Jeremiah 5:6–7

Jeremiah 5:6

Jeremiah 5:6

6. Wherefore a lion out of the forest shall slay them, and a wolf of the evenings shall spoil them, a leopard shall watch over their cities: every one that goeth out thence shall be torn in pieces: because their transgressions are many, and their backslidings are increased.

6. Propterea percussit eos leo e sylva; lupus solitudinum (alii per ערבות intelligunt vesperas, quia deducunt ab ערב quod significat vesperum; ita vertunt, lupus vesperinus) vastavit eos; pardus (alii vertunt, pantheram) vigilans super urbes eorum; quisquis egredietur, discerpet (vel, lacerabit;) quoniam multiplices sunt iniquitates eorum, auctae sunt defectiones ceorum.

Here, at length, God shews that he was moderate in his judgments, so that the wicked in vain charged him, as it is usual with them, with too much rigor.

Some render the words in the past tense, and think the sense to be, that the Prophet reminds the Jews that they had not been afflicted without reason by so many evils, as they had deserved heavier punishments. But another view may be taken; for we know that in Hebrew the tenses often change; and I am inclined to regard the future tense as intended; for the Prophet seems not here to record what they had already suffered, but to remind them of the heavy punishment that was awaiting them. Smite them shall the lion from the forest

The wolf is called the wolf of solitudes, because of his coming forth from the desert. Some render the words, “the wolf of the evening;” and this may be allowed. We indeed know, that in other places hungry wolves are called the wolves of the evening; for after having sought their prey in the day — time, and finding none, they become in the evening almost mad, and their hunger causes them to run furiously in all directions. This explanation, then, may be admitted. But as he says first, that the lion would come from the forest, it is more probable that the wolf is described as coming from the desert. As to the general import of the passage there is not much difference.

Note 133. The word, as found here, is never used for the evening; it ever means the desert, or uncultivated plains. The plural termination of the word, when it means the evening, is -ים, and not -ות, as here. See Numbers 22:1; Joshua 5:10; Jeremiah 39:5. In these verses it is rendered “plains;” they were evidently uncultivated, and might properly be called deserts. The Vulgate and the Targum have led commentators astray as to this word. The Septuagint have completely misunderstood it, and have rendered the sentence, “The wolf even to the houses (ἕως τῶν οἰκιῶν) has destroyed them.” The version of Blayney is, “The wolf of the plains:“ and he says in a note, that they were “unenclosed commons.” used for sheepwalks, which were commonly “infested with wolves.” — Ed

He mentions here three wild beasts — the lion, the wolf, and the leopard. By these wild beasts he understands no doubt the enemies, who would shortly attack them with the greatest cruelty. It is indeed true that the Jews, before the time in which Jeremiah spoke to them, had been afflicted with many evils; for God had not punished them only once, but had given them frequent warnings; and had there been any hope of repentance, they might have still continued in safety, though considerably reduced. But Jeremiah seems to predict future punishment: he therefore refers, not only to the Egyptians and the Assyrians, but also to other enemies. For that people, we know, were hated by all their neighbors, and had suffered grievous wrongs even from their own kindred. Since, then, many nations were hostile to the Jews, it is nothing strange that the Prophet enumerates here three sorts of wild beasts; as though he had said, that enemies would come from every quarter, who would, like lions, wolves, and leopards, vent their fury on them, because they had so often, and for so long a time, provoked God’s wrath. At the same time, God does here check those false complaints which are wont to be often alleged by the wicked, and shews that he is a righteous Judge, and that the punishments he inflicted could not be blamed by the Jews: and it was for this purpose that he used the particle, Wherefore — על-כז, ol-kan.

He also adds, A leopard shall watch, that he may tear all who shall go out of the cities This language is no doubt metaphorical; and what he means is, that when the enemies would occupy the land, the Jews would be shut up in their cities, and would not venture to go forth, for dangers would await them everywhere.

At the end of the verse he repeats again, and speaks more fully of what he meant by “Wherefore — על-כז, “at the beginning of the verse; for he says, Because multiplied have their transgressions, and increased have their defections By these words he further proves what he had said, that God is a righteous judge, even when he seems to be too severe: for it could not have been otherwise, but that he must have visited with extreme vengeance a people so abandoned and irreclaimable. Nor does he only call them wicked, and apostates, but he says that their iniquities, or evil deeds, were many, and that their defections had increased And by the last expression he amplifies their guilt: for though פשע, pesho, does not mean simply to offend, but to act wickedly; yet to fall away from God is a baser and a more atrocious sin. We hence learn, that such was the wickedness of the Jews, that it could not be corrected by common means or moderate punishment. He afterwards adds —

Note 134. This illative, “wherefore,” or therefore, or, for this cause, is both retrospective and anticipative. It is a reason given for what is contained in the latter part of the last verse, and for what is contained in the last words of this verse; it anticipates the particle “because” before “multiplied.” — Ed.

Note 135. It is rendered “ἀσεβείας — impieties, “by the Septuagint; “prevarications” by the Vulgate; “rebellions” by the Targum. It does not mean “iniquities,“ but willful violations of the law in matters connected with God’s worship and service. The other word means apostasies, defections from God, rendered by the Septuagint, “ἀποστρόφαις — turnings away, “and so by the Vulgate and the Targum. They were defections to various forms of idolatry. Their idols increased in number. The Septuagint render the last sentence thus, “They have become strong (ἴσχυσας) in their turnings away.” The Vulgate and the Targum are the same. The Verb עצםmeans an increase in quality or in quantity. But both verbs may be rendered here as transitives, — Because they have multiplied their transgressions,
They have strengthened (or increased) their apostasies. — Ed.

Jeremiah 5:7

Jeremiah 5:7

7. How shall I pardon thee for this? thy children have forsaken me, and sworn by them that are no gods: when I had fed them to the full, they then committed adultery, and assembled themselves by troops in the harlots’ houses.

7. Quomodo super hoc parcam tibi (hoc est, parcerem, nam debet resolvi futurum tempus in modum potentialem, quomodo, inquit, parcerem tibi super hoc?) Filii tui dereliquerunt me, et jurarunt in non Deo: ego autem saturavi eos, et scortati sunt (tamen scortati sunt;) et domus meretricis congregaverunt se (vel, in domum meretricis, ita subaudienda erit litera ב servilis.)

There is here what rhetoricians call a conference: for God seems here to seek the judgment of the adverse party, with whom he contends, on the cause between them, though it was sufficiently clear; and this is a proof of confidence. When advocates wish to shew that there is nothing doubtful or obscure, they thus deliberate with the opposite party, — “Why, I will propose the matter privately to yourself; have you anything to say? Even if you were at liberty to determine the question, would not reason compel you to pronounce such a judgment as this?” So now God shews that he was constrained, as it were, by necessity to inflict on the Jews a most severe punishment, and intimates that he was not, as it were, at liberty to do otherwise. “If I am, “he says, “the judge of the world, is it possible that they can escape unpunished, who thus openly provoke me? Should I not expose to ridicule my glory? and should I not also divest myself of my own power? I should cease to be what I am, and in a manner deny myself, were I not to punish a people so wicked and irreclaimable.” We now perceive the Prophet’s meaning.

Some consider ו, vau, to be understood, and take אי, ai, for אין, ain, and read thus, “I will not spare thee for this.” But as there is no reason to make any change, and many agree in the view that has been given, I prefer to follow what has been most commonly received. The meaning of אי, ai, in Hebrew is “where;” but it also means “how: “and here it is to be understood, not of place, but of manner, “How could I for this be propitious to you?”

We see how God, as it were, deliberates with the opposite party, and even appeals to them for judgment, “Say now, were I to allow you so much liberty and power as to decide the question, could I, who am the judge of the world, spare you who are guilty of such vices?”

Thy sons have forsaken me This was the first sin: and when God complained that he was forsaken, he intimated that the people had willfully, and from deliberate wickedness, cast off the yoke; for the same thing could not have been said of heathens. It is indeed true, if we have regard to the beginning, that all may be charged with defection, for God had revealed himself to the sons of Adam and of Noah; and when they fell away into superstitions, they became apostates. But the defection of the Jewish people was much more recent, and less to be borne: nay, when they boasted that they were God’s people, who could have alleged the pretense of ignorance? We now then see what the Prophet means when he says, that God had been forsaken by the people.

He then adds, They have sworn by a no- god He means, by stating a part for the whole, that the worship of God was become corrupt and vitiated: for swearing, as it was stated yesterday, is a part of God’s worship. Whenever we swear by God’s name, we profess that we are under his power, and that we cannot escape if we swear falsely: we also ascribe to him his glory as the God of truth; and we further testify that nothing escapes him, or is hid from his view. Hence, by saying here that the Israelites swore by a no- god, he means that God was deprived of his own right. They were indeed guilty of other sins; but, as it has been stated, the Prophet includes under one kind all the superstitions which then prevailed among the people. It was then the same as though he had said, that they worshipped idols and gods, whom they had devised for themselves.

He adds a circumstance which enhanced their guilt, I have filled them, he says, and they have committed adultery There is here a striking alliteration, which must not be omitted, he had said, ישבען, ishbon, “they have sworn;” and now he says, אשבע, ashbo, “I have filled them.” The only difference is in a point; when placed on the left side of ש, shin, the word means to fill, and when on the right, to swear. The Prophet then says, that they had sworn to another God, and yet had been filled God shews here how base and disgraceful had been the ingratitude of the people; for they had been filled to the full with all blessings, and yet they did not acknowledge their own God, who had been to them a Father, so kind and bountiful: I have filled them, he says, and they have committed adultery

Note 136. This has been done by the Punctuists, and is no part of the language. — Ed.

Now this passage teaches us, that they who go astray, when allured by God’s paternal kindness and bounty, are on that account the more unworthy of pardon. When men grow wanton against God, while he is kindly indulging them, they no doubt treasure up for themselves wrath against the day of wrath, as Paul tells us in Romans 2:5. Let us then take heed, lest we indulge ourselves, while God is, as it were, indulging us; and lest prosperity should lead us to wantonness: but let us learn to submit ourselves willingly to him, even because he thus kindly and sweetly invites us to himself; and when he shews himself so loving, let us learn to love him.

He says, that they committed adultery This may be taken metaphorically: but as in the next verse he inveighs against their vagrant lusts and adulteries, this phrase may be taken in its literal sense. I yet think that adultery here is to be understood figuratively, as meaning that they had no spiritual chastity, inasmuch as they did not give God his own glory. He further says, And at the house of the harlot have they assembled together The word “house” may be taken in the nominative case, as the Jews might have been called the house of the harlot; as though the Prophet had said, that all Jerusalem and Judea were like brothels. But some consider ב, beth, to be understood, so that they assembled themselves, as it were, at the house of a harlot; and that he thus alludes to the temple. And it is a mark of great shamelessness, when many adulterers or wanton men assemble in one house; for most are ashamed of their adulteries, so that they endeavor to hide their baseness: but when they come together in troops, as though under an uplifted banner, it is a proof that there is no shame, but that they thus disregard all decency, like brute beasts. The most suitable meaning then is, that they are said to have assembled together in brothels, because they gloried in their own superstitions and sacrileges. It follows —

Note 137. The last line may be rendered thus, — And the house of the harlot they crowd. The verb for “crowd” seems here to be transitive, though it be intransitive in Micah 5:1. — Ed.