Jeremiah 23:22

22. But if they had stood in my counsel, and had caused my people to hear my words, then they should have turned them from their evil way, and from the evil of their doings.

This verse is as it were an explanation of the former; for many might have been perplexed, if it had only been said to them, that there are none who are fit and legitimate teachers but those who had been sent and entrusted with what God had commanded. Hence the Prophet here calls our attention to the truth which is certain and manifest; for God had delivered the sum of all truth in his Law. As then the perfection of wisdom was found in the Law, from which the prophets drew whatever we read in their writings, no excuses, such as the following, could be admitted, — “How can we know that the prophets speak from God’s mouth, that they bring nothing devised by themselves, that they have the instructions which God approves?”

The Prophet then calls the attention of the Jews to the Law, as though He had said as Moses did,

“There is no need to ascend above the clouds, or to descend into the depths, or to run beyond the sea; for the Law and the word is nigh in thy mouth, that is, God has set before you whatever is necessary and useful to be known.” (Deuteronomy 30:12-14; Romans 10:6.)

This, then, is fully made known to you, nor will the knowledge of anything necessary be obscure, if ye attend to the Law. Hence the cause of error is not only your sloth, but also your perverseness; for ye wilfully neglect the Law, and remain doubtful and inquire, “Which is the way?”

“This is the way,” said Moses, “walk ye in it.” (Deuteronomy 5:33.)

We now then perceive what Jeremiah had in view: he had before said, that none were to be attended to, except they who were sent and spoke from the mouth of God; but he now explains what he meant, even that the Law contained the whole sum of wisdom. But as he had before introduced the false prophets, as boldly deriding the true and faithful servants of God, by objecting to them and saying, “Who had stood in the counsel of God? these imagine that they have fallen from the clouds, they terrify you with dreadful threatenings, as though they were angels from heaven,” — as then the false prophets were thus wont to speak disdainfully of God’s servants, and alleged that they did not stand in God’s counsel, Jeremiah now retorts upon them, and says, speaking in God’s name, If they had stood in my counsel, they would doubtless have spoken from my Law; as though he had said, “They believe not my servants, because they are men and not angels; they hence deny that they are of my counsel: thus they persuade the whole people to despise the doctrine of salvation. There are, however, some prophets whom I have sent: now, if they wish to be deemed sent, let them prove themselves to be so.” What is the true proof? If they had stood in my counsel, they would have doubtless made known my word to my people. What is that word? the definition follows, even the word of the Law, They would have turned the straying people from their evil way ²⁹

The passage may seem obscure, but from the context itself we can gather that the real design of the Prophet was to convict the false teachers, that they might no longer boast of God’s name, and falsely pretend that they were endued with the prophetic office, and glory in that distinction. He says that it was an evident proof that they were not God’s prophets, because they did not faithfully teach what they ought to have derived from the Law.

It is indeed certain, that no one has been God’s counsellor, according to what Scripture says in many places, when the object is to check the arrogance of those who, in their curiosity, attempt to penetrate into the hidden judgments of God, (Isaiah 40:13;) and Paul, while speaking of God’s eternal election, it being incomprehensible, exclaims, Who has been his counsellor? (Romans 11: 34.) He uses a similar language in the First Epistle to the Corinthians, (1 Corinthians 2:16:) and why? that he might check the temerity of the human mind, which ventures farther than it is lawful. But afterwards Paul adds by way of correction, “But we have the mind of Christ:” how so? because he has made known his counsel to us. When, therefore, the false prophets denied that God’s servants were his counsellors, they might indeed have said so, viewing them only as mortal men; but their object was to discredit and to render void the word of God; so that they wished to put a restraint not only on men, but also on God himself. This was an intolerable insult to God.

Moreover the Prophet now turns as it were upon them, “There is then no Prophet of God in the world!” But fixed was that saying, that there would ever be some prophets; and none of the Jews could have dared to deny Moses to have been divinely inspired. This, then, being allowed, the Prophet now indirectly reproves them, “Where are the prophets of God?” and as they laid claim to this distinction, he says, “Doubtless ye stand not in God’s counsel. How so? because the counsel of God is included in his Law; and as ye have departed from the doctrine of true religion, as ye have no care to convey instruction, as your doctrine does not teach men the fear of God, nor leads to repentance, it follows that ye are not God’s counsellors nor his prophets.” But that this may appear more evident, we must bear in mind what Moses said, that God has his own secret things, but that whatever is taught in the Law belongs to us and to our children. (Deuteronomy 29:29.) There is then no reason why the inquiry should be difficult respecting the true prophets of God; for they, without controversy, deserve to be heard as the angels of God, who are faithful interpreters of his Law; but they who lead us away from the Law ought to be firmly and boldly rejected.

But we must also bear in mind the definition that is given when it is said, that they ought to have turned the people from their evil way, and from the wickedness of their doings ³⁰ We indeed know that the worst men insolently pretend to preach God’s word, as the Papists do at this day: though they have inebriated the whole world with their ungodly and delirious doctrines, they yet boast that they are the servants of God. Hence the Prophet, after having spoken generally of God’s word, adds a special distinction, — that the doctrine of God is that which edifies, which teaches and leads men to repentance and the fear of God, according to what Paul says, that the Scripture is useful for these purposes, (2 Timothy 3:16;) for by so saying, he intended to condemn all false interpreters of Scripture, as there were many then who boasted that they were the best teachers, while yet they only pleased itching ears. As then there were many who regarded display and not edification, Paul says, that the Scripture is useful; and therefore he rejected with contempt all expositions in which there was nothing useful. So also in this place the Prophet shews that the right and legitimate use of Scripture was when it was employed to restore men from their evil way.

There is, indeed, here an instance of a part being stated for the whole: for if we only exhort men to repent, there will be no great fruit; and our teaching would be defective, for the doctrine of repentance would be inefficient without faith and without calling on the name of God. But the Prophet did not intend here to mention every part of a sound and useful doctrine; he deemed it enough to confute the false teachers who wished to be alone in repute, while yet they had no care to edify the people; for they saw all things in disorder, they saw crimes prevailing everywhere, they saw a dreadful contempt of God, but to these things they were wholly blind. It might then have been hence easily inferred that they neither faithfully labored for God nor manifested any care for the safety of the Church; for they thus betrayed miserable souls, whose ruin they saw was near at hand.

We now then see the whole design of the Prophet. But there is no doubt but that to the evil way he added the wickedness of their doings, in order that he might more fully expose the insensibility of those who under such an urgency were silent and remained inactive. There is sometimes the need of a moderate reproof; but when people allow themselves an extreme license in wickedness, when impunity is everywhere permitted, and when such corruptions prevail in common, that nothing remains untainted, if then the tongue of the teacher is silent and as it were tied, is he not rightly called an idle and a dumb dog? And thus the Prophet enhances the insensibility, for which he condemns the false teachers; they were silent, as though things were in a good order, while they had to witness not only common crimes, but even a vast accumulation of all kinds of crimes; for the people gave themselves up not only to one kind of wickedness, but to all kinds, and wholly despised God and his Law. It afterwards follows, —

Jeremiah 23:23-24

23 Am I a God at hand, saith the LORD, and not a God afar off?

24. Can any hide himself in secret places that I shall not see him? saith the LORD. Do not I fill heaven and earth? saith the LORD.

Here he especially shakes off from hypocrites their self-delusions; for they were torpid in their vices, because they thought that they could in a manner blind the eyes of God. They did not indeed say so; but the heedless security of men would, never be so great as it is, were they to believe that nothing is hid from God, but that he penetrates into the inmost recesses of the heart, that he discerns between the thoughts and the feelings, and leaves not unobserved the very marrow. If, then, this truth were fixed in the hearts of all, they would certainly obey God with more reverence, and also dread his threatenings.

As, then, they are so heedlessly torpid, it follows, that they imagine God as not having a clear sight, who sees only things nigh him, like one who has a deficient vision, who can see what is near at hand, but not what is far off. Such is what hypocrites dream God to be, who after the manner of men either connives at things, or is blind, or at least does not clearly see but what is near at hand. We now understand the design of the Prophet in saying, that Jehovah is God afar off as well as near at hand.

Prayer Lecture 88

Prayer

Grant, Almighty God, that as nothing necessary to be known for salvation is wanting in thy holy and celestial oracles, we may carefully and diligently study them, and so labor to make progress in the fear of thy name, in reliance on that grace which is offered to us in Christ, that we may derive real fruit from the reading and hearing of thy word; and may we also learn to turn everything to edification, so that thy name may be really glorified in us, and that we may through the whole course of our life make progress in faith and repentance, until we shall at length attain to that perfect holiness, to which thou daily invitest us, when we shall be wholly divested of all the filth of our flesh, and become fully renewed after the image of thy Son, our Lord. — Amen.

Lecture Eighty Ninth

Am I a God at hand, saith Jehovah? and not a God afar off? Will a man hide himself in darkness, or in coverts, and I shall not see him, or that I could not see him, saith Jehovah? Do not I fill heaven and earth, saith Jehovah? Here the Prophet most sharply reproves the hypocrites, who thought that they had no concern with God, as is the case always with those who delude themselves in their sins. Though this truth is ever professed by them, that God is the judge of the world, and that an account must some time be rendered to him; yet they afterwards think that they can by some evasion escape, so that God will forgive them. In short, it is usual with hypocrites to trifle as it were childishly with God. On this account, God is grievously displeased with them, and declares that he is far different from what they imagine him to be. For while they thus set themselves up as arbitrators, so that they subject God to their own laws, they think him to be as it were full of apprehension, and that he sees nothing, or at least very little; he says, that he is not only a God near at hand but also afar off ³¹

Some apply this to time, as though he denied that he lately came into existence; and so they think that the only true and eternal God is compared with idols, which men form presumptuously for themselves. But the other meaning is far more suitable, — even that he is a God afar off; for as it is said elsewhere,

“Though he dwells on high, yet he sees everything
that is done on earth.” (Psalm 102:19)

As, then, nothing escapes his sight, he is said to be a God afar off, while hypocrites thought him to be a God only near at hand, as we say in French, De courte veue*,* who sees only things near, as it were before the eyes. But a question has much more force than if it was said, that he was not merely a God near at hand; and this mode of speaking conveys reproof; for hypocrites greatly detract from his majesty, when they thus, according to their own notions, imagine that he can see no more than a mortal man. They would not indeed have dared to speak thus; but when any one examined all their counsels and their actions, he would have found that they could have never shewn so much audacity, had they not deceived themselves with the vain notion, that God could be deceived ³² And, therefore, Jeremiah does not relate their words, but points out the wickedness which sufficiently manifested itself in their doings, though they professed otherwise with their tongues.

And that this is the meaning appears more clearly from the next verse, which ought to be read in connection with this; Will a man hide himself in coverts, that I should not see him? ³³ This verse is added by way of explanation; there can therefore be no doubt respecting the words, far off and near, — that God is said to be a God afar off; because his eyes penetrate into the lowest depths, so that nothing can escape him.

It is a wonder that the Greek translators made so great a mistake; for they wholly changed the sense, — that God is God nigh at hand, but not afar off. In the first place, they did not consider the question, and then, as they did not see the drift of the passage, they contrived from their own brains what is wholly remote from the words of the Prophet. This sentiment, that God is nigh and not afar off, is indeed true; but what is meant here is quite another thing, — that God sees in a way very different from men, for he fully and perfectly sees what is farthest from him, according to the passage we have quoted from Psalm 102:19; and there is another in Psalm 139:7-12, where the Psalmist says,

“Where shall I flee from thy face? for if I ascend into heaven, thou art there; if I lie down in hell, there thou stretchest forth thine hand; if I take the wings of the dawn and fly to the clouds, even thine hand will lay hold of me there; if I seek coverts, even the night itself is before thee as the light, and darkness shines as the light.”

If, then, we join together these two passages, there will appear nothing ambiguous in the words of Jeremiah, — even that God penetrates with his eyes into the lowest depths, so that nothing is hid from him.

But Jeremiah not only explains the meaning of the last verse, but also makes a practical use of it; Will any one, he says, hide himself in coverts that I should not see him? The seeing of God has a reference to his judgment. Then all frivolous speculations ought to be cast aside, since Scripture says that God sees all things; but we ought especially to consider for what purpose it is that he sees all things; which is evidently this, — that he may at last call to judgment whatever is done by men. There is then an application of the doctrine to our case; for we hence learn, that whatsoever we do, think, and speak, is known to God.

By coverts, or hiding-places, he means all the secret frauds which men think they can cover; but by such an attempt they gain nothing but a heavier judgment. By coverts then we are to understand all those vain thoughts which hypocrites entertain; for they think that they can so hide themselves that God cannot see their purposes. Hence God laughs them to scorn, and says in effect, “Let them enter into their coverts, let them hide themselves as much as they please, I yet do see them in their coverts no less clearly than if they were quite close to me.”

To confirm this he adds, Do not I fill heaven and earth, saith Jehovah? This must not be refinedly explained of the infinite essence of God. It is indeed true, that his essence extends through heaven and earth, as it is interminable. But Scripture will not have us to feed on frivolous and unprofitable notions; it teaches only what avails to promote true religion. What therefore God declares here, that he fills heaven and earth, ought to be applied to his providence and his power; as though he had said, that he is not so taken up with things in heaven that he neglects the concerns of earth, as profane men dream; but he is said to fill heaven and earth, because he governs all things, because all things are noticed by him, because he is, in short, the judge of the world.

We now perceive what the Prophet means; and this passage is entitled to particular notice, because this error of imagining a God like ourselves is inbred almost in us all. Hence it is, that men allow themselves so much liberty; for they consider it a light thing to discharge their duty towards God, because they reflect not what sort of being he is, but they think of him according to their own understanding and character. As, then, we are thus gross in our ideas, it becomes us carefully to reflect on this passage, where God declares, that he is not only a God near at hand, that is, that he is not like us, who have only a limited power of seeing, but that he sees in the thickest darkness as well as in the clearest light; and that therefore it avails those nothing to deceive themselves who dig for themselves caverns, as it is said in Isaiah, and hide themselves in deep labyrinths. (Isaiah 2:21.) He thus denies that they gain anything, and gives this as the reason,

“Because he fills heaven and earth;”

that is, his providence, his power, and his justice are so diffused everywhere, that wherever men betake themselves, it is impossible for them to be concealed from him. It follows, —

Jeremiah 23:25

25. I have heard what the prophets said, that prophesy lies in my name, saying, I have dreamed, I have dreamed.

Jeremiah returns again to those impostors who soothed the people with their blandishments. Whenever Jeremiah and those who were like him, who faithfully performed their office, treated the people with severity by reproving and threatening them for their sins, these unprincipled men rose up against, them, and under the name of prophets flattered the ungodly despisers of God. It was, as we have before said, a most grievous trial, when in the very Church itself the ministers of Satan thus falsely pretended the name of God. The Jews would have unhesitantly despised and laughed to scorn what the vain prophets of the Gentiles might have boasted; for they knew that these had no knowledge of God; but when the false prophets of whom he now speaks occupied a place in the Church, and in high terms boasted that they were God’s servants, this would have greatly disturbed the weak and shaken their faith, and even wholly upset it, had not God stretched forth his hand. It is therefore no wonder that Jeremiah dwells so much on this subject; for it was an evil that could not be easily cured; had he said only, that they were not to be esteemed, the weak would not have been satisfied. It was hence necessary for him often to repeat this truth, that they were all to know that there was need of discrimination and judgment, and that those who pretended God’s name were not to be indiscriminately allowed to be his prophets.

He then repeats what we have before observed, but in other words, — I have heard, says God, what the prophets say who prophesy in my name ³⁴ An objection is anticipated, for it might have been said, “What can this mean? the prophets disagree! and what is to be done under these dissensions? they who differ dazzle our eyes with an illustrious title, and boldly affirm that they have been sent by God. As, then, there is such a conflict between the prophets, what are we to do?” God meets this objection, and declares that it was not unknown to him what the false prophets boasted of. He adds, that they prophesied in his name It was an offense, which must have greatly distressed weak minds, to hear of this profanation of God’s name. For as it behoves us reverently to receive what proceeds from God, so it is no small danger when God’s name is falsely and mendaciously pretended. As, then, they might have been greatly disturbed by this false pretext of what was good, it is here expressly said, that they had used the name of God, but he adds, falsely

We hence see the truth of what I have said, that those who affirm that they are prophets and ostentatiously pretend God’s name, ought not to be received indiscriminately, but that judgment ought to be exercised; for it has been God’s will in all ages to try the faith of his servants by permitting to Satan and his ministers the liberty of pretending falsely his holy name. And as we see that the Church has ever been exposed to this evil, there is no cause for us to be disturbed at this day, when the same thing happens, for it is nothing new. Let us, therefore, learn to harden ourselves against such trials; and whenever false prophets try our faith, let; us remain firm, holding this principle, — that we ought wisely to consider, whether God himself speaks, or whether men falsely boast themselves to be his servants.

To dream is to be taken here in a good sense; for, as we have seen elsewhere, God was wont to make himself known to his servants by dreams. It is not then every kind of dreams that is to be understood here, but, such dreams as were from above. The false prophets, indeed, stated what was not true by using this language; for it was the same as though they testified that they did not bring their own devices, but faithfully related what they had received from God. As the Pope at this day declares that he is the vicar of Christ and the successor of Peter, while he exercises tyranny over the Church; so also these, by a specious pretext, deceived the simple by saying that they brought nothing human, but were only witnesses as to God’s oracles. It follows, —

Jeremiah 23:26-27

26. How long shall this be in the heart of the prophets that prophesy lies? yea, they are prophets of the deceit of their own heart;

27. Which think to cause my people to forget my name by their dreams which they tell every man to his neighbour, as their fathers have forgotten my name for Baal.

Here God reproves the false prophets, and also promises to his people what was especially to be desired, — that he would cleanse his Church from such pollutions. He then shews that it was his purpose to take vengeance, because the false prophets had dared in such an impious and bold manner to abuse his sacred name. For it ever occurred to their minds, “How is it that God permits this? Is it because he cares not for the safety of his people? or does it give him any delight when he sees truth mingled with falsehood, and light with darkness?” Hence God here shews that he for a time bore with that sacrilegious audacity which the false prophets practiced, but that he did not so connive at it as not at length to punish them.

How long? he says, which is the same as though he had said, “It shall not be perpetual; though I may delay, yet they shall know that they have with extreme perverseness abused my forbearance.” And he also enhances their crime by saying, How long shall it be in the heart of the prophets to prophesy falsehood? By this way of speaking he intimates, that they erred not through ignorance, as many do, who through want of knowledge bring forth what they do not understand; but God here complains that these prophets, as it were designedly, rose up to suppress the truth. Then by heart is to be understood thought or purpose; as though he had said, that they designedly made a false pretense as to his name, that it was their settled purpose to deceive the people. ³⁵

He adds, that they were prophets of the deceit of their own heart. This deceit of the heart is put in opposition to true doctrine; and thus God intimates that whatever men bring forward from themselves is deceitful, for nothing can proceed from them but vanity. There is yet no doubt but that he condemns that foolish conceit, of which the false prophets proudly boasted, that they were alone wise, as the case is now under the Papacy; how arrogantly do unprincipled men prattle whenever they speak of their own figments? Nothing can be more silly, and yet they think that they surpass the angels in acuteness and in high speculations. Such was the arrogance displayed by the false prophets of old. But God declares that whatever men invent, and whatever they devise, which they have not received from his mouth, is only the deceit of the heart.

And this ought to be carefully noticed; for there are many plausible refinements, in which there is nothing solid, but they are mere trifles. If, then, at any time these vain thoughts seem pleasing to us, let us bear in mind what Jeremiah says here, that whatever proceeds not from God is the deceit of the heart; and further, that though the whole world applaud falsehoods and impostures, we ought yet to know that everything is a deceit which has not God himself as its author.

Then follows a clearer definition, that they made his people to forget his name by their dreams, as their fathers had forgotten it through Baal. ³⁶ We may infer from this verse, that those with whom Jeremiah contended were not openly the enemies of the Law; for they held many principles of true religion. They maintained in common with the true and sincere worshippers of God this truth, — that the only true God ought to be worshipped; and also this, — that there was only one legitimate altar on which sacrifices according to the Law were to be offered. On these points, then, there was no controversy. But yet they deceived the people by their flatteries; for they made gain of their prophetic office. Hence Jeremiah condemns them, because they made God’s name to be forgotten by their dreams, as their fathers had forgotten it through Baal; as though he had said, “These dreams are like the fictitious and spurious forms of worship, by which true religion was formerly subverted; for their fathers worshipped Baal and Baalim: they set up for themselves these false gods, and thus subverted the glory of God by their own devices.” The impiety of the false prophets, who lived in the time of Jeremiah, was not indeed so gross; and yet it was an indirect defection, for they brought forward their dreams, and falsely professed that. they were God’s servants, though he had not commissioned them.

We have said elsewhere (Jeremiah 23:21) that their crime was twofold; first, they ran when not called nor sent; and secondly, they brought forward their own fancies and not the word of God. And this passage ought to be carefully noticed; for we here learn, that not only open defection cannot be endured by God, but also indirect depravations, which stealthily withdraw us from the fear of God. Then these two evils must be carefully avoided in the Church, if we desire to continue entire in our obedience to God. One evil is sufficiently known, that is, when truth is openly turned into falsehood, when men are drawn away into idolatry and filthy superstitions, or when the ancient people, as Jeremiah says, forgat the name of God through Baal. But the other evil is more hidden, and therefore more dangerous, that is, when some appearance of true religion is retained, and men are yet insidiously drawn away from the fear of God and his true worship, and from pure doctrine, as we see to be the case at this day in the Churches, which profess to have separated from the Papacy that they might embrace the doctrine of the Gospel: there are many among them who insidiously corrupt the simple and genuine doctrine of the Gospel. We see how many curious men there are at this time, who disturb all things by their own inventions, and how absurdly many seek refinements, and how confidently also do many propound their own inventions as oracles! It behoves us then to be watchful, not only that we may shun open abominations, but that we may also retain the pure and true word of God, so as not to allow false workers insidiously to corrupt and vitiate anything. It follows, —

Jeremiah 23:28

28. The prophet that hath a dream, let him tell a dream; and he that hath my word, let him speak my word faithfully. What is the chaff to the wheat? saith the LORD.

We ought also to read this verse attentively, for doubtless it contains a doctrine especially useful. I have already said, that the faith of many might have failed at seeing a conflict in the Temple of God, not only among the common people, but also among the prophets of God. God did not appear from heaven, nor did he send his angels, but would have himself to be heard through men. They who came to the Temple expected the prophets to teach them. There the ministers of Satan appeared, who corrupted and perverted all things. There were a few, who sincerely declared the truth of God, and faithfully explained what God commanded. What could miserable men do in this case, who were willing to obey, and possessed a teachable spirit? Hence it was, that many threw aside every concern for religion, and gave themselves up to despair: “What means all this? why are there so many discords, so many disputes, so many contentions, so many invectives? Where can we now betake ourselves? It is better not to care for anything any more.” Thus many took occasion to indulge their indifference, choosing not to weary themselves any more, nor to seek what God was, what his will was, whether there was salvation for them, whether there was any hope, rather than to entangle themselves in troublesome and thorny disputes.

Such a temptation existed in the time of Jeremiah. He, therefore, applied in due time a suitable remedy and said, The Prophet, who has a dream, that is, with whom is a dream, he will relate a dream; and then, The Prophet with whom is my word, he will speak my word; ³⁷ as though God had said, that it was all extremely wicked thing to obstruct the way of truth by falsehood. But this is what usually happens, as I have already said; for where Satan has his agents, an obstacle seems to be in our way which prevents us to go on and proceed in the course of true religion. For when those who are right-minded, as we have said, see the prophets themselves contending, disputing, and quarrelling, they stand still, nay, they go backward. Now God shews that this is extremely unreasonable. Then the meaning is, as though he had said, “Let not the false prophets by Their fallacies impede the course of God’s servants, that they may not proceed, and that his word should not be reverently heard.”

Unless we attend to this which the Prophet had in view, the passage will appear unmeaning. It has been often quoted, but this circumstance has not certainly been observed. We ought, therefore, ever to consider, why is a thing said. This verse depends on what is gone before; and God here answers a question, which might have been raised, — “What then must we do, for falsehoods conflict with truth?” God answers, that his word ought not to be prejudiced by this circumstance; as though he had said, “Let nothing prevent my Prophets from teaching; I bid them to be heard.” We hence conclude, that those do wrong to God, who allege the controversies, by which religion is torn and as it were lacerated, and think that they thus obtain a license to indulge their impiety; for it is not a reason that can avail them, that Satan and his ministers labor to discredit the authority of God and of his servants. Though these false prophets insinuate themselves, though they may set up themselves against the true and faithful servants of God, yet let dreams, that is, prophetic revelations, retain their weight, and let him with whom is God’s word, speak the word of God, so that it may be heard. This clause refers to the hearers; they were not to desist from rendering obedience to the Law, how much soever Satan might strive to subvert their faith by attempting to destroy its unity.

It afterwards follows, What is the chaff to the wheat? This addition was also wholly necessary, for many might have again objected and said, that they had no sufficient judgment to distinguish between the true and false prophets. God here gives the answer, that the difference between true and false doctrine was nothing less to him who made a careful examination than between wheat and chaff And by this comparison he shews how foolishly and absurdly many detract from the authority of the Law on this pretense, that there are many who falsely interpret it. For when any one rejects the wheat because it is covered with chaff, does he not deserve to perish through hunger? and who will pity him who says that he has indeed wheat on his floor, but that it is mixed with chaff, and therefore not fit for food? Why, then, thou silly man, dost not thou separate the chaff from the wheat? But thou choosest to perish through want, rather than to cleanse the wheat that thou mayest have it for thy food. So also in the Temple the wheat is often mixed with the chaff, the pure truth of God is often defiled with many glosses and vain figments; and yet, except it be our own fault, we shall be able to distinguish between the wheat and the chaff. ³⁸ But if we be negligent, and think that it is a sufficient excuse for despising the word of God, because Satan brings in his fallacies, we shall perish in our sloth like him who neglects to cleanse his wheat that he might turn it to bread. But the time will not allow me to say more.

Prayer Lecture 89

Prayer

Grant, Almighty God, that as thou art graciously pleased daily to set before us thy sure and certain will, we may open our eyes and cars, and raise all our thoughts to that which not only reveals to us what is right, but also confirms us in a sound mind, so that we may go on in the course of true religion, and never turn aside, whatever Satan and his ministers may devise against us, but that we may stand firm and persevere, until having finished our warfare, we shall, at length come unto that blessed rest which has been prepared for us in heaven by Jesus Christ our Lord. — Amen.

Lecture Ninetieth

We saw yesterday that though the false prophets corrupted the true doctrine, yet the prophetic office remained in its honor without any loss to its authority. Hence Jeremiah said that all their fallacies ought not to be an hinderance to the faithful, so as to prevent them to proceed in the course of their calling, and that no one should object and say, that in so confused a state of things he could not know what to avoid and what to follow; he said that the difference between wheat and chaff was easily perceived, provided men were not wilfully blind. He now adds, —

Jeremiah 23:29

29 Is not my word like as a fire? saith the LORD; and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces?

He confirms what he said of the chaff and the wheat, but in different words. It was a fit comparison when Jeremiah compared God’s word to wheat, and the figments of men to chaff. But as the Jews, through their ingratitude, rendered the word of God ineffectual, so it did not become to them a spiritual support, the Prophet says that it would become like a fire and like a hammer, ³⁹ as though he had said, that though the Jews were void of judgment, as they had become hardened in their wickedness, yet the word of God could not be rendered void, or at least its power could not be taken away; for as Paul says,

“If it is not the odor of life unto life, it is the odor of death unto death to those who perish,” (2 Corinthians 2:16)

and so also the same Apostle says in another place, that God’s servants had vengeance in their power, for they bear the spiritual sword, in order to cast down every height that exalteth itself against Christ; but he adds,

“After the obedience” of the faithful “had been completed.”
(2 Corinthians 10:6)

The first and as it were the natural use of God’s word is to bring salvation to men; and hence it is called food; but it turns into poison to the reprobate: and this is the reason for so great a diversity.

He said, first, that God’s word was wheat, because souls are nourished by it unto a celestial life; and nothing can be more delightful than this comparison. But now he declares it to be fire and a hammer There is in these terms some appearance of contradiction; but there is a distinction to be made as to the hearers, for they who reverently embrace the word of God, as it becomes them, and with genuine docility of faith, find it to be food to them; but the ungodly, as they are unworthy of such a benefit, find it to be far otherwise. For the word which is in itself life-giving, is changed into fire, which consumes and devours them; and also it becomes a hammer to break, to tear them in pieces, and to destroy them.

The import of the whole is, that God’s word ever retains its own dignity; for if it happens to be despised by men, it cannot yet be deprived of its vigor and efficacy; if it be not wholesome for food, it will be like fire or like a hammer. Then these two comparisons belong to the wicked, for God’s word has another sense when called fire with reference to the faithful, even because it dries up and consumes the lusts of the flesh, as silver and gold are purified by fire. Hence the word of God is properly and fitly called fire, even with regard to the faithful; but not a devouring but a refining fire. But when it comes to the reprobate, it must necessarily destroy them, for they receive not the grace that it offers to them. It may also be called a hammer, for it subdues the depraved affections of the flesh and such as are opposed to God even in the elect; but it does not break the elect, for they suffer themselves to be subdued by it.

But this hammer is said to break the stone or the rock because the reprobate will not hear to be corrected; they must, therefore, be necessarily broken and destroyed. For this reason Paul also, while speaking of the refractory, says,

“Let him who is ignorant be ignorant.”
(1 Corinthians 14:38)

For by these words he means that they will at last find how great is the hardness of that word with which they dare to contend through the perverseness of their heart. But that passage which I have before quoted well explains what is here said by Jeremiah, even that truth in itself is wholesome, but that it turns into an odor of death unto death to those who perish. (2 Corinthians 2:16.) Paul, indeed, speaks of the Gospel, but this may be also applied to the Law. It now follows, —

Jeremiah 23:30-32

30. Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets, saith the LORD, that steal my words every one from his neighbour.

31. Behold, I am against the prophets, saith the LORD, that use their tongues, and say, He saith.

32. Behold, I am against them that prophesy false dreams, saith the LORD, and do tell them, and cause my people to err by their lies, and by their lightness; yet I sent them not, nor commanded them: therefore they shall not profit this people at all, saith the LORD.

Jeremiah returns again to the false teachers, who were the authors of all the evils; for they fascinated the people with their flatteries, so that every regard for sound and heavenly doctrine was almost extinguished. But while God declares that he is an avenger against them, he does not exempt the people from punishment. We indeed know that a just reward was rendered to the reprobate, when God let loose the reins to the ministers of Satan with impunity to deceive them. But as the people acquiesced in those false allurements, while Jeremiah so severely reproved the false teachers, he reminds the people how foolishly they betook themselves under the shadow of those men, thinking themselves to be safe.

He says, first, Behold, I am, against the prophets, who steal my words every one from his neighbor. Many explain this verse as though God condemned the false prophets, who borrowed something from the true prophets, so that they might be their rivals and as it were their apes; and no doubt the ungodly teachers had ever from the beginning made some assumptions, that they might be deemed God’s servants. But it seems, however, a forced view, that they stole words from the true prophets, for the words express what is different, that they stole every one from his friend Jeremiah would not have called God’s faithful servants by this name. I rather think that their secret arts are here pointed out, that they secretly and designedly conspired among themselves, and then that they spread abroad their own figments according to their usual manner. For the ungodly and the perfidious, that they might obtain credit among the simple and unwary, consulted together and devised all their measures craftily, that they might not be immediately found out; and thus one took from the other what he afterwards announced and published. And this is what Jeremiah calls stealing, because they secretly consulted, and then declared to the people what they agreed upon among themselves; and they did this as though every one had derived his oracle from heaven. I have, therefore, no doubt but that the Prophet condemns these hidden consultations when he says that every one stole from his neighhour. ⁴⁰

We indeed see the same thing now under the Papacy, for the monks and unprincipled men of the same character have their own false doctrines; and when they ascend the pulpit, every one speaks as though he was endued with some special gift; and yet they steal every one from his friend, for they are like the soothsayers or the magi, who concocted among themselves their own falsehoods, and only brought out what they deemed necessary to delude the common people. This, then, was one of the vices which the Prophet shews prevailed among the false teachers, — that no one attended to the voice of God, but that every one took furtively from his friend what he afterwards openly proclaimed.

He adds, secondly, Behold, I am against the prophets, who mollify their own tongue Almost all interpreters take לקה, lekech, as signifying to render sweet or soft; and they understand that the false prophets are condemned, because they flattered the wicked for the sake of gain; for had they offended or exasperated them, they could not have attached them to themselves. They then think that to mollify their tongue means here that they used their tongue in speaking smooth and flattering things. But others give another explanation, — that they mollified their tongue because they polished their words in imitation of God’s servants, so that their speech was sweeter than honey. But as לקה, lekech, means to receive and to take, and sometimes to raise on high, and sometimes to carry, I see not why it should not be taken in its proper meaning. I certainly see no reason to turn its meaning to a metaphor, when it can be taken in its plain sense of raising their tongue; they elevated themselves, and in high terms boasted that the office of teaching had been committed to them, for we know how haughtily false teachers elevate themselves. Therefore the verse may be taken thus, that God would punish those impostors who raised their tongue, that is, who proudly boasted and boldly arrogated to themselves authority, as though they were messengers from heaven. ⁴¹

It afterwards follows, And they say, נאם, nam, he saith. We know that it was a common thing for all the prophets to add, נאם יהוה, nam Jeve, the saying of Jehovah, or the word of Jehovah, in order to shew that they said nothing but what they had received from above. And if we read this verse as connected together, we shall find true what I have said — that the verb לקה, lekech, does not mean the smoothness or adulation used, but, the lofty vaunting of the false teachers, who wished to be deemed the organs of the Holy Spirit, and assumed to themselves all the authority of God. For their elation was this, that they confidently boasted that God himself had spoken, and said that it was the word; and they did this, that whatever they prattled might appear indisputed, though it was sufficiently evident that they falsely pretended the name of God.

He adds, thirdly, Behold, I am against those who prophesy dreams of falsehood It was indeed necessary to say here, that though the false teachers arrogated to themselves what alone belonged to the servants of God, they were yet mendacious. He afterwards adds, They narrate them, and cause my people to err by their falsehoods and their levity The meaning is, that however proudly they might, have pretended the name of prophets, they were yet impostors, who deceived the people by narrating to them their false dreams. The word dream is taken here in a good sense, but the word added to it, shews that they boasted of dreams which were only their own; and this is again confirmed when Jeremiah says, that they deceived the people by their falsehoods; and he adds, by their levity, ⁴² which some render “flattery.” I doubt not but that it means their inventions, which were vain, because they proceeded only from vain presumption.

He adds, Though I sent them not nor commanded them This negation ought especially to be noticed; for God shews how we are to form a judgment, when a question is raised respecting true and false teachers. Whatever, therefore, is without God’s command is like the wind, and will of itself vanish away. There is, then, no solidity in anything but in God’s command. Hence it follows, that all those who speak according to their own fancies are mendacious, and that whatever they bring forward has no weight in it; for God sets these two things in opposition the one to the other; on the one side are falsehood and levity, and on the other, his command and his call. It hence follows, that no one, except he simply obeys God and faithfully declares what he has received from him, can be of any account; for his whole weight is lighter than a feather, and all his apparent wisdom is falsehood.

At last he says, that they would not profit his people In which words he warns the people to shun them as the plague. But we see how the world indulges itself in this respect; for they who are drowsy seek to absolve themselves on the plea of ignorance, and throw the blame on their pastors, as though they were themselves beyond the reach of danger. But the Lord here reminded the people, that the teachers whom they received were pestilent; though for another reason he testified that they were useless, and that in order that he might shake off the vain confidence of the Jews, who were wont to set up this shield against all God’s threatenings, that their false teachers promised them wonderful things. It follows, —

Jeremiah 23:33

33. And when this people, or the prophet, or a priest, shall ask thee, saying, What is the burden of the LORD? thou shalt then say unto them, What burden? I will even forsake you, saith the LORD.

It appears sufficiently evident from this passage, — that the contumacy of the Jews was so great, that they sought from every quarter some excuse for their insensibility, as though they could with impunity despise God when they rejected his word. For the devil by his artifice fascinates the reprobate, when he renders God’s word either hateful or contemptible; and whenever he can exasperate their minds, so that they hear not God’s word except with disdain and bitterness, he gains fully his object. The Jews, then, were led into such a state of mind, that they regarded God’s word with hatred; and they were thus alienated from all docility and from every care for religion. In short, the prophets, as it is well known, everywhere employ the word משא, mesha, which means a burden.

Now, a burden means a prophecy, which terrifies the despisers of God by threatening them with vengeance. As, then, their minds were exasperated, they called through hatred the word of God a burden, and used it as a proverbial saying, “It is a burden, a burden.” They ought to have been moved by God’s threatenings, and to have trembled on hearing that he was angry with them. The word burden, then, ought to have humbled them; but, on the contrary, they became exasperated, first, through haughtiness, then through an indomitable contumacy, and thirdly, they kindled into rage. We hence see how the expression arose, that the prophets called their prophecies burdens. God now severely condemns this fury, because they hesitated not thus openly to shew their insolence. It was surely a most shameful thing, that the word of God should be thus called in disdain and contempt, in the ways and streets; for they thus acted disdainfully and insolently against God; for it was the same as though they treated his word with open contempt. It was then no wonder that he reproved this fury with so much vehemence, by saying, But if this people ask thee, What is the burden of Jehovah?

This manner of asking was altogether derisive, when they said to Jeremiah and to other servants of God, “What is the burden?” that is, “What dost thou bring to us, what trouble is to come on us?” They thus not only spoke contemptuously of God’s word, but, as though this wickedness was not sufficient, they became, as I have said, irritated and exasperated. If, then, they ask thee, What is the burden? And he speaks not only of the common people, but of the very prophets and priests.

We hence learn how great a contempt for God then prevailed, so that there was no integrity either in the priestly or the prophetic order. It is indeed wonderful with what impudence they dared to boast themselves to be God’s servants, while they spoke with so much insolence! But the same thing happens in the world in our day; for we see that the ministers of Satan in no other way hold the world under their power, than by alluring the minds of the ungodly; and at the same time they cause God’s word to be hated, and say that it brings not only troubles, but also torments. Since, then, these unprincipled men, who thus lead with hatred and disdain the true doctrine, occupy pulpits, we need not wonder that the same evil prevailed in the ancient Church.

It follows: If a prophet or a priest ask thee, What is the burden of Jehovah? thou shalt say to them, What burden? I will forsake thee, saith Jehovah. This was a most grievous threatening, but it has not been well considered and rightly understood; for interpreters have overlooked the implied contrast between the presence and the absence of God. Nothing could have been more acceptable to the Jews than God’s silence. And yet in no other way does he more clearly show that he is a Father to us, caring for our salvation, than by familiarly addressing us. Whenever, then, the prophetic word is announced, we have a sure and a clear evidence of God’s presence, as though he wished to be connected with us. But when the ungodly not only reject so remarkable a benefit, but also furiously repel, as far as they can, such a favor, they desire and seek the absence of God. Therefore God says, “Ye cannot bear my word, by which symbol I shew that I am present with you; I will forsake you;” that is, “I will no longer endure this indignity, but I will depart from you; there shall be hereafter no prophecy.” ⁴³

At the first view this was not deemed grievous to the Jews; for as I have said, the ungodly desire nothing more than that God should be silent, and they thought that they had gained their greatest happiness, when with consciences lulled to sleep they indulged themselves in their filth. It was then their chief wish that God should depart from them. But yet there was nothing more to be dreaded. The Prophet then shews here that they were extremely infatuated and wholly fascinated by the devil, for they could desire nothing more dreadful than that God should depart from them; as though he had said, “My word is a weariness to you, and I in my turn will now avenge myself, for I am weary of forbearing you, when I see that you can by no means be healed; and as I have been hitherto assiduous in instructing you, and have found you unteachable, I will now in my turn leave you.” It follows, —

Jeremiah 23:34

34. And as for the prophet, and the priest, and the people, that shall say, The burden of the LORD, I will even punish that man and his house.

Prophecy might indeed have been called a burden, when anything sad was announced; but it might also have been so called, when men were aroused to fear God, or when they were exhorted to repent. But God has a reference here to that wicked impiety, when men dared in ridicule to call any prophecy a burden. And hence it appears, that they were all so given up to their sins, that the very name of God’s judgment was hated by them. We now then perceive the Prophet’s meaning when he said, that God would punish all those who called his word a burden; for the Prophets themselves were wont to speak thus; and we find that Jeremiah in many places used this word. He does not then speak here generally, but points out, as by the finger, a vice which prevailed; for the Jews had so hardened themselves in hatred to sound doctrine, that they said, “He! these Prophets do nothing but terrify us by threatenings and by denouncing ruin on us; and what will be the end of all this?” God says, that he would take punishment on all who thus spoke and on all their families. It hence appears how much he abominated this blasphemy; and hence also we see how precious to God is the honor of his word; for it is not of every kind of sin that God speaks when he extends his vengeance to posterity. It is the same thing as though Jeremiah had said, “It is altogether intolerable, when men became irritated and exasperated against God’s word.” And yet this evil is not an evil of one age only. We see that the Israelites ever complained of God’s rigor; hence that saying,

“The ways of the Lord are not tortuous, but rather your ways, O house of Israel.”
(Ezekiel 18:25.)

And here we must notice the wickedness of the human mind; for God, as it has been before stated, has nothing else in view by calling us to himself, but to make us partakers of eternal life and salvation. It is then God’s design to receive us for the purpose or saving us; this is the end intended by, all the prophets; and hence the Prophet called before the word of God wheat; but what is done by men? They despise this favor; and not only so, but turn food into poison and cease not to provoke God’s wrath. He was, therefore, constrained to threaten them. When he finds us teachable, he allures us to himself even with paternal kindness. But when we provoke him to wrath, we in a manner force him to put on another character, according to what he says, that he will be refractory towards the refractory. (Psalm 18:26.) Yet we complain when God deals rigidly with us. We cease not to carry on war with him; but when he restrains and checks our insolence, we immediately expostulate with him, as though he were too severe and his word offended us. Whence is this offense? even from our obstinate wickedness. Were men to put an end to their sinful course, the Lord would change his manner of dealing with them, and gently treat them and foster them as chickens under his wings; but this they suffer not; nay, they reject such a treatment as much as they can. Hence it is, that they abhor the name of God and his word. What then is the excuse for the complaint, when they say that God is too rigorous, as though his word were a burden? There is none; for they are themselves refractory against God, and thus his word becomes a hammer to break their heads, to shatter and destroy them. We now see the reason why God not only declares that he was angry with these ungodly despisers of his word, but also denounces the same vengeance on their posterity. ⁴⁴

Jeremiah 23:35

35. Thus shall ye say every one to his neighbour, and every one to his brother, What hath the LORD answered? and, What hath the LORD spoken?

Here the Prophet explains himself more clearly; he shews why God would not have his word to be called a burden. Why so? because they in a manner closed the way, so that they derived no benefit from God’s word, while they regarded it with disdain and hatred; for the word burden was an obstacle, so that they gave no access to God, nor opened their ears to hear his word. God then bids them to come with empty and sincere hearts; for it is a real preparation for a teachable spirit, when we acknowledge that we ought to believe in God’s word, and also when we are not possessed by a perverse feeling which forms a prejudice and in a manner holds us bound, so that we are not free to form a right judgment.

The import of the passage then is this, that the Jews, renouncing their blasphemies, were to prepare themselves reverently to hear God’s word, for hearing is due to God; and then that this word was to be heard with sincere hearts, so that no weariness, nor pride, nor hatred, nor any depraved feeling, might hinder his word from being believed and reverently heard by all. This then is what the Prophet means when he says, “Ye shall hereafter change your impious expression, and shall say, What has Jehovah answered? what has Jehovah spoken?” That is, they shall not themselves close the door, but willingly come to the school of God, being meek and teachable, so that nothing would hinder them from rendering honor to God and from embracing his word, that they might be terrified by his threatenings, and that being allured by his promises they might devote themselves wholly to him.

Prayer Lecture 90

Prayer

Grant, Almighty God, that as nothing is better for us or more necessary for our chief happiness, than to depend on thy word, for that is a sure pledge of thy good will towards us, — O grant, that as thou hast favored us with so singular a benefit, which thou manifest to us daily, we may be attentive to hear thee and submit ourselves to thee in true fear, meekness, and humility, so that we may be prepared in the spirit of meekness to receive whatever proceeds from thee, and that thus thy word may not only be precious to us, but also sweet and delightful, until we shall enjoy the perfection of that life, which thine only-begotten Son has procured for us by his own blood. — Amen.

Lecture Ninety First

Jeremiah 23:36

36. And the burden of the LORD shall ye mention no more: for every man’s word shall be his burden; for ye have perverted the words of the living God, of the LORD of hosts our God

Jeremiah goes on with the same subject, that every one ought calmly and meekly to hear God speaking, he said, as we saw yesterday, that the prophets were to be asked as to what God had spoken and what he had answered; he thereby intimated that there must be docility, in order that God’s word may obtain credit, authority, and favor among us. He again repeats, that the word burden could not be endured by God; for, as we explained yesterday, this word was used commonly by the Jews as expressive of hatred or disdain, being as they were unwilling to receive sound doctrine.

In forbidding them to mention the word burden, it was the same thing as though he had said, “Let not this form of speaking be any longer in use among you.” He then adds, For to every one his word shall be his burden. By these words he shews that what is bitter in prophecies is as it were accidental; for God has nothing else in view in addressing men, but to call them to salvation. The word of God then in itself ought to be deemed sweet and delightful. Whence then is this bitterness and hatred towards it? even from the wickedness of men alone. As when a sick person, eating the most wholesome food finds it turned into poison, the cause being in himself; so it is with us, it is our own fault that the word of God becomes a burden. It was, moreover, the Prophet’s design to shew that the Jews had no reason to complain that prophecies were grievous to them, and always announced some trouble; for God wishes to address men with lenity and kindness, but he is forced by their wickedness to deal sharply with them. The Prophet seems, however, to go still farther, as though he had said, “Though prophecies should cease, yet every one shall be a prophet to himself; for as they murmur against God, and cannot bear his judgment, however silent God’s ministers may be, they will yet afford a sufficient cause for condemnation, who dare thus to rise up against God.”

We now see the design of the Prophet in saying, Ye shall no more mention the burden of Jehovah; that is, “This shameful proverb, which brands God’s word with disgrace, shall no more be used by you; this wicked practice shall cease, for else to every one of you; his word shall be a burden;” so the causal particle כי, ki, is to be rendered. But if another sense be preferred, I feel no objection, that is, that they ought to have considered the reason why God did not deal more mildly with them; which was, because they were of a perverse disposition, and thus they refused the paternal kindness which he was prepared to shew, provided they received it. ⁴⁵

This passage is entitled to special notice, for we see how the greater part cannot bear threatenings and terrors when announced to them. Hence they entertain contempt and hatred towards heavenly doctrine; and yet none consider why God so often threatens and terrifies them in his word. For if men ceased to sin, God would cease to contend with them; but when they continually provoke him, is he to be silent? and further, are his prophets to suffer everything just to be violated, and God himself to be despised? Let us then know that the fault is in us when God seems to deal rigidly with us, for we do not allow him to use such a paternal language as he always would, were it not that we put a hinderance in the way.

The Prophet also adds, For ye have corrupted the words of the living God, of Jehovah of hosts our God So ought the words to be rendered. Here he justly accuses them, that they perverted the words of God, and in two ways, because they constrained God by their wickedness to speak otherwise than he wished, and also, because they were preposterous interpreters of his dealings. For though God may severely chastise us, yet it is our duty to receive his reproofs with a meek spirit, as they are necessary for us; but when we murmur and become refractory, we pervert the word of God. We hence see that the word of God is not only perverted in one way, but when we furiously oppose him, we prevent him to deal gently and kindly with us; and we do the same when we submit not to his reproofs, but rage against him whenever he summons us to judgment. And as their wantonness was in this instance so great, the Prophet here sets up against them in express terms the power of God.

He says first, that he is the living God; and by this term he reminded them that the ungodly, who vomited thus their blasphemies against him, would not go unpunished; “See,” he says, “with whom ye have to do; for you contend with the living God; this audacity will rebound on your own heads; ye then carry on a fatal war.” He, secondly, adds, that he is Jehovah of hosts; by which expression he again shews his power. And, thirdly, he says, that he is the God of that people; as though he had said, that not only their impiety was madness in daring to contend with God, but that it was also connected with ingratitude; for God had adopted them as his people, and had promised to be their God.

We now then see the design of the Prophet; he first warned them not to entertain hatred in their hearts to prophetic doctrine; secondly, he shewed that the whole fault was in themselves, as they constrained God to deal severely with them; and further, that they perverted the word of God, being false interpreters of it, and closing the door against his kindness when he invited all the pious and the teachable; and lastly, he exalts God’s power and commends his goodness, that he might thus aggravate the sin of the people in daring to carry on war with God himself, and in despising the favor conferred on them. It follows, —

Jeremiah 23:37

37. Thus shalt thou say to the prophet, What hath the LORD answered thee? and, What hath the LORD spoken?

He repeats what we noticed yesterday, and almost in the same words. The meaning is, that if we desire to profit in God’s school, we must beware lest our minds be preoccupied by any corrupt feeling. For whence is it that God’s word is not savored by us, or excites in us a bitter spirit? even because we are infected by some sinful lust or passion which wholly corrupts our judgment. God then would have us to come to him free from every vicious disposition, and to be so teachable as to inquire only what he teaches, what he may answer to us; for whosoever becomes thus disentangled and free, will doubtless find the prophetic doctrine to be for his benefit. There is then but one cause why God’s word does not profit us, but on the contrary is injurious and fatal to us, and that is, because we seek not what God speaks, that is, because we are not teachable, nor come to learn, but either sloth, or contempt, or ingratitude, or perverseness, or something of this kind, bears rule in us.

Now he says here, that the prophets ought to be asked as to what God speaks, or as to what he may answer ⁴⁶ In these words he exculpates God’s faithful servants; for if a hearer is ready to obey, he will find from a faithful teacher what may justly please and do him good. In short he shews that there is nothing wrong in the prophets when their doctrine does not please us, but that this happens because we do not regard what Jeremiah here reminds us of, that we ought to hear God that we may learn, and that we may obey his voice. It follows, —

Jeremiah 23:38-39

38. But since ye say, The burden of the LORD; therefore thus saith the LORD, Because ye say this word, The burden of the LORD, and I have sent unto you, saying, Ye shall not say, The burden of the LORD;

39. Therefore, behold, I, even I, will utterly forget you, and I will forsake you, and the city that I gave you and your fathers, and cast you out of my presence:

Here the Prophet confirms what he had said, for God might have seemed to be too indignant, having been so grievously offended at one short expression. The Jews had borrowed from the prophets themselves, when they called prophecies burdens, as we have already said, and as we find in many places. Now as the lubricity of language is great, though the Jews might have done wrong as to one word, it might yet have appeared an insufficient reason for the punishment which God threatened to inflict. But the Prophet here shews that God was justly angry with them, for he had sent to them, and often warned them not to use this form of speaking, which was a manifest evidence of their impiety. As then they had thus disregarded God and his warnings, was it an excusable mistake? In short, Jeremiah shews that they had not erred inconsiderately, as it often happens as to those who speak rashly and thoughtlessly, but that this perverted way of speaking proceeded from determined wickedness, from a wish to affix some mark of disgrace to God’s word; and thus they acted in disdain towards God himself. This then is the import of the words.

If ye shall say, even when I warn you not to speak in this manner; if then ye persevere in this obstinacy, Behold I, etc.; God here declares that he would take vengeance. As to this sentence, most interpreters derive the verb from נשה, nushe, making ה, he, the final letter; but I doubt the correctness of this; yet if this explanation be adopted, we must still hold that the Prophet alludes to the verb, to take away, which immediately follows. But I am disposed to take another view, that God would by removing remove them. It must be noticed that the word משא, mesha, which has often been mentioned, comes from the same root; משא, mesha, a burden, is derived from נשא, nusha, to remove or take away. As therefore this proverb was commonly used, that prophetic doctrine ever brought some burden and trouble, God answers, “I will take you away;” that is, “ye shall find by experience how grievous and burdensome your wickedness is to me, it shall rebound on your heads; ye have burdened and treated with indignity my word, and I will treat you with indignity,” but in what manner? I will take you away even by taking you away. If any one approves more of the sense of forgetting, let him follow his own judgment; but that explanation appears to me unmeaning, “I will forget you,” except נשא, nusha, be taken in the second place as signifying to take away. “I will forget you, that I may take you away.” ⁴⁷

He adds, And I will pluck you up; which some render, “I will forsake you,” but they seem not to understand what the Prophet intended; for he declares something more grievous and more dreadful than before, when he says, I will pluck you up; and yet this sense does not satisfy me. The verb נטש, nuthash, means to extend, and metaphorically to cast far off; and casting off or away seems to suit the passage best. God then would not only remove or take away the Jews from their own place, but would also cast them far off into distant countries. He thus denounces on them an exile, by which they were to be driven as it were into another world. For had they dwelt in the neighborhood, it would have been more tolerable to them, but as they were to be driven away, as by a violent storm to the farthest and remotest regions, it was much more grievous.

He afterwards says, And the city also which I gave to you and to your fathers The verbs, to cast away and to pluck up, do not well suit stones; but as to the sense, it may rightly be said that God would take away the city with its inhabitants, as though they were driven away by the wind. And this was added designedly, for the Jews relying on this promise, “This is my rest for ever, here will I dwell,” thought it impossible that the sanctuary of God would ever be destroyed. As then this vain confidence deceived them, that the city which God had chosen as his habitation would stand always, the Prophet expressly adds that the city itself would perish.

And it is also added, that it was given to them and their fathers He anticipates all objections, and shakes off from the Jews the vain hope by which they were inebriated, even that the city was given perpetually to them, and that God resided there to defend them; “This donation,” he says, “will not keep you nor the city itself from destruction.” He adds, From my presence; for it was customary for them to pretend God’s name, when they sought to harden their hearts against the threatenings of the prophets; but God here answers them and says, from my presence; as though he had said, “In vain do ye harbor the thought respecting the perpetuity of the city and the Temple; for this depends on my will and good pleasure. As ye then stand or fall as it seems right to me, I now declare that ye shall be ejected and wholly removed from my presence.” It follows, —

Jeremiah 23:40

40. And I will bring an everlasting reproach upon you, and a perpetual shame, which shall not be forgotten.

What is here contained is, that though the Jews justly gloried for a time in being the peculiar people of God, yet this would avail them nothing, as they had divested themselves of that honor in which they had excelled, by the abnegation of true religion. Here then the Prophet strips the Jews of that foolish boasting with which they were inflated when they said that they were the people of God, and threatens that God having taken away their glory would make them lie under perpetual shame.

We at the same time know, that such threatenings are to be restricted as to time, they extend only to the coming of Christ; for the Church of God could not have been doomed to eternal reproach. But as to hypocrites, as there was no repentance, so they never obtained pardon; but God delivered his own from eternal reproach when Christ the Redeemer appeared; yet these words are to be understood as rightly addressed to the ungodly despisers of God. Now follows, —

---

← Jeremiah 22 · Contents · Jeremiah 24 →

Footnotes

1. It is an exclamation in the Sept. and Syr.; “Oh! the Pastors,” etc., but a denunciation in the Vulg. and the Targ., “Wo to the Pastors,” etc. The original may be rendered in either way; the latter is the most suitable here. — Ed. ↩

2. The word is singular in Hebrew, “pasture,” or feeding. — Ed ↩

3. The meaning seems to be that they had caused the flock to be scattered and driven away through their bad conduct, because they did not take care of them, as the last verb means. The two first verbs are indeed in Hiphil, and may be rendered causatively thus, — Ye have caused my sheep to be scattered, And have caused them to be driven away; And ye have not cared for them. The last verb is not in Hiphil, and states the reason why the sheep had been dispersed. It means to oversee, to take care of, to attend to. The dispersion was owing to the neglect of the pastors in taking care of the sheep. The scattering or dispersion was their exile; which God states in the third verse was his act as a punishment for their wickedness, but the cause of dispersion was the conduct of the pastors. We see here an instance of the order in which ideas are often stated by the Prophets. Scattering, though mentioned first, is the last act, the most ostensible; the driving out of the land was the previous act, and the first in order, though the last stated, was the neglect of the pastors in taking an oversight of them. It is to begin with the effect and to go back to the cause. “You have caused them to be scattered to all lands, you have made them to be driven out of their own land, and you have neglected to take care of them.” These are the three points of accusation, but stated in an inverted order. There are constant instances of this kind of arrangement. — Ed. ↩

4. “To their own pasture,” is the Sept. and Arab.; “to their own country,” the Vulg.; “to their own fold,” the Syr.; “to their own places,” the Targ. The Hebrew is, “to their own folds;” the word is plural, and means generally “habitations,” either for men, or cattle, or beasts. As sheep are mentioned, “folds” no doubt is the proper word. — Ed. ↩

5. This verb is omitted by the Sept. and Arab., and rendered, “no one of their number shall be sought,” by the Vulg.; “nor wander,” by the Syr.; “nor be moved,” by the Targ. Our version has followed that of Montanus, “neither shall they be lacking.” Venema and Gataker render it, “nor shall they be missing;” and Blayney, “nor shall they be visited,” that is, with judgment. But the verb is used in the sense of being wanting or missing, see Numbers 31:49; 1 Samuel 25:7; 15:21; and this is the meaning most suitable to this passage, — And I will set over them pastors, And they will feed them; And they shall fear no more, nor be terrified, Nor be missing, saith Jehovah. — Ed. ↩

6. The Sept. and Arab. give, “a righteous sun-rising — ἀνατολὴν δίκαιαν;” the Vulg., “a righteous branch;” the Syr., “a ray of righteousness.” The Vulg. is alone correct, as there can be no doubt as to the original words. — Ed ↩

7. We cannot express the words in our language without changing the terms as follows, “And a ruler shall rule,” or, “a reigner shall reign.” Bochart says that this double use of the same word, as a substantive and a verb, imports in Hebrew what is enhancive, according to what Calvin says here. The king was to be a king indeed, with full power and dignity, and with a large extent of empire. The Welsh will express the words literally, — A breniniaetha brenin. And so it is rendered in Greek, — Καὶ βασιλεύσει βασιλεὺς — Ed. ↩

8. The verb שכל first means to be wise or prudent, and in Hiphil, as here, to understand, to act wisely or prudently; and secondly, as the natural effect of wisdom, it means sometimes to prosper. But the first sense is given to it here by all the Versions: “and shall understand,” is the Septuagint; “and shall be wise,” the Vulgate; “and shall act prudently,” the Syriac. Our version is the Targum, Blayney gives the same idea with Calvin, “and shall act wisely;” which is no doubt the correct one. — Ed ↩

9. See the Preface to this volume. ↩

10. “This king,” says Venema, “is the true God, the meritorious cause and pledge of our righteousness, and also the efficient cause and exemplar of all holiness, piety, and virtue.” He holds that Messiah alone is spoken of here, and blames Grotius for applying the passage in the first place to Zerubbabel, and maintains that what is said here cannot be applied to any but to the Messiah. He mentions, as a proof of this, his name — “a righteous Branch;” his royal dignity — “a king shall reign;” his title — “Jehovah our righteousness,” his prosperity and the security of his kingdom. All these things comport with the character of no one, but with that of our Lord Jesus Christ. — Ed. ↩

11. It is a fact worthy of being observed, that what God effected in the course of his providence was more remarkable, and is represented as more astonishing, than what he did by means of many and wonderful miracles: the secret working of his providence on the minds of men is more wonderful and effects greater things than his power when put forth to reverse the course of nature. Though he performs no miracles now, yet he works in a way more wonderful than if he did. We cannot but see this if we notice the course of events with enlightened eyes. — Ed. ↩

12. The verse begins with לכן, rendered “therefore,” or, “on this account,” by the Vulg., the Syr., and by our own version; but, “after this,” by Blayney, and “moreover,” by Gataker. It might be rendered “surely,” or doubtless, as it is by Venema, — Surely, behold the days are coming, saith Jehovah, When they shall no more say, Jehovah lives, etc. It is better to render the ו, “when,” than “that,” as in our version. The Sept. and Vulg, render it “and,” which gives no meaning in either language. Calvin follows the Syr., and gives the sense, “in which.” — Ed ↩

13. These words are connected with the former verse in the Sept. where they seem to have no meaning. The Vulg. puts them as a heading to what follows, and Blayney has done the same, “concerning the prophets.” The Syr. connects them with the following words, as Calvin does, and our version, and also the Arab. and Targ. The most suitable rendering would be, — For the prophets broken is my heart within me. The sentence is otherwise hardly complete. It may be rendered “with regard to the prophets,” etc. — Ed. ↩

14. The idea of shaking or trembling is commonly given here to the verb: “are shaken,” Sept.; “have trembled,” Vulg., Syr., and Targ. The word “tremble” is the most suitable. — Ed. ↩

15. The early Versions and the Targum differ as to this word: the Sept., the Syr., and the Arab. have “on account of these,” that is, adulterers; the Vulg.,” on account of a curse,” that is of God; the Targ., “on account of false swearing.” Blayney says, that there is nothing here about swearing, and renders the words “because of these:” but the 14th verse (Jeremiah 23:14) decides the question, where we have “adultery” and “walking in lies,” ascribed to the same persons, the prophets. That, אלה means sometimes “false swearing,” is evident from Hosea 4:2; and in Hosea 10:4, we have the word “falsely” added to it. Their false swearing was their unfaithfulness to God’s covenant, their apostasy in worshipping idols. And the charge of being “adulterers” seems to refer to their spiritual adultery — their idolatry, and not as Calvin and others think, to that which is natural. Everything in the context favors this view; their wickedness was found in God’s house, verse 11 (Jeremiah 23:11); and a comparison is made between them and the Samaritan prophets, verse 14 (Jeremiah 23:14). The construction of this verse leads us to the same conclusion: when two כי occur in succession, as here, they may be rendered as and so, — As the land has been filled with adulterers, So for false swearing has the land mourned, Withered have the pastures of the wilderness; And their course has become calamitous, And their strength not firm, (that is, to run their course.) Houbigant and Horsley have re-arranged the whole verse, and made several transpositions. Had these learned men for a moment reflected how such delocations of words, as they suppose, could have taken place, they would have, no doubt, restrained their innovating propensities. — Ed. ↩

16. That the word means “course,” is evident from Jeremiah 8:6, where it can have no other meaning. So it is rendered by the Sept. and the Vulg. Blayney gives it another meaning. Their will also hath been wickedness, And their might without right. He derives it from רצה, to choose, and not from ריף, run: but the sense of the last line is hardly discernible. — Ed ↩

17. This verb is used three times in Jeremiah 3:1, 2, and 9, and in every instance in the sense of defiling the land with adultery, and in the two last verses, with spiritual adultery — idolatry. It is rendered here passively by the Sept. and the Vulg., “have become defiled;” but it is most commonly used in a transitive sense; and so Jun. and Trem. render it here, and consider it, the land, as understood after it; and this is most consistent with the context, — For both prophet and priest have defiled it: Also in my house have I found Their wickedness, saith Jehovah. The “house” of God is here put in contrast with the land or the country; and in Jeremiah 23:15, it is expressly said that from Jerusalem pollution had gone forth throughout all the land. Idolatry is evidently what is meant throughout this passage, from verse 9 to 15 (Jeremiah 23:9-15). Calvin as to this verb has followed the Syriac version. — Ed. ↩

18. Such is the word literally; but there is here an ellipsis, not uncommon in Hebrew; the word way is left out before “lubricities” or slipperinesses. The word being plural, and a reduplicate, expresses what is extreme — “most slippery,” or, wholly slippery, — 12. Therefore their way shall be to them, As a way wholly slippery in thick darkness; They shall drive on and fall in it; For I will bring on them an evil — The year of their visitation, saith Jehovah. It is not darkness, but thick darkness is what the word means; and it is connected with the previous words by the Targ. and by all the versions, except the Syr.; which Blayney has thus followed, — Into darkness shall they be thrust and shall fall therein. But this spoils the whole force of the passage: their way was to be altogether slippery, and also in thick darkness; along which they would be hurried on, or slide, or drive on, and the inevitable effect would be falling. — Ed. ↩

19. Rendered “iniquities” by the Sept.; “fatuity” by the Vulg.; “falsehood” by the Syr.; and “impiety by the Targ. Blayney has, “that which was disgusting.” The word, as here, is found only in two other places, Job 1:22; Job 24:12. It means, not what is “disgusting,” but what is crude, insipid, untempered, and hence figuratively, what is unreasonable, absurd, fatuitous, foolish. It is rendered “folly” in Job. The Vulg., which is followed by Calvin, gives its best meaning here — “fatuity.” To prophesy by Baal was the effect of infatuation: it was an absurd and fatuitous thing. This was the character of the thing in itself; and the evil which this fatuity produced was to lead the people astray. — Ed. ↩

20. Or “wickedness — pravitatem,” rendered “horrible things” by the Sept., and “folly” by the Syr. The Vulg. and the Targ. go altogether astray. The word means properly horridness, hideousness, or a horrid thing, and may be rendered enormity. The difference found in the Targ. and the Versions, as to the word and the manner of rendering the words which follow, seems to shew that the passage was not understood. I offer the following version, — 14. But among the prophets of Jerusalem Have I seen a horrid thing — The committing of adultery and walking in falsehood; And they have strengthened the hand of the wicked, That they might not turn, each from his wickedness: They are all of them become to me like Sodom, And its inhabitants like those of Gomorrah. The verb I render “the committing of adultery,” is an infinitive without a preposition; it cannot be otherwise rendered in our language, but in Welsh it can be rendered literally, as an infinitive without a preposition, though commonly in that language, as in Hebrew, the infinitive mood has a preposition before it. The “horrid thing” was adultery, that is, idolatry, combined with “walking in falsehood,” that is, with a false profession of prophesying in God’s name, which is afterwards more distinctly specified. Here was the difference between the prophets: those of Samaria were idolaters, and consistently they prophesied in the name of Baal; but the prophets of Jerusalem were not only idolaters, but added to this sin the enormity of defending all they did by alleging that they were the Lord’s prophets. This was the horrid thing. It is a great sin to advocate error, but to do this in the name of the Lord, or by perverting his word, is a horrid thing. The last line presents an instance of that ellipsis mentioned in a Note on the 12th verse. The word “inhabitants” is to be understood before Gomorrah. — Ed. ↩

21. This is the Syr., but it is not the meaning; it is properly rendered “pollution,” or defilement, by the Sept., the Vulg., and Arab., but improperly flattery, by the Targ. The verb from which it comes is commonly rendered to defile; see Isaiah 24:5; Micah 4:11. The “profaneness” of our version, and “the perverseness” of Blayney, seem incorrect; the word is used in neither sense. The pollution here was by idolatry — the adultery beforementioned. This pollution had spread from Jerusalem through the whole land. — Ed. ↩

22. The Sept. gives this version, “for they make a vain vision for themselves; from their heart they speak, and not from the mouth of the Lord.” Though the sense is given, yet it is not a correct version. The Vulg. and Syr. keep nearer to the original, and render the first clause “and they deceive you.” The words literally are, “Infatuating you are they.” The whole verse is as follows, — 16. Thus saith Jehovah of hosts, Hearken not to the words of the prophets, Who prophesy unto you; Infatuating you are they; The vision of their own heart do they speak, And not from the mouth of Jehovah. The “And” in the last line is supplied in several copies, is given by the Sept. and the Syr. To render “from,” as Blayney does, “after the mouth,” etc., is no improvement. To speak “from the mouth of the Lord” is very striking. All the Versions retain the preposition “from,” and the Targ. gives “word” for “mouth.” — Ed. ↩

23. Some, as Venema and Blayney, think that אמרים belongs to the preceding verse; but this would not consist with the Hebrew idiom, where a participle often precedes a verb in the future tense, but never follows it; nor is this countenanced by any of the Versions or the Targ. The words as they stand are indeed unusual; the probability is that אמור should be אמרו, and all the Versions give it as such, “they say.” Then it would be, “Saying they say;” which imports the boldness and the confidence of the false prophets; that is, “They boldly say.” — Ed ↩

24. There is a difference in the early versions as to this clause; it is connected in the Sept. and Arab. with the preceding, “They say to those who reject the word of the Lord,” etc., and Blayney has followed this arrangement. The Vulg., the Syr., and the Targ., take it as a separate clause, and render it as here. The Hebrew no doubt admits of either constructions, but the Lord appears to be the speaker, and therefore the latter construction ought to have the preference, — 17. They boldly say to those who despise me, Spoken hath Jehovah, “Peace shall be to you;” And to every one who walks in the resolutions of his own heart, They say, “Not come upon you shall evil.” This rendering also corresponds more with what is said in Jeremiah 23:25, that the prophets prophesied lies in God’s name. — Ed. ↩

25. What seems to militate against this view is the fact, that these false prophets themselves pretended to a divine revelation; they announced their message as coming from God. Hence these questions seem to deny their pretensions. He seems to say, “Who of you have been in the council of Jehovah?” The tautology may be avoided without having recourse to the emendations which Blayney proposes, — But who (of you) has stood in the secret council of Jehovah? And saw and understood his business? Who has listened to his word and heard it? We know that דבר means not only a word, but also a thing, affair, business, matter, any thing represented or imagined. The verb to “see,” which implies a vision, proves that it means the latter here. Then in the last line it means a message, because it was what was listened to and heard. But the verb שמע, in the first clause, comports with seeing, and understanding is what it sometimes signifies; and in the last clause it comports with listening, which is that of hearing. The Prophet refers to a vision and to a message, or to an affair as set before one admitted into the council chamber of his sovereign, (for this is the representation,) and to a message given to him who is commissioned to transact the business. It is not an unusual thing in Scripture to use a word in two different senses in the same passage; but the surrounding context is always sufficient to make the subject clear. — Ed ↩

26. “Storm,” or tempest, is the most suitable here. The word חמה, after Jehovah, seems to belong to it — “hot tempest;” the reference is to the burning winds of the south. See Jeremiah 4:11, 12. The verse may be thus rendered, — Behold the burning tempest of Jehovah! It shall go forth, yea, a pregnant tempest; On the head of the wicked shall it burst. The tempest or storm would be “burning,” and also “pregnant,” or in travail, as the word means; and being as it were in labor, it would “burst,” or literally bring forth on the head of the wicked. The verb is not from יחל, but from חול, which means not only to be in labor but also to bring forth. “It shall come,” is the Sept. and the Vulg.; our version is the Targum. — Ed ↩

27. Literally, “at the posteriority of days,” meaning, at a future time, without designating any particular period; it is the same as “hereafter.” The words which follow can hardly be rendered literally in our language — “ye shall discern it with discernment.” What is the antecedent to “it,” which is, ה, a feminine gender? Venema says that it is to be taken as a neuter; but if so, what does it refer to? It appears to me that there is nothing in the passage to which it can be referred, except to the “tempest,” which is feminine, in the former verse; they would understand at a future time the meaning of that tempest, that it was from the Lord as a punishment for their sins. This they did not understand at the time. These two verses are found nearly in the same words at the end of Jeremiah 23:30: The last word is omitted there, — “At the posteriority of days ye shall discern it,” or understand it, or consider it. The Vulg. here is, “at the last days ye shall understand his counsel;” the Sept., “at the last of days ye shall understand it;” and the Targ., “at the end of days ye shall by understanding understand this.” ↩

28. The order here is according to the usual style of the prophets; the most visible act is mentioned first — the prophets ran without being sent; then the previous act is referred to, — God never spoke to them, and yet they prophesied. They ran as though God had communicated something to them; but God neither spoke to them nor sent them. They had neither a mission nor a message from God. In the following verse, consistently still with the style of Scripture, the order is reversed. The message is first referred to, and then the mission. They had no message, because they never “stood” or were present in God’s council; and then they did not go forth for the purpose of turning the people from their evil way. — Ed. ↩

29. In the Sept. there is no corresponding clause to the “if” at the beginning of the verse. The Vulg. and the Targ., as in our version, make the “turning” to be such a clause, but strangely render it in the first person singular, “then would I have turned them,” etc. The rendering of Calvin, is the most suitable, only the ו after אם, might better be rendered “then” than “surely,” — But if they had stood in my council, Then would they have caused my people to hear my words, And turned them from their wicked way, And from the wickedness of their doings. Blayney renders the verse in the same way, making the corresponding clause to begin at the second line. — Ed. ↩

30. Their “evil way” was their idolatry, and “the wickedness of their doings” was their injustice and immoral conduct. — Ed. ↩

31. “Am I not a God here upon earth, that seems farther from me, as well as in heaven, that seemeth nearer to me, as being the place of my special residence? do you think that because my palace is in heaven I take no notice of what is done upon earth?” — Gataker. This appears to be the meaning; for he says afterwards, “Do not I fill heaven and earth?” The words seem literally to be, — 21. Am I a God of nearness, saith Jehovah? And not a God of distance? — Ed. ↩

32. “The Scripture,” says Venema, “often brings to light and condemns, not what men profess, but what may be inferred from their doings.” — Ed. ↩

33. The future here ought to be rendered potentially, — Can a man hide in hiding-places, That I should not see him, saith Jehovah? Do not I fill the heavens and the earth, saith Jehovah? The first line may be thus rendered more literally, — Can a man secrete himself in secrecies? In Welsh, — A lecha dyn mewn llechveydd? “The heavens,” and not “heaven,” ought to be the word in the last line; and so does Blayney render it. The visible and the invisible heaven are intended. — Ed. ↩

34. The more literal rendering is as follows, — 25. I have heard what the prophets have said, Who have prophesied in my name falsely, saying. — “I have dreamed, I have dreamed.” — Ed. ↩

35. Emendators have been very busy in correcting the first words in this verse, without the authority of any MSS., or of the early versions. When there is a meaning and a striking one, emendations, merely conjectural, are surely to be repudiated. Houbigant, Blayney, and Horsley, have their corrections, but we can do without them. What seems to have prompted conjectural emendations has been the ה prefixed to יש; but Gataker removed this difficulty; his version is substantially as follows, — How long! — Is it in the heart of these prophets, To be prophesying falsehood, And prophesying the deceit of their own hearts? To be “in the heart” is to be resolved, to form a purpose or determination. See Isaiah 63:4. It is the same, as though it was said, “Are these prophets resolved?” To be “in the heart” means also to delight in a thing. See Psalm 40:8. The meaning then may be, “Is it the delight of these prophets?” etc. But the first sense is the most suitable. “How long!” is an exclamation of wonder at their perseverance in their wicked course. They had been often warned, and yet they continued. Then follows a question, whether it was their settled purpose to persevere in prophesying falsely? — Ed. ↩

36. Calvin begins this verse as our version, “Who think,” etc. So the Sept.; the Vulg. is, “who seek (or wish), volunt.” Blayney has, “who study.” The verb means sometimes to contrive or to purpose a thing after counting the reasons for and against. It may be rendered here, “who design.” The Syriac is, “whose counsel is.” It was their design and intended object to make the people to forget God’s name through their dreams. But how to forget his name? for they professed to announce their dreams in his name. God’s name here evidently means his revealed name, himself as revealed in his word. — Ed ↩

37. All the early versions and the Targ. render the last verb in the imperative mood, “Let him speak,” etc. And so most of modern expounders. — Ed ↩

38. The difference between the chaff and the wheat is what the Sept. and Vulg. intimate, “What is the chaff to the wheat?” But the Syr. has another idea, “Why mingle ye the chaff with the wheat?” The literal rendering of the Hebrew is, “Why to the chaff the wheat?” The mixture is what seems to be intended. So thought Gataker and Blayney, who rendered it, “What has the chaff to do with the wheat?” that is, why do you mix them together? And so does Adam Clarke view the phrase. Venema, Henry, Scott, and Lowth take the first meaning, which is also that of our version; but the other is more agreeable to the original. — Ed ↩

39. The particle כה at the beginning of this verse, rendered ut by Calvin, seems to be without meaning. It is omitted by the Vulg., and rendered “behold” by the Sept. and Syr., as though it was חנה. Venema regarded it either as a noun, burning, from כוה, to burn, or a misprint for כח, strength, vigor, power. The last is adopted by Blayney, and approved by Horsley, and is countenanced by the Targ., “Are not all my words strong as fire?” Blayney’s version is, — Is not the power of my word like fire? This is the most probable meaning; though there is no different reading, yet the difference between the two letters is very small. — Ed. ↩

40. Various have been the expositions of this sentence: they adopted the manner of the true prophets, as some say, and used their words, an instance of which is found in Jeremiah 28:1-4; and this is the view of Scott; others hold that the imitation in saying, “Thus saith the Lord,” is what is referred to. It has also been suggested that they are intended — who, knowing the truth, withheld it from the people; and that to withhold what they knew, is represented here as stealing. But none of these views sufficiently account for the words here used, “who steal my words every one from his neighbor.” They were God’s words committed to the people, and these prophets stole them, that is, by rendering them void by their falsehoods and vain dreams, as Satan is said to steal the seed sown in the heart of the way-side hearer. This is the view taken by Grotius, Venema, and Gataker. — Ed. ↩

41. There are those who, with Houbigant, suppose a transposition in the word, the ח being put last instead of being first; and then it would mean to render smooth. But this does not suit the passage. The probable idea is what is given paraphrastically by the Sept., “who send forth the prophecies of the tongue;” they derived their prophecies from their own hearts and their own tongues, and said that they came from God. They took or used their tongues only, and at the same time professed to speak God’s words. Or we may consider the taking or using the tongue as meaning only profession, as though it was said, “who profess and say, ‘He saith.’” The Syr. is, “who pervert their own tongues,” which means that they used them falsely; and the Targ., “who prophesy according to the will of their own heart.” — Ed. ↩

42. The word is rendered “errors,” by the Sept.; “miracles,” by the Vulg.; “lasciviousness,” by the Syr.; and “rashness,” by the Targ. It comes from a verb which means to swell, to overflow. As a feminine noun it is only found here, and as a participial noun in two places, Judges 9:4, and Zephaniah 3:4, in which places it evidently means licentious persons; and I once thought that as used here it means licentiousness; see Note on Zephaniah 3:4, in vol. 4 on the Minor Prophets: but I now think that the meaning most suitable here is excess or overflowing in words — vaunting boasting. The false prophets boasted that they were prophesying in God’s name; they were telling lies, and boasting that they were sent by God. In this way they succeeded in leading astray the people, Venema renders it “vain boasting.” Behold, I am against those who prophesy Lying dreams, saith Jehovah; And who declare them, that they may lead astray My people by their lies and by their vauntings. Then follows a virtual denial of their vauntings, for God had “not sent’ nor “commanded” them; and the conclusion of the verse refers to their lies, for what they said would “not profit” the people. Thus we see a perfect correspondence between what is said in this and in the following verse, and the order is according to the usual style of the Prophets, it being reversed in the latter instance; their vauntings were false, because God did not send them; and their lies were vain, for they would not profit the people. — Ed. ↩

43. The latter part of the verse is rendered by the Septuagint, “Ye are the assumption. (λὢμμα,) I will dash you to pieces, saith the Lord;” by the Vulgate, “Ye are the burden, I will surely cast you away, saith the Lord;” by the Syriac, “This is the word of the Lord; I will pluck you up, saith the Lord;” and by the Targum, “Such is the prophecy; I will cast you away, saith the Lord.” Blayney considers that these words את-מח משא ought to be thus arranged אתם המשא, consistently with all the Versions and the Targum; the letters are the same, only differently connected. This, doubtless, is the right reading, though not found in any MS.; both the Versions and the sense being in its favor. Then as to the verb, the most suitable meaning here is to cast off, as Blayney renders it. The verse then would read as follows, — 33. And when ask thee shall this people, Or a prophet or a priest, saying, “What is the burden of Jehovah?” Then say to them, “Ye are the burden;” And I will cast you off; saith Jehovah. It was a suitable answer to mockers, who made, as it were, a sport of the true Prophets. — Ed. ↩

44. The beginning of this verse will read better in connection with the last, in apposition with “you” whom the Lord threatened to cast off, — Then say to them, “Ye are the burden;” And I will cast you off, saith Jehovah — 34. Even the prophet and the priest and the people: Who will say, “The burden of Jehovah,” Yea, I will punish that man and his house. Notice here the change of order in the words; in the preceding verse we find “the people and the prophet and the priest;” but here, “the prophet and the priest and the people.” Whoever he might be, whether a prophet or a priest or one of the people,” that man was to be punished. — Ed. ↩

45. This sentence, as given by the Sept. and Vulg., bears the meaning first mentioned by Calvin, but another, as given by the Syr., “for the word, let it be to man his prophecy,” that is, the Lord’s prophecy. The meaning of which seems to be, that the burden, or prophecy, ought to be deemed by every man as the word of God, or ought to be called his word; it was no longer to be called burden, but God’s word. According to Calvin and many others, the meaning is, “the word, or the phrase,” the burden of the Lord, “which ye use in derision, shall really be a burden to you.” The כי in this case must be rendered else or otherwise. But the following words do not well connect; and as punishment in case of disregarding the injunction here given is afterwards especially specified, to mention it here seems improper. I am therefore inclined to regard the two last clauses as including reasons for the prohibition; and I give this version, 36. And “the burden of Jehovah” ye shall no more mention; For the burden, it is become to every one his word; And ye have perverted the words of the living God, Of Jehovah of hosts, our God. The word burden was used by all, it had become a common word; and by using it in derision, they turned the words of the living God into contempt, instead of receiving them as his words and obeying them. This was the process, they first ridiculed them, and then despised and neglected them. Hence God prohibited the use of the expression, “the burden of Jehovah.” The only objection to the rendering above is, that היה, a future, is rendered as a present, “it is become;” but this is what is often done. Besides, כי is sometimes conversive as well as the ו. — Ed ↩

46. “Thus shalt thou say to the Prophet,” that is, every one of you. The singular is used, as is the case often, instead of the plural. The Syr. indeed adopts the plural, “Thus shall ye say,” etc. They are here directed how to address a Prophet. — Ed. ↩

47. The variety in the Versions as to this clause, and the different constructions given of it by expositors, seem to intimate some derangement in the text, and the text itself as it now exists, (and there are no different readings,) is not according to the Hebrew idiom; for הנני, “behold me,” is commonly, if not uniformly, followed by a participle and then by a verb, preceded by ו conversive in the past tense. See Jeremiah 9:7; Jeremiah 10:18; Jeremiah 16:16. This is not the case here. Besides, when a verb, and the same verb as a gerund are put together, which is no uncommon thing, the gerund in general, if not always, precedes the verb; not so here, if we take נשיתי, as most do, to be from נשא. These anomalies are evident in the text as it now stands. Suppose the misplacing of one word, and put נשא after הנני, and the sentence will be perfectly grammatical, and the version would be as follows, — Therefore, behold, I will carry off and let you go; Yea, I will dismiss you and the city, Which I gave to you and to your fathers, From my presence. Alluding to burden, he says that he would carry them off as one carries a burden, and then let them go, or throw them down: the verb נשה means to loosen, to disengage one’s self from a thing, to remit, to let go. Then נמש has a similar meaning, to set loose, to relax, to set free, to dismiss, to cast off; which intimates that he would not suffer them to continue as it were in his presence. It is the same verb as in Jeremiah 23:33 — Ed ↩