False Shepherds, the Righteous Branch, and the Fire of the Lord's Word

Jer 23:6-8 Jer 23:6 exhibits the welfare which the "branch" will, by His wise and just rule, secure for the people. Judah shall be blessed with welfare (נושׁע), and Israel dwell safely; that blessing will come into fulfilment which Moses set before the people’s view in Deu 33:28. יהוּדה as the totality of the inhabitants is construed as feminine, as in Jer 3:7; Jer 14:2, etc.

Israel denotes the ten tribes. Under the just sceptre of the Messiah, all Israel will reach the destiny designed for it by the Lord, will, as God’s people, attain to full dignity and glory. This is the name by which they shall call Him, the branch of David: Jahveh our Righteousness. The suffix in יקראו refers to "righteous branch." Instead of the 3 pers . sing .

יקרא with the suffix ו, some codd . have the plur. יקראוּ. This some polemical authors, such as Raim. , Martini, Galatin, hold to be the true reading; and they affirmed the other had proceeded from the Jews, with the design of explaining away the deity of the Messiah. The Jews translated, they said: This is the name whereby Jahveh will call him: Our Righteousness; which is indeed the rendering of R.

Saad. Gaon apud Aben Ezra, and of Menasse ben Israel. But this rendering is rejected by most Jewish comm. as being at variance with the accents, so that the impugned reading could not well have been invented by the Jews for polemical purposes. יקראו is attested by most codd . , and is rendered by the lxx, so that the sense can be none other than: they will call the righteous branch of David "Jahveh our Righteousness."

Most comm. , including even Hitz. , admit that the suffix refers to צמח, the principal person in both verses. Only Ew. , Graf, and Näg. seek to refer it to Israel, because in Jer 33:16 the same name is given to Jerusalem. But the passage cited does not prove the case. To call any one by a name universally denotes in the prophetic usage: to set him forth as that which the name expresses; so here: the branch of David will manifest Himself to the people of Israel as Jahve Tsidkenu.

This name is variously expounded. The older Christian comm. understand that the Messiah is here called Jehovah, and must therefore be true God, and that He is called our righteousness, inasmuch as He justifies us by His merit. But the rabbinical interpreters, headed by the Chald. , take the name to be an abbreviation of a sentence; so e. g. , Kimchi: Israel vocabit Messiam hoc nomine, quia ejus temporibus Domini justitia nobis firma, jugis et non recedet .

They appeal to Jer 33:17 and to other passages, such as Exo 17:15, where Moses calls the altar "Jahveh my Banner," and Gen 33:20, where Jacob gives to the altar built by him the name El elohe Jisrael . Hgstb. has rightly pronounced for this interpretation. The passages cited show who in such names an entire sentence is conveyed. "Jahveh my Banner" is as much as to say: This altar is dedicated to Jahveh my banner, or to the Almighty, the God of Israel.

So all names compounded of Jahveh ; e. g. , Jehoshua = Jahveh salvation, brief for: he to whom Jahveh vouchsafes salvation. So Tsidkijahu = Jahve’s righteousness, for: he to whom Jahveh deals righteousness. To this corresponds Jahveh Tsidkenu : he by whom Jahveh deals righteousness. We are bound to take the name thus by the parallel passage, Jer 33:16, where the same name is given to Jerusalem, to convey the thought, that by the Messiah the Lord will make Jerusalem the city of Righteousness, will give His righteousness to it, will adorn and glorify it therewith.

צדקנוּ is not to be referred, as it is by the ancient Church comm. , to justification through the forgiveness of sins. With this we have not here to do, but with personal righteousness, which consists in deliverance from all unrighteousness, and which is bound up with blessedness. Actual righteousness has indeed the forgiveness of sins for its foundation, and in this respect justification is not to be wholly excluded; but this latter is here subordinate to actual righteousness, which the Messiah secures for Israel by the righteousness of His reign.

The unrighteousness of the former kings has brought Israel and Judah to corruption and ruin; the righteousness of the branch to be hereafter raised up to David will remove all the ruin and mischief from Judah, and procure for them the righteousness and blessedness which is of God. - "What Jeremiah," as is well remarked by Hgstb. , "sums up in the name Jehovah Tsidkenu, Ezekiel expands at length in the parallel Eze 34:25-31 : the Lord concludes with them a covenant of peace; rich blessings fall to their lot; He breaks their yoke, frees them from bondage; they do not become the heathen’s prey."

These divine blessings are also to be conferred upon the people by means of the righteous branch. What the ancient Church comm. found in the name was true as to the substance . For as no man is perfectly righteous, so no mere earthly king can impart to the people the righteousness of Jahveh in the full sense of the term; only He who is endowed with the righteousness of God.

In so far the Godhead of this King is contained implicite in the name; only we must not understand that he that bore the name is called Jahveh. But that righteousness, as the sum of all blessing, is set before the people’s view, we may gather from the context, especially from Jer 23:7 and Jer 23:8, where it is said that the blessings to be conferred will outshine all former manifestations of God’s grace.

This is the sense of both verses, which, save in the matter of a trifling change in Jer 23:8, are verbally repeated from Jer 16:14 and Jer 16:15, where they have already been expounded. Against the False Prophets. - Next to the kings, the pseudo-prophets, who flattered the people’s carnal longings, have done most to contribute to the fall of the realm. Therefore Jeremiah passes directly from his discourse against the wicked kings to rebuking the false prophets; and if we may presume from the main substance, the latter discourse belongs to the same time as the former.

It begins

Jer 23:6-8 Jer 23:6 exhibits the welfare which the "branch" will, by His wise and just rule, secure for the people. Judah shall be blessed with welfare (נושׁע), and Israel dwell safely; that blessing will come into fulfilment which Moses set before the people’s view in Deu 33:28. יהוּדה as the totality of the inhabitants is construed as feminine, as in Jer 3:7; Jer 14:2, etc.

Israel denotes the ten tribes. Under the just sceptre of the Messiah, all Israel will reach the destiny designed for it by the Lord, will, as God’s people, attain to full dignity and glory. This is the name by which they shall call Him, the branch of David: Jahveh our Righteousness. The suffix in יקראו refers to "righteous branch." Instead of the 3 pers . sing .

יקרא with the suffix ו, some codd . have the plur. יקראוּ. This some polemical authors, such as Raim. , Martini, Galatin, hold to be the true reading; and they affirmed the other had proceeded from the Jews, with the design of explaining away the deity of the Messiah. The Jews translated, they said: This is the name whereby Jahveh will call him: Our Righteousness; which is indeed the rendering of R.

Saad. Gaon apud Aben Ezra, and of Menasse ben Israel. But this rendering is rejected by most Jewish comm. as being at variance with the accents, so that the impugned reading could not well have been invented by the Jews for polemical purposes. יקראו is attested by most codd . , and is rendered by the lxx, so that the sense can be none other than: they will call the righteous branch of David "Jahveh our Righteousness."

Most comm. , including even Hitz. , admit that the suffix refers to צמח, the principal person in both verses. Only Ew. , Graf, and Näg. seek to refer it to Israel, because in Jer 33:16 the same name is given to Jerusalem. But the passage cited does not prove the case. To call any one by a name universally denotes in the prophetic usage: to set him forth as that which the name expresses; so here: the branch of David will manifest Himself to the people of Israel as Jahve Tsidkenu.

This name is variously expounded. The older Christian comm. understand that the Messiah is here called Jehovah, and must therefore be true God, and that He is called our righteousness, inasmuch as He justifies us by His merit. But the rabbinical interpreters, headed by the Chald. , take the name to be an abbreviation of a sentence; so e. g. , Kimchi: Israel vocabit Messiam hoc nomine, quia ejus temporibus Domini justitia nobis firma, jugis et non recedet .

They appeal to Jer 33:17 and to other passages, such as Exo 17:15, where Moses calls the altar "Jahveh my Banner," and Gen 33:20, where Jacob gives to the altar built by him the name El elohe Jisrael . Hgstb. has rightly pronounced for this interpretation. The passages cited show who in such names an entire sentence is conveyed. "Jahveh my Banner" is as much as to say: This altar is dedicated to Jahveh my banner, or to the Almighty, the God of Israel.

So all names compounded of Jahveh ; e. g. , Jehoshua = Jahveh salvation, brief for: he to whom Jahveh vouchsafes salvation. So Tsidkijahu = Jahve’s righteousness, for: he to whom Jahveh deals righteousness. To this corresponds Jahveh Tsidkenu : he by whom Jahveh deals righteousness. We are bound to take the name thus by the parallel passage, Jer 33:16, where the same name is given to Jerusalem, to convey the thought, that by the Messiah the Lord will make Jerusalem the city of Righteousness, will give His righteousness to it, will adorn and glorify it therewith.

צדקנוּ is not to be referred, as it is by the ancient Church comm. , to justification through the forgiveness of sins. With this we have not here to do, but with personal righteousness, which consists in deliverance from all unrighteousness, and which is bound up with blessedness. Actual righteousness has indeed the forgiveness of sins for its foundation, and in this respect justification is not to be wholly excluded; but this latter is here subordinate to actual righteousness, which the Messiah secures for Israel by the righteousness of His reign.

The unrighteousness of the former kings has brought Israel and Judah to corruption and ruin; the righteousness of the branch to be hereafter raised up to David will remove all the ruin and mischief from Judah, and procure for them the righteousness and blessedness which is of God. - "What Jeremiah," as is well remarked by Hgstb. , "sums up in the name Jehovah Tsidkenu, Ezekiel expands at length in the parallel Eze 34:25-31 : the Lord concludes with them a covenant of peace; rich blessings fall to their lot; He breaks their yoke, frees them from bondage; they do not become the heathen’s prey."

These divine blessings are also to be conferred upon the people by means of the righteous branch. What the ancient Church comm. found in the name was true as to the substance . For as no man is perfectly righteous, so no mere earthly king can impart to the people the righteousness of Jahveh in the full sense of the term; only He who is endowed with the righteousness of God.

In so far the Godhead of this King is contained implicite in the name; only we must not understand that he that bore the name is called Jahveh. But that righteousness, as the sum of all blessing, is set before the people’s view, we may gather from the context, especially from Jer 23:7 and Jer 23:8, where it is said that the blessings to be conferred will outshine all former manifestations of God’s grace.

This is the sense of both verses, which, save in the matter of a trifling change in Jer 23:8, are verbally repeated from Jer 16:14 and Jer 16:15, where they have already been expounded. Against the False Prophets. - Next to the kings, the pseudo-prophets, who flattered the people’s carnal longings, have done most to contribute to the fall of the realm. Therefore Jeremiah passes directly from his discourse against the wicked kings to rebuking the false prophets; and if we may presume from the main substance, the latter discourse belongs to the same time as the former.

It begins

Jer 23:6-8 Jer 23:6 exhibits the welfare which the "branch" will, by His wise and just rule, secure for the people. Judah shall be blessed with welfare (נושׁע), and Israel dwell safely; that blessing will come into fulfilment which Moses set before the people’s view in Deu 33:28. יהוּדה as the totality of the inhabitants is construed as feminine, as in Jer 3:7; Jer 14:2, etc.

Israel denotes the ten tribes. Under the just sceptre of the Messiah, all Israel will reach the destiny designed for it by the Lord, will, as God’s people, attain to full dignity and glory. This is the name by which they shall call Him, the branch of David: Jahveh our Righteousness. The suffix in יקראו refers to "righteous branch." Instead of the 3 pers . sing .

יקרא with the suffix ו, some codd . have the plur. יקראוּ. This some polemical authors, such as Raim. , Martini, Galatin, hold to be the true reading; and they affirmed the other had proceeded from the Jews, with the design of explaining away the deity of the Messiah. The Jews translated, they said: This is the name whereby Jahveh will call him: Our Righteousness; which is indeed the rendering of R.

Saad. Gaon apud Aben Ezra, and of Menasse ben Israel. But this rendering is rejected by most Jewish comm. as being at variance with the accents, so that the impugned reading could not well have been invented by the Jews for polemical purposes. יקראו is attested by most codd . , and is rendered by the lxx, so that the sense can be none other than: they will call the righteous branch of David "Jahveh our Righteousness."

Most comm. , including even Hitz. , admit that the suffix refers to צמח, the principal person in both verses. Only Ew. , Graf, and Näg. seek to refer it to Israel, because in Jer 33:16 the same name is given to Jerusalem. But the passage cited does not prove the case. To call any one by a name universally denotes in the prophetic usage: to set him forth as that which the name expresses; so here: the branch of David will manifest Himself to the people of Israel as Jahve Tsidkenu.

This name is variously expounded. The older Christian comm. understand that the Messiah is here called Jehovah, and must therefore be true God, and that He is called our righteousness, inasmuch as He justifies us by His merit. But the rabbinical interpreters, headed by the Chald. , take the name to be an abbreviation of a sentence; so e. g. , Kimchi: Israel vocabit Messiam hoc nomine, quia ejus temporibus Domini justitia nobis firma, jugis et non recedet .

They appeal to Jer 33:17 and to other passages, such as Exo 17:15, where Moses calls the altar "Jahveh my Banner," and Gen 33:20, where Jacob gives to the altar built by him the name El elohe Jisrael . Hgstb. has rightly pronounced for this interpretation. The passages cited show who in such names an entire sentence is conveyed. "Jahveh my Banner" is as much as to say: This altar is dedicated to Jahveh my banner, or to the Almighty, the God of Israel.

So all names compounded of Jahveh ; e. g. , Jehoshua = Jahveh salvation, brief for: he to whom Jahveh vouchsafes salvation. So Tsidkijahu = Jahve’s righteousness, for: he to whom Jahveh deals righteousness. To this corresponds Jahveh Tsidkenu : he by whom Jahveh deals righteousness. We are bound to take the name thus by the parallel passage, Jer 33:16, where the same name is given to Jerusalem, to convey the thought, that by the Messiah the Lord will make Jerusalem the city of Righteousness, will give His righteousness to it, will adorn and glorify it therewith.

צדקנוּ is not to be referred, as it is by the ancient Church comm. , to justification through the forgiveness of sins. With this we have not here to do, but with personal righteousness, which consists in deliverance from all unrighteousness, and which is bound up with blessedness. Actual righteousness has indeed the forgiveness of sins for its foundation, and in this respect justification is not to be wholly excluded; but this latter is here subordinate to actual righteousness, which the Messiah secures for Israel by the righteousness of His reign.

The unrighteousness of the former kings has brought Israel and Judah to corruption and ruin; the righteousness of the branch to be hereafter raised up to David will remove all the ruin and mischief from Judah, and procure for them the righteousness and blessedness which is of God. - "What Jeremiah," as is well remarked by Hgstb. , "sums up in the name Jehovah Tsidkenu, Ezekiel expands at length in the parallel Eze 34:25-31 : the Lord concludes with them a covenant of peace; rich blessings fall to their lot; He breaks their yoke, frees them from bondage; they do not become the heathen’s prey."

These divine blessings are also to be conferred upon the people by means of the righteous branch. What the ancient Church comm. found in the name was true as to the substance . For as no man is perfectly righteous, so no mere earthly king can impart to the people the righteousness of Jahveh in the full sense of the term; only He who is endowed with the righteousness of God.

In so far the Godhead of this King is contained implicite in the name; only we must not understand that he that bore the name is called Jahveh. But that righteousness, as the sum of all blessing, is set before the people’s view, we may gather from the context, especially from Jer 23:7 and Jer 23:8, where it is said that the blessings to be conferred will outshine all former manifestations of God’s grace.

This is the sense of both verses, which, save in the matter of a trifling change in Jer 23:8, are verbally repeated from Jer 16:14 and Jer 16:15, where they have already been expounded. Against the False Prophets. - Next to the kings, the pseudo-prophets, who flattered the people’s carnal longings, have done most to contribute to the fall of the realm. Therefore Jeremiah passes directly from his discourse against the wicked kings to rebuking the false prophets; and if we may presume from the main substance, the latter discourse belongs to the same time as the former.

It begins

Jer 23:9-11 With a description of the pernicious practices of these persons. - Jer 23:9 . "Concerning the prophets. Broken is mine heart within me; all my bones totter. I am become like a drunken man, and like a man whom wine hath overcome, because of Jahveh and because of His holy words. Jer 23:10. For of adulterers the land is full, for because of the curse the land withereth, the pastures of the wilderness dry up; and their course is become evil, and their strength not right.

Jer 23:11. For both prophet and priest are profane; yea, in mine house found I their wickedness, saith Jahveh. Jer 23:12. Therefore their way shall be to them as slippery places in darkness, they shall be thrown down and fall therein; for I bring evil upon them, the year of their visitation, saith Jahveh. Jer 23:13. In the prophets of Samaria saw I folly; they prophesied in the name of Baal, and led my people Israel astray.

Jer 23:14. But in the prophets of Jerusalem saw I an horrible thing, committing adultery and walking in falsehood, and they strengthen the hands of the wicked, that none returneth from his wickedness. They are all become to me as Sodom, and the inhabitants thereof as Gomorrah. Jer 23:15. Therefore thus saith Jahveh of hosts concerning the prophets: Behold, I feed them with wormwood, and give them to drink water of bitterness; for from the prophets of Jerusalem is profaneness gone forth over all the land."

"Concerning the prophets" is the heading, as in Jer 46:2; Jer 48:1; Jer 49:1, Jer 49:7, Jer 49:23, Jer 49:28; and corresponds to the woe uttered against the wicked shepherds, Jer 23:1. It refers to the entire portion vv. 9-40, which is thus distinguished from the oracles concerning the kings, Jer 21:1-14 and 22. It might indeed be joined, according to the accents, with what follows: because of the prophets is my heart broken; but as the cause of Jeremiah’s deep agitation is given at the end of the second half-verse: because of Jahveh, etc.

, it is not likely the seer would in one sentence have given two different and quite separate reasons. The brokenness of his heart denotes the profoundest inward emotion yet not despondency by reason of sin and misery, like "a broken heart" in Psa 34:19; Psa 51:19, etc. , but because of God’s wrath at the impious lives of the pseudo-prophets. This has overcome him, and this he must publish.

This wrath had broken his heart and seized on all his bones, so that they nervelessly tremble, and he resembles a drunken man who can no longer stand firm on his feet. He feels himself inwardly quite downcast; he not only feels the horrors of the judgment that is to befall the false prophets and corrupt priests who lead the people astray, but knows well the dreadful sufferings the people too will have to endure.

The verb רחף occurs only twice in the Piel besides in the present passage; in Gen 1:2, of the Spirit of God that in the beginning of creation brooded over the waters of the earth, and Deu 32:11, of the eagle that flutters over her young - in Arabic rchf , to be soft. The root meaning of the word is doubtless: to be flaccid; here accordingly, to totter, to sway to and fro.

"Because of Jahveh" is more fully explained by "because of the words of His holiness," i. e. , the words which God as holy has made known to him regarding the unholy ongoings of the pseudo-prophets. - From Jer 23:10 onwards come the sayings of God which have so terribly agitated the prophet. The land is full of adulterers. Adultery in the literal sense is mentioned by way of example, as a reckless transgression of God’s commands, then much in vogue, whereby the moral foundations of the kingdom were broken up.

In Jer 23:14 the prophets are said to commit adultery and walk in lying, cf. Jer 29:23 and Jer 5:7. By reason of this vice a curse lies on the land, under which it is withering away. The clause "for because of the curse," etc. , is not to be taken as parenthesis (Näg.) , but as co-ordinate with the previous clause, giving the second, or rather the chief ground, why Jeremiah is so deeply distressed.

The reason of this is not so much the prevailing moral corruption, as the curse lying on the land because of the moral corruption of its inhabitants. אלה is not perjury (Chald. , Rashi, Kimchi), but the curse wherewith God punishes the transgression of His covenant laws, cf. Jer 11:3, Jer 11:8, Deu 28:15. , Jer 29:19. The words are modelled after Isa 24:4. ; and הארץ is not the population, but the land itself, which suffers under God’s curse, and which is visited with drought; cf.

Jer 12:4. The next words point to drought. נאות מדבּר as in Jer 9:9. By ותּהי the further description of the people’s depravity is attached to the first clause of the verse. Their course is become evil; their running or racing, i. e. , the aim and endeavour of the ungodly. The suffix on this word מרוּצתם refers not to "adulterers," but ad sensum to the inhabitants of the land.

Their strength is not-right, i. e. , they are strong, valiant in wrong; cf. Jer 9:2. For - so goes Jer 23:11 - both prophets and priests, who should lead the people in the right way, are profane, and desecrate by their wickedness even the house of God, presumably by idolatry; cf. Jer 32:34. There is no reason for thinking here, as Hitz. does, of adultery practised in the temple.

Jer 23:9-11 With a description of the pernicious practices of these persons. - Jer 23:9 . "Concerning the prophets. Broken is mine heart within me; all my bones totter. I am become like a drunken man, and like a man whom wine hath overcome, because of Jahveh and because of His holy words. Jer 23:10. For of adulterers the land is full, for because of the curse the land withereth, the pastures of the wilderness dry up; and their course is become evil, and their strength not right.

Jer 23:11. For both prophet and priest are profane; yea, in mine house found I their wickedness, saith Jahveh. Jer 23:12. Therefore their way shall be to them as slippery places in darkness, they shall be thrown down and fall therein; for I bring evil upon them, the year of their visitation, saith Jahveh. Jer 23:13. In the prophets of Samaria saw I folly; they prophesied in the name of Baal, and led my people Israel astray.

Jer 23:14. But in the prophets of Jerusalem saw I an horrible thing, committing adultery and walking in falsehood, and they strengthen the hands of the wicked, that none returneth from his wickedness. They are all become to me as Sodom, and the inhabitants thereof as Gomorrah. Jer 23:15. Therefore thus saith Jahveh of hosts concerning the prophets: Behold, I feed them with wormwood, and give them to drink water of bitterness; for from the prophets of Jerusalem is profaneness gone forth over all the land."

"Concerning the prophets" is the heading, as in Jer 46:2; Jer 48:1; Jer 49:1, Jer 49:7, Jer 49:23, Jer 49:28; and corresponds to the woe uttered against the wicked shepherds, Jer 23:1. It refers to the entire portion vv. 9-40, which is thus distinguished from the oracles concerning the kings, Jer 21:1-14 and 22. It might indeed be joined, according to the accents, with what follows: because of the prophets is my heart broken; but as the cause of Jeremiah’s deep agitation is given at the end of the second half-verse: because of Jahveh, etc.

, it is not likely the seer would in one sentence have given two different and quite separate reasons. The brokenness of his heart denotes the profoundest inward emotion yet not despondency by reason of sin and misery, like "a broken heart" in Psa 34:19; Psa 51:19, etc. , but because of God’s wrath at the impious lives of the pseudo-prophets. This has overcome him, and this he must publish.

This wrath had broken his heart and seized on all his bones, so that they nervelessly tremble, and he resembles a drunken man who can no longer stand firm on his feet. He feels himself inwardly quite downcast; he not only feels the horrors of the judgment that is to befall the false prophets and corrupt priests who lead the people astray, but knows well the dreadful sufferings the people too will have to endure.

The verb רחף occurs only twice in the Piel besides in the present passage; in Gen 1:2, of the Spirit of God that in the beginning of creation brooded over the waters of the earth, and Deu 32:11, of the eagle that flutters over her young - in Arabic rchf , to be soft. The root meaning of the word is doubtless: to be flaccid; here accordingly, to totter, to sway to and fro.

"Because of Jahveh" is more fully explained by "because of the words of His holiness," i. e. , the words which God as holy has made known to him regarding the unholy ongoings of the pseudo-prophets. - From Jer 23:10 onwards come the sayings of God which have so terribly agitated the prophet. The land is full of adulterers. Adultery in the literal sense is mentioned by way of example, as a reckless transgression of God’s commands, then much in vogue, whereby the moral foundations of the kingdom were broken up.

In Jer 23:14 the prophets are said to commit adultery and walk in lying, cf. Jer 29:23 and Jer 5:7. By reason of this vice a curse lies on the land, under which it is withering away. The clause "for because of the curse," etc. , is not to be taken as parenthesis (Näg.) , but as co-ordinate with the previous clause, giving the second, or rather the chief ground, why Jeremiah is so deeply distressed.

The reason of this is not so much the prevailing moral corruption, as the curse lying on the land because of the moral corruption of its inhabitants. אלה is not perjury (Chald. , Rashi, Kimchi), but the curse wherewith God punishes the transgression of His covenant laws, cf. Jer 11:3, Jer 11:8, Deu 28:15. , Jer 29:19. The words are modelled after Isa 24:4. ; and הארץ is not the population, but the land itself, which suffers under God’s curse, and which is visited with drought; cf.

Jer 12:4. The next words point to drought. נאות מדבּר as in Jer 9:9. By ותּהי the further description of the people’s depravity is attached to the first clause of the verse. Their course is become evil; their running or racing, i. e. , the aim and endeavour of the ungodly. The suffix on this word מרוּצתם refers not to "adulterers," but ad sensum to the inhabitants of the land.

Their strength is not-right, i. e. , they are strong, valiant in wrong; cf. Jer 9:2. For - so goes Jer 23:11 - both prophets and priests, who should lead the people in the right way, are profane, and desecrate by their wickedness even the house of God, presumably by idolatry; cf. Jer 32:34. There is no reason for thinking here, as Hitz. does, of adultery practised in the temple.

Jer 23:9-11 With a description of the pernicious practices of these persons. - Jer 23:9 . "Concerning the prophets. Broken is mine heart within me; all my bones totter. I am become like a drunken man, and like a man whom wine hath overcome, because of Jahveh and because of His holy words. Jer 23:10. For of adulterers the land is full, for because of the curse the land withereth, the pastures of the wilderness dry up; and their course is become evil, and their strength not right.

Jer 23:11. For both prophet and priest are profane; yea, in mine house found I their wickedness, saith Jahveh. Jer 23:12. Therefore their way shall be to them as slippery places in darkness, they shall be thrown down and fall therein; for I bring evil upon them, the year of their visitation, saith Jahveh. Jer 23:13. In the prophets of Samaria saw I folly; they prophesied in the name of Baal, and led my people Israel astray.

Jer 23:14. But in the prophets of Jerusalem saw I an horrible thing, committing adultery and walking in falsehood, and they strengthen the hands of the wicked, that none returneth from his wickedness. They are all become to me as Sodom, and the inhabitants thereof as Gomorrah. Jer 23:15. Therefore thus saith Jahveh of hosts concerning the prophets: Behold, I feed them with wormwood, and give them to drink water of bitterness; for from the prophets of Jerusalem is profaneness gone forth over all the land."

"Concerning the prophets" is the heading, as in Jer 46:2; Jer 48:1; Jer 49:1, Jer 49:7, Jer 49:23, Jer 49:28; and corresponds to the woe uttered against the wicked shepherds, Jer 23:1. It refers to the entire portion vv. 9-40, which is thus distinguished from the oracles concerning the kings, Jer 21:1-14 and 22. It might indeed be joined, according to the accents, with what follows: because of the prophets is my heart broken; but as the cause of Jeremiah’s deep agitation is given at the end of the second half-verse: because of Jahveh, etc.

, it is not likely the seer would in one sentence have given two different and quite separate reasons. The brokenness of his heart denotes the profoundest inward emotion yet not despondency by reason of sin and misery, like "a broken heart" in Psa 34:19; Psa 51:19, etc. , but because of God’s wrath at the impious lives of the pseudo-prophets. This has overcome him, and this he must publish.

This wrath had broken his heart and seized on all his bones, so that they nervelessly tremble, and he resembles a drunken man who can no longer stand firm on his feet. He feels himself inwardly quite downcast; he not only feels the horrors of the judgment that is to befall the false prophets and corrupt priests who lead the people astray, but knows well the dreadful sufferings the people too will have to endure.

The verb רחף occurs only twice in the Piel besides in the present passage; in Gen 1:2, of the Spirit of God that in the beginning of creation brooded over the waters of the earth, and Deu 32:11, of the eagle that flutters over her young - in Arabic rchf , to be soft. The root meaning of the word is doubtless: to be flaccid; here accordingly, to totter, to sway to and fro.

"Because of Jahveh" is more fully explained by "because of the words of His holiness," i. e. , the words which God as holy has made known to him regarding the unholy ongoings of the pseudo-prophets. - From Jer 23:10 onwards come the sayings of God which have so terribly agitated the prophet. The land is full of adulterers. Adultery in the literal sense is mentioned by way of example, as a reckless transgression of God’s commands, then much in vogue, whereby the moral foundations of the kingdom were broken up.

In Jer 23:14 the prophets are said to commit adultery and walk in lying, cf. Jer 29:23 and Jer 5:7. By reason of this vice a curse lies on the land, under which it is withering away. The clause "for because of the curse," etc. , is not to be taken as parenthesis (Näg.) , but as co-ordinate with the previous clause, giving the second, or rather the chief ground, why Jeremiah is so deeply distressed.

The reason of this is not so much the prevailing moral corruption, as the curse lying on the land because of the moral corruption of its inhabitants. אלה is not perjury (Chald. , Rashi, Kimchi), but the curse wherewith God punishes the transgression of His covenant laws, cf. Jer 11:3, Jer 11:8, Deu 28:15. , Jer 29:19. The words are modelled after Isa 24:4. ; and הארץ is not the population, but the land itself, which suffers under God’s curse, and which is visited with drought; cf.

Jer 12:4. The next words point to drought. נאות מדבּר as in Jer 9:9. By ותּהי the further description of the people’s depravity is attached to the first clause of the verse. Their course is become evil; their running or racing, i. e. , the aim and endeavour of the ungodly. The suffix on this word מרוּצתם refers not to "adulterers," but ad sensum to the inhabitants of the land.

Their strength is not-right, i. e. , they are strong, valiant in wrong; cf. Jer 9:2. For - so goes Jer 23:11 - both prophets and priests, who should lead the people in the right way, are profane, and desecrate by their wickedness even the house of God, presumably by idolatry; cf. Jer 32:34. There is no reason for thinking here, as Hitz. does, of adultery practised in the temple.

Jer 23:12 For this the Lord will punish them. Their way shall be to them as slippery places in darkness. This threatening is after the manner of Psa 35:6, where חשׁך are joined, changed by Jeremiah to the words in the text. The passage cited shows that we may not separate בּאפלה from חלקלקּות, as Ew. does, to join it to the following ידּחוּ. Their way shall resemble slippery places in the dark, when one may readily slip and fall.

Besides, they are to be thrust, pushed, so that they must fall on the slippery path (ידּחוּ from דּחח = דּחה, Psa 35:5; "therein" to be referred to "their way"). The clause: "for I bring evil," etc. , is formed after Jer 11:23.

Jer 23:13-15 To display the vileness of the prophets, these are parallelized with the prophets of Samaria. The latter did foolishly (תּפלה, prop. of that which is unsalted, insipid, Job 6:6, hence irrational, insulsum ), since they prophesied, being inspired by Baal the no-god, and by such prophesying led the people into error; cf. 1Ki 18:19. Much more horrible is the conduct of the prophets of Jerusalem, who commit adultery, walk in lying, and strengthen the wicked in their wickedness, not merely by their delusive pretences (cf.

Jer 23:17, Jer 6:14; Jer 14:13), but also by their immoral lives, so that no one turns from his wickedness, cf. Eze 13:22. לבלתּי is here and in Jer 27:18, as in ex. 20:20, construed, contrary to the usage everywhere else, not with the infin . , but with the verb. fin . As the prophets, instead of converting the wicked, only confirmed them in their sins, therefore all the inhabitants of Judah or Jerusalem are become as corrupt as Sodom and Gomorrah.

"They all" are not the prophets, but the inhabitants of Judah or Jerusalem; and "the inhabitants thereof" are those of the capital, cf. Deu 32:32; Isa 1:10. On the seducers the Lord will therefore inflict punishment, because impiousness has gone forth from them over the whole land. With the punishment threatened in Jer 23:15, cf. Jer 9:14.

Jer 23:13-15 To display the vileness of the prophets, these are parallelized with the prophets of Samaria. The latter did foolishly (תּפלה, prop. of that which is unsalted, insipid, Job 6:6, hence irrational, insulsum ), since they prophesied, being inspired by Baal the no-god, and by such prophesying led the people into error; cf. 1Ki 18:19. Much more horrible is the conduct of the prophets of Jerusalem, who commit adultery, walk in lying, and strengthen the wicked in their wickedness, not merely by their delusive pretences (cf.

Jer 23:17, Jer 6:14; Jer 14:13), but also by their immoral lives, so that no one turns from his wickedness, cf. Eze 13:22. לבלתּי is here and in Jer 27:18, as in ex. 20:20, construed, contrary to the usage everywhere else, not with the infin . , but with the verb. fin . As the prophets, instead of converting the wicked, only confirmed them in their sins, therefore all the inhabitants of Judah or Jerusalem are become as corrupt as Sodom and Gomorrah.

"They all" are not the prophets, but the inhabitants of Judah or Jerusalem; and "the inhabitants thereof" are those of the capital, cf. Deu 32:32; Isa 1:10. On the seducers the Lord will therefore inflict punishment, because impiousness has gone forth from them over the whole land. With the punishment threatened in Jer 23:15, cf. Jer 9:14.

Jer 23:13-15 To display the vileness of the prophets, these are parallelized with the prophets of Samaria. The latter did foolishly (תּפלה, prop. of that which is unsalted, insipid, Job 6:6, hence irrational, insulsum ), since they prophesied, being inspired by Baal the no-god, and by such prophesying led the people into error; cf. 1Ki 18:19. Much more horrible is the conduct of the prophets of Jerusalem, who commit adultery, walk in lying, and strengthen the wicked in their wickedness, not merely by their delusive pretences (cf.

Jer 23:17, Jer 6:14; Jer 14:13), but also by their immoral lives, so that no one turns from his wickedness, cf. Eze 13:22. לבלתּי is here and in Jer 27:18, as in ex. 20:20, construed, contrary to the usage everywhere else, not with the infin . , but with the verb. fin . As the prophets, instead of converting the wicked, only confirmed them in their sins, therefore all the inhabitants of Judah or Jerusalem are become as corrupt as Sodom and Gomorrah.

"They all" are not the prophets, but the inhabitants of Judah or Jerusalem; and "the inhabitants thereof" are those of the capital, cf. Deu 32:32; Isa 1:10. On the seducers the Lord will therefore inflict punishment, because impiousness has gone forth from them over the whole land. With the punishment threatened in Jer 23:15, cf. Jer 9:14.

Jer 23:16-20 Warning against the lying prophecies of the prophets. - Jer 23:16. "Thus saith Jahveh of hosts: Hearken not unto the words of the prophets that prophesy unto you! They deceive you; a vision of their heart they speak, not out of the mouth of Jahveh. Jer 23:17. They say still unto my despisers: 'Jahveh hath spoken: Peace shall ye have;' and unto every one that walketh in the stubbornness of his heart they say: 'There shall no evil come upon you.'

Jer 23:18. For who hath stood in Jahveh’s counsel, that he might have seen and heard His word? who hath marked my word and heard it? Jer 23:19. Behold a tempest from Jahveh, fury goeth forth, and eddying whirlwind shall hurl itself upon the head of the wicked. Jer 23:20. The anger of God shall not turn till He have done and till He have performed the thoughts of His heart.

At the end of the days shall ye be well aware of this. Jer 23:21. I have not sent the prophets, yet they ran; I have not spoken to them, yet they prophesied. Jer 23:22. But if they had stood in my counsel, they would publish my words to my people and bring them back from their evil way and from the evil of their doings." The warning against these prophets is founded in Jer 23:16 on the fact that they give out the thoughts of their own hearts to be divine revelation, and promise peace and prosperity to all stiff-necked sinners.

מהבּלים, lit. , they make you vain, i. e. , make you to yield yourselves to vain delusion, seduce you to false confidence. This they do by their speaking visions, i. e. , revelations of their heart, not what God has spoken, revealed to them. As an illustration of this, Jer 23:17 tells that they prophesy continued peace or well-being to the despisers of God. The infin.

abs . אמור after the verb. fin . intimates the duration or repetition of the thing. דּבּר יהוה are words of the false prophets, with which they give out that their prophesyings are God’s word. Since we nowhere else find sayings of Jahveh introduced by דּבּר יהוה, but usually by 'כּה אמר י, the lxx have taken offence at that formula, and, reading דבר, join the words with למנאצי: τοῖς ἀπωθουμένοις τὸν λόγον κυρίου.

To this reading Hitz. and Gr. give the preference over the Masoretic; but they have not noticed that they thus get an unsuitable sense. For דבר יהוה in prophetic language never denotes the Mosaic law or the "moral law" (Hitz.) , but the word of God published by the prophets. By their view of "word of Jahveh" they would here obtain the self-inconsistent thought: to the despisers of divine revelation they proclaim as revelation.

The Masoretic reading is clearly right; and Jeremiah chose the unusual introductory formula to distinguish the language of the pseudo-prophets from that of the true prophets of the Lord. וכל־הלך ב' is prefixed absolutely: and as concerning every one that walks... they say, for: and to every one... they say. On the "stubbornness of their heart," see on Jer 3:17.

With the speech of the false prophets, cf. Jer 14:13 and Jer 6:14. - In Jer 23:18 a more comprehensive reason is given to show that these prophets are not publishing God’s decrees. The question: Who hath stood? has negative force = None hath stood. By this Jeremiah does not deny the possibility of this universally, but only of the false prophets (Hitz.) This limitation of the words is suggested by the context.

To the true prophets the Lord reveals His סוד, Amo 3:7. ויראוישׁמע are not to be taken jussively: let him see and hear (Hitz.) , for the foregoing interrogation is not a conditional clause introducing a command. The imperfects with ו are clauses of consequence or design, and after a preceding perfect should be rendered in English by the conditional of the pluperfect.

Seeing the word of God refers to prophetic vision. The second question is appended without at all conveying any inference from what precedes; and in it the second verb (with ו consec .) is simply a strengthening of the first: who hath hearkened to my word and heard it? The Masoretes have quite unnecessarily changed the Chet . דּברי . tehC into דּברו. In the graphic representation of the prophets, the transition to the direct speech of God, and conversely, is no unusual thing.

The change of ויּשׁמע into ישׁמע, unnecessary and even improper as it is, is preferred by Graf and Näg. , inasmuch as they take the interrogative מי in both clauses in the sense of quisquis and understand the verse thus: He who has but stood in the counsel of the Lord, let him see and hear His word (i. e. , he must see and hear His word); and he that hath marked my word, let him publish it (i.

e. , he must publish it). This exposition becomes only then necessary, if we leave the context out of view and regard the question as being to the effect that no one has stood in God’s counsel - which Jeremiah could not mean. Not to speak of the change of the text necessary for carrying it through, this view does not even give a suitable sense. If the clause: He that has stood in the counsel of the Lord, he must proclaim His word, is to be regarded as having a demonstrative force, then the principal idea must be supplied, thus namely: "and it is impossible that it should be favourable to those who despise it."

In Jer 23:19 Jeremiah publishes a real word of the Lord, which sounds very differently from the words of the false prophets. A tempest from Jahveh will burst over the heads of the evil-doers, and the wrath of God will not cease until it has accomplished the divine decree. "A tempest from Jahveh" is defined by "fury" in apposition as being a manifestation of God’s wrath; and the whole first clause is further expanded in the second part of the verse.

The tempest from Jahveh goes forth, i. e. , breaks out, and as whirling tornado or eddying whirlwind bursts over the head of the wicked. יחוּל is to be taken in accordance with מתחולל: twist, whirl, cf. 2Sa 3:29. "The thoughts of His heart" must not be limited to what God has decreed de interitu populi (Calv.) ; it comprehends God’s whole redemptive plan in His people’s regard-not merely the overthrow of the kingdom of Judah, but also the purification of the people by means of judgments and the final glorification of His kingdom.

To this future the next clause points: at the end of the days ye shall have clear knowledge of this. "The end of the days" is not merely the completion of the period in which we now are (Hitz. , Gr. Näg. , etc.) , but, as universally, the end of the times, i. e. , the Messianic future, the last period of the world’s history which opens at the close of the present aeon; see on Gen 49:1; Num 24:14, etc.

התבּונן is strengthened by בּינה yb dene: attain to insight, come to clearer knowledge.

Jer 23:16-20 Warning against the lying prophecies of the prophets. - Jer 23:16. "Thus saith Jahveh of hosts: Hearken not unto the words of the prophets that prophesy unto you! They deceive you; a vision of their heart they speak, not out of the mouth of Jahveh. Jer 23:17. They say still unto my despisers: 'Jahveh hath spoken: Peace shall ye have;' and unto every one that walketh in the stubbornness of his heart they say: 'There shall no evil come upon you.'

Jer 23:18. For who hath stood in Jahveh’s counsel, that he might have seen and heard His word? who hath marked my word and heard it? Jer 23:19. Behold a tempest from Jahveh, fury goeth forth, and eddying whirlwind shall hurl itself upon the head of the wicked. Jer 23:20. The anger of God shall not turn till He have done and till He have performed the thoughts of His heart.

At the end of the days shall ye be well aware of this. Jer 23:21. I have not sent the prophets, yet they ran; I have not spoken to them, yet they prophesied. Jer 23:22. But if they had stood in my counsel, they would publish my words to my people and bring them back from their evil way and from the evil of their doings." The warning against these prophets is founded in Jer 23:16 on the fact that they give out the thoughts of their own hearts to be divine revelation, and promise peace and prosperity to all stiff-necked sinners.

מהבּלים, lit. , they make you vain, i. e. , make you to yield yourselves to vain delusion, seduce you to false confidence. This they do by their speaking visions, i. e. , revelations of their heart, not what God has spoken, revealed to them. As an illustration of this, Jer 23:17 tells that they prophesy continued peace or well-being to the despisers of God. The infin.

abs . אמור after the verb. fin . intimates the duration or repetition of the thing. דּבּר יהוה are words of the false prophets, with which they give out that their prophesyings are God’s word. Since we nowhere else find sayings of Jahveh introduced by דּבּר יהוה, but usually by 'כּה אמר י, the lxx have taken offence at that formula, and, reading דבר, join the words with למנאצי: τοῖς ἀπωθουμένοις τὸν λόγον κυρίου.

To this reading Hitz. and Gr. give the preference over the Masoretic; but they have not noticed that they thus get an unsuitable sense. For דבר יהוה in prophetic language never denotes the Mosaic law or the "moral law" (Hitz.) , but the word of God published by the prophets. By their view of "word of Jahveh" they would here obtain the self-inconsistent thought: to the despisers of divine revelation they proclaim as revelation.

The Masoretic reading is clearly right; and Jeremiah chose the unusual introductory formula to distinguish the language of the pseudo-prophets from that of the true prophets of the Lord. וכל־הלך ב' is prefixed absolutely: and as concerning every one that walks... they say, for: and to every one... they say. On the "stubbornness of their heart," see on Jer 3:17.

With the speech of the false prophets, cf. Jer 14:13 and Jer 6:14. - In Jer 23:18 a more comprehensive reason is given to show that these prophets are not publishing God’s decrees. The question: Who hath stood? has negative force = None hath stood. By this Jeremiah does not deny the possibility of this universally, but only of the false prophets (Hitz.) This limitation of the words is suggested by the context.

To the true prophets the Lord reveals His סוד, Amo 3:7. ויראוישׁמע are not to be taken jussively: let him see and hear (Hitz.) , for the foregoing interrogation is not a conditional clause introducing a command. The imperfects with ו are clauses of consequence or design, and after a preceding perfect should be rendered in English by the conditional of the pluperfect.

Seeing the word of God refers to prophetic vision. The second question is appended without at all conveying any inference from what precedes; and in it the second verb (with ו consec .) is simply a strengthening of the first: who hath hearkened to my word and heard it? The Masoretes have quite unnecessarily changed the Chet . דּברי . tehC into דּברו. In the graphic representation of the prophets, the transition to the direct speech of God, and conversely, is no unusual thing.

The change of ויּשׁמע into ישׁמע, unnecessary and even improper as it is, is preferred by Graf and Näg. , inasmuch as they take the interrogative מי in both clauses in the sense of quisquis and understand the verse thus: He who has but stood in the counsel of the Lord, let him see and hear His word (i. e. , he must see and hear His word); and he that hath marked my word, let him publish it (i.

e. , he must publish it). This exposition becomes only then necessary, if we leave the context out of view and regard the question as being to the effect that no one has stood in God’s counsel - which Jeremiah could not mean. Not to speak of the change of the text necessary for carrying it through, this view does not even give a suitable sense. If the clause: He that has stood in the counsel of the Lord, he must proclaim His word, is to be regarded as having a demonstrative force, then the principal idea must be supplied, thus namely: "and it is impossible that it should be favourable to those who despise it."

In Jer 23:19 Jeremiah publishes a real word of the Lord, which sounds very differently from the words of the false prophets. A tempest from Jahveh will burst over the heads of the evil-doers, and the wrath of God will not cease until it has accomplished the divine decree. "A tempest from Jahveh" is defined by "fury" in apposition as being a manifestation of God’s wrath; and the whole first clause is further expanded in the second part of the verse.

The tempest from Jahveh goes forth, i. e. , breaks out, and as whirling tornado or eddying whirlwind bursts over the head of the wicked. יחוּל is to be taken in accordance with מתחולל: twist, whirl, cf. 2Sa 3:29. "The thoughts of His heart" must not be limited to what God has decreed de interitu populi (Calv.) ; it comprehends God’s whole redemptive plan in His people’s regard-not merely the overthrow of the kingdom of Judah, but also the purification of the people by means of judgments and the final glorification of His kingdom.

To this future the next clause points: at the end of the days ye shall have clear knowledge of this. "The end of the days" is not merely the completion of the period in which we now are (Hitz. , Gr. Näg. , etc.) , but, as universally, the end of the times, i. e. , the Messianic future, the last period of the world’s history which opens at the close of the present aeon; see on Gen 49:1; Num 24:14, etc.

התבּונן is strengthened by בּינה yb dene: attain to insight, come to clearer knowledge.

Jer 23:16-20 Warning against the lying prophecies of the prophets. - Jer 23:16. "Thus saith Jahveh of hosts: Hearken not unto the words of the prophets that prophesy unto you! They deceive you; a vision of their heart they speak, not out of the mouth of Jahveh. Jer 23:17. They say still unto my despisers: 'Jahveh hath spoken: Peace shall ye have;' and unto every one that walketh in the stubbornness of his heart they say: 'There shall no evil come upon you.'

Jer 23:18. For who hath stood in Jahveh’s counsel, that he might have seen and heard His word? who hath marked my word and heard it? Jer 23:19. Behold a tempest from Jahveh, fury goeth forth, and eddying whirlwind shall hurl itself upon the head of the wicked. Jer 23:20. The anger of God shall not turn till He have done and till He have performed the thoughts of His heart.

At the end of the days shall ye be well aware of this. Jer 23:21. I have not sent the prophets, yet they ran; I have not spoken to them, yet they prophesied. Jer 23:22. But if they had stood in my counsel, they would publish my words to my people and bring them back from their evil way and from the evil of their doings." The warning against these prophets is founded in Jer 23:16 on the fact that they give out the thoughts of their own hearts to be divine revelation, and promise peace and prosperity to all stiff-necked sinners.

מהבּלים, lit. , they make you vain, i. e. , make you to yield yourselves to vain delusion, seduce you to false confidence. This they do by their speaking visions, i. e. , revelations of their heart, not what God has spoken, revealed to them. As an illustration of this, Jer 23:17 tells that they prophesy continued peace or well-being to the despisers of God. The infin.

abs . אמור after the verb. fin . intimates the duration or repetition of the thing. דּבּר יהוה are words of the false prophets, with which they give out that their prophesyings are God’s word. Since we nowhere else find sayings of Jahveh introduced by דּבּר יהוה, but usually by 'כּה אמר י, the lxx have taken offence at that formula, and, reading דבר, join the words with למנאצי: τοῖς ἀπωθουμένοις τὸν λόγον κυρίου.

To this reading Hitz. and Gr. give the preference over the Masoretic; but they have not noticed that they thus get an unsuitable sense. For דבר יהוה in prophetic language never denotes the Mosaic law or the "moral law" (Hitz.) , but the word of God published by the prophets. By their view of "word of Jahveh" they would here obtain the self-inconsistent thought: to the despisers of divine revelation they proclaim as revelation.

The Masoretic reading is clearly right; and Jeremiah chose the unusual introductory formula to distinguish the language of the pseudo-prophets from that of the true prophets of the Lord. וכל־הלך ב' is prefixed absolutely: and as concerning every one that walks... they say, for: and to every one... they say. On the "stubbornness of their heart," see on Jer 3:17.

With the speech of the false prophets, cf. Jer 14:13 and Jer 6:14. - In Jer 23:18 a more comprehensive reason is given to show that these prophets are not publishing God’s decrees. The question: Who hath stood? has negative force = None hath stood. By this Jeremiah does not deny the possibility of this universally, but only of the false prophets (Hitz.) This limitation of the words is suggested by the context.

To the true prophets the Lord reveals His סוד, Amo 3:7. ויראוישׁמע are not to be taken jussively: let him see and hear (Hitz.) , for the foregoing interrogation is not a conditional clause introducing a command. The imperfects with ו are clauses of consequence or design, and after a preceding perfect should be rendered in English by the conditional of the pluperfect.

Seeing the word of God refers to prophetic vision. The second question is appended without at all conveying any inference from what precedes; and in it the second verb (with ו consec .) is simply a strengthening of the first: who hath hearkened to my word and heard it? The Masoretes have quite unnecessarily changed the Chet . דּברי . tehC into דּברו. In the graphic representation of the prophets, the transition to the direct speech of God, and conversely, is no unusual thing.

The change of ויּשׁמע into ישׁמע, unnecessary and even improper as it is, is preferred by Graf and Näg. , inasmuch as they take the interrogative מי in both clauses in the sense of quisquis and understand the verse thus: He who has but stood in the counsel of the Lord, let him see and hear His word (i. e. , he must see and hear His word); and he that hath marked my word, let him publish it (i.

e. , he must publish it). This exposition becomes only then necessary, if we leave the context out of view and regard the question as being to the effect that no one has stood in God’s counsel - which Jeremiah could not mean. Not to speak of the change of the text necessary for carrying it through, this view does not even give a suitable sense. If the clause: He that has stood in the counsel of the Lord, he must proclaim His word, is to be regarded as having a demonstrative force, then the principal idea must be supplied, thus namely: "and it is impossible that it should be favourable to those who despise it."

In Jer 23:19 Jeremiah publishes a real word of the Lord, which sounds very differently from the words of the false prophets. A tempest from Jahveh will burst over the heads of the evil-doers, and the wrath of God will not cease until it has accomplished the divine decree. "A tempest from Jahveh" is defined by "fury" in apposition as being a manifestation of God’s wrath; and the whole first clause is further expanded in the second part of the verse.

The tempest from Jahveh goes forth, i. e. , breaks out, and as whirling tornado or eddying whirlwind bursts over the head of the wicked. יחוּל is to be taken in accordance with מתחולל: twist, whirl, cf. 2Sa 3:29. "The thoughts of His heart" must not be limited to what God has decreed de interitu populi (Calv.) ; it comprehends God’s whole redemptive plan in His people’s regard-not merely the overthrow of the kingdom of Judah, but also the purification of the people by means of judgments and the final glorification of His kingdom.

To this future the next clause points: at the end of the days ye shall have clear knowledge of this. "The end of the days" is not merely the completion of the period in which we now are (Hitz. , Gr. Näg. , etc.) , but, as universally, the end of the times, i. e. , the Messianic future, the last period of the world’s history which opens at the close of the present aeon; see on Gen 49:1; Num 24:14, etc.

התבּונן is strengthened by בּינה yb dene: attain to insight, come to clearer knowledge.

Jer 23:16-20 Warning against the lying prophecies of the prophets. - Jer 23:16. "Thus saith Jahveh of hosts: Hearken not unto the words of the prophets that prophesy unto you! They deceive you; a vision of their heart they speak, not out of the mouth of Jahveh. Jer 23:17. They say still unto my despisers: 'Jahveh hath spoken: Peace shall ye have;' and unto every one that walketh in the stubbornness of his heart they say: 'There shall no evil come upon you.'

Jer 23:18. For who hath stood in Jahveh’s counsel, that he might have seen and heard His word? who hath marked my word and heard it? Jer 23:19. Behold a tempest from Jahveh, fury goeth forth, and eddying whirlwind shall hurl itself upon the head of the wicked. Jer 23:20. The anger of God shall not turn till He have done and till He have performed the thoughts of His heart.

At the end of the days shall ye be well aware of this. Jer 23:21. I have not sent the prophets, yet they ran; I have not spoken to them, yet they prophesied. Jer 23:22. But if they had stood in my counsel, they would publish my words to my people and bring them back from their evil way and from the evil of their doings." The warning against these prophets is founded in Jer 23:16 on the fact that they give out the thoughts of their own hearts to be divine revelation, and promise peace and prosperity to all stiff-necked sinners.

מהבּלים, lit. , they make you vain, i. e. , make you to yield yourselves to vain delusion, seduce you to false confidence. This they do by their speaking visions, i. e. , revelations of their heart, not what God has spoken, revealed to them. As an illustration of this, Jer 23:17 tells that they prophesy continued peace or well-being to the despisers of God. The infin.

abs . אמור after the verb. fin . intimates the duration or repetition of the thing. דּבּר יהוה are words of the false prophets, with which they give out that their prophesyings are God’s word. Since we nowhere else find sayings of Jahveh introduced by דּבּר יהוה, but usually by 'כּה אמר י, the lxx have taken offence at that formula, and, reading דבר, join the words with למנאצי: τοῖς ἀπωθουμένοις τὸν λόγον κυρίου.

To this reading Hitz. and Gr. give the preference over the Masoretic; but they have not noticed that they thus get an unsuitable sense. For דבר יהוה in prophetic language never denotes the Mosaic law or the "moral law" (Hitz.) , but the word of God published by the prophets. By their view of "word of Jahveh" they would here obtain the self-inconsistent thought: to the despisers of divine revelation they proclaim as revelation.

The Masoretic reading is clearly right; and Jeremiah chose the unusual introductory formula to distinguish the language of the pseudo-prophets from that of the true prophets of the Lord. וכל־הלך ב' is prefixed absolutely: and as concerning every one that walks... they say, for: and to every one... they say. On the "stubbornness of their heart," see on Jer 3:17.

With the speech of the false prophets, cf. Jer 14:13 and Jer 6:14. - In Jer 23:18 a more comprehensive reason is given to show that these prophets are not publishing God’s decrees. The question: Who hath stood? has negative force = None hath stood. By this Jeremiah does not deny the possibility of this universally, but only of the false prophets (Hitz.) This limitation of the words is suggested by the context.

To the true prophets the Lord reveals His סוד, Amo 3:7. ויראוישׁמע are not to be taken jussively: let him see and hear (Hitz.) , for the foregoing interrogation is not a conditional clause introducing a command. The imperfects with ו are clauses of consequence or design, and after a preceding perfect should be rendered in English by the conditional of the pluperfect.

Seeing the word of God refers to prophetic vision. The second question is appended without at all conveying any inference from what precedes; and in it the second verb (with ו consec .) is simply a strengthening of the first: who hath hearkened to my word and heard it? The Masoretes have quite unnecessarily changed the Chet . דּברי . tehC into דּברו. In the graphic representation of the prophets, the transition to the direct speech of God, and conversely, is no unusual thing.

The change of ויּשׁמע into ישׁמע, unnecessary and even improper as it is, is preferred by Graf and Näg. , inasmuch as they take the interrogative מי in both clauses in the sense of quisquis and understand the verse thus: He who has but stood in the counsel of the Lord, let him see and hear His word (i. e. , he must see and hear His word); and he that hath marked my word, let him publish it (i.

e. , he must publish it). This exposition becomes only then necessary, if we leave the context out of view and regard the question as being to the effect that no one has stood in God’s counsel - which Jeremiah could not mean. Not to speak of the change of the text necessary for carrying it through, this view does not even give a suitable sense. If the clause: He that has stood in the counsel of the Lord, he must proclaim His word, is to be regarded as having a demonstrative force, then the principal idea must be supplied, thus namely: "and it is impossible that it should be favourable to those who despise it."

In Jer 23:19 Jeremiah publishes a real word of the Lord, which sounds very differently from the words of the false prophets. A tempest from Jahveh will burst over the heads of the evil-doers, and the wrath of God will not cease until it has accomplished the divine decree. "A tempest from Jahveh" is defined by "fury" in apposition as being a manifestation of God’s wrath; and the whole first clause is further expanded in the second part of the verse.

The tempest from Jahveh goes forth, i. e. , breaks out, and as whirling tornado or eddying whirlwind bursts over the head of the wicked. יחוּל is to be taken in accordance with מתחולל: twist, whirl, cf. 2Sa 3:29. "The thoughts of His heart" must not be limited to what God has decreed de interitu populi (Calv.) ; it comprehends God’s whole redemptive plan in His people’s regard-not merely the overthrow of the kingdom of Judah, but also the purification of the people by means of judgments and the final glorification of His kingdom.

To this future the next clause points: at the end of the days ye shall have clear knowledge of this. "The end of the days" is not merely the completion of the period in which we now are (Hitz. , Gr. Näg. , etc.) , but, as universally, the end of the times, i. e. , the Messianic future, the last period of the world’s history which opens at the close of the present aeon; see on Gen 49:1; Num 24:14, etc.

התבּונן is strengthened by בּינה yb dene: attain to insight, come to clearer knowledge.

Jer 23:16-20 Warning against the lying prophecies of the prophets. - Jer 23:16. "Thus saith Jahveh of hosts: Hearken not unto the words of the prophets that prophesy unto you! They deceive you; a vision of their heart they speak, not out of the mouth of Jahveh. Jer 23:17. They say still unto my despisers: 'Jahveh hath spoken: Peace shall ye have;' and unto every one that walketh in the stubbornness of his heart they say: 'There shall no evil come upon you.'

Jer 23:18. For who hath stood in Jahveh’s counsel, that he might have seen and heard His word? who hath marked my word and heard it? Jer 23:19. Behold a tempest from Jahveh, fury goeth forth, and eddying whirlwind shall hurl itself upon the head of the wicked. Jer 23:20. The anger of God shall not turn till He have done and till He have performed the thoughts of His heart.

At the end of the days shall ye be well aware of this. Jer 23:21. I have not sent the prophets, yet they ran; I have not spoken to them, yet they prophesied. Jer 23:22. But if they had stood in my counsel, they would publish my words to my people and bring them back from their evil way and from the evil of their doings." The warning against these prophets is founded in Jer 23:16 on the fact that they give out the thoughts of their own hearts to be divine revelation, and promise peace and prosperity to all stiff-necked sinners.

מהבּלים, lit. , they make you vain, i. e. , make you to yield yourselves to vain delusion, seduce you to false confidence. This they do by their speaking visions, i. e. , revelations of their heart, not what God has spoken, revealed to them. As an illustration of this, Jer 23:17 tells that they prophesy continued peace or well-being to the despisers of God. The infin.

abs . אמור after the verb. fin . intimates the duration or repetition of the thing. דּבּר יהוה are words of the false prophets, with which they give out that their prophesyings are God’s word. Since we nowhere else find sayings of Jahveh introduced by דּבּר יהוה, but usually by 'כּה אמר י, the lxx have taken offence at that formula, and, reading דבר, join the words with למנאצי: τοῖς ἀπωθουμένοις τὸν λόγον κυρίου.

To this reading Hitz. and Gr. give the preference over the Masoretic; but they have not noticed that they thus get an unsuitable sense. For דבר יהוה in prophetic language never denotes the Mosaic law or the "moral law" (Hitz.) , but the word of God published by the prophets. By their view of "word of Jahveh" they would here obtain the self-inconsistent thought: to the despisers of divine revelation they proclaim as revelation.

The Masoretic reading is clearly right; and Jeremiah chose the unusual introductory formula to distinguish the language of the pseudo-prophets from that of the true prophets of the Lord. וכל־הלך ב' is prefixed absolutely: and as concerning every one that walks... they say, for: and to every one... they say. On the "stubbornness of their heart," see on Jer 3:17.

With the speech of the false prophets, cf. Jer 14:13 and Jer 6:14. - In Jer 23:18 a more comprehensive reason is given to show that these prophets are not publishing God’s decrees. The question: Who hath stood? has negative force = None hath stood. By this Jeremiah does not deny the possibility of this universally, but only of the false prophets (Hitz.) This limitation of the words is suggested by the context.

To the true prophets the Lord reveals His סוד, Amo 3:7. ויראוישׁמע are not to be taken jussively: let him see and hear (Hitz.) , for the foregoing interrogation is not a conditional clause introducing a command. The imperfects with ו are clauses of consequence or design, and after a preceding perfect should be rendered in English by the conditional of the pluperfect.

Seeing the word of God refers to prophetic vision. The second question is appended without at all conveying any inference from what precedes; and in it the second verb (with ו consec .) is simply a strengthening of the first: who hath hearkened to my word and heard it? The Masoretes have quite unnecessarily changed the Chet . דּברי . tehC into דּברו. In the graphic representation of the prophets, the transition to the direct speech of God, and conversely, is no unusual thing.

The change of ויּשׁמע into ישׁמע, unnecessary and even improper as it is, is preferred by Graf and Näg. , inasmuch as they take the interrogative מי in both clauses in the sense of quisquis and understand the verse thus: He who has but stood in the counsel of the Lord, let him see and hear His word (i. e. , he must see and hear His word); and he that hath marked my word, let him publish it (i.

e. , he must publish it). This exposition becomes only then necessary, if we leave the context out of view and regard the question as being to the effect that no one has stood in God’s counsel - which Jeremiah could not mean. Not to speak of the change of the text necessary for carrying it through, this view does not even give a suitable sense. If the clause: He that has stood in the counsel of the Lord, he must proclaim His word, is to be regarded as having a demonstrative force, then the principal idea must be supplied, thus namely: "and it is impossible that it should be favourable to those who despise it."

In Jer 23:19 Jeremiah publishes a real word of the Lord, which sounds very differently from the words of the false prophets. A tempest from Jahveh will burst over the heads of the evil-doers, and the wrath of God will not cease until it has accomplished the divine decree. "A tempest from Jahveh" is defined by "fury" in apposition as being a manifestation of God’s wrath; and the whole first clause is further expanded in the second part of the verse.

The tempest from Jahveh goes forth, i. e. , breaks out, and as whirling tornado or eddying whirlwind bursts over the head of the wicked. יחוּל is to be taken in accordance with מתחולל: twist, whirl, cf. 2Sa 3:29. "The thoughts of His heart" must not be limited to what God has decreed de interitu populi (Calv.) ; it comprehends God’s whole redemptive plan in His people’s regard-not merely the overthrow of the kingdom of Judah, but also the purification of the people by means of judgments and the final glorification of His kingdom.

To this future the next clause points: at the end of the days ye shall have clear knowledge of this. "The end of the days" is not merely the completion of the period in which we now are (Hitz. , Gr. Näg. , etc.) , but, as universally, the end of the times, i. e. , the Messianic future, the last period of the world’s history which opens at the close of the present aeon; see on Gen 49:1; Num 24:14, etc.

התבּונן is strengthened by בּינה yb dene: attain to insight, come to clearer knowledge.

Jer 23:21-22 From the word of the Lord proclaimed in Jer 23:19. it appears that the prophets who prophesy peace or well-being to the despisers of God are not sent and inspired by God. If they had stood in the counsel of God, and so had truly learnt God’s word, they must have published it and turned the people from its evil way. This completely proves the statement of Jer 23:16, that the preachers of peace deceive the people. Then follows -

Jer 23:21-22 From the word of the Lord proclaimed in Jer 23:19. it appears that the prophets who prophesy peace or well-being to the despisers of God are not sent and inspired by God. If they had stood in the counsel of God, and so had truly learnt God’s word, they must have published it and turned the people from its evil way. This completely proves the statement of Jer 23:16, that the preachers of peace deceive the people. Then follows -

Jer 23:23-29 Jer 23:23-32, in continuation, an intimation that God knows and will punish the lying practices of these prophets. - Jer 23:23. "Am I then a God near at hand, saith Jahveh, and not a God afar off? Jer 23:24. Or can any hide himself in secret, that I cannot see him? saith Jahveh. Do not I will the heaven and the earth? saith Jahveh. Jer 23:25. I have heard what the prophets say, that prophesy falsehood in my name, saying: I have dreamed, I have dreamed.

Jer 23:26. How long? Have they it in their mind, the prophets of the deceit of their heart, Jer 23:27. Do they think to make my people forget my name by their dreams which they tell one to the other, as their fathers forgot my name by Baal? Jer 23:28. The prophet that hath a dream, let him tell a dream; and he that hath my word, let him speak my word in truth.

What is the straw to the corn? saith Jahveh. Jer 23:29. Is not thus my word - as fire, saith Jahveh, and as a hammer that dasheth the rock in pieces? Jer 23:30. Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets that steal my words one from the other. Jer 23:31. Behold, I am against the prophets, saith Jahveh, that take their tongues and say: God’s word. Jer 23:32.

Behold, I am against the prophets that prophesy lying dreams, saith Jahve, and tell them, and lead my people astray with their lies and their boasting, whom yet I have not sent nor commanded them, and they bring no good to this people, saith Jahveh." The force of the question: Am I a God at hand, not afar off? is seen from what follows. Far and near are here in their local, not their temporal signification.

A god near at hand is one whose domain and whose knowledge do not extend far; a God afar off, one who sees and works into the far distance. The question, which has an affirmative force, is explained by the statement of Jer 23:24 : I fill heaven and earth. Hitz. insists on understanding "near at hand" of temporal nearness, after Deu 32:17 : a God who is not far hence, a newly appeared God; and he supposes that, since in the east, from of old, knowledge is that which is known by experience, therefore the greatness of one’s knowledge depends on one’s advancement in years (Job 15:7, Job 15:10; Job 12:12, etc.)

; and God, he says, is the Ancient of days, Dan 7:9. But this line of thought is wholly foreign to the present passage. It is not wealth of knowledge as the result of long life or old age that God claims for Himself in Jer 23:24, but the power of seeing into that which is hidden so that none can conceal himself from Him, or omniscience. The design with which God here dwells on His omniscience and omnipresence too (cf.

1Ki 8:27; Isa 66:1) is shown in Jer 23:25. The false prophets went so far with their lying predictions, that it might appear as if God did not hear or see their words and deeds. The Lord exposes this delusion by calling His omniscience to mind in the words: I have heard how they prophesy falsehood in my name and say, I have dreamed, i. e. , a dream sent by God, have had a revelation in dreams, whereas according to Jer 23:26 the dream was the deceit of their heart - "spun out of their own heart" (Hitz.)

Jer 23:26 is variously interpreted. Hitz. supposes that the interrogative ה (in הישׁ) is made subordinate in the clause, and that the question is expressed with a double interrogative. He translates: How long still is there anything left in the heart of the prophets? as much as to say: how long have they materials for this? But there is a total want of illustrations in point for this subordination and doubling of the interrogative; and the force given to the ישׁ is quite arbitrary, since we should have had some intimation of what it was that was present in their hearts.

Even the repetition of the interrogative particles is unexplained, and the connecting of ישׁ with a participle, instead of with the infinitive with ל, cannot be defended by means of passages where החל is joined with an adjective and the idea "to be" has to be supplied. L. de Dieu, followed by Seb. Schmidt, Chr. B. Mich. , Ros. , Maur. , Umbr. , Graf, was right in taking "How long" by itself as an aposiopesis: how long, sc.

shall this go on? and in beginning a new question with הישׁ, a question continued and completed by the further question: "Do they think," etc. , Jer 23:27. Is it in the heart of the prophets, i. e. , have the prophets a mind to prophesy falsehood? do they mean to make men forget my name? Against holding Jer 23:27 as a resumption of the question there is no well-founded objection.

Näg. affirms that after החשׁבים we must in that case have here הם as recapitulation of the subject; but that is rendered unnecessary by the subject’s being contained in the immediately preceding words. The conjecture propounded by Näg. , to change הישׁ into האשׁ: how long still is the fire in the heart of the prophets? needs no refutation. To make to forget the name of the Lord is: so to banish the Lord, as seen in His government and works, from the people’s heart, that He is no longer feared and honoured.

By their dreams which they relate one to the other, i. e. , not one prophet to the other, but the prophet to his fellow-man amongst the people. בּבּעל, because of the Baal, whom their fathers made their god, cf. Jdg 3:7; 1Sa 12:9. - These lies the prophets ought to cease. Jer 23:28. Each is to speak what he has, what is given him. He that has a dream is to tell the dream, and he that has God’s word should tell it.

Dream as opposed to word of the Lord is an ordinary dream, the fiction of one’s own heart; not a dream-revelation given by God, which the pseudo-prophets represented their dreams to be. These dreams are as different from God’s word as straw is from corn. This clause is supported, Jer 23:29, by a statement of the nature of God’s word. It is thus (כּה), namely, as fire and as a hammer that smashes the rocks.

The sense of these words is not this: the word of God is strong enough by itself, needs no human addition, or: it will burn as fire the straw of the man’s word mixed with it. There is here no question of the mixing of God’s word with man’s word. The false prophets did not mingle the two, but gave out their man’s word for God's. Nor, by laying stress on the indwelling power of the word of God, does Jeremiah merely give his hearers a characteristic by which they may distinguish genuine prophecy; he seeks besides to make them know that the word of the Lord which he proclaims will make an end of the lying prophets’ work.

Thus understood, Jer 23:29 forms a stepping-stone to the threatenings uttered in Jer 23:30-32 against the lying prophets. The comparison to fire does not refer to the reflex influence which the word exerts on the speaker, so as that we should with Rashi and Ros. cf. Jer 20:9; the fire comes before us as that which consumes all man’s work that will not stand the test; cf.

1Co 3:12. The comparison to a hammer which smashes the rock shows the power of God, which overcomes all that is earthly, even what is firmest and hardest; cf. Heb 4:12. Its effect and accomplishment nothing can hinder.

Jer 23:23-29 Jer 23:23-32, in continuation, an intimation that God knows and will punish the lying practices of these prophets. - Jer 23:23. "Am I then a God near at hand, saith Jahveh, and not a God afar off? Jer 23:24. Or can any hide himself in secret, that I cannot see him? saith Jahveh. Do not I will the heaven and the earth? saith Jahveh. Jer 23:25. I have heard what the prophets say, that prophesy falsehood in my name, saying: I have dreamed, I have dreamed.

Jer 23:26. How long? Have they it in their mind, the prophets of the deceit of their heart, Jer 23:27. Do they think to make my people forget my name by their dreams which they tell one to the other, as their fathers forgot my name by Baal? Jer 23:28. The prophet that hath a dream, let him tell a dream; and he that hath my word, let him speak my word in truth.

What is the straw to the corn? saith Jahveh. Jer 23:29. Is not thus my word - as fire, saith Jahveh, and as a hammer that dasheth the rock in pieces? Jer 23:30. Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets that steal my words one from the other. Jer 23:31. Behold, I am against the prophets, saith Jahveh, that take their tongues and say: God’s word. Jer 23:32.

Behold, I am against the prophets that prophesy lying dreams, saith Jahve, and tell them, and lead my people astray with their lies and their boasting, whom yet I have not sent nor commanded them, and they bring no good to this people, saith Jahveh." The force of the question: Am I a God at hand, not afar off? is seen from what follows. Far and near are here in their local, not their temporal signification.

A god near at hand is one whose domain and whose knowledge do not extend far; a God afar off, one who sees and works into the far distance. The question, which has an affirmative force, is explained by the statement of Jer 23:24 : I fill heaven and earth. Hitz. insists on understanding "near at hand" of temporal nearness, after Deu 32:17 : a God who is not far hence, a newly appeared God; and he supposes that, since in the east, from of old, knowledge is that which is known by experience, therefore the greatness of one’s knowledge depends on one’s advancement in years (Job 15:7, Job 15:10; Job 12:12, etc.)

; and God, he says, is the Ancient of days, Dan 7:9. But this line of thought is wholly foreign to the present passage. It is not wealth of knowledge as the result of long life or old age that God claims for Himself in Jer 23:24, but the power of seeing into that which is hidden so that none can conceal himself from Him, or omniscience. The design with which God here dwells on His omniscience and omnipresence too (cf.

1Ki 8:27; Isa 66:1) is shown in Jer 23:25. The false prophets went so far with their lying predictions, that it might appear as if God did not hear or see their words and deeds. The Lord exposes this delusion by calling His omniscience to mind in the words: I have heard how they prophesy falsehood in my name and say, I have dreamed, i. e. , a dream sent by God, have had a revelation in dreams, whereas according to Jer 23:26 the dream was the deceit of their heart - "spun out of their own heart" (Hitz.)

Jer 23:26 is variously interpreted. Hitz. supposes that the interrogative ה (in הישׁ) is made subordinate in the clause, and that the question is expressed with a double interrogative. He translates: How long still is there anything left in the heart of the prophets? as much as to say: how long have they materials for this? But there is a total want of illustrations in point for this subordination and doubling of the interrogative; and the force given to the ישׁ is quite arbitrary, since we should have had some intimation of what it was that was present in their hearts.

Even the repetition of the interrogative particles is unexplained, and the connecting of ישׁ with a participle, instead of with the infinitive with ל, cannot be defended by means of passages where החל is joined with an adjective and the idea "to be" has to be supplied. L. de Dieu, followed by Seb. Schmidt, Chr. B. Mich. , Ros. , Maur. , Umbr. , Graf, was right in taking "How long" by itself as an aposiopesis: how long, sc.

shall this go on? and in beginning a new question with הישׁ, a question continued and completed by the further question: "Do they think," etc. , Jer 23:27. Is it in the heart of the prophets, i. e. , have the prophets a mind to prophesy falsehood? do they mean to make men forget my name? Against holding Jer 23:27 as a resumption of the question there is no well-founded objection.

Näg. affirms that after החשׁבים we must in that case have here הם as recapitulation of the subject; but that is rendered unnecessary by the subject’s being contained in the immediately preceding words. The conjecture propounded by Näg. , to change הישׁ into האשׁ: how long still is the fire in the heart of the prophets? needs no refutation. To make to forget the name of the Lord is: so to banish the Lord, as seen in His government and works, from the people’s heart, that He is no longer feared and honoured.

By their dreams which they relate one to the other, i. e. , not one prophet to the other, but the prophet to his fellow-man amongst the people. בּבּעל, because of the Baal, whom their fathers made their god, cf. Jdg 3:7; 1Sa 12:9. - These lies the prophets ought to cease. Jer 23:28. Each is to speak what he has, what is given him. He that has a dream is to tell the dream, and he that has God’s word should tell it.

Dream as opposed to word of the Lord is an ordinary dream, the fiction of one’s own heart; not a dream-revelation given by God, which the pseudo-prophets represented their dreams to be. These dreams are as different from God’s word as straw is from corn. This clause is supported, Jer 23:29, by a statement of the nature of God’s word. It is thus (כּה), namely, as fire and as a hammer that smashes the rocks.

The sense of these words is not this: the word of God is strong enough by itself, needs no human addition, or: it will burn as fire the straw of the man’s word mixed with it. There is here no question of the mixing of God’s word with man’s word. The false prophets did not mingle the two, but gave out their man’s word for God's. Nor, by laying stress on the indwelling power of the word of God, does Jeremiah merely give his hearers a characteristic by which they may distinguish genuine prophecy; he seeks besides to make them know that the word of the Lord which he proclaims will make an end of the lying prophets’ work.

Thus understood, Jer 23:29 forms a stepping-stone to the threatenings uttered in Jer 23:30-32 against the lying prophets. The comparison to fire does not refer to the reflex influence which the word exerts on the speaker, so as that we should with Rashi and Ros. cf. Jer 20:9; the fire comes before us as that which consumes all man’s work that will not stand the test; cf.

1Co 3:12. The comparison to a hammer which smashes the rock shows the power of God, which overcomes all that is earthly, even what is firmest and hardest; cf. Heb 4:12. Its effect and accomplishment nothing can hinder.

Jer 23:23-29 Jer 23:23-32, in continuation, an intimation that God knows and will punish the lying practices of these prophets. - Jer 23:23. "Am I then a God near at hand, saith Jahveh, and not a God afar off? Jer 23:24. Or can any hide himself in secret, that I cannot see him? saith Jahveh. Do not I will the heaven and the earth? saith Jahveh. Jer 23:25. I have heard what the prophets say, that prophesy falsehood in my name, saying: I have dreamed, I have dreamed.

Jer 23:26. How long? Have they it in their mind, the prophets of the deceit of their heart, Jer 23:27. Do they think to make my people forget my name by their dreams which they tell one to the other, as their fathers forgot my name by Baal? Jer 23:28. The prophet that hath a dream, let him tell a dream; and he that hath my word, let him speak my word in truth.

What is the straw to the corn? saith Jahveh. Jer 23:29. Is not thus my word - as fire, saith Jahveh, and as a hammer that dasheth the rock in pieces? Jer 23:30. Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets that steal my words one from the other. Jer 23:31. Behold, I am against the prophets, saith Jahveh, that take their tongues and say: God’s word. Jer 23:32.

Behold, I am against the prophets that prophesy lying dreams, saith Jahve, and tell them, and lead my people astray with their lies and their boasting, whom yet I have not sent nor commanded them, and they bring no good to this people, saith Jahveh." The force of the question: Am I a God at hand, not afar off? is seen from what follows. Far and near are here in their local, not their temporal signification.

A god near at hand is one whose domain and whose knowledge do not extend far; a God afar off, one who sees and works into the far distance. The question, which has an affirmative force, is explained by the statement of Jer 23:24 : I fill heaven and earth. Hitz. insists on understanding "near at hand" of temporal nearness, after Deu 32:17 : a God who is not far hence, a newly appeared God; and he supposes that, since in the east, from of old, knowledge is that which is known by experience, therefore the greatness of one’s knowledge depends on one’s advancement in years (Job 15:7, Job 15:10; Job 12:12, etc.)

; and God, he says, is the Ancient of days, Dan 7:9. But this line of thought is wholly foreign to the present passage. It is not wealth of knowledge as the result of long life or old age that God claims for Himself in Jer 23:24, but the power of seeing into that which is hidden so that none can conceal himself from Him, or omniscience. The design with which God here dwells on His omniscience and omnipresence too (cf.

1Ki 8:27; Isa 66:1) is shown in Jer 23:25. The false prophets went so far with their lying predictions, that it might appear as if God did not hear or see their words and deeds. The Lord exposes this delusion by calling His omniscience to mind in the words: I have heard how they prophesy falsehood in my name and say, I have dreamed, i. e. , a dream sent by God, have had a revelation in dreams, whereas according to Jer 23:26 the dream was the deceit of their heart - "spun out of their own heart" (Hitz.)

Jer 23:26 is variously interpreted. Hitz. supposes that the interrogative ה (in הישׁ) is made subordinate in the clause, and that the question is expressed with a double interrogative. He translates: How long still is there anything left in the heart of the prophets? as much as to say: how long have they materials for this? But there is a total want of illustrations in point for this subordination and doubling of the interrogative; and the force given to the ישׁ is quite arbitrary, since we should have had some intimation of what it was that was present in their hearts.

Even the repetition of the interrogative particles is unexplained, and the connecting of ישׁ with a participle, instead of with the infinitive with ל, cannot be defended by means of passages where החל is joined with an adjective and the idea "to be" has to be supplied. L. de Dieu, followed by Seb. Schmidt, Chr. B. Mich. , Ros. , Maur. , Umbr. , Graf, was right in taking "How long" by itself as an aposiopesis: how long, sc.

shall this go on? and in beginning a new question with הישׁ, a question continued and completed by the further question: "Do they think," etc. , Jer 23:27. Is it in the heart of the prophets, i. e. , have the prophets a mind to prophesy falsehood? do they mean to make men forget my name? Against holding Jer 23:27 as a resumption of the question there is no well-founded objection.

Näg. affirms that after החשׁבים we must in that case have here הם as recapitulation of the subject; but that is rendered unnecessary by the subject’s being contained in the immediately preceding words. The conjecture propounded by Näg. , to change הישׁ into האשׁ: how long still is the fire in the heart of the prophets? needs no refutation. To make to forget the name of the Lord is: so to banish the Lord, as seen in His government and works, from the people’s heart, that He is no longer feared and honoured.

By their dreams which they relate one to the other, i. e. , not one prophet to the other, but the prophet to his fellow-man amongst the people. בּבּעל, because of the Baal, whom their fathers made their god, cf. Jdg 3:7; 1Sa 12:9. - These lies the prophets ought to cease. Jer 23:28. Each is to speak what he has, what is given him. He that has a dream is to tell the dream, and he that has God’s word should tell it.

Dream as opposed to word of the Lord is an ordinary dream, the fiction of one’s own heart; not a dream-revelation given by God, which the pseudo-prophets represented their dreams to be. These dreams are as different from God’s word as straw is from corn. This clause is supported, Jer 23:29, by a statement of the nature of God’s word. It is thus (כּה), namely, as fire and as a hammer that smashes the rocks.

The sense of these words is not this: the word of God is strong enough by itself, needs no human addition, or: it will burn as fire the straw of the man’s word mixed with it. There is here no question of the mixing of God’s word with man’s word. The false prophets did not mingle the two, but gave out their man’s word for God's. Nor, by laying stress on the indwelling power of the word of God, does Jeremiah merely give his hearers a characteristic by which they may distinguish genuine prophecy; he seeks besides to make them know that the word of the Lord which he proclaims will make an end of the lying prophets’ work.

Thus understood, Jer 23:29 forms a stepping-stone to the threatenings uttered in Jer 23:30-32 against the lying prophets. The comparison to fire does not refer to the reflex influence which the word exerts on the speaker, so as that we should with Rashi and Ros. cf. Jer 20:9; the fire comes before us as that which consumes all man’s work that will not stand the test; cf.

1Co 3:12. The comparison to a hammer which smashes the rock shows the power of God, which overcomes all that is earthly, even what is firmest and hardest; cf. Heb 4:12. Its effect and accomplishment nothing can hinder.

Jer 23:23-29 Jer 23:23-32, in continuation, an intimation that God knows and will punish the lying practices of these prophets. - Jer 23:23. "Am I then a God near at hand, saith Jahveh, and not a God afar off? Jer 23:24. Or can any hide himself in secret, that I cannot see him? saith Jahveh. Do not I will the heaven and the earth? saith Jahveh. Jer 23:25. I have heard what the prophets say, that prophesy falsehood in my name, saying: I have dreamed, I have dreamed.

Jer 23:26. How long? Have they it in their mind, the prophets of the deceit of their heart, Jer 23:27. Do they think to make my people forget my name by their dreams which they tell one to the other, as their fathers forgot my name by Baal? Jer 23:28. The prophet that hath a dream, let him tell a dream; and he that hath my word, let him speak my word in truth.

What is the straw to the corn? saith Jahveh. Jer 23:29. Is not thus my word - as fire, saith Jahveh, and as a hammer that dasheth the rock in pieces? Jer 23:30. Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets that steal my words one from the other. Jer 23:31. Behold, I am against the prophets, saith Jahveh, that take their tongues and say: God’s word. Jer 23:32.

Behold, I am against the prophets that prophesy lying dreams, saith Jahve, and tell them, and lead my people astray with their lies and their boasting, whom yet I have not sent nor commanded them, and they bring no good to this people, saith Jahveh." The force of the question: Am I a God at hand, not afar off? is seen from what follows. Far and near are here in their local, not their temporal signification.

A god near at hand is one whose domain and whose knowledge do not extend far; a God afar off, one who sees and works into the far distance. The question, which has an affirmative force, is explained by the statement of Jer 23:24 : I fill heaven and earth. Hitz. insists on understanding "near at hand" of temporal nearness, after Deu 32:17 : a God who is not far hence, a newly appeared God; and he supposes that, since in the east, from of old, knowledge is that which is known by experience, therefore the greatness of one’s knowledge depends on one’s advancement in years (Job 15:7, Job 15:10; Job 12:12, etc.)

; and God, he says, is the Ancient of days, Dan 7:9. But this line of thought is wholly foreign to the present passage. It is not wealth of knowledge as the result of long life or old age that God claims for Himself in Jer 23:24, but the power of seeing into that which is hidden so that none can conceal himself from Him, or omniscience. The design with which God here dwells on His omniscience and omnipresence too (cf.

1Ki 8:27; Isa 66:1) is shown in Jer 23:25. The false prophets went so far with their lying predictions, that it might appear as if God did not hear or see their words and deeds. The Lord exposes this delusion by calling His omniscience to mind in the words: I have heard how they prophesy falsehood in my name and say, I have dreamed, i. e. , a dream sent by God, have had a revelation in dreams, whereas according to Jer 23:26 the dream was the deceit of their heart - "spun out of their own heart" (Hitz.)

Jer 23:26 is variously interpreted. Hitz. supposes that the interrogative ה (in הישׁ) is made subordinate in the clause, and that the question is expressed with a double interrogative. He translates: How long still is there anything left in the heart of the prophets? as much as to say: how long have they materials for this? But there is a total want of illustrations in point for this subordination and doubling of the interrogative; and the force given to the ישׁ is quite arbitrary, since we should have had some intimation of what it was that was present in their hearts.

Even the repetition of the interrogative particles is unexplained, and the connecting of ישׁ with a participle, instead of with the infinitive with ל, cannot be defended by means of passages where החל is joined with an adjective and the idea "to be" has to be supplied. L. de Dieu, followed by Seb. Schmidt, Chr. B. Mich. , Ros. , Maur. , Umbr. , Graf, was right in taking "How long" by itself as an aposiopesis: how long, sc.

shall this go on? and in beginning a new question with הישׁ, a question continued and completed by the further question: "Do they think," etc. , Jer 23:27. Is it in the heart of the prophets, i. e. , have the prophets a mind to prophesy falsehood? do they mean to make men forget my name? Against holding Jer 23:27 as a resumption of the question there is no well-founded objection.

Näg. affirms that after החשׁבים we must in that case have here הם as recapitulation of the subject; but that is rendered unnecessary by the subject’s being contained in the immediately preceding words. The conjecture propounded by Näg. , to change הישׁ into האשׁ: how long still is the fire in the heart of the prophets? needs no refutation. To make to forget the name of the Lord is: so to banish the Lord, as seen in His government and works, from the people’s heart, that He is no longer feared and honoured.

By their dreams which they relate one to the other, i. e. , not one prophet to the other, but the prophet to his fellow-man amongst the people. בּבּעל, because of the Baal, whom their fathers made their god, cf. Jdg 3:7; 1Sa 12:9. - These lies the prophets ought to cease. Jer 23:28. Each is to speak what he has, what is given him. He that has a dream is to tell the dream, and he that has God’s word should tell it.

Dream as opposed to word of the Lord is an ordinary dream, the fiction of one’s own heart; not a dream-revelation given by God, which the pseudo-prophets represented their dreams to be. These dreams are as different from God’s word as straw is from corn. This clause is supported, Jer 23:29, by a statement of the nature of God’s word. It is thus (כּה), namely, as fire and as a hammer that smashes the rocks.

The sense of these words is not this: the word of God is strong enough by itself, needs no human addition, or: it will burn as fire the straw of the man’s word mixed with it. There is here no question of the mixing of God’s word with man’s word. The false prophets did not mingle the two, but gave out their man’s word for God's. Nor, by laying stress on the indwelling power of the word of God, does Jeremiah merely give his hearers a characteristic by which they may distinguish genuine prophecy; he seeks besides to make them know that the word of the Lord which he proclaims will make an end of the lying prophets’ work.

Thus understood, Jer 23:29 forms a stepping-stone to the threatenings uttered in Jer 23:30-32 against the lying prophets. The comparison to fire does not refer to the reflex influence which the word exerts on the speaker, so as that we should with Rashi and Ros. cf. Jer 20:9; the fire comes before us as that which consumes all man’s work that will not stand the test; cf.

1Co 3:12. The comparison to a hammer which smashes the rock shows the power of God, which overcomes all that is earthly, even what is firmest and hardest; cf. Heb 4:12. Its effect and accomplishment nothing can hinder.

Jer 23:23-29 Jer 23:23-32, in continuation, an intimation that God knows and will punish the lying practices of these prophets. - Jer 23:23. "Am I then a God near at hand, saith Jahveh, and not a God afar off? Jer 23:24. Or can any hide himself in secret, that I cannot see him? saith Jahveh. Do not I will the heaven and the earth? saith Jahveh. Jer 23:25. I have heard what the prophets say, that prophesy falsehood in my name, saying: I have dreamed, I have dreamed.

Jer 23:26. How long? Have they it in their mind, the prophets of the deceit of their heart, Jer 23:27. Do they think to make my people forget my name by their dreams which they tell one to the other, as their fathers forgot my name by Baal? Jer 23:28. The prophet that hath a dream, let him tell a dream; and he that hath my word, let him speak my word in truth.

What is the straw to the corn? saith Jahveh. Jer 23:29. Is not thus my word - as fire, saith Jahveh, and as a hammer that dasheth the rock in pieces? Jer 23:30. Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets that steal my words one from the other. Jer 23:31. Behold, I am against the prophets, saith Jahveh, that take their tongues and say: God’s word. Jer 23:32.

Behold, I am against the prophets that prophesy lying dreams, saith Jahve, and tell them, and lead my people astray with their lies and their boasting, whom yet I have not sent nor commanded them, and they bring no good to this people, saith Jahveh." The force of the question: Am I a God at hand, not afar off? is seen from what follows. Far and near are here in their local, not their temporal signification.

A god near at hand is one whose domain and whose knowledge do not extend far; a God afar off, one who sees and works into the far distance. The question, which has an affirmative force, is explained by the statement of Jer 23:24 : I fill heaven and earth. Hitz. insists on understanding "near at hand" of temporal nearness, after Deu 32:17 : a God who is not far hence, a newly appeared God; and he supposes that, since in the east, from of old, knowledge is that which is known by experience, therefore the greatness of one’s knowledge depends on one’s advancement in years (Job 15:7, Job 15:10; Job 12:12, etc.)

; and God, he says, is the Ancient of days, Dan 7:9. But this line of thought is wholly foreign to the present passage. It is not wealth of knowledge as the result of long life or old age that God claims for Himself in Jer 23:24, but the power of seeing into that which is hidden so that none can conceal himself from Him, or omniscience. The design with which God here dwells on His omniscience and omnipresence too (cf.

1Ki 8:27; Isa 66:1) is shown in Jer 23:25. The false prophets went so far with their lying predictions, that it might appear as if God did not hear or see their words and deeds. The Lord exposes this delusion by calling His omniscience to mind in the words: I have heard how they prophesy falsehood in my name and say, I have dreamed, i. e. , a dream sent by God, have had a revelation in dreams, whereas according to Jer 23:26 the dream was the deceit of their heart - "spun out of their own heart" (Hitz.)

Jer 23:26 is variously interpreted. Hitz. supposes that the interrogative ה (in הישׁ) is made subordinate in the clause, and that the question is expressed with a double interrogative. He translates: How long still is there anything left in the heart of the prophets? as much as to say: how long have they materials for this? But there is a total want of illustrations in point for this subordination and doubling of the interrogative; and the force given to the ישׁ is quite arbitrary, since we should have had some intimation of what it was that was present in their hearts.

Even the repetition of the interrogative particles is unexplained, and the connecting of ישׁ with a participle, instead of with the infinitive with ל, cannot be defended by means of passages where החל is joined with an adjective and the idea "to be" has to be supplied. L. de Dieu, followed by Seb. Schmidt, Chr. B. Mich. , Ros. , Maur. , Umbr. , Graf, was right in taking "How long" by itself as an aposiopesis: how long, sc.

shall this go on? and in beginning a new question with הישׁ, a question continued and completed by the further question: "Do they think," etc. , Jer 23:27. Is it in the heart of the prophets, i. e. , have the prophets a mind to prophesy falsehood? do they mean to make men forget my name? Against holding Jer 23:27 as a resumption of the question there is no well-founded objection.

Näg. affirms that after החשׁבים we must in that case have here הם as recapitulation of the subject; but that is rendered unnecessary by the subject’s being contained in the immediately preceding words. The conjecture propounded by Näg. , to change הישׁ into האשׁ: how long still is the fire in the heart of the prophets? needs no refutation. To make to forget the name of the Lord is: so to banish the Lord, as seen in His government and works, from the people’s heart, that He is no longer feared and honoured.

By their dreams which they relate one to the other, i. e. , not one prophet to the other, but the prophet to his fellow-man amongst the people. בּבּעל, because of the Baal, whom their fathers made their god, cf. Jdg 3:7; 1Sa 12:9. - These lies the prophets ought to cease. Jer 23:28. Each is to speak what he has, what is given him. He that has a dream is to tell the dream, and he that has God’s word should tell it.

Dream as opposed to word of the Lord is an ordinary dream, the fiction of one’s own heart; not a dream-revelation given by God, which the pseudo-prophets represented their dreams to be. These dreams are as different from God’s word as straw is from corn. This clause is supported, Jer 23:29, by a statement of the nature of God’s word. It is thus (כּה), namely, as fire and as a hammer that smashes the rocks.

The sense of these words is not this: the word of God is strong enough by itself, needs no human addition, or: it will burn as fire the straw of the man’s word mixed with it. There is here no question of the mixing of God’s word with man’s word. The false prophets did not mingle the two, but gave out their man’s word for God's. Nor, by laying stress on the indwelling power of the word of God, does Jeremiah merely give his hearers a characteristic by which they may distinguish genuine prophecy; he seeks besides to make them know that the word of the Lord which he proclaims will make an end of the lying prophets’ work.

Thus understood, Jer 23:29 forms a stepping-stone to the threatenings uttered in Jer 23:30-32 against the lying prophets. The comparison to fire does not refer to the reflex influence which the word exerts on the speaker, so as that we should with Rashi and Ros. cf. Jer 20:9; the fire comes before us as that which consumes all man’s work that will not stand the test; cf.

1Co 3:12. The comparison to a hammer which smashes the rock shows the power of God, which overcomes all that is earthly, even what is firmest and hardest; cf. Heb 4:12. Its effect and accomplishment nothing can hinder.

Jer 23:23-29 Jer 23:23-32, in continuation, an intimation that God knows and will punish the lying practices of these prophets. - Jer 23:23. "Am I then a God near at hand, saith Jahveh, and not a God afar off? Jer 23:24. Or can any hide himself in secret, that I cannot see him? saith Jahveh. Do not I will the heaven and the earth? saith Jahveh. Jer 23:25. I have heard what the prophets say, that prophesy falsehood in my name, saying: I have dreamed, I have dreamed.

Jer 23:26. How long? Have they it in their mind, the prophets of the deceit of their heart, Jer 23:27. Do they think to make my people forget my name by their dreams which they tell one to the other, as their fathers forgot my name by Baal? Jer 23:28. The prophet that hath a dream, let him tell a dream; and he that hath my word, let him speak my word in truth.

What is the straw to the corn? saith Jahveh. Jer 23:29. Is not thus my word - as fire, saith Jahveh, and as a hammer that dasheth the rock in pieces? Jer 23:30. Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets that steal my words one from the other. Jer 23:31. Behold, I am against the prophets, saith Jahveh, that take their tongues and say: God’s word. Jer 23:32.

Behold, I am against the prophets that prophesy lying dreams, saith Jahve, and tell them, and lead my people astray with their lies and their boasting, whom yet I have not sent nor commanded them, and they bring no good to this people, saith Jahveh." The force of the question: Am I a God at hand, not afar off? is seen from what follows. Far and near are here in their local, not their temporal signification.

A god near at hand is one whose domain and whose knowledge do not extend far; a God afar off, one who sees and works into the far distance. The question, which has an affirmative force, is explained by the statement of Jer 23:24 : I fill heaven and earth. Hitz. insists on understanding "near at hand" of temporal nearness, after Deu 32:17 : a God who is not far hence, a newly appeared God; and he supposes that, since in the east, from of old, knowledge is that which is known by experience, therefore the greatness of one’s knowledge depends on one’s advancement in years (Job 15:7, Job 15:10; Job 12:12, etc.)

; and God, he says, is the Ancient of days, Dan 7:9. But this line of thought is wholly foreign to the present passage. It is not wealth of knowledge as the result of long life or old age that God claims for Himself in Jer 23:24, but the power of seeing into that which is hidden so that none can conceal himself from Him, or omniscience. The design with which God here dwells on His omniscience and omnipresence too (cf.

1Ki 8:27; Isa 66:1) is shown in Jer 23:25. The false prophets went so far with their lying predictions, that it might appear as if God did not hear or see their words and deeds. The Lord exposes this delusion by calling His omniscience to mind in the words: I have heard how they prophesy falsehood in my name and say, I have dreamed, i. e. , a dream sent by God, have had a revelation in dreams, whereas according to Jer 23:26 the dream was the deceit of their heart - "spun out of their own heart" (Hitz.)

Jer 23:26 is variously interpreted. Hitz. supposes that the interrogative ה (in הישׁ) is made subordinate in the clause, and that the question is expressed with a double interrogative. He translates: How long still is there anything left in the heart of the prophets? as much as to say: how long have they materials for this? But there is a total want of illustrations in point for this subordination and doubling of the interrogative; and the force given to the ישׁ is quite arbitrary, since we should have had some intimation of what it was that was present in their hearts.

Even the repetition of the interrogative particles is unexplained, and the connecting of ישׁ with a participle, instead of with the infinitive with ל, cannot be defended by means of passages where החל is joined with an adjective and the idea "to be" has to be supplied. L. de Dieu, followed by Seb. Schmidt, Chr. B. Mich. , Ros. , Maur. , Umbr. , Graf, was right in taking "How long" by itself as an aposiopesis: how long, sc.

shall this go on? and in beginning a new question with הישׁ, a question continued and completed by the further question: "Do they think," etc. , Jer 23:27. Is it in the heart of the prophets, i. e. , have the prophets a mind to prophesy falsehood? do they mean to make men forget my name? Against holding Jer 23:27 as a resumption of the question there is no well-founded objection.

Näg. affirms that after החשׁבים we must in that case have here הם as recapitulation of the subject; but that is rendered unnecessary by the subject’s being contained in the immediately preceding words. The conjecture propounded by Näg. , to change הישׁ into האשׁ: how long still is the fire in the heart of the prophets? needs no refutation. To make to forget the name of the Lord is: so to banish the Lord, as seen in His government and works, from the people’s heart, that He is no longer feared and honoured.

By their dreams which they relate one to the other, i. e. , not one prophet to the other, but the prophet to his fellow-man amongst the people. בּבּעל, because of the Baal, whom their fathers made their god, cf. Jdg 3:7; 1Sa 12:9. - These lies the prophets ought to cease. Jer 23:28. Each is to speak what he has, what is given him. He that has a dream is to tell the dream, and he that has God’s word should tell it.

Dream as opposed to word of the Lord is an ordinary dream, the fiction of one’s own heart; not a dream-revelation given by God, which the pseudo-prophets represented their dreams to be. These dreams are as different from God’s word as straw is from corn. This clause is supported, Jer 23:29, by a statement of the nature of God’s word. It is thus (כּה), namely, as fire and as a hammer that smashes the rocks.

The sense of these words is not this: the word of God is strong enough by itself, needs no human addition, or: it will burn as fire the straw of the man’s word mixed with it. There is here no question of the mixing of God’s word with man’s word. The false prophets did not mingle the two, but gave out their man’s word for God's. Nor, by laying stress on the indwelling power of the word of God, does Jeremiah merely give his hearers a characteristic by which they may distinguish genuine prophecy; he seeks besides to make them know that the word of the Lord which he proclaims will make an end of the lying prophets’ work.

Thus understood, Jer 23:29 forms a stepping-stone to the threatenings uttered in Jer 23:30-32 against the lying prophets. The comparison to fire does not refer to the reflex influence which the word exerts on the speaker, so as that we should with Rashi and Ros. cf. Jer 20:9; the fire comes before us as that which consumes all man’s work that will not stand the test; cf.

1Co 3:12. The comparison to a hammer which smashes the rock shows the power of God, which overcomes all that is earthly, even what is firmest and hardest; cf. Heb 4:12. Its effect and accomplishment nothing can hinder.

Jer 23:23-29 Jer 23:23-32, in continuation, an intimation that God knows and will punish the lying practices of these prophets. - Jer 23:23. "Am I then a God near at hand, saith Jahveh, and not a God afar off? Jer 23:24. Or can any hide himself in secret, that I cannot see him? saith Jahveh. Do not I will the heaven and the earth? saith Jahveh. Jer 23:25. I have heard what the prophets say, that prophesy falsehood in my name, saying: I have dreamed, I have dreamed.

Jer 23:26. How long? Have they it in their mind, the prophets of the deceit of their heart, Jer 23:27. Do they think to make my people forget my name by their dreams which they tell one to the other, as their fathers forgot my name by Baal? Jer 23:28. The prophet that hath a dream, let him tell a dream; and he that hath my word, let him speak my word in truth.

What is the straw to the corn? saith Jahveh. Jer 23:29. Is not thus my word - as fire, saith Jahveh, and as a hammer that dasheth the rock in pieces? Jer 23:30. Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets that steal my words one from the other. Jer 23:31. Behold, I am against the prophets, saith Jahveh, that take their tongues and say: God’s word. Jer 23:32.

Behold, I am against the prophets that prophesy lying dreams, saith Jahve, and tell them, and lead my people astray with their lies and their boasting, whom yet I have not sent nor commanded them, and they bring no good to this people, saith Jahveh." The force of the question: Am I a God at hand, not afar off? is seen from what follows. Far and near are here in their local, not their temporal signification.

A god near at hand is one whose domain and whose knowledge do not extend far; a God afar off, one who sees and works into the far distance. The question, which has an affirmative force, is explained by the statement of Jer 23:24 : I fill heaven and earth. Hitz. insists on understanding "near at hand" of temporal nearness, after Deu 32:17 : a God who is not far hence, a newly appeared God; and he supposes that, since in the east, from of old, knowledge is that which is known by experience, therefore the greatness of one’s knowledge depends on one’s advancement in years (Job 15:7, Job 15:10; Job 12:12, etc.)

; and God, he says, is the Ancient of days, Dan 7:9. But this line of thought is wholly foreign to the present passage. It is not wealth of knowledge as the result of long life or old age that God claims for Himself in Jer 23:24, but the power of seeing into that which is hidden so that none can conceal himself from Him, or omniscience. The design with which God here dwells on His omniscience and omnipresence too (cf.

1Ki 8:27; Isa 66:1) is shown in Jer 23:25. The false prophets went so far with their lying predictions, that it might appear as if God did not hear or see their words and deeds. The Lord exposes this delusion by calling His omniscience to mind in the words: I have heard how they prophesy falsehood in my name and say, I have dreamed, i. e. , a dream sent by God, have had a revelation in dreams, whereas according to Jer 23:26 the dream was the deceit of their heart - "spun out of their own heart" (Hitz.)

Jer 23:26 is variously interpreted. Hitz. supposes that the interrogative ה (in הישׁ) is made subordinate in the clause, and that the question is expressed with a double interrogative. He translates: How long still is there anything left in the heart of the prophets? as much as to say: how long have they materials for this? But there is a total want of illustrations in point for this subordination and doubling of the interrogative; and the force given to the ישׁ is quite arbitrary, since we should have had some intimation of what it was that was present in their hearts.

Even the repetition of the interrogative particles is unexplained, and the connecting of ישׁ with a participle, instead of with the infinitive with ל, cannot be defended by means of passages where החל is joined with an adjective and the idea "to be" has to be supplied. L. de Dieu, followed by Seb. Schmidt, Chr. B. Mich. , Ros. , Maur. , Umbr. , Graf, was right in taking "How long" by itself as an aposiopesis: how long, sc.

shall this go on? and in beginning a new question with הישׁ, a question continued and completed by the further question: "Do they think," etc. , Jer 23:27. Is it in the heart of the prophets, i. e. , have the prophets a mind to prophesy falsehood? do they mean to make men forget my name? Against holding Jer 23:27 as a resumption of the question there is no well-founded objection.

Näg. affirms that after החשׁבים we must in that case have here הם as recapitulation of the subject; but that is rendered unnecessary by the subject’s being contained in the immediately preceding words. The conjecture propounded by Näg. , to change הישׁ into האשׁ: how long still is the fire in the heart of the prophets? needs no refutation. To make to forget the name of the Lord is: so to banish the Lord, as seen in His government and works, from the people’s heart, that He is no longer feared and honoured.

By their dreams which they relate one to the other, i. e. , not one prophet to the other, but the prophet to his fellow-man amongst the people. בּבּעל, because of the Baal, whom their fathers made their god, cf. Jdg 3:7; 1Sa 12:9. - These lies the prophets ought to cease. Jer 23:28. Each is to speak what he has, what is given him. He that has a dream is to tell the dream, and he that has God’s word should tell it.

Dream as opposed to word of the Lord is an ordinary dream, the fiction of one’s own heart; not a dream-revelation given by God, which the pseudo-prophets represented their dreams to be. These dreams are as different from God’s word as straw is from corn. This clause is supported, Jer 23:29, by a statement of the nature of God’s word. It is thus (כּה), namely, as fire and as a hammer that smashes the rocks.

The sense of these words is not this: the word of God is strong enough by itself, needs no human addition, or: it will burn as fire the straw of the man’s word mixed with it. There is here no question of the mixing of God’s word with man’s word. The false prophets did not mingle the two, but gave out their man’s word for God's. Nor, by laying stress on the indwelling power of the word of God, does Jeremiah merely give his hearers a characteristic by which they may distinguish genuine prophecy; he seeks besides to make them know that the word of the Lord which he proclaims will make an end of the lying prophets’ work.

Thus understood, Jer 23:29 forms a stepping-stone to the threatenings uttered in Jer 23:30-32 against the lying prophets. The comparison to fire does not refer to the reflex influence which the word exerts on the speaker, so as that we should with Rashi and Ros. cf. Jer 20:9; the fire comes before us as that which consumes all man’s work that will not stand the test; cf.

1Co 3:12. The comparison to a hammer which smashes the rock shows the power of God, which overcomes all that is earthly, even what is firmest and hardest; cf. Heb 4:12. Its effect and accomplishment nothing can hinder.

Jer 23:30-32 Threatening of punishment. לכן does not connect with Jer 23:29, but with the main idea of the previous verses, the conduct of the false prophets there exposed. הנני על, behold, I will be against them, will come upon them as an enemy; cf. Eze 5:8. The practice of these prophets is characterized in three ways, yet without marking out three classes of unworthy men.

One habit of theirs is that of stealing the word of God one from another. Not inspired of God themselves, they tried to appropriate words of God from other prophets in order to give their own utterances the character of divine oracles. Another is: they take their tongues and say, God’s word, i. e. , they use their tongues to speak pretended words from God. The verb ינאמוּ occurs only here; elsewhere only the participle נאם, and that almost always joined with יהוה in the sig.

effatum Domini ; here without it, but in the same sense. The root meaning of נאם is disputed. Connected etymologically with נהם, המה, it doubtlessly denotes originally, that which is whispered, Jahveh’s secret confidential communication; but it is constantly used, not for the word of God as silently inspired by God, but as softly uttered by the prophet. The meaning is not: their prophesying is "mere wagging of the tongue, talk according to their own caprice" (Graf); but: they give out their sayings for God’s, whereas God speaks neither to nor by them.

Finally, their third way of doing consists in feigning revelations by means of dreams, which are but deceptive dreams. At this point the discourse falls back on the description in Jer 23:26. The words "and lead my people astray" refer to all their three ways of acting before characterized. פּחזוּת is their boasting of revelations from God. Then comes

Jer 23:30-32 Threatening of punishment. לכן does not connect with Jer 23:29, but with the main idea of the previous verses, the conduct of the false prophets there exposed. הנני על, behold, I will be against them, will come upon them as an enemy; cf. Eze 5:8. The practice of these prophets is characterized in three ways, yet without marking out three classes of unworthy men.

One habit of theirs is that of stealing the word of God one from another. Not inspired of God themselves, they tried to appropriate words of God from other prophets in order to give their own utterances the character of divine oracles. Another is: they take their tongues and say, God’s word, i. e. , they use their tongues to speak pretended words from God. The verb ינאמוּ occurs only here; elsewhere only the participle נאם, and that almost always joined with יהוה in the sig.

effatum Domini ; here without it, but in the same sense. The root meaning of נאם is disputed. Connected etymologically with נהם, המה, it doubtlessly denotes originally, that which is whispered, Jahveh’s secret confidential communication; but it is constantly used, not for the word of God as silently inspired by God, but as softly uttered by the prophet. The meaning is not: their prophesying is "mere wagging of the tongue, talk according to their own caprice" (Graf); but: they give out their sayings for God’s, whereas God speaks neither to nor by them.

Finally, their third way of doing consists in feigning revelations by means of dreams, which are but deceptive dreams. At this point the discourse falls back on the description in Jer 23:26. The words "and lead my people astray" refer to all their three ways of acting before characterized. פּחזוּת is their boasting of revelations from God. Then comes

Jer 23:30-32 Threatening of punishment. לכן does not connect with Jer 23:29, but with the main idea of the previous verses, the conduct of the false prophets there exposed. הנני על, behold, I will be against them, will come upon them as an enemy; cf. Eze 5:8. The practice of these prophets is characterized in three ways, yet without marking out three classes of unworthy men.

One habit of theirs is that of stealing the word of God one from another. Not inspired of God themselves, they tried to appropriate words of God from other prophets in order to give their own utterances the character of divine oracles. Another is: they take their tongues and say, God’s word, i. e. , they use their tongues to speak pretended words from God. The verb ינאמוּ occurs only here; elsewhere only the participle נאם, and that almost always joined with יהוה in the sig.

effatum Domini ; here without it, but in the same sense. The root meaning of נאם is disputed. Connected etymologically with נהם, המה, it doubtlessly denotes originally, that which is whispered, Jahveh’s secret confidential communication; but it is constantly used, not for the word of God as silently inspired by God, but as softly uttered by the prophet. The meaning is not: their prophesying is "mere wagging of the tongue, talk according to their own caprice" (Graf); but: they give out their sayings for God’s, whereas God speaks neither to nor by them.

Finally, their third way of doing consists in feigning revelations by means of dreams, which are but deceptive dreams. At this point the discourse falls back on the description in Jer 23:26. The words "and lead my people astray" refer to all their three ways of acting before characterized. פּחזוּת is their boasting of revelations from God. Then comes

Jer 23:33-37 A rebuke of their mockery at Jeremiah’s threatening predictions. - Jer 23:33. "And when this people, or the prophet, or a priest ask thee, saying: What is the burden of Jahveh? then say to them: What the burden is - now I will cast you off, saith Jahveh. Jer 23:34. And the prophet, the priest, and the people that shall say: burden of Jahveh, on that man will I visit it and on his house.

Jer 23:35. Thus shall ye say each to the other, and each to his brother: What hath Jahveh answered, and what hath Jahveh spoken? Jer 23:36. But burden of Jahveh shall ye mention no more, for a burden to every one shall his own word be; and ye wrest the words of the living God Jahveh of hosts, our God. Jer 23:37. Thus shalt thou say to the prophet: What hath Jahveh answered thee, and what hath He spoken?

Jer 23:38. But if ye say: burden of Jahveh, therefore thus saith Jahveh: Because ye say this word: burden of Jahveh, and yet I have sent unto you, saying, Ye shall not say: burden of Jahveh; Jer 23:39. Therefore, behold, I will utterly forget you, and cast away from my face you and this city that I gave you and your fathers, Jer 23:40. And will lay upon you everlasting reproach, and everlasting, never-to-be-forgotten disgrace."

The word משּׂא, from נשׂא, lift up, bear, sig. burden, and, like the phrase: lift up the voice, means a saying of weighty or dread import. The word has the latter sig. in the headings to the prophecies of threatening character; see on Nah 1:1, where this meaning of the word in the headings is asserted, and the widespread opinion that it means effatum is refuted.

Jeremiah’s adversaries - as appears from these verses - used the word "burden" of his prophetic sayings by way of mockery, meaning burdensome prophecies, in order to throw ridicule on the prophet’s speeches, by them regarded as offensive. Thus if the people, or a prophet, or a priest ask: What is the burden of Jahveh, i. e. , how runs it, or what does it contain?

he is to answer: The Lord saith: I will cast you off, i. e. , disburden myself of you, as it were - the idea of "burden" being kept up in the answer to the question. The article on the word prophet is used to show that the word is used generally of the class of prophets at large. The את in the answering clause is nota accus . , the following phrase being designedly repeated from the question; and hence the unusual combination את־מה.

The sense is: as regards the question what the burden is, I will cast you away. There is no reason to alter the text to fit the lxx translation: ὑμεῖς ἐστὲ τὸ λῆμμα, or Vulg. : vos estis onus , as Cappell. , J. D. Mich. , Hitz. , Gr. , etc. , do. The lxx rendering is based, not on another reading, but on another division of the words, viz. , אתם המשׂא. - In Jer 23:34 the meaning of this answer is more fully explained.

On every one that uses the word "burden" in this sneering way God will avenge the sneer, and not only on his person, but on his house, his family as well. In Jer 23:35 they are told how they are to speak of prophecy. Jer 23:36. They are no longer to make use of the phrase "burden of Jahveh," "for the burden shall his word be to each one," i. e. , the word "burden" will be to each who uses it a burden that crushes him down.

"And ye wrest," etc. , is part of the reason for what is said: and ye have = for ye have wrested the words of the living God. The clause is properly a corollary which tells what happens when they use the forbidden word.

Jer 23:33-37 A rebuke of their mockery at Jeremiah’s threatening predictions. - Jer 23:33. "And when this people, or the prophet, or a priest ask thee, saying: What is the burden of Jahveh? then say to them: What the burden is - now I will cast you off, saith Jahveh. Jer 23:34. And the prophet, the priest, and the people that shall say: burden of Jahveh, on that man will I visit it and on his house.

Jer 23:35. Thus shall ye say each to the other, and each to his brother: What hath Jahveh answered, and what hath Jahveh spoken? Jer 23:36. But burden of Jahveh shall ye mention no more, for a burden to every one shall his own word be; and ye wrest the words of the living God Jahveh of hosts, our God. Jer 23:37. Thus shalt thou say to the prophet: What hath Jahveh answered thee, and what hath He spoken?

Jer 23:38. But if ye say: burden of Jahveh, therefore thus saith Jahveh: Because ye say this word: burden of Jahveh, and yet I have sent unto you, saying, Ye shall not say: burden of Jahveh; Jer 23:39. Therefore, behold, I will utterly forget you, and cast away from my face you and this city that I gave you and your fathers, Jer 23:40. And will lay upon you everlasting reproach, and everlasting, never-to-be-forgotten disgrace."

The word משּׂא, from נשׂא, lift up, bear, sig. burden, and, like the phrase: lift up the voice, means a saying of weighty or dread import. The word has the latter sig. in the headings to the prophecies of threatening character; see on Nah 1:1, where this meaning of the word in the headings is asserted, and the widespread opinion that it means effatum is refuted.

Jeremiah’s adversaries - as appears from these verses - used the word "burden" of his prophetic sayings by way of mockery, meaning burdensome prophecies, in order to throw ridicule on the prophet’s speeches, by them regarded as offensive. Thus if the people, or a prophet, or a priest ask: What is the burden of Jahveh, i. e. , how runs it, or what does it contain?

he is to answer: The Lord saith: I will cast you off, i. e. , disburden myself of you, as it were - the idea of "burden" being kept up in the answer to the question. The article on the word prophet is used to show that the word is used generally of the class of prophets at large. The את in the answering clause is nota accus . , the following phrase being designedly repeated from the question; and hence the unusual combination את־מה.

The sense is: as regards the question what the burden is, I will cast you away. There is no reason to alter the text to fit the lxx translation: ὑμεῖς ἐστὲ τὸ λῆμμα, or Vulg. : vos estis onus , as Cappell. , J. D. Mich. , Hitz. , Gr. , etc. , do. The lxx rendering is based, not on another reading, but on another division of the words, viz. , אתם המשׂא. - In Jer 23:34 the meaning of this answer is more fully explained.

On every one that uses the word "burden" in this sneering way God will avenge the sneer, and not only on his person, but on his house, his family as well. In Jer 23:35 they are told how they are to speak of prophecy. Jer 23:36. They are no longer to make use of the phrase "burden of Jahveh," "for the burden shall his word be to each one," i. e. , the word "burden" will be to each who uses it a burden that crushes him down.

"And ye wrest," etc. , is part of the reason for what is said: and ye have = for ye have wrested the words of the living God. The clause is properly a corollary which tells what happens when they use the forbidden word.

Jer 23:33-37 A rebuke of their mockery at Jeremiah’s threatening predictions. - Jer 23:33. "And when this people, or the prophet, or a priest ask thee, saying: What is the burden of Jahveh? then say to them: What the burden is - now I will cast you off, saith Jahveh. Jer 23:34. And the prophet, the priest, and the people that shall say: burden of Jahveh, on that man will I visit it and on his house.

Jer 23:35. Thus shall ye say each to the other, and each to his brother: What hath Jahveh answered, and what hath Jahveh spoken? Jer 23:36. But burden of Jahveh shall ye mention no more, for a burden to every one shall his own word be; and ye wrest the words of the living God Jahveh of hosts, our God. Jer 23:37. Thus shalt thou say to the prophet: What hath Jahveh answered thee, and what hath He spoken?

Jer 23:38. But if ye say: burden of Jahveh, therefore thus saith Jahveh: Because ye say this word: burden of Jahveh, and yet I have sent unto you, saying, Ye shall not say: burden of Jahveh; Jer 23:39. Therefore, behold, I will utterly forget you, and cast away from my face you and this city that I gave you and your fathers, Jer 23:40. And will lay upon you everlasting reproach, and everlasting, never-to-be-forgotten disgrace."

The word משּׂא, from נשׂא, lift up, bear, sig. burden, and, like the phrase: lift up the voice, means a saying of weighty or dread import. The word has the latter sig. in the headings to the prophecies of threatening character; see on Nah 1:1, where this meaning of the word in the headings is asserted, and the widespread opinion that it means effatum is refuted.

Jeremiah’s adversaries - as appears from these verses - used the word "burden" of his prophetic sayings by way of mockery, meaning burdensome prophecies, in order to throw ridicule on the prophet’s speeches, by them regarded as offensive. Thus if the people, or a prophet, or a priest ask: What is the burden of Jahveh, i. e. , how runs it, or what does it contain?

he is to answer: The Lord saith: I will cast you off, i. e. , disburden myself of you, as it were - the idea of "burden" being kept up in the answer to the question. The article on the word prophet is used to show that the word is used generally of the class of prophets at large. The את in the answering clause is nota accus . , the following phrase being designedly repeated from the question; and hence the unusual combination את־מה.

The sense is: as regards the question what the burden is, I will cast you away. There is no reason to alter the text to fit the lxx translation: ὑμεῖς ἐστὲ τὸ λῆμμα, or Vulg. : vos estis onus , as Cappell. , J. D. Mich. , Hitz. , Gr. , etc. , do. The lxx rendering is based, not on another reading, but on another division of the words, viz. , אתם המשׂא. - In Jer 23:34 the meaning of this answer is more fully explained.

On every one that uses the word "burden" in this sneering way God will avenge the sneer, and not only on his person, but on his house, his family as well. In Jer 23:35 they are told how they are to speak of prophecy. Jer 23:36. They are no longer to make use of the phrase "burden of Jahveh," "for the burden shall his word be to each one," i. e. , the word "burden" will be to each who uses it a burden that crushes him down.

"And ye wrest," etc. , is part of the reason for what is said: and ye have = for ye have wrested the words of the living God. The clause is properly a corollary which tells what happens when they use the forbidden word.

Jer 23:33-37 A rebuke of their mockery at Jeremiah’s threatening predictions. - Jer 23:33. "And when this people, or the prophet, or a priest ask thee, saying: What is the burden of Jahveh? then say to them: What the burden is - now I will cast you off, saith Jahveh. Jer 23:34. And the prophet, the priest, and the people that shall say: burden of Jahveh, on that man will I visit it and on his house.

Jer 23:35. Thus shall ye say each to the other, and each to his brother: What hath Jahveh answered, and what hath Jahveh spoken? Jer 23:36. But burden of Jahveh shall ye mention no more, for a burden to every one shall his own word be; and ye wrest the words of the living God Jahveh of hosts, our God. Jer 23:37. Thus shalt thou say to the prophet: What hath Jahveh answered thee, and what hath He spoken?

Jer 23:38. But if ye say: burden of Jahveh, therefore thus saith Jahveh: Because ye say this word: burden of Jahveh, and yet I have sent unto you, saying, Ye shall not say: burden of Jahveh; Jer 23:39. Therefore, behold, I will utterly forget you, and cast away from my face you and this city that I gave you and your fathers, Jer 23:40. And will lay upon you everlasting reproach, and everlasting, never-to-be-forgotten disgrace."

The word משּׂא, from נשׂא, lift up, bear, sig. burden, and, like the phrase: lift up the voice, means a saying of weighty or dread import. The word has the latter sig. in the headings to the prophecies of threatening character; see on Nah 1:1, where this meaning of the word in the headings is asserted, and the widespread opinion that it means effatum is refuted.

Jeremiah’s adversaries - as appears from these verses - used the word "burden" of his prophetic sayings by way of mockery, meaning burdensome prophecies, in order to throw ridicule on the prophet’s speeches, by them regarded as offensive. Thus if the people, or a prophet, or a priest ask: What is the burden of Jahveh, i. e. , how runs it, or what does it contain?

he is to answer: The Lord saith: I will cast you off, i. e. , disburden myself of you, as it were - the idea of "burden" being kept up in the answer to the question. The article on the word prophet is used to show that the word is used generally of the class of prophets at large. The את in the answering clause is nota accus . , the following phrase being designedly repeated from the question; and hence the unusual combination את־מה.

The sense is: as regards the question what the burden is, I will cast you away. There is no reason to alter the text to fit the lxx translation: ὑμεῖς ἐστὲ τὸ λῆμμα, or Vulg. : vos estis onus , as Cappell. , J. D. Mich. , Hitz. , Gr. , etc. , do. The lxx rendering is based, not on another reading, but on another division of the words, viz. , אתם המשׂא. - In Jer 23:34 the meaning of this answer is more fully explained.

On every one that uses the word "burden" in this sneering way God will avenge the sneer, and not only on his person, but on his house, his family as well. In Jer 23:35 they are told how they are to speak of prophecy. Jer 23:36. They are no longer to make use of the phrase "burden of Jahveh," "for the burden shall his word be to each one," i. e. , the word "burden" will be to each who uses it a burden that crushes him down.

"And ye wrest," etc. , is part of the reason for what is said: and ye have = for ye have wrested the words of the living God. The clause is properly a corollary which tells what happens when they use the forbidden word.

Jer 23:33-37 A rebuke of their mockery at Jeremiah’s threatening predictions. - Jer 23:33. "And when this people, or the prophet, or a priest ask thee, saying: What is the burden of Jahveh? then say to them: What the burden is - now I will cast you off, saith Jahveh. Jer 23:34. And the prophet, the priest, and the people that shall say: burden of Jahveh, on that man will I visit it and on his house.

Jer 23:35. Thus shall ye say each to the other, and each to his brother: What hath Jahveh answered, and what hath Jahveh spoken? Jer 23:36. But burden of Jahveh shall ye mention no more, for a burden to every one shall his own word be; and ye wrest the words of the living God Jahveh of hosts, our God. Jer 23:37. Thus shalt thou say to the prophet: What hath Jahveh answered thee, and what hath He spoken?

Jer 23:38. But if ye say: burden of Jahveh, therefore thus saith Jahveh: Because ye say this word: burden of Jahveh, and yet I have sent unto you, saying, Ye shall not say: burden of Jahveh; Jer 23:39. Therefore, behold, I will utterly forget you, and cast away from my face you and this city that I gave you and your fathers, Jer 23:40. And will lay upon you everlasting reproach, and everlasting, never-to-be-forgotten disgrace."

The word משּׂא, from נשׂא, lift up, bear, sig. burden, and, like the phrase: lift up the voice, means a saying of weighty or dread import. The word has the latter sig. in the headings to the prophecies of threatening character; see on Nah 1:1, where this meaning of the word in the headings is asserted, and the widespread opinion that it means effatum is refuted.

Jeremiah’s adversaries - as appears from these verses - used the word "burden" of his prophetic sayings by way of mockery, meaning burdensome prophecies, in order to throw ridicule on the prophet’s speeches, by them regarded as offensive. Thus if the people, or a prophet, or a priest ask: What is the burden of Jahveh, i. e. , how runs it, or what does it contain?

he is to answer: The Lord saith: I will cast you off, i. e. , disburden myself of you, as it were - the idea of "burden" being kept up in the answer to the question. The article on the word prophet is used to show that the word is used generally of the class of prophets at large. The את in the answering clause is nota accus . , the following phrase being designedly repeated from the question; and hence the unusual combination את־מה.

The sense is: as regards the question what the burden is, I will cast you away. There is no reason to alter the text to fit the lxx translation: ὑμεῖς ἐστὲ τὸ λῆμμα, or Vulg. : vos estis onus , as Cappell. , J. D. Mich. , Hitz. , Gr. , etc. , do. The lxx rendering is based, not on another reading, but on another division of the words, viz. , אתם המשׂא. - In Jer 23:34 the meaning of this answer is more fully explained.

On every one that uses the word "burden" in this sneering way God will avenge the sneer, and not only on his person, but on his house, his family as well. In Jer 23:35 they are told how they are to speak of prophecy. Jer 23:36. They are no longer to make use of the phrase "burden of Jahveh," "for the burden shall his word be to each one," i. e. , the word "burden" will be to each who uses it a burden that crushes him down.

"And ye wrest," etc. , is part of the reason for what is said: and ye have = for ye have wrested the words of the living God. The clause is properly a corollary which tells what happens when they use the forbidden word.

Jer 23:38-40 In case they, in spite of the prohibition, persist in the use of the forbidden word, i. e. , to not cease their mockery of God’s word, then the punishment set forth in Jer 23:33 is certainly to come on them. In the threat אתכם נשׁיתי there is a manifestly designed word-play on משּׂא. lxx, Vulg. , Syr. have therefore rendered as if from נשׂיתי נשׂא (or נשׂאתי) instead: ἐγὼ λαμβάνω, ego tollam vos portans .

One cod. gives נשׂא, and Ew. , Hitz. , Graf, Näg. , etc. , hold this reading to be right; but hardly with justice. The Chald. has expressed the reading of the text in its ארטושׁ יתכון מרטשׁ, et relinquam vos relinquendo . And the form נשׁיתי is explained only by reading נשׁא (נשׁה); not by נשׂא, for this verb keeps its א everywhere, save with the one exception of נשׂוּי, Psa 32:1, formed after the parallel כסוּי.

The assertion that the reading in the text gives no good sense is unfounded. I will utterly forget you is much more in keeping than: I will utterly lift you up, carry you forth. - With Jer 23:40, cf. Jer 20:11.

Jer 23:38-40 In case they, in spite of the prohibition, persist in the use of the forbidden word, i. e. , to not cease their mockery of God’s word, then the punishment set forth in Jer 23:33 is certainly to come on them. In the threat אתכם נשׁיתי there is a manifestly designed word-play on משּׂא. lxx, Vulg. , Syr. have therefore rendered as if from נשׂיתי נשׂא (or נשׂאתי) instead: ἐγὼ λαμβάνω, ego tollam vos portans .

One cod. gives נשׂא, and Ew. , Hitz. , Graf, Näg. , etc. , hold this reading to be right; but hardly with justice. The Chald. has expressed the reading of the text in its ארטושׁ יתכון מרטשׁ, et relinquam vos relinquendo . And the form נשׁיתי is explained only by reading נשׁא (נשׁה); not by נשׂא, for this verb keeps its א everywhere, save with the one exception of נשׂוּי, Psa 32:1, formed after the parallel כסוּי.

The assertion that the reading in the text gives no good sense is unfounded. I will utterly forget you is much more in keeping than: I will utterly lift you up, carry you forth. - With Jer 23:40, cf. Jer 20:11.

Jer 23:38-40 In case they, in spite of the prohibition, persist in the use of the forbidden word, i. e. , to not cease their mockery of God’s word, then the punishment set forth in Jer 23:33 is certainly to come on them. In the threat אתכם נשׁיתי there is a manifestly designed word-play on משּׂא. lxx, Vulg. , Syr. have therefore rendered as if from נשׂיתי נשׂא (or נשׂאתי) instead: ἐγὼ λαμβάνω, ego tollam vos portans .

One cod. gives נשׂא, and Ew. , Hitz. , Graf, Näg. , etc. , hold this reading to be right; but hardly with justice. The Chald. has expressed the reading of the text in its ארטושׁ יתכון מרטשׁ, et relinquam vos relinquendo . And the form נשׁיתי is explained only by reading נשׁא (נשׁה); not by נשׂא, for this verb keeps its א everywhere, save with the one exception of נשׂוּי, Psa 32:1, formed after the parallel כסוּי.

The assertion that the reading in the text gives no good sense is unfounded. I will utterly forget you is much more in keeping than: I will utterly lift you up, carry you forth. - With Jer 23:40, cf. Jer 20:11.

Jer 24:1 The Two Fig Baskets-an emblem of the future of Judah’s people. - Jer 24:1 . "Jahveh caused me to see, and behold two baskets of figs set before the temple of Jahveh, after Nebuchadrezzar had carried captive Jechoniah, the son of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, and the princes of Judah, and the work-people and the smiths from Jerusalem, and had brought them to Babylon.

Jer 24:2 . One basket had very good figs like the early figs, the other basket very bad figs, which could not be eaten for badness. Jer 24:3 . And Jahveh said to me: What seest thou, Jeremiah? and I said: Figs; the good figs are very good, and the bad figs very bad, which cannot be eaten for badness. Jer 24:4 . Then came the word of Jahveh unto me, saying: Jer 24:5 .

Thus saith Jahveh, the God of Israel: Like these good figs, so will I look on the captives of Judah, whom I have sent out of this place into the land of the Chaldeans, for good; Jer 24:6 . And I will set mine eye upon them for good, and will bring them back again to this land, and build them and not pull down, and plant them and not pluck up. Jer 24:7 . And I give them an heart to know me, that I am Jahveh; and they shall be my people, and I will be their God; for they will return unto me with their whole heart.

Jer 24:8 . And as the bad figs, which cannot be eaten for badness, yea thus saith Jahveh, so will I make Zedekiah the king of Judah, and his princes and the residue of Jerusalem, them that are left remaining in this land and them that dwell in Egypt. Jer 24:9 . I give them up for ill-usage, for trouble to all kingdoms of the earth, for a reproach and a by-word, for a taunt and for a curse in all the places whither I shall drive them.

Jer 24:10. and I send among them the sword, the famine, and the plague, till they be consumed from off the land that I gave to them and to their fathers." This vision resembles in form and substance that in Amo 8:1-3. The words: Jahveh caused me to see, point to an inward event, a seeing with the eyes of the spirit, not of the body. The time is, Jer 24:1, precisely given: after Nebuchadnezzar had carried to Babylon King Jechoniah, with the princes and a part of the people; apparently soon after this deportation, at the beginning of the reign of Zedekiah, the king set up by Nebuchadnezzar over Judah.

Cf. 2Ki 24:14-17. - The Lord caused the prophet to see in spirit two baskets of figs (דּוּדאים, from דּוּדי, equivalent to דּוּד, Jer 24:2), מוּעדים (from יעד) in the place appointed therefor (מועד( rofereh) before the temple. We are not to regard these figs as an offering brought to Jahveh (Graf); and so neither are we to think here of the place where first-fruits or tithes were offered to the Lord, Exo 23:19.

, Deu 26:2. The two baskets of figs have nothing to do with first-fruits. They symbolize the people, those who appear before the Lord their God, namely, before the altar of burnt-offering; where the Lord desired to appear to, to meet with His people (נועד, Exo 29:42.) , so as to sanctify it by His glory, Exo 29:43. מוּעדים therefore means: placed in the spot appointed by the Lord for His meeting with Israel.

Jer 24:2 "The one basket very good figs" is short for: the basket was quite full of very good figs; cf. Friedr. W. M. Philippi, on the Nature and Origin of the Status constr. in Hebrew (1871), p. 93. The comparison to early figs serves simply to heighten the idea of very good; for the first figs, those ripened at the end of June, before the fruit season in August, were highly prized dainties. Cf. Isa 28:4; Hos 9:10.

Jer 24:3 The question: what seest thou? serves merely to give the object seen greater prominence, and does not imply the possibility of seeing wrong (Näg.).

Jer 24:4-7 The interpretation of the symbol. Jer 24:5. Like the good figs, the Lord will look on the captives in Chaldea for good ("for good" belongs to the verb "look on them"). The point of resemblance is: as one looks with pleasure on good figs, takes them and keeps them, so will I bestow my favour on Judah’s captives. Looking on them for good is explained, Jer 24:6 : the Lord will set His eye on them, bring them back into their land and build them up again.

With "build them," etc. , cf. Jer 1:10. The building and planting of the captives is not to consist solely in the restoration of their former civil well-being, but will be a spiritual regeneration of the people. God will give them a heart to know Him as their God, so that they may be in truth His people, and He their God. "For they will return," not: when they return (Ew.

, Hitz.) The turning to the Lord cannot be regarded as the condition of their receiving favour, because God will give them a heart to know Him; it is the working of the knowledge of the Lord put in their hearts. And this is adduced to certify the idea that they will then be really the Lord’s people.