To the same decisive year, 605-4, _the fourth of Jehoiakim_, is referred

an address by Jeremiah reported in XXV. 1-11 (with perhaps 13_a_). This

repeats the Prophet’s charge that his people have refused—now for

three-and-twenty years—to listen to his call for repentance and reaffirms

the certainty, at last made clear by the Battle of Carchemish, that their

deserved doom lies in the hands of a Northern Power, which shall waste

their land and carry them into foreign servitude for seventy years. The

suggestion that this address formed the conclusion of the Second Roll

dictated by Jeremiah to Baruch is suitable to the contents of the address

and becomes more probable if we take as genuine the words in 13_a_, _Thus

will I bring upon that land all My words which I have spoken against her,

all that is written in this Book_. But a curious question rises from the

fact that we have two differing reports of the address.(333) Very

significantly the shorter Greek Version contains neither the addition to

the date, _that was the first year of Nebuchadrezzar, king of Babylon_,

nor the two statements that his was the Northern Power which would waste

Judah and which she should serve for seventy years (verses 1, 9, 11, as

also the similar reference in verse 12), all of which are inserted in the

Hebrew text but not without a sign of their being later intrusions upon

it.(334) And indeed it is inconceivable that the Greek translator could

have omitted the four references to Nebuchadrezzar (including that in

verse 12) had he found them in the Hebrew text from which he worked.

Probably, therefore, Jeremiah did not include them in the first version of

his address; and for this he had reason. His purpose in the address was to

declare the fulfilment of the substance of all his previous prophesying,

and this had been not that the Chaldeans, but that _a northern power_,

would prove to be the executioner of God’s judgment upon Judah. The

references to Nebuchadrezzar were added, possibly by Jeremiah himself or

by Baruch, as the Chaldean doom steadily drew nearer. The interesting

thing is that the earlier version of the address survived and was used by

the Greek translator.(335)

Verses 12-14, indicating the destruction of Babylon in her turn after

seventy years, are, in whole or in part, generally taken as a post-exilic

addition.(336) Omitting verse 14, the Greek inserts between 13 and 15 the

Oracles on Foreign Nations, which the Hebrew postpones to Chs. XLVI.

ff.(337) In the uncertain state of the text of 12-14 it is impossible to

decide whether this was or was not the original position of those Oracles.

The rest of the chapter, verses 15-38, is so full of expansions and

repetitions, which we may partly see from a comparison of it with the

Greek, as well as of inconsistencies with some earlier Oracles by

Jeremiah,(338) of traces of the later prophetic style and of echoes of

other prophets, that many deny any part of the miscellany to be Jeremiah’s

own. Yet we must remember that his commission was not to Judah alone(339)

but to _the nations_ as well, against many of which XXV. 15-38 is

directed; and the figure of the Lord handing to the Prophet the cup of the

wine of His wrath is not one which we have any reason to doubt to be

Jeremiah’s. Sifting, by help of the Greek, the Hebrew list of nations who

are to drink of the cup, we get Judah and Egypt; Askalon, Gaza, Ekron, and

the remnant of Ashdod; Dedan, Tema, Buz, and their _clipt_ neighbours in

Arabia; all of whom were shaken in Jeremiah’s day by the Chaldean terror.

Indeed the reference to Ashdod suits the condition of that Philistine city

in the Prophet’s time better than its restored prosperity in the

post-exilic age. The substance of verses 15-23 may therefore be reasonably

left to Jeremiah. Verses 24-38 are more doubtful.(340)

2. Parables. (XIII, XVIII-XX, XXXV.)

To the reign of Jehoiakim are usually referred a number of symbolic

actions by Jeremiah, the narratives of which carry no dates. So far as

they imply that the Prophet was still able to move openly about Jerusalem

and the country they might be regarded as earlier than 604, when he was

under restraint and had to hide himself.(341) But this is not certain. We

are left to take them in the order in which they occur in the Book.

The first is that of the waist-cloth, XIII. 1-11. Jeremiah was charged to

buy a linen waist-cloth(342) and after wearing it, but keeping it from

damp, to bury it in the cleft of a rock, and after many days to dig it up,

when he found it rotting. So had the Lord taken Israel to cleave to Him as

such a cloth _cleaves to the loins of a man_; but separated from Him they

had likewise rotted and were good for nothing. Separated by what—God’s

action or their own? As it stands the interpretation is complicated. God

spoils Israel because of their pride (verse 9) and Israel spoil themselves

by disobedience and idolatry (verse 10). The complication may be due to a

later addition to the text. But this question is not serious. Neither is

that of the place where Jeremiah is said to have buried the cloth.

_Pĕrath_, the spelling in the text, is the Hebrew name for the Euphrates

and so the Greek and our own versions render it. But the name has not its

usual addition of The River. If the Euphrates be intended the story is

hardly one of fact, but rather a vivid parable of the saturation of the

national life by heathen, corruptive influences from Mesopotamia.(343) Yet

within an hour from Anathoth lies the Wady Farah, a name which corresponds

to the Hebrew _Pĕrath_ or (by a slight change) _Parah_; and the Wady,

familiar as it must have been to Jeremiah, suits the picture, having a

lavish fountain, a broad pool and a stream, all of which soak into the

sand and fissured rock of the surrounding desert.(344) That the Wady Farah

was the scene of the parable is therefore possible, though not

certain.(345) But the ambiguity of these details does not interfere with

the moral of the whole.

This parable is immediately followed by the ironic metaphor of the Jars

Full of Wine, XIII. 12-14, which I have already quoted.(346)

Next comes the Parable of the Potter, Ch. XVIII, that might be from any

part of the Prophet’s ministry, during which he was free to move in

public. This parable is instructive first by disclosing one of the ways

along which Revelation reached, and spelt itself out in, the mind of the

Prophet. He felt a Divine impulse to go down to the house of the

Potter,(347) _and there I will cause thee to hear My Words_, obviously not

words spoken to the outward ear. For, as Jeremiah watched the potter at

work on _his two stones_,(348) and saw that when the vessel he first

attempted was marred he would remould the clay into another vessel as

seemed good to him, a fresh conception of the Divine Method with men broke

upon Jeremiah and became articulate. A word from the Lord flashed through

his eyes upon his mind, just as in his first visions of the almond-blossom

and the caldron.(349)

XVIII. 5. Then the Word of the Lord came unto me, saying, [6] O

House of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter?(350) Behold,

as the clay in the hand of the potter, so are ye in My hand.(351)

Thus by figure and by word the Divine Sovereignty was proclaimed as

absolutely as possible. But the Sovereignty is a real Sovereignty and

therefore includes Freedom. It is not fettered by its own previous

decrees, as some rigorous doctrines of predestination insist, but is free

to recall and alter these, should the human characters and wills with

which it works in history themselves change. There is a Divine as well as

a human Free-will. “God’s dealing with men is moral; He treats them as

their moral conduct permits Him to do.”(352)

The Predestination of men or nations, which the Prophet sees figured in

the work of the potter, is to Service. This is clear from the comparison

between Israel and a vessel designed for a definite use. It recalls

Jeremiah’s similar conception of his own predestination, which was not to

a certain state, of life or death, but to the office of speaker for God to

the nations. Yet because the acceptance or rejection by a nation or an

individual of the particular service, for which God has destined them,

naturally determines their ultimate fate, therefore this wider sense,

which predestination came to have in Christian doctrine, is so far also

involved in the parable.(353)

To the truths of the Divine Sovereignty and the Divine Freedom the parable

adds that of the Divine Patience. The potter of Hinnom does not

impatiently cast upon the rubbish which abounds there the lump of clay

that has proved refractory to his design for it. He gives the lump another

trial upon another design. If, as many think, the verses which follow the

parable, 7-10, are not by Jeremiah himself (though this is far from

proved, as we shall see) then he does not explicitly draw from the

potter’s patience with the clay the inference of the Divine patience with

men. But the inference is implicit in the parable. Did Jeremiah intend it?

If he did, this is proof that in spite of his people’s obstinacy under the

hand of God, he cherished, though he dared not yet utter, the hope that

God would have some fresh purpose for their service beyond the wreck they

were making of His former designs for them and the ruin they were thereby

bringing on themselves—that He would grant them still another chance of

rising to His will. But if Jeremiah did not intend this inference from his

parable then we may claim the parable as one more example of that of which

we have already had several, the power of this wonderful man’s experience

and doctrine to start in other minds ideas and beliefs of which he himself

was not conscious, or which at least he did not articulate—that power

which after all is his highest distinction as a prophet. I do not think,

however, that we can deny to Jeremiah all consciousness of what his

parable implies in regard to the Patience of the Divine Potter with the

perverse human clay in His hands. For we have already seen from another of

the Prophet’s metaphors that under the abused and rank surface of a

nation’s or an individual’s life he was sure of soil which by deeper

ploughing would yet yield fruits meet for repentance.(354)

In either case the parable is rich in Gospel for ourselves. If we have

failed our God upon His first designs for us and for our service do not

let us despair. He is patient and ready to give us another trial under His

hand. And this not only is the lesson of more than one of our Lord’s

parables, for instance that of the fig-tree found fruitless, but

nevertheless given the chance of another year,(355) and the motive of His

hopes for the publicans and harlots, but is implied by all the Gospel of

His life and death for sinners. In these He saw still possibilities worth

His dying for.

But as Christ Himself taught, there are, and ethically must be, limits to

the Divine Patience with men. Of these the men of Judah and Jerusalem are

warned in the verses which follow the parable. While it is true (verse 7

ff.) that if a nation, which God has said He will destroy, turn from its

evil, He will relent, the converse is equally true of a nation which He

has promised to plant and build, that if it do wrong and obey not He will

surely repent of the good He had planned for it. For this refractory

people of Judah He is already _framing_ or _moulding evil_—the verb used

is that of which the Hebrew name for _potter_ is the participle. Though

chosen of God and shaped by His hands for high service Israel’s destiny is

not irrevocable; nay, their doom is already being shaped. Yet He makes

still another appeal to them to repent and amend their ways. To this they

answer: _No use! we will walk after our own devices and carry out every

one the stubbornness __ of his evil heart._ At least that is how Jeremiah

interprets their temper; his people had hardened since Megiddo and the

accession of Jehoiakim.

Some moderns have denied these verses to Jeremiah and taken them as the

addition of a later hand and without relevance to the parable. With all

respect to the authority of those critics,(356) I find myself unable to

agree with them. They differ as to where the authentic words of the

Prophet cease, some concluding these with verse 4 others with verse 6. In

either case the parable is left in the air, without such practical

application of his truths as Jeremiah usually makes to Judah or other

nations. Nor can the relevance of the verses be denied, as Cornill, one of

their rejectors, admits. Nor does the language bear traces of a later

date. They seem to me to stand as Jeremiah’s own.

The Prophet’s threat of evil is still so vague, that, with due

acknowledgment of the uncertainty of such points, we may suppose it, along

with the Parable of the Potter, to have been uttered before the Battle of

Carchemish, when the Babylonian sovereignty over Western Asia became

assured.(357)

The next in order of Jeremiah’s symbols, Ch. XIX, the breaking of a

potter’s jar past restoration, with his repetition of doom upon Judah, led

to his arrest, Ch. XX, and this at last to his definite statement that the

doom would be captivity to the King of Babylon. Some therefore date the

episode after Carchemish, but this is uncertain; Jeremiah is still not

under restraint nor in hiding.

He is charged to buy an earthen jar and take with him some of the elders

of the people and of the priests to the Potsherd Gate in the Valley of

Hinnom.(358) There, after predicting the evils which the Lord shall bring

on the city because of her idolatry and her sacrifice of children in that

Valley down which they were looking from this gate, he broke the jar and

flung it upon the heaps of shattered earthenware from which the gate

derived its name;(359) and returning to the Temple repeated the Lord’s

doom upon Judah and Jerusalem. He was heard by Pashḥur of the priestly

guild of Immer, who appears to have been chief of the Temple police, and

after being _smitten_ was put in the stocks, but the next day released,

probably rather because his friends among the princes had prevailed in his

favour than because the mind of Pashḥur had meantime changed. For Jeremiah

on his release immediately faced his captor with these words:—

XX. 3. The Lord hath called thy name not Pashḥur but

Magor-Missabib, Terror-all-round. 4. For thus saith the Lord, Lo,

I will make thee a terror to thyself and all thy friends, and they

shall fall by the sword of their foes, and thine own eyes shall be

seeing it; and all Judah shall I give into the hand of the king of

Babylon, and he shall carry them to exile and smite them with the

sword ... 6. And thou Pashḥur and all that dwell in thy house

shall go into captivity and in Babylon thou shalt die.(360)

At last Jeremiah definitely states what Judah’s doom from the North is to

be. We wish that we knew the date of this utterance.

Assigned by its title to _the days of Jehoiakim_ is another action of the

Prophet, which is the exhibition rather of an example than of a symbol,

Ch. XXXV. The story was probably dictated by Jeremiah to Baruch, for while

the Hebrew text opens it in the first person (2-5), the Greek version

carries the first person throughout and the later change by the Hebrew to

the third person (12 and 18) may easily have been due to a copyist

mistaking the first personal suffix for the initial letter of the name

Jeremiah.(361)

The Rechabites, a tent-dwelling tribe sojourning within the borders, and

worshipping the God, of Israel, had taken refuge from the Chaldean

invasion within the walls of Jerusalem. Knowing their fidelity to their

ancestral habits Jeremiah invited some of them to one of the Temple

chambers and offered them wine. They refused, for they said that their

ancestor Jehonadab ben-Rechab(362) had charged them to drink no wine,

neither to build houses, nor sow seed nor plant vineyards. Whereupon

Jeremiah went forth and held them up as an example to the men of Judah,

not because of any of the particular forms of their abstinence, but

because of their constancy. Here were people who remembered, and through

centuries had remained loyal to, the precepts of an ancestor; while Israel

had fallen from their ancient faithfulness to their God and ignored His

commandments. The steadfast loyalty of these simple nomads to the

institutions of a far-away human father, how it put to shame Judah’s

delinquency from the commands of her Divine Father! This contrast is in

line with the others, which we have seen Jeremiah emphasising, between his

people’s fickleness towards God and the obdurate adherence of the Gentiles

to their national gods, or the constancy of the processes of nature: the

birds that know the seasons of their coming, the unfailing snows of

Lebanon and the streams of the hills. The whole story is characteristic of

Jeremiah’s teaching.(363)

3. Oracles on the Edge of Doom. (VII. 16-XVIII _passim_, XXII, XLV.)

From the seventh to the tenth chapters of the Book of Jeremiah there are a

number of undated passages in prose and in verse, which are generally held

to have been included in the collection of the Prophet’s Oracles written

out by Baruch in 604-3, and of which some may have been delivered during

the reign of Josiah, but the most of them more probably either upon its

tragic close at Megiddo in 608, or under Jehoiakim. We have already

considered the addresses reported in VII. 1-15, 21-27,(364) as well as the

metrical fragments VII. 28, 29, and VIII. 8, 9.(365) There are other prose

passages describing (1) VII. 16-20, the worship of the Queen, or the Host,

of Heaven, which had been imposed upon Jerusalem by the Assyrians, and

either survived the decay of their power from 625 onwards, or if

suppressed by Josiah in obedience to Deuteronomy,(366) had been revived

under Jehoiakim; (2) VII. 30-34, the high-places in Topheth, upon which

children were sacrificed, also condemned by Deuteronomy and recorded as

destroyed by Josiah;(367) (3) VIII. 1-3, the desecration of the graves of

Jerusalem. It is not necessary to reproduce these prose passages, whether

they be Jeremiah’s or not; our versions of them, Authorised and Revised,

are sufficiently clear.

But there follow, from VIII. 4 onwards, after the usual introduction, a

series of metrical Oracles of which the following translation is offered

in observance of the irregularity of the measures of the original. Note

how throughout the Prophet is, as before, testing his false

people—_heeding_ and _listening_ are his words—finding no proof of a

genuine repentance and bewailing the doom that therefore must fall upon

them. Some of his earlier verses are repeated, and there is the reference

to the Law, VIII. 8 f., which we have discussed.(368) There is also a hint

of exile—which, however, is still future.

In Ch. VIII, verses 4-12 (including the repetitions they contain) seem a

unity; verse 13 stands by itself (unless it goes with the preceding); 14,

15 echo one of the Scythian songs, but the fear they reflect may be that

either of an Egyptian invasion after Megiddo or of a Chaldean; 16 and 17

are certainly of a northern invasion, but whether the same as the

preceding is doubtful; and doubtful too is the connection of both with the

incomparable elegy which follows—VIII. 18-IX. 1. For IX. 1 undoubtedly

belongs to this, as the different division of the chapters in the Hebrew

text properly shows. In Ch. IX. 2-9 the Prophet is in another mood than

that of the preceding songs. There the miseries of his people had

oppressed him; here it is their sins. There his heart had been with them

and he had made their sufferings his own; here he would flee from them to

a lodge in the desert.(369) IX. 10-12, is another separate dirge on the

land, burned up but whether by invaders or by drought is not clear. Then

13-16 is a passage of prose. In 17-22 we have still another elegy with

some of the most haunting lines Jeremiah has given us, on war or

pestilence, or both. And there follow eight lines, verses 23-24, on a very

different, a spiritual, theme, and then 25-26 another prose passage, on

the futility of physical circumcision if the heart be not circumcised. If

these be Jeremiah’s, and there is no sign in them to the contrary, they

form further evidence of his originality as a prophet.

The two Chs. VIII and IX are thus a collection both of prose passages and

poems out of different circumstances and different moods, with little

order or visible connection. Are we to see in them a number of those _many

like words_ which Jeremiah, when he dictated his Second Roll to Baruch,

added to his Oracles on the First Roll?(370)

* * * * *

The first verses are in curious parallel to Tchekov’s remarkable plaint

about his own people and “the Russian disease” as he calls their failing:

“Why do we tire so soon? And when we fall how is it that we never try to

rise again?”

And thou shalt say to them,(371) Thus saith the Lord: VIII. 4

“Does any one fall and not get up,

Or turn and not return?”(372)

Why then are this people turning 5

Persistently turning(373)?

They take fast hold of deceit,

Refuse to return.

I have been heeding, been listening— 6

They speak but untruth!

Not a man repents of his evil,

Saying, “What have I done?”

All of them swerve in their courses

Like a plunging horse in the battle.

Even the stork in the heavens 7

Knoweth her seasons,

And dove and swift and swallow

Keep time of their coming—

Only my people, they know not

The Rule(374) of the Lord.

How say ye, “We are the wise, 8

With us is the Law(375) of the Lord.”

But, lo, into falsehood hath wrought it(376)

False pen of the scribes.

Put to shame are the wise, 9

Dismayed and taken,

The Word of the Lord have they spurned—

What wisdom is theirs?

So to others I give their wives, 10

Their fields to who may take them,

For all from the least to the greatest

On plunder are bent;

From the prophet on to the priest

Everyone worketh lies.

They would heal the breach of my people 11

As though it were trifling,

Saying “It is well, it is well!”—

And well it is not!

Were they shamed of the foulness they wrought? 12

Nay, shamed not at all,

Nor knew their dishonour!

So shall they fall with the falling,

Reel in the time of their reckoning,

Sayeth the Lord.(377)

Would I harvest them?—Rede of the Lord— 13

No grapes on the vine,

And never a fig on the fig-tree,

Withered the leaves.(378)

For what sit we still? 14

Sweep together

And into the fortified cities,

To perish.

For the Lord our own God

Hath doomed us to perish,

Hath drugged us with waters of bale—

To Him(379) have we sinned.

Hoping for peace? 15

’Twas no good,

For a season of healing?

Lo, panic.(380)

From Dan the bruit(381) has been heard, 16

Hinnying of his horses,

With the noise of the neighing of his steeds

The land is aquake.

He(382) comes,(383) he devours the land and her fulness

The city and her dwellers.

For behold, I am sending upon you 17

Basilisk-serpents,

Against whom availeth no charm,

But they shall bite you.(384)

Ah! That my grief is past comfort(385) 18

Faints on me my heart,

Lo, hark to the cry of my people

Wide o’er the land.(386)

“Is the Lord not in Ṣion, 19

Is there no king?(387)

[Why have they vexed Me with idols,

Foreigners’ fancies?](388)

“Harvest is past, summer is ended, 20

And we are not saved!”

For the breaking of the daughter of my people 21

I break, I blacken!

Horror hath fastened upon me

Pangs as of her that beareth.(389)

Is there no balm in Gilead, 22

Is there no healer?

Why do the wounds never close(390)

Of the daughter of my people?

Oh that my head were waters, IX. 1

Mine eyes a fountain of tears,

That day and night I might weep

For the slain of my people!

There follows an Oracle in a very different mood. In the previous one the

Prophet has taken his people to his heart, in spite of their sin and its

havoc; in this he repels and would be quit of them.

Jeremiah : Being The Baird Lecture for 1922 · 第 8 / 20 段