Footnotes

1. Jeremiah 21:1 tn Heb “The word which came to Jeremiah from the Lord.”
2. Jeremiah 21:1 sn Zedekiah was the last king of Judah. He ruled from 597 b.c., when he was placed on the throne by Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kgs 24:17), until the fall of Jerusalem in 587/6 b.c. He acquiesced to some of his anti-Babylonian counselors, rebelled against Nebuchadnezzar, and sought help from the Egyptians (Ezek 17:12-15). This brought Nebuchadnezzar against the city in 588 b.c. This is the first of two delegations to Jeremiah. The later one was sent after Nebuchadnezzar withdrew to take care of the Egyptian threat (cf. Jer 37:1-9).
3. Jeremiah 21:1 sn The Pashhur son of Malkijah referred to here is not the same as the Pashhur referred to in 20:1-6, who was the son of Immer. This Pashhur is referred to later in 38:1. The Zephaniah referred to here was the chief of security referred to later in Jer 29:25-26. He appears to have been favorably disposed toward Jeremiah.
4. Jeremiah 21:1 tn Heb “sent to him…Maaseiah, saying,….”
5. Jeremiah 21:2 tn The verb used here is often used of seeking information through a prophet (e.g., 2 Kgs 1:16; 8:8), and hence many translate, “inquire of the Lord for us.” However, it is obvious from the following that they were not seeking information but help. The word is also used for that in Pss 34:4 (34:5 HT); 77:2 (77:3 HT).
6. Jeremiah 21:2 tn The dominant spelling of this name is actually Nebuchadrezzar, which is closer to his Babylonian name Nabû kuddurī uṣur. An alternate spelling, which is found 6 times in the book of Jeremiah and 17 times elsewhere, is Nebuchadnezzar, which is the form of the name that is usually used in English versions.sn Nebuchadnezzar was the second and greatest king of Babylon in the Neo-Babylonian Empire (626-539 b.c.). He is known in the Bible both for his two conquests of Jerusalem in 597 b.c. (2 Kgs 24:10-17) and 587 b.c. (2 Kgs 25:1-7), and for his having built Babylon the Great (Dan 4:28-30).
7. Jeremiah 21:2 tn Heb “Perhaps the Lord will do according to his miracles that he may go up from against us.”sn The miracles that they may have had in mind would have included the Exodus, the conquest of Jericho, the deliverance of Jehoshaphat (2 Chr 20:1-30), etc., but predominant in their minds was probably the deliverance of Jerusalem from Sennacherib in the times of Hezekiah (Isa 37:33-38).
8. Jeremiah 21:4 tn Heb “Tell Zedekiah, ‘Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel.’” Using the indirect quote eliminates one level of embedded quotation and makes it easier for the reader to follow.
9. Jeremiah 21:4 tn Heb “the weapons that are in your hand.” Weapons stands here by substitution for the soldiers who wield them.
10. Jeremiah 21:4 sn The Babylonians (Heb “the Chaldeans”). The Chaldeans were a group of people in the country south of Babylon from which Nebuchadnezzar came. The Chaldean dynasty his father established became the name by which the Babylonians are regularly referred to in the book of Jeremiah. Jeremiah’s contemporary Ezekiel uses both terms.
11. Jeremiah 21:4 tn The structure of the Hebrew sentence of this verse is long and complex and has led to a great deal of confusion and misunderstanding. There are two primary points of confusion: 1) the relation of the phrase “outside the walls,” and 2) the antecedent of “them” in the last clause of the verse, which reads in Hebrew, “I will gather them back into the midst of the city.” Most take the phrase “outside the walls” with “the Babylonians….” Some take it with “turn back/bring back” to mean “from outside….” However, the preposition “from” is part of the idiom for “outside….” The phrase goes with “fighting,” as J. Bright (Jeremiah [AB], 215) notes and as NJPS suggests. The antecedent of “them” has sometimes been taken mistakenly to refer to the Babylonians. It refers rather to “the forces at your disposal,” which is literally, “the weapons which are in your hands.” This latter phrase is a figure involving substitution (called metonymy), as Bright also correctly notes. The whole sentence reads in Hebrew, “I will bring back the weapons of war that are in your hand, with which you are fighting Nebuchadrezzar, the King of Babylon, and the Chaldeans who are besieging you outside your wall, and I will gather them into the midst of the city.” The sentence has been restructured to better reflect the proper relationships and to make the sentence conform more to contemporary English style.
12. Jeremiah 21:5 tn Heb “with outstretched hand and with strong arm.” These are, of course, figurative of God’s power and might. He does not literally have hands and arms.sn The phrases in this order are unique, but a very similar phrase, “by strong hand and outstretched arm,” is found several times with reference to God’s mighty power unleashed against Egypt at the exodus (cf., Deut 4:34; 5:15; 26:8; Jer 32:21; Ps 136:12). Instead of being directed at Israel’s enemies, it will now be directed against her.
13. Jeremiah 21:7 tn Heb “And afterward.”
14. Jeremiah 21:7 tn Heb “oracle of the Lord.”
15. Jeremiah 21:8 tn Heb “And/But unto this people you shall say…” “But” is suggested here by the unusual word order, which offsets what they are to say to Zedekiah (v. 3).
16. Jeremiah 21:8 tn Heb “these people.”
17. Jeremiah 21:8 tn Heb “Behold, I am setting before you the way of life and the way of death.”
18. Jeremiah 21:9 tn Heb “his life will be to him for spoil.”sn Spoil was what was carried off by the victor (see, e.g., Judg 5:30). Those who surrendered to the Babylonians would lose their property, their freedom, and their citizenship but would at least escape with their lives. Jeremiah was branded a traitor for this counsel (cf. 38:4), but it was the way of wisdom since the Lord was firmly determined to destroy the city (cf. v. 10).
19. Jeremiah 21:10 tn Heb “oracle of the Lord.”
20. Jeremiah 21:10 tn Heb “I have set my face against this city for evil [i.e., disaster] and not for good [i.e., well-being].” For the use of the idiom “set one’s face against/toward” see, e.g., 1 Kgs 2:15; 2 Kgs 2:17; Jer 42:15, 17, and note the interesting interplay of usage in Jer 44:11-12.
21. Jeremiah 21:10 tn Heb “he will burn it with fire.”
22. Jeremiah 21:11 tn The words “The Lord told me to say” are not in the text. They have been supplied in the translation for clarity. This text has been treated in two very different ways depending upon how one views the connection of the words “and to/concerning the household of the King of Judah, ‘Hear the word of the Lord:…’” with the preceding and following. Some treat the words that follow as a continuation of Jeremiah’s response to the delegation sent by Zedekiah (cf. vv. 3, 8). Others treat this as introducing a new set of oracles parallel to those in 23:9-40, which are introduced by the heading “to/concerning the prophets.” There are three reasons why the latter is the more probable connection: (1) there is parallelism in expression with 23:9; (2) the other introductions in vv. 3, 8 use the preposition אֶל (ʾel) instead of ל (lamed) used here, and they have the formal introduction “you shall say…”; (3) the warning or challenge here would mitigate the judgment pronounced on the king and the city in vv. 4-7. Verses 8-9 are different. They are not a mitigation but an offer of escape for those who surrender. Hence, these words are a title “Now concerning the royal court.” (The vav [ו] that introduces this is disjunctive = “Now.”) However, since the imperative that follows is masculine plural and addressed to the royal house, something needs to be added to introduce it. Hence the translation supplies “The Lord told me to say” to avoid confusion or mistakenly connecting it with the preceding.
23. Jeremiah 21:11 tn Heb “house” or “household.” It is clear from 22:1-6 that this involved the king, the royal family, and the court officials.
24. Jeremiah 21:12 tn Heb “house of David.” This is essentially equivalent to the royal court in v. 11.
25. Jeremiah 21:12 tn Heb “to the morning” = “morning by morning” or “each morning.” See Isa 33:2 and Amos 4:4 for parallel usage.
26. Jeremiah 21:12 sn The kings of Israel and Judah were responsible for justice. See Pss 122:5. The king himself was the final court of appeals judging from the incident of David with the wise woman of Tekoa (2 Sam 14), Solomon’s adjudication of two prostitutes (1 Kgs 3:16-28), and Absalom’s attempts to win the hearts of the people of Israel by interfering with due process (2 Sam 15:2-4). How the system was designed to operate may be seen from 2 Chr 19:4-11.
27. Jeremiah 21:12 tn Heb “from the hand [or power] of.”
28. Jeremiah 21:12 tn Heb “Lest my wrath go out like fire and burn with no one to put it out because of the evil of your deeds.”
29. Jeremiah 21:13 tn Or “Listen, Jerusalem, you…”; Heb text of v. 21a-b reads, “Behold I am against you [fem. sg.], O inhabitant [fem. sg.] of the valley [and of] the rock of the plain, oracle of the Lord, who are saying [masc. pl.].” Verses 13-14 are generally treated as a separate oracle addressed to Jerusalem. The basis for this is (1) the appropriateness of the description here to the city of Jerusalem; (2) the rather similar reference to Jerusalem smugly living in her buildings made from cedars of Lebanon in 22:23; (3) the use of the second feminine singular pronoun “you” in other places in reference to Jerusalem (cf. clearly in 4:14; 6:8; 13:20; 15:5-6); and (4) the use of the feminine singular participle to refer to personified Jerusalem in 10:17 as well as 20:23. However, the description in 21:13 is equally appropriate to the royal household that the Lord has been addressing; the palace stood on the Ophel, or fill between the northern and southern hill just south of the temple, and overlooked the Kidron valley. Moreover, the word “enthroned” is even more fitting to the royal household than to Jerusalem. The phrase “enthroned above the valley” is literally “inhabitant of the valley.” But since the literal is inappropriate for either Jerusalem or the royal palace, the phrase is regularly interpreted after the parallel phrase referring to the Lord “enthroned above the cherubim.” The royal house was “enthroned” more literally than Jerusalem was. Taking this to refer to the royal court rather than Jerusalem also introduces one less unintroduced entity by the shift in pronoun in vv. 11-14, as well as eliminating the introduction of an otherwise unintroduced oracle. The “you” of “you boast” is actually the masculine plural participle (Heb “who say”) that modifies the feminine singular participle “you who sit enthroned” and goes back to the masculine plural imperatives in v. 12 rather than introducing a new entity, the people of the city. The participle “you who sit enthroned” is to be interpreted as a collective referring to the royal court, not a personification of the city of Jerusalem (cf. GKC 394 §122.s and see, e.g., Isa 12:6; Mic 1:11). Moreover, taking the referent to be the royal court makes the reference to the word translated “palace” much more natural. The word is literally “forest” and is often seen to be an allusion to the armory that was called the “Forest of Lebanon” (1 Kgs 7:2; 10:17; 10:21; Isa 22:8, and see also Ezek 17:3 in an allegory [17:2-18] that may have been contemporary with this oracle). Taking the oracle to refer to the royal court also makes this oracle more parallel with the one that follows, where destruction of the palace leads also to the destruction of the city.
30. Jeremiah 21:13 tn Heb “I am against you.”
31. Jeremiah 21:13 tn Heb “oracle of the Lord.”
32. Jeremiah 21:13 tn Heb “Who can swoop…Who can penetrate…?” The questions are rhetorical and expect a negative answer. They are rendered as negative affirmations for clarity.sn What is being expressed here is the belief in the inviolability of Zion/Jerusalem carried to its extreme. Signal deliverances of Jerusalem, such as those experienced under Jehoshaphat (2 Chr 20) and Hezekiah (Isa 37:36-37), in the context of promises to protect it (Isa 31:4-5; 37:33-35; 38:6) led to a belief that Zion was unconquerable. This belief found expression in several of Israel’s psalms (Pss 46, 48, 76) and led to the mistaken assumption that God would protect it regardless of how the people treated God or one another. Micah and Jeremiah both deny that (cf. Mic 3:8-12; Jer 21:13-14).
33. Jeremiah 21:14 tn Heb “oracle of the Lord.”
34. Jeremiah 21:14 tn Heb “I will set fire in its forest, and it will devour its surroundings.” The pronouns are actually third feminine singular, going back to the participle “you who sit enthroned above the valley.” However, this is another example of those rapid shifts in pronouns typical of the biblical Hebrew style but uncommon in English. They have regularly been leveled to the same person throughout in the translation to avoid possible confusion for the English reader.
35. Jeremiah 22:1 tn The word “me” is not in the text. It is, however, implicit and is supplied in the translation for clarity.
36. Jeremiah 22:1 sn The allusion here is to going down from the temple to the palace, which was on a lower eminence. See 36:12 in its context.
37. Jeremiah 22:1 tn Heb “And speak there this word:” The translation is intended to eliminate an awkward and lengthy sentence.
38. Jeremiah 22:2 tn Heb “who sits on David’s throne.”
39. Jeremiah 22:2 tn Heb “Hear the word of the Lord, O king of Judah who sits on the throne of David, you, and your officials, and your people who pass through these gates.”
40. Jeremiah 22:3 tn Heb “from the hand [or power] of.”
41. Jeremiah 22:3 tn Heb “aliens, orphans, or widows,” treating the terms as generic or collective. However, the term “alien” carries faulty connotations, and the term “orphan” is not totally appropriate because the Hebrew term does not necessarily mean that both parents have died.sn These were classes of people who had no one to look out for their rights. The laws of Israel, however, were careful to see that their rights were guarded (cf. Deut 10:18) and that provision was made for meeting their needs (cf. Deut 24:19-21). The Lord promised to protect them (cf. Ps 146:9), and a curse was called down on any who deprived them of justice (cf. Deut 27:19).
42. Jeremiah 22:3 tn Heb “Do not shed innocent blood.”sn Do not kill innocent people. For an example of one of the last kings who did this, see Jer 36:20-23. Manasseh was notorious for having done this, and the book of 2 Kgs attributes the ultimate destruction of Judah to this crime and his sin of worshiping false gods (2 Kgs 21:16; 24:4).
43. Jeremiah 22:4 tn The translation here reflects the emphasizing infinitive absolute before the verb.
44. Jeremiah 22:4 tn Heb “There will come through the gates of this city the kings…riding in chariots and on horses, they and their officials…” The structure of the original text is broken up here because of the long compound subject, which would make the English sentence too long. Cf. 17:25 for the structure and wording of this sentence.
45. Jeremiah 22:5 sn Heb “I swear by myself.” Oaths were guaranteed by invoking the name of a god or swearing by “his life.” See Jer 12:16 and 44:26. Since the Lord is incomparably great, he could swear by none higher (see Heb 6:13-16) than to swear by himself or his own great name.
46. Jeremiah 22:5 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
47. Jeremiah 22:6 tn Heb “Gilead you are to me, the height of Lebanon, but I will surely make you a wilderness, [with] cities uninhabited.” The points of comparison are made explicit in the translation for the sake of clarity. See the study note for further explanation. For the use of the preposition ל (lamed) = “in my eyes/in my opinion,” see BDB 513 s.v. ל 5.a(d) and compare Jonah 3:3 and Esth 10:3. For the use of the particles אִם לֹא (ʾim loʾ) to introduce an emphatic oath, see BDB 50 s.v. אִם 1.b(2).sn Lebanon was well known for its cedars, and the palace (and the temple) had used a good deal of such timber in its construction (see 1 Kgs 5:6, 8-10; 7:2-3). In this section several references are made to cedar (see vv. 7, 14, 15, 23), and allusion has also been made to the paneled and colonnade armory of the Forest of Lebanon (2:14). It appears to have been a source of pride and luxury, perhaps at the expense of justice. Gilead was also noted in antiquity for its forests as well as for its fertile pastures.
48. Jeremiah 22:7 sn Heb “I will sanctify destroyers against it.” If this is not an attenuated use of the term “sanctify,” the traditions of Israel’s holy wars are being turned against her. See also 6:4. In Israel’s early wars in the wilderness and in the conquest, the Lord fought for her against the enemies (cf., e.g., Josh 10:11, 14, 42; 24:7; Judg 5:20; 1 Sam 7:10). Now he is going to fight against them (21:5, 13) and use the enemy as his instruments of destruction. For a similar picture of destruction in the temple see the lament in Ps 74:3-7.
49. Jeremiah 22:10 tn The word “king” is not in the original text of either the first or the third line. It is implicit in the connection and is supplied in the translation for clarity.sn As the next verse makes clear, the king who will never return to see his native land is Shallum, also known as Jehoahaz (cf. 1 Chr 3:15; 2 Kgs 23:30, 33-34). He was made king by popular acclaim after the death of his father, Josiah, who was killed at Megiddo trying to stop Pharaoh Necho from going to the aid of the Assyrians. According to 2 Kgs 23:32 Jehoahaz was a wicked king. He was deposed by Necho and carried into exile, where he died. The dead king alluded to is his father, Josiah, who was a godly king and was accordingly spared from seeing the destruction of his land (2 Kgs 22:20).
50. Jeremiah 22:11 tn Heb “For thus said the Lord concerning Shallum son of Josiah, king of Judah, who reigned instead of his father, who went away from this place: He will not return there again.”
51. Jeremiah 22:12 sn This prophecy was fulfilled according to 2 Kgs 23:34.
52. Jeremiah 22:13 sn Heb “Woe.” This particle is used in laments for the dead (1 Kgs 13:30; Jer 34:5) and as an introductory particle in indictments against people (Isa 5:8, 11; Jer 23:1) or entities (Isa 18:1; Nah 3:1) on whom judgment is pronounced. The indictment is found here in vv. 13-17 and the announcement of judgment in vv. 18-19.
53. Jeremiah 22:13 tn Heb “Woe to the one who builds his house by unrighteousness and its upper rooms with injustice, using his neighbor [= countryman] as a slave for nothing and not giving to him his wages.” sn This was a clear violation of covenant law (cf. Deut 24:14-15) and a violation of the requirements set forth in Jer 22:3. The allusion is to Jehoiakim, who is not mentioned until v. 18. He was placed on the throne by Pharaoh Necho and ruled from 609-598 b.c. He became a vassal of Nebuchadnezzar but rebelled against him, bringing about the siege of 597 b.c., in which his son and many of the Judean leaders were carried off to Babylon (2 Kgs 23:34-24:16). He was a wicked king according to the author of the book of Kings (2 Kgs 23:37). He had Uriah the prophet killed (Jer 26:23) and showed no regard for Jeremiah’s prophecies, destroying the scroll containing them (Jer 36:23) and ordering Jeremiah’s arrest (Jer 36:23).
54. Jeremiah 22:14 tc The MT should be emended to read חַלֹּנָיו וְסָפוֹן (khallonayv v^esafon) instead of חַלֹּנָי וְסָפוּן (khallonay v^esafun), i.e., the plural noun with third singular suffix rather than the first singular suffix, and the infinitive absolute rather than the passive participle. The latter form then parallels the form for “paints” and functions in the same way (cf. GKC 345 §113.z for the infinitive with vav [ו] continuing a perfect). The errors in the MT involve reading the ו once instead of twice (haplography) and reading the וּ (u) for the וֹ (o).
55. Jeremiah 22:14 tn The word translated “red” only occurs here and in Ezek 23:14, where it refers to the pictures of the Babylonians on the wall of the temple. Evidently this was a favorite color for decoration. It is usually identified as vermilion, a mineral product from red ocher (cf. C. L. Wickwire, “Vermilion,” IDB 4:748).
56. Jeremiah 22:15 tn For the use of this verb see Jer 12:5, where it is used of Jeremiah “competing” with horses. The form is a rare Tiphel (see GKC 153 §55.h).
57. Jeremiah 22:15 tn Heb “Your father, did he not eat and drink and do justice and right?” The copulative vav in front of the verbs here (all Hebrew perfects) shows that these actions are all coordinate, not sequential. The contrast drawn between the actions of Jehoiakim and Josiah show that the phrase about eating and drinking should be read in light of the same contrasts in Eccl 2, which ends with the note of contentment in Eccl 2:24 (see also Eccl 3:13; 5:18 [5:17 HT]; 8:15). The question is, of course, rhetorical, setting forth the positive role model against which Jehoiakim’s actions are to be condemned. The key phrase is, “then things went well with him,” which is repeated in the next verse after the reiteration of Josiah’s practice of justice.
58. Jeremiah 22:15 sn The father referred to here is the godly king Josiah. He followed the requirements for kings set forth in 22:3 in contrast to his son, who did not (22:13).
59. Jeremiah 22:16 tn The words “for Judah” are not in the text, but the absence of the preposition plus object as in the preceding verse suggests that this is a more general statement, i.e., “things went well for everyone.”
60. Jeremiah 22:16 tn Heb “Is that not what it means to know me?” The question is rhetorical and expects a positive answer. It is translated in the light of the context.sn Comparison of the usage of the words “know me” in their context in Jer 2:8; 9:3, 6, 24; and here shows that more than mere intellectual knowledge is involved. Also implied is personal commitment to God and obedience to the demands of the agreements with him. The word “know” is used in ancient Near-Eastern treaty contexts of submission to the will of the overlord. See further the notes on 9:3.
61. Jeremiah 22:17 tn Heb “Your eyes and your heart do not exist except for dishonest gain and for innocent blood to shed [it] and for fraud and for oppression to do [them].” The sentence has been broken up to conform more to English style, and the significance of “eyes” and “heart” is explained before they are introduced into the translation.
62. Jeremiah 22:18 sn This is the regular way of introducing the announcement of judgment after an indictment of crimes. See, e.g., Isa 5:13, 14 and Jer 23:2.
63. Jeremiah 22:18 tn The translation follows the majority of scholars, who think that the address of brother and sister are the address of the mourners to one another, lamenting their loss. Some scholars feel that all four terms are parallel and represent the relation that the king had metaphorically to his subjects; i.e., he was not only Lord and Majesty to them but like a sister or a brother. In that case it would be something like, “How sad it is for the one who was like a brother to us! How sad it is for the one who was like a sister to us.” This makes for poor poetry and is not very likely. The lover can call his bride sister in Song 4:9, 10, but there are no documented examples of a subject ever speaking of a king in this way in Israel or the ancient Near East.
64. Jeremiah 22:19 sn A similar judgment against this ungodly king is pronounced by Jeremiah in 36:30. According to 2 Chr 36:6 he was bound over to be taken captive to Babylon but apparently died before he got there. According to the Jewish historian Josephus, Nebuchadnezzar ordered his body thrown outside the wall in fulfillment of this judgment. The Bible itself, however, does not tell us that.
65. Jeremiah 22:20 tn The words “people of Jerusalem” are not in the text. They are supplied in the translation to clarify the referent of the imperative. The imperative is feminine singular and it is generally agreed that personified Zion/Jerusalem is in view. The second feminine singular has commonly been applied to Jerusalem or the people of Judah throughout the book. The reference to allies (v. 20, 22) and to leaders (v. 22) make it very probable that this is the case here too.
66. Jeremiah 22:20 tn Heb “from Abarim.” This was the mountain range in Moab from which Moses viewed the promised land (cf. Deut 32:49).
67. Jeremiah 22:20 tn Heb “your lovers.” For the use of this term to refer to allies, see 30:14 and a semantically similar term in 4:30.sn If the passages in this section are chronologically ordered, this refers to the help that Jehoiakim relied on when he rebelled against Nebuchadnezzar.
68. Jeremiah 22:21 tn Heb “I spoke to you in your security.” The reference is to the sending of the prophets. Compare this context with the context of 7:25. For the nuance “security” for this noun (שַׁלְוָה, shalvah), rather than “prosperity” as many translate, see Pss 122:7; 30:6; and the related adjective (שָׁלֵו, shalev) in Jer 49:31; Job 16:2; and 21:23.
69. Jeremiah 22:21 tn Heb “from your youth.” Compare the usage in 2:2 and 3:24, and see a similar idea in 7:25.
70. Jeremiah 22:22 tn Heb “A wind will shepherd away all your shepherds.” The figures have all been interpreted in the translation for the sake of clarity. For the use of the word “wind” as a metaphor or simile for God’s judgment (using the enemy forces), see 4:11-12; 13:24; 18:17. For the use of the word “shepherd” to refer to rulers/leaders, see 2:8; 10:21; 23:1-4. For the use of the word “shepherd away” in the sense of carry off/drive away, see BDB 945 s.v. רָעָה 2.d and compare Job 20:26. There is an obvious wordplay involved in two different senses of the word “shepherd,” one referring to their leaders and one referring to the loss of those leaders by the wind driving them off. There may even be a further play involving the word “wickedness,” which comes from a word having the same consonants. If the oracles in this section are chronologically ordered, this threat was fulfilled in 597 b.c. Then many of the royal officials and nobles were carried away captive with Jehoiachin (see 2 Kgs 24:15), who is the subject of the next oracle.
71. Jeremiah 22:22 tn The use of the Hebrew particle כִּי (ki) is intensive here and probably also at the beginning of the last line of v. 21. (See BDB 472 s.v. כִּי 1.e.)
72. Jeremiah 22:23 tn Heb “You who dwell in Lebanon, you who are nested in its cedars, how you….” The metaphor has been interpreted for the sake of clarity. The figure here has often been interpreted of the people of Jerusalem living in paneled houses or living in a city dominated by the temple and palace, which were built from the cedars of Lebanon. Some even interpret this as a reference to the king, who has been characterized as living in a cedar palace, in a veritable Lebanon (cf. vv. 6-7, 14 and see also the alternate interpretation of 21:13-14). However, the reference to “nesting in the cedars” and the earlier reference to “feeling secure” suggest that the figure is instead like that of Ezek 31:6 and Dan 4:12. See also Hab 2:9, where a related figure is used. The forms for “you who dwell” and “you who are nested” in the literal translation are feminine singular participles, referring again to personified Jerusalem. (The written forms of these participles are to be explained as participles with a hireq campaginis according to GKC 253 §90.m. The use of the participle before the preposition is to be explained according to GKC 421 §130.a.)
73. Jeremiah 22:23 tn The verb here should be identified as a Niphal perfect of the verb אָנַח (ʾanakh) with the א (aleph) left out (so BDB 336 s.v. חָנַן Niph and GKC 80 §23.f, n. 1). The form is already translated that way by the Greek, Latin, and Syriac versions.
74. Jeremiah 22:23 sn This simile has already been used in Jer 4:31 and 6:24 in conjunction with Zion/Jerusalem’s judgment.
75. Jeremiah 22:24 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
76. Jeremiah 22:24 tn Heb “Coniah.” This is the spelling of this king’s name here and in v. 28 and 37:1. Elsewhere in Jeremiah he is called Jeconiah (24:1; 27:20; 28:4; 29:2 [see also 1 Chr 3:16, 17; Esth 2:6]) and Jehoiachin (52:31, 33 [see also 2 Kgs 24:6, 8, 12, 15; 25:27, 29; 2 Chr 36:8, 9; Ezek 1:2]). For the sake of consistency the present translation uses the name Jeconiah throughout.sn According to 2 Kgs 24:8-9 Jeconiah (= Jehoiachin) succeeded his father Jehoiakim and evidently followed in his anti-Babylon, anti-God stance. He surrendered to Nebuchadnezzar shortly after he became king and along with his mother, his family, his officials, and some of the leading men of Jerusalem and Judah was carried into exile in 597 b.c. According to Jer 28:4, 10, there were popular hopes that he would be restored from exile and returned to the throne. This oracle flatly denies that hope. Allusion has already been made to the loss of regal authority by this king and his mother in 13:18-19.
77. Jeremiah 22:24 tn Heb “As surely as I live, Jeconiah, King of Judah, son of Jehoiakim will not be a signet ring on my right hand. Indeed I will tear you off from it [i.e., pull you off of my finger as a signet ring].” The signet ring was the king’s seal by which he verified all his legal and political transactions. To have the signet ring was to exercise authority in the king’s name. For examples of this see Gen 41:42-43; 1 Kgs 21:8; Esth 3:10; 8:2. The figure has been interpreted in the translation for the sake of clarity. The particles כִּי אִם (ki ʾim) that stand after the oath formula “As I live” introduce a negative statement according to Hebrew grammar (cf. BDB 474 s.v. כִּי אִם 1.a and BDB 50 s.v. אִם 1.b[2] and compare 2 Sam 3:35). The particle כִּי that stands in front of “I will tear you off” contrariwise introduces a positive affirmation (cf. BDB 472 s.v. כִּי 1.c and compare 1 Sam 14:39, 44). The Lord is swearing emphatically that Jeconiah will not be the earthly representative of his rule, i.e., not carry the authority of the signet-ring bearer. As in several other places in Jeremiah, there is a sudden shift from the third person to the second person, which runs throughout vv. 24-27. The pronouns are leveled in the translation to the second person to avoid confusion. The figures are interpreted in the translation to convey the proper significance. See the study note for explanation.sn According to the Davidic covenant the Davidic king sat on God’s throne over God’s kingdom, Israel (cf. 2 Chr 29:30; 28:5). As God’s representative he ruled in God’s stead and could even be addressed figuratively as God (cf. Ps 45:6 [45:7 HT] and compare the same phenomenon for the earthly judges: Exod 22:7-8; Ps 82:1, 6). Jeconiah is being denied the right to function any longer as the Davidic king, and any hopes of ever regaining that right in his lifetime or through the succession of his sons is also denied. This oracle is reversed by the later oracle of the prophet Haggai to his grandson Zerubbabel in Hag 2:20-23, and both Jeconiah and Zerubbabel are found in the genealogy of Christ in Matt 1:12-13.
78. Jeremiah 22:25 tn Heb “the Chaldeans.” See the study note on 21:4.
79. Jeremiah 22:26 tn Heb “I will hurl you and your mother…into another land where…” The verb used here is very forceful. It is the verb used for Saul throwing a spear at David (1 Sam 18:11) and for the Lord unleashing a violent storm on the sea (Jonah 1:4). It is used both here and in v. 28 for the forceful exile of Jeconiah and his mother.
80. Jeremiah 22:27 tn Heb “And unto the land to which they lift up their souls to return there, there they will not return.” Once again there is a sudden shift in person from the second plural to the third plural. As before, the translation levels the pronouns to avoid confusion. For the idiom “to lift up the soul to” = “to long/yearn to,” see BDB 670 s.v. נָשָׂא 1.b(9).
81. Jeremiah 22:28 tn The word translated “clay vessel” occurs only here. Its meaning, however, is assured on the basis of the parallelism and the verb root, which is used for shaping or fashioning in Job 10:8. The KJV renders it as “idol,” but that word, while having the same consonants, never appears in the singular. The word is missing in the Greek version but is translated “vessel” in the Latin version. The word “clay” is supplied in the translation to clarify what sort of vessel is meant; its inclusion is justified based on context and use of the same verb root in Job 10:8 to refer to shaping or fashioning, which would imply clay pots or vessels.
82. Jeremiah 22:28 tn Heb “Is this man, Coniah, a despised, broken vessel or a vessel that no one wants?” The question is rhetorical, expecting a positive answer in agreement with the preceding oracle.sn For the image of a rejected, broken vessel, see Jer 19:1-13 (where, however, the vessel is rejected first and then broken), and compare Jer 13, especially vv. 10-11, for the image of linen shorts that are good for nothing.
83. Jeremiah 22:28 sn The question “Why?” is a common rhetorical feature in the book of Jeremiah. See Jer 2:14, 31; 8:5, 19, 22; 12:1; 13:22; 14:19. In several cases like this one, no answer is given, leaving a sense of exasperation and hopelessness with the sinfulness of the nation that calls forth such punishment from God.
84. Jeremiah 22:29 tn The words “of Judah” have been added to clarify the addressee, which is actually the people of Judah. There is no certain explanation for the triple repetition of the word “land” here. F. B. Huey (Jeremiah, Lamentations [NAC], 209) suggests the idea of exasperation, but is it exasperation at their continued apostasy, which made these exiles necessary, or at their pitiful hopes of seeing Jeconiah restored? Perhaps “pitiful, pitiful, pitiful land of Judah” would convey some of the force of the repetition. The triple address could be a highly emphatic way (cf. Isa 6:3; Ezek 21:27) to gain attention (cf. Gen 22:11; 46:2; Exod 3:4; 1 Sam 3:10).
85. Jeremiah 22:30 tn Heb “Write this man childless.” For the explanation see the study note. The word translated “childless” has spawned some debate because Jeconiah was in fact not childless. There is record from both the Bible and ancient Near Eastern texts that he had children (see, e.g., 1 Chr 3:17). G. R. Driver, “Linguistic and Textual Problems: Jeremiah,” JQR 28 (1937-38): 115, has suggested that the word both here and in Lev 20:20-21 should be translated “stripped of honor.” While that would relieve some of the difficulties here, the word definitely means “childless” in Gen 15:2 and also in Sir 16:3, where it is contrasted with having godless children. The issue is not one of childlessness but of having “one of his sons” succeed to the Davidic throne. The term for “one of his sons” is literally “from his seed a man,” and the word “seed” is the same one that is used to refer to his “children” who were forced into exile with him (v. 28).sn The figure here is of registering a person on an official roll of citizens, etc. (cf. Num 11:26; 1 Chr 4:41; Ps 87:6). Here it probably refers to the “king list” of dynastic succession. While Jeconiah did have children (2 Chr 3:17), none of them ever returned to Judah or ruled over it. What is being denied here is his own succession and that of his immediate sons, contrary to the popular hopes expressed in Jer 28:4. His grandson Zerubbabel did return to Judah, became governor (Hag 1:1; 2:2), and along with the high priest Joshua was responsible for rebuilding the second temple (e.g., Ezra 5:2).
86. Jeremiah 23:1 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
87. Jeremiah 23:1 sn Heb This particle once again introduces a judgment speech. The indictment is found in v. 1 and the announcement of judgment in v. 2. This leads into an oracle of deliverance in vv. 3-4. See also the note on the word “judged” in 22:13.
88. Jeremiah 23:1 tn Heb “Woe to the shepherds who are killing and scattering the sheep of my pasture.” See the study note on 22:13 for the significance of “sure to be judged” (Heb “woe”). See the study note for the significance of the metaphor introduced here.sn Verses 1-4 of ch. 23 are an extended metaphor in which the rulers are compared to shepherds and the people are compared to sheep. This metaphor has already been met with in 10:21 and is found elsewhere in the context of the Lord’s covenant with David (cf. 2 Sam 7:7-8; Ps 78:70-72). The sheep are God’s people, and he is the ultimate shepherd, who is personally concerned about their care (cf. Pss 23:1; 80:2). He has set rulers over them as his undershepherds, and they are responsible to him for the care of his sheep (see 22:3-4). They have been lax shepherds, allowing the sheep to be scattered and destroyed. So he will punish them. As the true shepherd of Israel he will regather his scattered flock and place new shepherds (rulers) over them. These verses lead to a promise of an ideal ruler set over an Israel that has experienced a new and better exodus (vv. 6-8). For a more complete development of this metaphor with similar messianic and eschatological implications, see Ezek 34. The metaphor has been interpreted in the translation, but some of the flavor remains in the simile.
89. Jeremiah 23:2 tn Heb “about the shepherds who are shepherding my people. ‘You have caused my sheep….’” For the metaphor see the study note on the previous verse.
90. Jeremiah 23:2 tn Heb “Therefore, thus says the Lord, the God of Israel, concerning the shepherds who should be shepherding my people: You have scattered my sheep and driven them away and you have not taken care of them. Behold, I will visit upon you the evil of your deeds.” “Therefore” announces the judgment, which does not come until “Behold.” It is interrupted by the messenger formula and a further indictment. The original has been broken up to conform more to contemporary English style, the metaphors have been interpreted for clarity, and the connections between the indictments and the judgments have been carried by “So.”
91. Jeremiah 23:2 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
92. Jeremiah 23:3 tn Heb “my sheep.”
93. Jeremiah 23:3 tn Heb “their fold.”
94. Jeremiah 23:4 tn Heb “shepherds.”
95. Jeremiah 23:4 tn There are various nuances of the word פָּקַד (paqad) represented in vv. 2, 4. See Ps 8:4 (8:5 HT) and Zech 10:3 for “care for/take care of” (cf. BDB 823 s.v. פָּקַד Qal.A.1.a). See Exod 20:5; Amos 3:2; Jer 9:24; and 11:22 for “punish” (cf. BDB 823 s.v. פָּקַד Qal.A.3). See 1 Kgs 20:39 and 2 Kgs 10:19 for “be missing” (cf. BDB 823 s.v. פָּקַד Niph.1).sn There is an extended play on the Hebrew word פָּקַד (paqad), which is a word with rather broad English equivalents. Here the word refers to the fault of the shepherds/rulers who have not “taken care” of the sheep/people (v. 2), the “punishment” for the evil they have done in not taking care of them (v. 2), and the fact that after the Lord assigns new shepherds/rulers over them they will be cared for in such a way that none of them “will turn up missing” (v. 4).
96. Jeremiah 23:4 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
97. Jeremiah 23:5 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
98. Jeremiah 23:5 tn Heb “Behold the days are coming.”
99. Jeremiah 23:5 tn Heb “a righteous sprig to David” or “a righteous shoot” (NAB).sn This passage and the parallel in Jer 33:15 are part of a growing number of prayers and prophecies regarding an ideal ruler to come forth from the Davidic line who will bring the justice, security, and well-being that the continuing line of Davidic rulers did not. Though there were periodic kings like Josiah who did fulfill the ideals set forth in Jer 22:3 (see Jer 22:15), by and large they were more like Jehoiakim, who did not (see Jer 22:13). Hence the Lord brought to an end the Davidic rule. The potential for the ideal, however, remained because of God’s promise to David (2 Sam 7:16). The Davidic line became like a tree which was cut down, leaving only a stump. But from that stump God would bring forth a “shoot,” a “sprig” which would fulfill the ideals of kingship. See Isa 11:1-6; Zech 3:8; and 6:12 for this metaphor and compare Dan 4:14-15, 23, 26 for a different but related use of the metaphor.
100. Jeremiah 23:5 tn Heb “he will reign as king and act wisely.” This is another example of the use of two verbs joined by “and” where one becomes the adverbial modifier of the other (hendiadys). For the nuance of the verb “act wisely” rather than “prosper,” see Amos 5:13 and Ps 2:10 (cf. BDB 968 s.v. שָׂכַל Hiph.5).
101. Jeremiah 23:5 sn This has been the constant emphasis in this section. See 22:3 for the demand, 22:15 for its fulfillment, and 22:13 for its abuse. The ideal king would follow in the footsteps of his illustrious ancestor David (2 Sam 8:15), who set this forth as an ideal for his dynasty (2 Sam 23:3). David's son Solomon prayed for it to be true in his reign (Ps 72:1-2).
102. Jeremiah 23:6 tn Heb “In his days [= during the time he rules].”
103. Jeremiah 23:6 tn Parallelism and context (cf. v. 4) suggest this nuance for the word often translated “be saved.” For this nuance elsewhere see Ps 119:117 and Prov 28:18 for the verb (יָשַׁע [yashaʿ] in the Niphal), and Ps 12:6 and Job 5:4, 11 for the related noun (יֶשַׁע, yeshaʿ).
104. Jeremiah 23:6 sn It should be noted that this brief oracle of deliverance implies the reunification of Israel and Judah under the future Davidic ruler. Jeremiah has already spoken about this reunification earlier in 3:18 and will have more to say about it in 30:3 and 31:27, 31. This same ideal was espoused in the prophecies of Hosea (1:10-11 [2:1-2 HT]), Isaiah (11:1-4, 10-12), and Ezekiel (37:15-28), all of which have messianic and eschatological significance.
105. Jeremiah 23:6 tn Heb “his name will be called ‘The Lord our righteousness.’”sn The Hebrew word translated “justice” here is very broad in its usage, and it is hard to catch all the relevant nuances for this word in this context. It is used for “vindication” in legal contexts (see, e.g., Job 6:29); for “deliverance” or “salvation” in exilic contexts (see, e.g., Isa 58:8); and in the sense of ruling, judging, with “justice” (see, e.g., Lev 19:15; Isa 32:1). Here it probably sums up the justice that the Lord provides through raising up this ruler, as well as the safety, security, and well-being that result (see vv. 5-6a). In the NT this takes on soteriological connotations (see 1 Cor 1:31 in its context).
106. Jeremiah 23:7 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
107. Jeremiah 23:7 tn Heb “Behold, the days are coming.”
108. Jeremiah 23:8 tn Heb “descendants of the house of Israel.”
109. Jeremiah 23:8 tc It is probably preferable to read the third masculine singular plus suffix (הִדִּיחָם, hiddikham) here, with the Greek version and the parallel passage in 16:15, rather than the first singular plus suffix in the MT (הִדַּחְתִּים, hiddakhtim). If this is not a case of mere graphic confusion, the MT could have arisen under the influence of the first person in v. 3. Though sudden shifts in person have been common in the book of Jeremiah, that is unlikely in a context reporting an oath.
110. Jeremiah 23:8 tn This passage is the same as 16:14-15 with a few minor variations in Hebrew wording. The notes on that passage should be consulted for the rendering here. This passage has the Niphal of the verb “to say” rather than the impersonal use of the Qal. It adds the idea of “bringing out” to the idea of “bringing up out” (Heb “who brought up and who brought out,” probably a case of hendiadys) before “the people [here “seed” rather than “children”] of Israel [here “house of Israel”] from the land of the north.” These are minor variations and do not affect the sense in any way. So the passage is rendered in much the same way.sn This passage looks forward to a new and greater exodus, so outstripping the earlier one that it will not serve as the model of deliverance any longer. This same ideal was the subject of Isaiah’s earlier prophecies in Isa 11:11-12, 15-16; 43:16-21; 49:8-13; and 51:1-11.