Jeremiah 3–4

Footnotes

1. 1 Heb “May he go back to her again?” The question is rhetorical and expects a negative answer. For the legal background for the illustration that is used here see Deut 24:1–4.
2. 2 Heb “Would the land not be utterly defiled?” The stative is here rendered actively to connect better with the preceding. The question is rhetorical and expects a positive answer.
3. 3 Heb “But you have played the prostitute with many lovers.”
4. 4 Heb “Returning to me.” The form is the bare infinitive which the and have interpreted as an imperative “Yet, return to me!” However, it is more likely that a question is intended, expressing surprise in the light of the law alluded to and the facts cited. For the use of the infinitive absolute in the place of a finite verb, cf. §113.ee. For the introduction of a question without a question marker, cf. §150.a.
5. 5 Heb “and see.”
6. 6 Heb “Where have you not been ravished?” The rhetorical question expects the answer “nowhere,” which suggests she has engaged in the worship of pagan gods on every one of the hilltops.
7. 7 Heb “You sat for them [the lovers, i.e., the foreign gods] beside the road like an Arab in the desert.”
8. 8 Heb “by your prostitution and your wickedness.” This is probably an example of hendiadys where, when two nouns are joined by “and,” one expresses the main idea and the other qualifies it.
9. 9 Heb “you have the forehead of a prostitute.”
10. 10 Heb “Have you not just now called out to me, ‘[you are] my father!’?” The rhetorical question expects a positive answer.
11. 11 Heb “Will he keep angry forever? Will he maintain [it] to the end?” The questions are rhetorical and expect a negative answer. The change to direct address in the English translation is intended to ease the problem of the rapid transition, common in Hebrew style (but not in English), from second person direct address in the preceding lines to third person indirect address in these two lines. See §144.p.
12. 12 Heb “You do the evil and you are able.” This is an example of hendiadys, meaning “You do all the evil that you are able to do.”
13. 13 “Have you seen …” The question is rhetorical and expects a positive answer.
14. 14 Heb “she played the prostitute there.” This is a metaphor for Israel’s worship; she gave herself to the worship of other gods like a prostitute gives herself to her lovers. There seems no clear way to completely spell out the metaphor in the translation.
15. 15 Or “I said to her, ‘Come back to me!’ ” The verb אָמַר (’amar) usually means “to say,” but here it means “to think,” of an assumption that turns out to be wrong (so אמר); cf. Gen 44:28; Jer 3:19; Pss 82:6; 139:11; Job 29:18; Ruth 4:4; Lam 3:18. Open theists suggest that passages such as this indicate God has limited foreknowledge; however, more traditional theologians view this passage as an extended metaphor in which God presents himself as a deserted husband, hoping against hope that his adulterous wife might return to him. The point of the metaphor is not to make an assertion about God’s foreknowledge, but to develop the theme of God’s heartbreak due to Israel’s unrepentance.
16. 16 The words “what she did” are not in the text but are implicit from the context and are supplied in the translation for clarification.
17. 17 Heb “she [‘her sister, unfaithful Judah’ from the preceding verse] saw” with one Hebrew , some Greek , and the version. The reads “I saw” which may be a case of attraction to the verb at the beginning of the previous verse.
18. 18 Heb “because she committed adultery.” The translation is intended to spell out the significance of the metaphor.
19. 19 The words “Even after her unfaithful sister, Judah, had seen this” are not in the Hebrew text but are implicit in the connection and are supplied for clarification.
20. 20 Heb “she played the prostitute there.” This is a metaphor for Israel’s worship; she gave herself to the worship of other gods like a prostitute gives herself to her lovers. There seems no clear way to completely spell out the metaphor in the translation.
21. 21 The translation reads the form as a causative (Hiphil, תַּהֲנֵף, tahanef) with some of the versions in place of the simple stative (Qal, תֶּחֱנַף, tekhenaf) in the .
22. 22 Heb “because of the lightness of her prostitution, she defiled the land and committed adultery with stone and wood.”
23. 23 Heb “And even in all this.”
24. 24 Heb “has not turned back to me with all her heart but only in falsehood.”
25. 25 Heb “Wayward Israel has proven herself to be more righteous than unfaithful Judah.” A comparison is drawn here between the greater culpability of Judah, who has had the advantage of seeing how God disciplined her sister nation for having sinned and yet ignored the warning and committed the same sin, and the culpability of Israel who had no such advantage.
26. 26 Heb “Go and proclaim these words to the north.” The translation assumes that the message is directed toward the exiles of northern Israel who have been scattered in the provinces of Assyria to the north.
27. 27 Heb “I will not cause my face to fall on you.”
28. 28 Heb “Only acknowledge your iniquity.”
29. 29 The words “You must confess” are repeated to convey the connection. The Hebrew text has an introductory “that” in front of the second line and a coordinative “and” in front of the next two lines.
30. 30 reads דְּרָכַיִךְ (dérakhayikh, “your ways”), but the editors suggest דּוֹדַיִךְ (dodayikh, “your breasts”) as an example of orthographic confusion. While the proposal makes sense, it remains a conjectural emendation since it is not supported by any actual manuscripts or ancient versions. Heb “scattered your ways with foreign [gods]” or “spread out your breasts to strangers.”
31. 31 Or “I am your true husband.” There is a wordplay between the term “true master” and the name of the pagan god Baal. The pronoun “I” is emphatic, creating a contrast between the Lord as Israel’s true master/husband versus Baal as Israel’s illegitimate lover/master. See 2:23–25.
32. 32 The words, “If you do” are not in the text but are implicit in the connection of the Hebrew verb with the preceding.
33. 33 Heb “shepherds.”
34. 34 Heb “after/according to my [own] heart.”
35. 35 Heb “you will become numerous and fruitful.”
36. 36 Or “chest.”
37. 37 Heb “the ark of the covenant.” It is called this because it contained the tables of the law which in abbreviated form constituted their covenant obligations to the Lord, cf. Exod 31:18; 32:15; 34:29.
38. 38 Or “Nor will another one be made”; Heb “one will not do/make [it?] again.”
39. 39 For location see ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; .
40. 40 Heb “will gather to the name of the Lord.”
41. 41 Heb “the stubbornness of their evil hearts.”
42. 42 Heb “In those days.”
43. 43 Heb “the house of Judah will walk together with the house of Israel.”
44. 44 Heb “the land that I gave your [fore]fathers as an inheritance.”
45. 45 Heb “I, myself, said.” See note on “I thought that she might come back to me” in .
46. 46 Heb “How I would place you among the sons.” Israel appears to be addressed here contextually as the Lord’s wife (see the next verse). The pronouns of address in the first two lines are second feminine singular as are the readings of the two verbs preferred by the Masoretes (the Qere readings) in the third and fourth lines. The verbs that are written in the text in the third and fourth lines (the Kethib readings) are second masculine plural as is the verb describing Israel’s treachery in the next verse. The imagery here appears to be that of treating the wife as an equal heir with the sons and of giving her the best piece of property.
47. 47 The words “What a joy it would be for me to” are not in the Hebrew text but are implied in the parallel structure.
48. 48 Heb “the most beautiful heritage among the nations.”
49. 49 Heb “my father.”
50. 50 Heb “turn back from [following] after me.”
51. 51 Heb “house of Israel.”
52. 52 Heb “a wife unfaithful from her husband.”
53. 53 Heb “A sound is heard on the hilltops, the weeping of the supplication of the children of Israel because [or indeed] they have perverted their way.” At issue here is whether the supplication is made to Yahweh in repentance because of what they have done or whether it is supplication to the pagan gods which is evidence of their perverted ways. The reference in this verse to the hilltops where idolatry was practiced according to 3:2 and the reference to Israel’s unfaithfulness in the preceding verse make the latter more likely. For the asseverative use of the Hebrew particle (here rendered “indeed”) where the particle retains some of the explicative nuance; cf. 472–73 כִּי 1.e and 3.c.
54. 54 Heb “have forgotten the Lord their God,” but in the view of the parallelism and the context, the word “forget” (like “know” and “remember”) involves more than mere intellectual activity.
55. 55 Or “I will forgive your apostasies.” Heb “I will [or want to] heal your apostasies.” For the use of the verb “heal” (רָפָא, rafa’) to refer to spiritual healing and forgiveness see Hos 14:4.
56. 56 Or “They say.” There is an obvious ellipsis of a verb of saying here since the preceding words are those of the Lord and the following are those of the people. However, there is debate about whether these are the response of the people to the Lord’s invitation, a response which is said to be inadequate according to the continuation in 4:1–4, or whether these are the Lord’s model for Israel’s confession of repentance to which he adds further instructions about the proper heart attitude that should accompany it in 4:1–4. The former implies a dialogue with an unmarked twofold shift in speaker between 3:22b–25 and 4:1–4:4 while the latter assumes the same main speaker throughout with an unmarked instruction only in 3:22b–25. This disrupts the flow of the passage less and appears more likely.
57. 57 Heb “Truly in vain from the hills the noise/commotion [and from] the mountains.” The syntax of the Hebrew sentence is very elliptical here.
58. 58 Heb “Truly in the Lord our God is deliverance for Israel.”
59. 59 Heb “From our youth the shameful thing has eaten up …” The shameful thing is specifically identified as Baal in Jer 11:13. Compare also the shift in certain names such as Ishbaal (“man of Baal”) to Ishbosheth (“man of shame”).
60. 60 Heb “fathers” (also in v. 25).
61. 61 Heb “Let us lie down in.…”
62. 62 Heb “Let us be covered with disgrace.”
63. 1 Or “If you, Israel, want to turn [away from your shameful ways (those described in 3:23–25)] … then you must turn back to me.” Or perhaps, “Israel, you must turn back … Yes, you must turn back to me.”
64. 2 Heb “disgusting things.”
65. 3 Or possibly, “If you get those disgusting idols out of my sight, you will not need to flee.” This is less probable because the normal meaning of the last verb is “to wander,” “to stray.”
66. 4 Heb “If you [= you must, see the translator’s note on the word “do” later in this verse] swear/take an oath, ‘As the Lord lives,’ in truth, justice, and righteousness …”
67. 5 4:1–2a consists of a number of “if” clauses, two of which are formally introduced by the Hebrew particle אִם (’im) while the others are introduced by the conjunction “and,” followed by a conjunction (“and” = “then”) with a perfect in 4:2b which introduces the consequence. The translation “You must.… If you do,” was chosen to avoid a long and complicated sentence.
68. 6 Heb “bless themselves in him and make their boasts in him.”
69. 7 The Hebrew particle is obviously asseverative here since a causal connection appears to make little sense.
70. 8 Heb “Plow up your unplowed ground and do not sow among the thorns.” The translation is an attempt to bring out the force of a metaphor. The idea seems to be that they are to plow over the thorns and make the ground ready for the seeds which will produce a new crop where none had been produced before.
71. 9 Heb “Circumcise yourselves to the Lord and remove the foreskin of your heart.” The translation is again an attempt to bring out the meaning of a metaphor. The mention of the “foreskin of the heart” shows that the passage is obviously metaphorical and involves heart attitude, not an external rite.
72. 10 Heb “lest.”
73. 11 The words “The Lord said” are not in the text, but it is obvious from v. 6 and v. 9 that he is the speaker. These words are supplied in the translation for clarity.
74. 12 It is unclear who the addressees of the masculine plural imperatives are here. They may be the citizens of Jerusalem and Judah who are sounding the alarm to others. However, the first person reference to the Lord in v. 6 and Jeremiah’s response in v. 10 suggest that this is a word from the Lord that he is commanded to pass on to the citizens of Jerusalem and Judah. If the imperatives are not merely rhetorical plurals they may reflect the practice referred to in Jer 23:18, 22; Amos 3:7. A similar phenomenon also occurs in Jer 5:1 and also in Isa 40:1–2. This may also be the explanation for the plural imperatives in Jer 31:6. For further discussion see the translator’s note on .
75. 13 For location see ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; .
76. 14 Heb “ram’s horn,” but the modern equivalent is “trumpet” and is more readily understandable.
77. 15 Heb “Raise up a signal toward Zion.”
78. 16 Heb “out of the north, even great destruction.”
79. 17 Heb “A lion has left its lair.” The metaphor is turned into a simile for clarification. The word translated “lair” has also been understood to refer to a hiding place. However, it appears to be cognate in meaning to the word translated “lair” in Ps 10:9; Jer 25:38, a word which also refers to the abode of the Lord in Ps 76:3.
80. 18 Heb “his place.”
81. 19 Or “wail because the fierce anger of the Lord has not turned away from us.” The translation does not need to assume a shift in speaker as the alternate reading does.
82. 20 Heb “In that day.”
83. 21 The words “In response to all this” are not in the text but are supplied in the translation to clarify the connection.
84. 22 Heb “Lord Yahweh.” The translation follows the ancient Jewish tradition of substituting the Hebrew word for God for the proper name Yahweh.
85. 23 Or “You have deceived.” The Hiphil of נָשָׁא (nasha’, “to deceive”) is understood in a tolerative sense here: “to allow [someone] to be deceived.” §27.5c notes that this function of the hiphil describes caused activity that is welcome to the undersubject, but unacceptable or disagreeable to a third party. Jerusalem and Judah welcomed the assurances of false prophets who deceived them. Although this was detestable to God, he allowed it.
86. 24 Heb “this people and Jerusalem.”
87. 25 Heb “Jerusalem, saying, ‘You will have peace’ ”; or “You have deceived the people of Judah and Jerusalem, saying, ‘You will have peace.’ ” The words “you will be safe” are, of course, those of the false prophets (cf., Jer 6:14; 8:11; 14:13; 23:16–17). It is difficult to tell whether the charge here is meant literally as the emotional outburst of the prophet (compare for example, Jer 15:18) or whether it is to be understood as a figure of speech in which a verb of direct causation is to be understood as permissive or tolerative, i.e., God did not command the prophets to say this but allowed them to do so. While it is not beyond God to use false prophets to accomplish his will (cf., e.g., 1 Kgs 22:19–23), he elsewhere in the book of Jeremiah directly denies having sent the false prophets to say such things as this (cf., e.g., Jer 14:14–15; 23:21, 32). For examples of the use of this figure of speech, see E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, , and compare Ezek 20:25. The translation given attempts to resolve the issue.
88. 26 Heb “touches the throat/soul.” For this use of the word usually translated “soul” or “life” cf. נֶפֶשׁ 1, 2 and compare the use in Ps 105:18.
89. 27 Heb “this people and Jerusalem.”
90. 28 Heb “A scorching wind from the hilltops in the desert toward …” The allusion is, of course, to the destructive forces of the enemy armies of Babylon compared above in 4:7 to a destructive lion and here to the destructive desert winds of the Near Eastern sirocco.
91. 29 Heb “daughter of my people.” The term “daughter of” is appositional to “my people” and is supplied in the translation as a term of sympathy and endearment. Compare the common expression “daughter of Zion.”
92. 30 Heb “not for winnowing and not for cleansing.” The words “It will not be a gentle breeze” are not in the text but are implicit in the connection. They are supplied in the translation here for clarification.
93. 31 The word “No” is not in the text but is carried over from the connection with the preceding line “not for …”
94. 32 Heb “will speak judgments against them.”
95. 33 Heb “he is coming up like clouds.” The words “The enemy” are supplied in the translation to identify the referent and the word “gathering” is supplied to try to convey the significance of the simile, i.e., that of quantity and of an approaching storm.
96. 34 Heb “his chariots [are] like a whirlwind.” The words “roar” and “sound” are supplied in the translation to clarify the significance of the simile.
97. 35 The words “I cry out” are not in the text, but the words that follow are obviously not the Lord’s. They are either those of the people or of Jeremiah. Taking them as Jeremiah’s parallels the interjection of Jeremiah’s response in 4:10 which is formally introduced.
98. 36 Heb “Woe to us!” The words “woe to” are common in funeral laments and at the beginning of oracles of judgment. In many contexts they carry the connotation of hopelessness or apprehensiveness of inevitable doom.
99. 37 Heb “Oh, Jerusalem, wash your heart from evil.”
100. 38 Heb “For a voice declaring from Dan and making heard disaster from the hills of Ephraim.”
101. 39 The words “They are saying” are not in the text but are implicit in the connection and are supplied in the translation for clarification.
102. 40 The word “surrounding” is not in the text but is implicit and is supplied in the translation for clarification.
103. 41 Or “Here they come!” Heb “Look!” or “Behold!” Or “Announce to the surrounding nations, indeed [or yes] proclaim to Jerusalem, ‘Besiegers …’ ” The text is very elliptical here. Some of the modern English versions appear to be emending the text from הִנֵּה (hinneh, “behold”) to either הֵנָּה (hennah, “these things”; so ), or הַזֶּה (hazzeh, “this”; so ). The solution proposed here is as old as the which reads, “Behold, they have come.”
104. 42 The words, “this message,” are not in the text but are supplied in the translation to make the introduction of the quote easier.
105. 43 Heb “Besiegers.” For the use of this verb to refer to besieging a city compare Isa 1:8.
106. 44 Heb “They have raised their voices against.” The verb here, a vav (ו) consecutive with an imperfect, continues the nuance of the preceding participle “are coming.”
107. 45 Heb “will surround her.” The antecedent is Jerusalem in the preceding verse. The referent is again made explicit in the translation to avoid any possible lack of clarity. The verb form here is a form of the verb that emphasizes the fact as being as good as done (i.e., it is a prophetic perfect).
108. 46 There is some irony involved in the choice of the simile since the men guarding a field were there to keep thieves from getting in and stealing the crops. Here the besiegers are guarding the city to keep people from getting out.
109. 47 Heb “Your way and your deeds.”
110. 48 Heb “How bitter!”
111. 49 Heb “Indeed, it reaches to your heart.” The subject must be the pain alluded to in the last half of the preceding line; the verb is masculine, agreeing with the adjective translated “painful.” The only other possible antecedent “punishment” is feminine.
112. 50 The words “I said” are not in the text. They are used to mark the shift from the Lord’s promise of judgment to Jeremiah’s lament concerning it.
113. 51 Heb “My bowels! My bowels!”
114. 52 Heb “the walls of my heart!”
115. 53 Heb “ram’s horn,” but the modern equivalent is “trumpet” and is more readily understandable.
116. 54 The translation reflects a different division of the last two lines than that suggested by the Masoretes. The written text (the Kethib) reads “for the sound of the ram’s horn I have heard [or “you have heard,” if the form is understood as the old second feminine singular perfect] my soul” followed by “the battle cry” in the last line. The translation is based on taking “my soul” with the last line and understanding an elliptical expression “the battle cry [to] my soul.” Such an elliptical expression is in keeping with the elliptical nature of the exclamations at the beginning of the verse (cf. the literal translations of the first two lines of the verse in the notes on the words “stomach” and “heart”).
117. 55 The words, “I see” are not in the text here or at the beginning of the third line. They are supplied in the translation to show that this is Jeremiah’s vision of what will happen as a result of the invasion announced in 4:5–9, 11–17a.
118. 56 Heb “my.” This is probably not a reference to Jeremiah’s own tents since he foresees the destruction of the whole land. Jeremiah so identifies with the plight of his people that he sees the destruction of their tents as though they were his very own. It would probably lead to confusion to translate literally and it is not uncommon in Hebrew laments for the community or its representative to speak of the community as an “I.” See for example the interchange between first singular and first plural pronouns in Ps 44:4–8.
119. 57 Heb “my.”
120. 58 It is not altogether clear what Jeremiah intends by the use of this metaphor. In all likelihood he means that the defenses of Israel’s cities and towns have offered no more resistance than nomads’ tents. However, in light of the fact that the word “tent” came to be used generically for a person’s home (cf. 1 Kgs 8:66; 12:16), it is possible that Jeremiah is here referring to the destruction of their homes and the resultant feeling of homelessness and loss of even elementary protection. Given the lack of certainty the present translation is rather literal here.
121. 59 Heb “the sound of ram’s horns,” but the modern equivalent is “bugles” and is more readily understandable.
122. 60 These words are not in the text but are supplied in the translation to show clearly the shift in speaker. Jeremiah has been speaking; now the Lord answers, giving the reason for the devastation Jeremiah foresees.
123. 61 Heb “For.…” This gives the explanation for the destruction envisaged in 4:20 to which Jeremiah responds in 4:19, 21.
124. 62 Heb “They are senseless children.”
125. 63 Heb “I looked at the land and behold …” This indicates the visionary character of Jeremiah’s description of the future condition of the land of Israel.
126. 64 Heb “formless and empty.” This is a case of hendiadys (two nouns joined by “and” both describe the same thing): one noun retains its full nominal force, the other functions as an adjective. The words תֹהוּ וָבֹהוּ (tohu vavohu) allude to Gen 1:2, hyperbolically picturing a reversal of creation and return to the original precreation chaos.
127. 65 Heb “there was no man/human being.”