Calvin’s CommentariesJeremiah 2

The Prophet repeats, as I think, what he had before said, — that the wickedness of his nation was incorrigible; for they repented not when warned, but on the contrary raged like wild beasts against the Prophets and religious teachers. Those interpreters are mistaken who think that the savage cruelty of the Jews in general is here condemned; and all are of this opinion. But the Prophet no doubt enhances this evil, by saying, that the Jews were not only obstinate in their vices, but also raged furiously against the Prophets. Hence he shews again, that God had used all remedies to heal the Jews, but without effect, for what better medicine could have been offered than for the Prophets to reprove the people and to shew to them how wickedly they had departed from God? God then wished thus to correct the vices of his own people; but so far was he from effecting anything, that at Jerusalem and through the whole of Judea, the Prophets were slaughtered, and the whole land was filled with and polluted by their blood. Hence he says, Even in thy wings has been found the blood of the souls of the poor innocents. He calls the borders of garments wings. He seems to say, that these slaughters were not hid, for the Jews were besprinkled with blood to the very extremities of their garment; as though he had said, “There is no cause for me to deal sharply with you in this instance; for your filthiness is most apparent: ye have not only been rebellious against my teaching, but ye have also cruelly murdered my prophets. If ye ask, Where these slaughters are to be found? Even in your wings, on the borders of your garments; so that your crimes are fully known.” We now perceive what the Prophet means. We must also notice the import of the particle גם, gam, also, or even. Their cruelty was worse and more nefarious, because they thus rose up against their own physicians; for the prophets, as it has been said, were the ministers of their safety. As then they thus raged against God’s favor so as to murder his prophets, it became still more evident, that they were utterly irreclaimable. He afterwards adds what serves for a confirmation. They have not been found in digging under Some give another explanation; but their opinion is right who think, that the Prophet alludes to what is said by Moses in Exodus 22:2, — that if a thief should be found in digging under, (or undermining,) he might be killed with impunity: for he who thus breaks through into the houses of others, is equal to a robber in audacity; and he ought to be counted not only a thief, but also as one guilty of manslaughter and felony. God then says, that the Prophets, who had been slain by the Jews, had not been found in digging up, that is, had not been found guilty of any crime, either of robbery or of murder: for he mentions a particular act, instead of the general crime. But it has been on account of all these things; that is, “because they boldly dared to reprove you, because they severely condemned your vices, because they discovered your baseness, because they were enemies to your perfidy and to your sins: as then the prophets had thus by the divine Spirit carried on war with your sins, they have on this account been murdered by you. (Our version of this text seems on the whole the best. “Blood,” דם, is to be taken here in a collective sense, as the verb to which it belongs is plural. Instead of “poor innocents, “it ought rather to be “the innocent poor,“ as the noun in Hebrew generally precedes its adjective. “Found” is in the first person, and there is no different reading, and it is so in the Septuagint, and the Vulgate, though the Syriac and Arabic give the second person, and the Targum the third person plural, as Calvin does. The last word is rendered “these” in the Vulgate and the Targum; but “oak” in the Septuagint, the Syriac, and the Arabic, and adopted by Blayney, but disapproved by Houbigant and Horsley As to the word, rendered in our version, “secret search,” the early versions have pit, pits, or ditches, and so the Targum Blayney renders it “a digged hole,“ of which Horsley approves; and he refers, as an illustration, to Leviticus 17:13, and to Ezekiel 24:7. The word means digging, and seems to be used here metaphorically for searching; there is no need of adding “secret” to it, — Also in thy skirts has been found
The blood of the souls of the innocent poor:
Not by searching have I found it,
But upon all these (i.e., skirts.) The reference is to what is said in Jeremiah 2:30, where the Jews are charged with the killing the prophets. As to “the blood, “we find a similar passage in Ezekiel 24:7, 8. — Ed.) We see how well the whole passage reads, provided it be applied to the prophets only. It was not indeed the object of Jeremiah to condemn murders generally among the Jews, but to shew that they were the enemies of the prophets, because they were opposed to every good and sound counsel, and were incapable of receiving instruction. The mistake of other expounders is hereby made evident: for in the last clause they touch neither heaven nor earth. It follows —

Jeremiah 2:35

35. Yet thou sayest, Because I am innocent, surely his anger shall turn from me. Behold, I will plead with thee, because thou sayest, I have not sinned. 35. Et dixisti (hoc est, dixisti tamen; nam copula hic accipitur pro tamen,) certe (nam כי causalis particula hic audaciam notat, vel illam jactantiam plenam impudentiae, ut auderent asserere Iudaei se esse innoxios, certe) ego sum munda (ego sum innocens;) tantum recedat furor ejus a me: Ecce ego judico to (vel, contendam tecum in judicio,) quia dixisti, non peccavi.

The Prophet here shews that the Jews were possessed of such a brazen front, that they could not be led by any admonitions to feel any shame. Though then they were like adulterous women, and though they gave meretricious hire to such as they ran to in all parts, and though also they had murdered the prophets and the pious ministers of God, yet they boasted, as persons conscious of no evil, that they were innocent. Thou hast yet said; that is, “How darest thou to pretend to be innocent, since thou art proved to be guilty, not by allegations, but by manifest and glaring proofs?” In short, the Prophet shews that the condition of the people was past remedy, for they would not receive any admonition; nay, they dared, as it were with the front of brass, obstinately to boast that they were innocent: Thou hast said, (he still speaks of a woman, in the feminine gender,) Thou hast yet said, surely I am clean Thus hypocrites not only excuse themselves, and allege vain pretences, but dare to come forth publicly, and to fly as it were above the clouds, elated by their own self — confidence. “Who will dare to allege anything against me?” Thus hypocrites willfully and impertinently challenge all the servants of God and seek by their own presumption to close the mouth of all. The Prophet now condemns this petulancy in the Jews; for though they were manifestly proved guilty, yet they boastingly asserted that they were innocent. Only (אך, ak, I take here to mean only) depart, etc. The Prophet upbraids the Jews with another crime, — that they said, that wrong was done to them by God in seeking to bring them to a right mind by punishment and by reproofs. For God, as it is well known, had inflicted many punishments on the Jews, and had also added serious reproofs. He tried by these means to find out whether they were capable of being healed. What did they say? “I am innocent; and God is angry with me without a cause. Let him remove his anger from me;” that is, “only let not God deal severely with us, nor use his supreme authority, and we shall be able to prove our innocency.” Thus ungodly men, when urged with severe warnings, vomit forth their blasphemies against God, — “O what can I do? I know that I am not able to resist; God fights with a shadow when he afflicts me; his violence I must indeed bear though he may overwhelm me; yet he doeth me wrong: but were he to deal justly and fairly with me, I could prove that I do not deserve these evils.” Such then was the language of the Jews, — only depart let his fury from me, we could then shew that we are just, or at least excusable. Now also in this part we perceive the design of the Prophet: it was to shew, that the Jews not only dared dishonestly and proudly to claim innocency for themselves, but hesitated not to contend with God, and to intimate that he with too much severity oppressed them, and did not treat them justly, but announced a cruel sentence for the purpose of overwhelming them. Behold, he says, I will judge thee, because thou hast said, I have not sinned Some give this version, “I judge, or, condemn thee.” But there is here no doubt a contrast between the fury of God and his judgment. The people said, that God was too rigorous; this was his fury: God now mentions his judgment. “There is no reason,” he says, “for you to allege such a pretext as this, as it will vanish into nothing; for I will in judgment contend with you;” that is, “I will really prove that I am a just judge and not a tyrant, that I execute just punishments and according to the law, and that I am not like a man in anger, who takes vengeance on his enemies and does so precipitantly and rashly: I will shew,” he says, “that I am a just judge.” We may hence gather a profitable instruction. Let it in the first place be observed, that nothing is so displeasing to God as this headstrong presumption, that is, when we seek to appear innocent, while our own conscience condemns us. Then in the second place observe, that all who thus perversely rebel and strive dishonestly and shamelessly to defend their own vices, contend at the same time with God: for false excuses have ever this tendency — to charge God with unjust severity. But we see what such men gain for themselves; for God shews that he will be at length their judge, and that he will openly discover the vices of those who thought that they could excuse themselves by evasions and by false charges against himself. They then who thus obstinately resist God, must at length, according to what the Prophet declares, come to this end, — that they will be constrained to acknowledge that God has not been too violently angry with them, but has only executed a just punishment. (The literal rendering of this verse is as follows: — 35. And thou hast said, “Verily I have been innocent; Surely turned away has he his anger from me:“ Behold I will contend in judgment with thee, On account of thy saying, “I have not sinned.” The Septuagint have rendered the second line, “Let his anger be turned away from me;” the Vulgate and the Arabic are the same. The Syriac is, “therefore he turns away his anger from me.” “Turned away is his anger,“ is the Targum, Piscator, Jun. and Trem. Blayney renders it, — Surely his wrath shall turn from me. There is no reason for construing the verb in the future tense, or in the imperative mood. It is in the past tense, and there is no other reading. The claim of innocency is made on the supposition that God had turned away his displeasure. Hence the declaration that follows — that God would contest the matter — would bring it as it were into trial, as the verb here when in Niphal means. — Ed.) PRAYER Grant, Almighty God, that since we are loaded with so many vices, and provoke thee so often, yea, daily and in ways innumerable, — O grant, that we may not at last become hardened against thy godly admonitions, but be teachable and submissive and in time repent, lest our wantonness and hardness should constrain thee to put forth thy powerful hand against us; but as we have hitherto experienced thy patental kindness, so may we in future be made partakers of it, and thus become more and more accustomed to bear thy yoke, until having at length completed our warfare, we shall come to that blessed rest, which has been provided for us in heaven, through Christ our Lord. — Amen. Lecture Tenth

Jeremiah 2:36

36. Why gaddest thou about so much to change thy way? thou also shalt be ashamed of Egypt, as thou wast ashamed of Assyria. 36. Quid discurris tantopere ad mutandum vias tuas? Etiam ab Egypto pudefies, sicuti pudefacta es ab Assur.

The Prophet goes on with the same subject. He had said before that the people were like an unfaithful wife, who having left her husband rambles here and there to gratify her lusts. For this view he now gives the reason; for he might have appeared to treat the people too severely, had not the fact been pointed out as it were by the finger; and this he does now. He says, that they ran here and there, not in a common manner, but in a way to render evident their shameful levity, such as is seen in strumpets, who without any shame seek either adulterers or fornicators. But I have already briefly shewn what the Prophet means: When any danger was nigh, the Jews sought aid, now in Egypt, then in Assyria. Yet they knew that this was forbidden them; not that it was in itself an evil or a bad thing to seek help from neighbors; but because it was God’s will that the safety and security of that people should be dependent on him only; for he had taken them under his safeguard. As then the Jews were God’s dependents, they ought to have acquiesced in his protection. When they wandered here and there, it was an evidence of unbelief; and what they attributed to the Egyptians or to Assyrians, they took away from their own God, who had promised that their safety would be the object of his care. Hence he compares these movements to wanton levity; they were like those of strumpets, who ramble in all directions. Now a strumpet must be wholly shameless, when she thus seeks the gratification of her lust: for harlots often wait for the coming of lovers; but when they ramble everywhere, they are altogether abominable. This then is what the Prophet now means, that is, that the Jews ran here and there; and thus it was, that they changed their ways There remains indeed often in harlots some natural love; but it is a proof of a brutish, shameless, and monstrous lust, when a woman seeks the company of any one she may see, or when a man lusts after any woman he may meet with. When there is such a shamelessness as this, it appears that no modesty remains, nor even what is natural; for as I have already said, it ought to be deemed monstrous, when a woman is inflamed with lust at the sight of any one. And yet this lewdness is what the Prophet reprobates in the Jews when he says, that they ran here and there to change their ways: so that their love never continued, but they lusted after any they met with; nay, they went here and there to allure them. This subject is spoken of oftener and more at large by Ezekiel; and we shall find this comparison used also in other parts of this book. But it is enough for me to mention briefly the design of the Prophet. (The idea of gadding, or of running here and there, is not countenanced by any of the early versions. The notion of vileness or degradation is what the versions convey. The Vulgate is, — Quinn vilis factus es nimis, iterans vias tuas!
How extremely worthless art thou become, iterating thy ways! The other versions are nearly of the same general import. Blayney’s version is, — Why wilt thou make thyself exceedingly vile, In repeating over again thy ways? Modern critics have considered the verb to be אזל, and not זל. It no doubt may be either. As shame is threatened at the end of the verse, the latter verb is the most suitable, — Why shouldest thou become wholly degraded By repeating thy course?
Even by Egypt shalt thou be put to shame, As thou hast been put to shame by Assyria. “Course,” or way, means here a proceeding, and to repeat it is to pursue a course similar to what had been previously adopted. — Ed.) He then adds, Ashamed shalt thou also be of the Egyptians, as ashamed thou hast been of the Assyrians Before the time of Hezekiah, the Jews had made a treaty with the Assyrians against the Syrians and the Israelites, as it is well known; and then against the Egyptians; for soon after a war arose between them and the Egyptians, who had been their confederates, and changing their policy, they went for help to Assyria. They afterwards reconciled themselves to their ancient enemies; but this second treaty also turned out unhappily. Hence the Prophet says, that the end would be the same with what they had before experienced. God had indeed chastised their ungodly defection when they went to Assyria. He now says, that no better success would attend the help of the Egyptians than what attended the help of the Assyrians. The Jews, we know, were ever subjected to plunder, and suffered more loss from their associates than from their open enemies. It was the just reward of their impiety and defection. God then declares that he would be the avenger of this second defection, as he had been of the former. It follows —

Jeremiah 2:37

37. Yea, thou shalt go forth from him, and thine hands upon thine head: for the LORD hath rejected thy confidences, and thou shalt not prosper in them. 37. Et jam ab hoc (ab hac re, hoc est, propter hoc scelus) egredieris, et manus tuae super caput tuum, quia detestatur Jehova confidentias tuas, et in illis non prospere tibi succedet.

He expresses more clearly what he had said of the shameful character of his own nation, — that the Jews, who thought that their safety would be secured by the Egyptians, were seeking their own entire ruin. This seemed to them indeed incredible; for as the Egyptians were neighbors, and as the Jews then only feared the Assyrians and Chaldeans, who were afar off, they thought that they had the best prospect: “What! our enemies are distant from us twenty or thirty days’ journey; and those who are prepared to help us will be soon with us at the shortest warning.” Hence the Jews thought, as we have said, that they were quite safe. But the Prophet here declares, that they were greatly mistaken; for on account of this wickedness, that is, because they trusted in their unlawful and accursed treaty, and promised themselves peace from their enemies, or thought that they could easily overcome them; on this account, he says, thou shalt go forth: but nothing could have been less credible to the Jews than what the Prophet said; for as the Egyptians opposed themselves as a wall against the Chaldeans, and were deemed unassailable, who could have otherwise thought but that the Jews would be preserved quiet in their own country? But he says, Go forth shalt thou, and thine hands on thy head (There are three other expositions of the words rendered by Calvin, “on this account.” One is that of our version, “from him;” the second is, “from hence,” i e , from Egypt, adopted by Piscator, Grotius, and Blayney; and the third is, “from here,” i e , from this place, their own land; which, as Gataker says, is probably “the genuine sense:” it is a threatening, that they were to be led into captivity. The rendering of the Septuagint is, “ἐντεῦθεν — from hence,” or from this place; of the Vulgate, “ab ista — from that,” meaning, evidently Egypt; of the Syriac and Targum, “ex hoc — from this;” and of Arabic, “illinc — from thence.” The particle זה is “this,” and not “that.” — Ed) By this gesture he means extreme despair; for women did either strike or extend their arms when any great calamity happened, as we see it done often in the present day; for when a woman, not able to keep within due bounds, either loses a husband, or expects some very great calamity, she beats her breast, or raises up her hands, according to what is said here. Jeremiah then mentions this gesture as an evidence of extreme despair; as though he had said, “The treaty which fills the Jews with so much confidence shall be so far from being advantageous to them, that it will, on the contrary, bring on them utter ruin and disgrace. (“The gesture” mentioned here, a striking example of, we find in 2 Samuel 13:19. Many consider the ו here as having the meaning of “with,” and render the line as Blayney does, — With thy hands upon thy head. But more consistent with the genius of the language is to regard the auxiliary verb to be understood, — And thy hands shall be on thy head. There is a similar phrase in Isaiah 35:10, which ought to be rendered thus, — And everlasting joy shall be upon their heads. — Ed.) But the reason which follows ought especially to be observed, because abhor does Jehovah thy confidences The Prophet here shews why he had spoken so severely. It might have appeared that he spoke hyperbolically when he said, that the people were like an abandoned harlot, who rambled here and there in all directions: but the reason here given ought to have been sufficient to take away all evasions, and that is, that they foolishly trusted in those fallacious helps which they knew were condemned by God. Had this been permitted by God, they would not have been so severely reprimanded; but as God had forbidden them to flee to the Egyptians, it was in the first place a disallowed confidence; and in the second place, they thus despised the aid of God, and cast aside, as it were, all his promises: for as their hearts were fixed on the Egyptians, and as they thought that their safety would be secured by them; so their prayer to God became not only cold, but almost wholly extinguished. We hence see that the Prophet did not exceed due limits when he spoke against the Jews with so much displeasure, and condemned them in such reproachful terms; for they had transferred the glory due to God to the Egyptians, when they considered them to be the authors of their safety; and they had thus despised the promises of God, so that there was no attention given to prayer: Abhor, then, does Jehovah thy confidences (The verb for “abhor” is מאם, which means to reject, that is, with disdain and contempt; and the same when followed by ב, though often rendered “despise” in our version. It is rendered “reject, “without the ב, in 1 Samuel 15:23; Jeremiah 7:29; and “despise” being followed by ב in Judges 9:38; Jeremiah 4:30. The early versions and the Targum mostly differ, and none of them give the specific meaning of the verb, except that the Septuagint give its meaning when not followed by ב, “ἀπώσατο — has rejected.” The whole verse may be thus rendered, — 37. Also from this place shalt thou go forth, And thy hands shall be on thy head: For rejected has Jehovah those in whom thou trustest, And thou shalt not prosper by them. It is not correct to render מבטחיך, “thy confidences;” for the word means “thy confided ones,“ it being a Huphal participle. The Syriac renders it, “those who afford thee confidence — fiduciam tibi praebentibus.” Blayney’s version is, “the objects of thy trust;” and he translates the verb, “reprobated.” That this is its meaning when followed by ב is evident from Jeremiah 6:30. — Ed) He then adds, Thou shalt not prosper in them. It ought to be carefully observed, that whatever we resolve to do that is not approved by God, cannot possibly succeed; for God will subvert all our hopes. Let us then know that here is set before us the punishment of all unbelievers, who, being not content with God’s protection, wander after vain and false objects of trust, and prefer to have men propitious to them rather than God himself. Now follows — CHAPTER 3

Jeremiah 3:1

1. They say, If a man put away his wife, and she go from him, and become another man’s, shall he return unto her again? shall not that land be greatly polluted? but thou hast played the harlot with many lovers; yet return again to me, saith the LORD. l. Dicendo, si dimiserit vir uxorem suam, et profecta ab eo, fuepit viri alterius, (id est, transierit ad alium virum) an revertetur ad eam adhuc? Annon pollutione polluta est terra in hoc? et tu scortata es cum sociis multis; revertere tamen ad me, dicit Jehova.