jeremiah 18:18-23; Jeremiah 20:7-18); and (2) the laments (e.g., Jeremiah 4:19-21; Jeremiah 5:3-5; Jeremiah 8:18 to Jeremiah 9:1).

The third type of literature in the Book of Jeremiah is the prose discourse. Most of the passages in this category begin with God addressing Jeremiah and giving him directions as to what he is to say and do (e.g., Jeremiah 7:2; Jeremiah 7:16; Jeremiah 7:2 zf.; Jeremiah 11:1-17; Jeremiah 16:1-13; Jeremiah 18:1-12; Jeremiah 19:1-13). sometimes the introductory address has been omitted and only the prose sermon remains (e.g., Jeremiah 16:14-18; Jeremiah 31:27-34; Jeremiah 38:17; chapter 33). The prose discourse is found in all parts of the book and is often intermingled with the poetic material. As much as twenty-five percent of the content of the Book of Jeremiah falls into this category.

Biography constitutes the fourth category of literature in the Book of Jeremiah. While other prophetic books contain snatches of this type of material, large blocks of such material is found in this book. This narrative material refers to Jeremiah in the third person. The individual sections of this material are usually introduced by precise chronological data (e.g., Jeremiah 26:1; Jeremiah 38:1; Jeremiah 36:1) though sometimes such data are omitted (e.g., Jeremiah 14:14 to Jeremiah 20:6). Often times the biographical material serves to provide a framework for one of the prose sermons of Jeremiah. Some critics believe that the creator of this material, the Biographer as he is sometimes called, lived several generations after the time of Jeremiah.[88] However it is more likely that Baruch is responsible for recording and preserving this material probably at the direction and possibly the dictation of Jeremiah himself.[89]

[88] H. G. May, Journal of Biblical Literature 61 (1942), 139-66.

[89] John Bright (op. cit., p. lxvii) has pointed out that the biographical accounts cover the period from 609 (Chapter 26) to the end of Jeremiah's career. Baruch is known to have been the secretary of Jeremiah from at least 605 B.C. (Chapter 36, 45) until after 587 B.C. (Jeremiah 43:3).

B. Arrangement of the Material

One of the most difficult problems facing the student of Jeremiah is that of the arrangement of the materials within the book. Francisco regards the arrangement of the book as the most confused in the Old Testament.[90] That the book is not chronologically arranged can be seen in the following chart which indicates the various time notices in the book. Eleven of these notices are explicit as to the particular year of a king's reign; the remainder mention events which can be dated precisely by other means.

[90] Francisco, op. cit., p. 145.

CHRONOLOGICAL NOTICES IN THE BOOK OF JEREMIAH

In the Reign of JOSIAH

In the Reign of JEHOIAKIM

In the Reign of ZEDEKIAH

After the Fall of Jerusalem

Jeremiah 1:2 (Jeremiah 25:3)

Jeremiah 3:6

Jeremiah 21:1-2

Jeremiah 22:18

Jeremiah 24:1; Jeremiah 24:8

Jeremiah 25:1

Jeremiah 26:1

Jeremiah 27:3; Jeremiah 27:12

Jeremiah 36:1; Jeremiah 36:9

Jeremiah 37:1; Jeremiah 37:3

At times the Book of Jeremiah is chronological (Chapter s 37-44) and at times it is topical (Chapter s 46-51). Chapter s 1-6 seem to be in sequence; but from chapter 7 on, no real systematic pattern can be observed. Even a superficial reading of the book reveals that materials from widely different periods of Jeremiah's life have been placed side by side. The undated material presents still another problem. Where do these Chapter s fit chronologically in the ministry of the prophet? Many conjectures have been put forward but to this day scholars are not in agreement as to how the Book of Jeremiah reached its present form.[91]

[91] Gray, op. cit., p, 311.

Some of the most constructive work on the problem of the arrangement of the materials in the Book of Jeremiah has been done by J. Barton Payne.[92] This scholar believes that the book is arranged topically and that it grew with each of the three or four successive editions which preceded the final comprehensive scroll. As Jeremiah continued to preach he added to the writings that ultimately made up the book which bears his name. Payne takes each of the chronologically displaced units in the book and offers an explanation both as to the time and the reason that unit was placed in its present position. Payne believes that both the original scroll and the scroll reproduced in 604 B. C. were arranged chronologically. However, when the third edition of the book was produced in Egypt certain logical or topical supplements were inserted at various places in the document. Certainly the arrangement of the material as it stands was suitable for the purpose of the book which was to lead God's people to repentance and to reconciliation with Him (Jeremiah 36:3; Jeremiah 36:7).

[92] The Arrangement of Jeremiah's Prophecies, Bulletin of the Evangelical Theological Society, VII (Fall, 1964), 120-130.

Any attempt to outline the Book of Jeremiah in detail must result only in an approximate division of the text. while the broad divisions of the book are evident, wide disagreement exists as to how the material is arranged within those portions of the book. The main divisions of the Book of Jeremiah come at the end of Chapter s 1, 25, 45, and 51.
Chapter one is introductory to the entire Book of Jeremiah. It contains an account of the prophet's call and a summary of his prophet activity in prospect.

Chapter s 2-25 are for the most part a collection of Jeremiah's oracles or prophecies down to 605 B.C. (Jeremiah 25:1). This broad statement must, however, be qualified by noting that some biographical material is found in these Chapter s as well as some material (e.g., Jeremiah 21:1-10) which must be dated after 605 B.C. Chapter s 2-25 are mainly poetical, mainly oracular, mainly national, and for this reason Robert Pfeiffer designates this division of the book as the words of Jeremiah. Most of the material in this division of the book was dictated to Baruch, Jeremiah's secretary, in 605 B.C. when the Lord commanded the prophet to commit his words to writing.

Chapter s 26-45 contain primarily biographical material relating to the ministry of Jeremiah after 605 B.C. Again some qualification of this generalization is necessary. Excerpts from some of Jeremiah's sermons are found in this section as is some material dating prior to 605 B.C. (e.g., chapter 26). This section, which is mainly prose, has been called by Pfeiffer the biography of Jeremiah. The materials here were likely compiled by Baruch.

Chapter s 46-51 are prophecies against foreign nations which were written at various times during the ministry of Jeremiah. Perhaps at one time this section of Jeremiah circulated separately. In the Septuagint version this whole section is placed after Jeremiah 25:13.

Chapter 52 is an appendix added to the Book of Jeremiah apparently to show how some of the prophecies of Jeremiah were fulfilled in the fall of Jerusalem and exile of many Jews. Others see the purpose of this chapter as a kind of introduction to the Book of Lamentations which seems at one time to have been a part of the Book of Jeremiah. Chapter 52 ends on a note of hope with the account of the release of Jehoiachin in 560 B.C.
Perhaps all that has been said in the previous paragraphs concerning the arrangement of the Book of Jeremiah can be summarized in the following chart.

REVIEW OF CHAPTER THREE

I. True and False

___ 1. Jeremiah is the longest of the prophetic books.
___ 2. Baruch is the real author of the Book of Jeremiah.
___ 3. Baruch first appears as the associate of Jeremiah during the reign of king Jehoiakim.
___ 4. Both Baruch and Jeremiah were forced to emigrate to Egypt after the assassination of Gedaliah.
___ 5. Liberal and conservative scholars agree that Jeremiah and Baruch are responsible for all the material in the Book of Jeremiah.
___ 6. There is no internal evidence to justify regarding chapter 52 as non-Jeremian.

___ 7. Jeremiah 52 was borrowed directly from II Kings.

___ 8. Frequent repetition is one of the stylistic features of the book.
___ 9. Jeremiah was most influenced by Amos, the eighth-century prophet.
___ 10. Most of the Book of Jeremiah is written in prose.
___ 11. The earliest edition of the Book of Jeremiah was placed in the ark of the covenant for safe keeping.
___ 12. The original roll of Jeremiah was composed in 605-604 B.C.
___ 13. The last event recorded in the Book of Jeremiah is the release of king Jehoiachin from captivity.
___ 14. The shorter Greek version of Jeremiah offers a more original text than do the Hebrew manuscripts.

15. Jeremiah always follows Isaiah in Hebrew manuscripts.
11. Fill in the Blanks

1.______ stands first among the oracles against foreign nations in the Hebrew, while occupies that position in the Greek.

2. The Septuagint is

shorter than the Hebrew Book of Jeremiah.

3. In the Greek version the oracles against foreign nations appear in the middle of chapter
4. The first individual known to have read and studied the Book of Jeremiah was
5. The first mention of Jeremiah outside the Old Testament is found in.
6. _____ passages from Jeremiah are quoted in the New Testament.
7. The most unique type of literature found in the Book of Jeremiah is.
8. The most natural divisions of the Book of Jeremiah occur at the end of Chapter s,,, and

III. Points of Discussion.

Features of the style of Jeremiah.

Types of passages rejected by critics of Jeremiah.

Why Matthew quotes Zechariah and assigns the passage to Jeremiah.

Explanation of the differences between the He brew and Greek versions of the book.

The history of the writing of the Book of Jeremiah.

JEREMIAH, THE RELUCTANT PREACHER[432]

[432] A sermon preached in the chapel of the Cincinnati Bible Seminary, November 24, 1970.

By ROGER CHAMBERS

Did you read about the time Jeremiah quit the ministry? He did not quit like Paul's associate minister Demas did. Whatever reason Demas gave to Paul when he left, Paul knew the real cause of the defection. It was because .. he loved this present world.
Jeremiah did not quit like those pure spirits who find the local church beneath their rarefied natures and who righteously burn their collection of sermon books, file their ordination certificates under old business and go sell tombstones or teach English. (And become experts on the local ministry!)

Then I said, I will not make mention of him, nor speak any more in His name. But his word was in mine heart as a burning fire shut up in my bones, and I was weary with forbearing, and I cannot contain. (Jeremiah 20:9).

Jeremiah quit the ministry in the way a genuine preacher might resign on Monday morning. (One preacher observed that he was glad that salvation does not depend on one's feelings, because if it did and the Lord returned on Monday, half the preachers in town would be lost.)
Jeremiah tried to quit on God, but could not, and so he continued his prophetic ministry reluctantly. His was the reluctance of Moses who tried to quit before he began because he stuttered. His was the reluctance of Amos who admitted that he had not been born to nor trained for the office of the prophet. He was born to pinch fruit and chase sheep. But he allowed that since he was in this work, he would have to preach it straight and preach it true. His was the reluctance of Paul who confessed to the Corinthians that when he had been in their pulpit it had been with .. weakness, fear, and much trembling.

Necessity is laid upon me; yea, woe is me if I preach not the gospel. if I do this willingly I have a reward, but if against my will (reluctantly), I have a stewardship entrusted to me. (1 Corinthians 9:16-17).

The ministry is spiritual work. Reluctance is a proper attitude. The alternative is to become a smooth, polished, confident, professional which is the shame of heaven and the joy of hell.

I. JEREMIAH WAS RELUCTANT BECAUSE OF THE PRESUMPTION OF PREACHING

Then the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou tamest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations. Then said I, Ah, Lord God! Behold, I cannot speak; for I am a child. But the LORD said unto me, Say not, I am a child: for thou shalt go to all that I send thee, and whatsoever I command thee thou shalt speak.. 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. (Jeremiah 1:4 ff).

That is exactly what we are, Jeremiah, children! The sheer presumption, the unmitigated gall of a man who stands up to speak for God! How dare we casually saunter into such a ministry! We ought not reproduce the foolishness of the well-intentioned but careless Uzzah who grasped the Ark of the Covenant as it was being transported to Jerusalem. It is an awesome thing to preach the Word of God. We ought to handle the Word with the same reluctance with which an engineer handles dynamite.

And if we accept the ministry of preaching, we ought to have enough fear to stick to that divine task. Preach the Word, said Paul to Timothy. If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God. How dare we continually bless the congregation with our opinions and thereby cease to be preachers in favor of being commentators. And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power (1 Corinthians 2:4).

The professors here at the Seminary have waged holy war against the practice of preaching without proper grammar and vocabulary. This is good and needful. It is a real possibility that people can be turned away from the gospel and be lost because of dangling participles and double negatives. But we have raised up a generation of preachers who are so articulate that the people cannot find out if they are saved or lost because the preacher is wandering around in Webster's Unabridged. We have got so many three-dollar words that there is no issue so clear that it is not thoroughly clouded by the time we get through talking about it. We baptize our doubts in pseudo-sanctified jargon and then labor under the impression that we have changed something when at best we have only redefined it. (For example, many prefer the term unchurched to lost. What in the world does unchurched mean?) There is no situation so bad but what we can make it respectable by a storm of words. Our doubletalk is like that inscribed on a tombstone in a western frontier cemetery:

TO LEM S. FRAME

Who during his life shot 89 Indians,
Whom the Lord delivered into his hands,
And who was looking forward to making up
His hundred before the end of the year,
When he fell asleep in Jesus at his house
At Hawk's Ferry

March 27, 1843.

We need more than conversation, we need conversion!
God promised Jeremiah that He would put His own words in the prophet's mouth. Have you read lately the burning, direct, clinical, scathing language of Jeremiah? He was preaching desolation and misery and judgment while the certified prophets of his day were shouting peace, peace, peace. I can picture the professional clergy remonstrating with the prophet for his cutting oratory and devastating condemnations:

Enter the President of the SHALOM LEAGUE OF PROPHETS (S.L.O.P,).

President: Brother Jeremiah, should not the clergy be more careful in using the term, -Thus saith the Lord-'?
Jeremiah: What do you think I am preaching, The Farmer's Almanac?

President: But to suggest that God would say that everyone neighed after his neighbor's wife like corn-fed horses seems to malign the dignity of God.
Jeremiah: I see you got the message!
President: But the sight of a prophet running up and down the streets of Jerusalem saying that if he could find one honest man God would pardon the city looks bad to visitors from the outside.
Jeremiah: By the way, if you see one, send him my way. My feet are killing me.
President: But preacher, the people come to the temple for a restful dignified worship experience, and you tell them of God's anger, they want a more positive message.
Jeremiah: You can catch Rabbi Norman Vincent Peale at 3:00 P.M. on channel 7.
President: NOW Jeremiah, about this word -repent.-' I would be more comfortable using a phrase like: -Restudy your value systems-'.
Jeremiah: Then you need to repent!
President: But Sir, to describe Judah as a nation pursuing idols as a camel in heat pursues a mate is language unbefitting a gentleman and a scholar.
Jeremiah: Funny you should say that. I told God he ought to get a gentleman and a scholar for this job, but he wanted me.

Is not my word like as a fire? saith the LORD: and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces? (Jeremiah 23:29).

For the word of God is quick and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. (Hebrews 4:12).

The Word of God burns and shatters and exposes and meets man as he is in his most secret hideaway, and nothing eke will do that! So let us preach the Word! Let us stop feeding our people warmed-over Baptist pulpit pablum!

Let us not depend on the power of dynamics and Church factors to get the job done. Every preacher ought to be aware of those principles which lend themselves to a growing program. But do we not know that if we use the methods which touch universal human nature we can program people into the local congregation while we preach Mother Goose Rhymes? The sects are doing just that while preaching messages which make Old Mother Hubbard sound pretty good. If we do not preach the Word as it is, folk are not going to ask the right questions, face the real issues, and make the right kind of changes in their lives.
When Jeremiah got through with his sermons, he was not very popular, but everyone had a pretty good idea of what he was getting at. Let us have done with this babel which produces a climate in which we cannot tell the difference between denominations and the Lord's Church.

II. JEREMIAH WAS RELUCTANT BECAUSE OF THE PERIL OF PREACHING

What a scene as Jehoiakim sits in the winter palace cutting up Jeremiah's written prophecy piece by piece and throws it in the fire. And there is Jeremiah up to his knees in mud in that dungeon where one would not put a dog. Picture the prophet as he waits out the last days of Jerusalem in the local jail.
We have all thrown a few of our own sermons in the fire after we have preached them lest the Lord return and find us with the incriminating evidence. But in the main our preaching is pretty respectable. And that is just the peril of the preaching ministry, respectability! This is not to say that we ought not to be competent. Our preaching must be respectable in the sense of demonstrating the careful effort befitting a disciple of Jesus. I have preached some sermons so bad that it seems a miracle that the people could sit through them and come out the other side still believing in God. We all have our bad ones. But we do not have to be like the hen that swallowed the yo-yo and laid the same egg twenty times.
The truth is never respectable in a world dominated by lies, and Christ is never respectable in a world under the influence of the spirit of anti-christ. The people were divided over Jeremiah's preaching. Some hated his roes. sage, the rest hated him. The day of mercy is too far spent for us to be contented with anemic preaching from bloodless little Lord Fauntleroys who mean well. If our preaching produces neither positive nor negative reaction, then we can be sure it is not God's Word that we are speaking. (The comment was heard from one pulpit, If I preached this sermon in Russia, I would be shot for it. Still, it would be nice to get some reaction.)

God save us from the harmless respectability of much modern preaching!

III. JEREMIAH WAS RELUCTANT BECAUSE OF THE PASSION OF PREACHING

My heart! My heart! I am pained at my very heart; my heart maketh a noise in me. I cannot hold my peace, because thou hast heard, O my soul, the sound of the trumpet, the alarm of war. (Jeremiah 4:19).

The prophet's heart was broken by the scene of the destruction of Jerusalem which was to be so complete that it would be like creation in reverse.
In the last few months of its operation, an average of 6,000 Jews a day were gassed at Auschwitz. The crematoria were unable to keep pace in reducing this daily number of corpses to ashes, and so pyres of a thousand corpses each were ignited in the open. The flames and smoke were visible for eighteen miles. A pall of smoke with the smell of burning flesh hung heavily over Auschwitz and drew swarms of flies! A microcosm of hell!
How can we casually approach the task of preaching if we-'re really haunted by the prospect of uncounted millions being in hell for eternity?! We ought to approach the preaching ministry reluctantly because the heart from which all true preaching comes is a broken one.
I am concerned about the rising sentiment that says that the gospel is a groovy thing, Christianity is fun. Jesus swings. Turn on with Christ. I am for enthusiasm and the joy that is in Christ. But let us not confuse the smiling-through-tears of Christianity with the painless giggle of the world. And what about the cross? And what about the lost? There is no greater contradiction under heaven than the preacher or the seminary student who is committed only to being cool. It is all right for Bill Cosby, but it is wrong for a Christian. The Son of Man is come to seek and to save that which is lost.
Jeremiah tried to quit that task which seems too great for any man. But despite the PRESUMPTION of preaching and the PERIL of preaching, the Word was still a fire shut up in his bones, and he went on because of the PASSION of preaching.
Preach the Word!

BibliaPlus

Old Testament

New Testament