|
|
By now it is a familiar theme. It has been heard again and again from the prophets: “Repent or perish! Turn to God or face your enemies alone.” Israel heard it and ignored it. They went to destruction. But even more tragic is the story of Judah. Judah heeded the cry of the Lord’s servants and was delivered from Assyria in a most dramatic way. But they were like someone who, snatched from the path of a speeding train, jumps in front of a moving truck. The lesson of deliverance was quickly forgotten. Idol worship was begun again, and Babylon became the Lord’s instrument of punishment. As Mormon noted, affliction seems the only way the Lord’s children learn (see Helaman 12:1–5), so Judah was enrolled in the bitter school of experience.
1. Use Notes and Commentary below to help you as you read and study 2 Kings 21–25.
2. Complete Points to Ponder as directed by your teacher. (Individual-study students should complete all of this section.)
“King Manasseh had ascended the throne in Jerusalem at the age of twelve. He reigned for about fifty years and became the most loathed and cursed king in the history of Judah.
“Assyria was then at the height of her power. All the world of Mesopotamia and the west lay subdued before her. In 671 B.C.E. [before the common era, the Jewish equivalent of B.C., before Christ] she would conquer the Egyptian Delta as well, and Esarhaddon would die in 669 B.C.E. during another military campaign against the land of the Nile.
“In Judah, Assyria ruled not only politically but also culturally. Her cults, gods, and fashions were introduced into the land by Manasseh. This was the golden age of astrology and divination in Assyria, and during the reign of Esarhaddon priests and astrologers filled the court with their omens and predictions. . . . The Aramean-Assyrian gods were clearly superior to the gods of all other lands, for all kingdoms were vassals of the God Ashur. The astral gods of Assyria—Ishtar, Shamash, Adad—were worshiped on rooftops everywhere.
“Assyrian cultic texts carefully describe the rituals. ‘You clean the roof before Ishtar, sprinkle pure water, you set up an altar of incense, you pour out flour, you place honey and butter, and libate wine.’ ‘You clean the roof, you sprinkle pure water, you place four bricks . . . you pile up cuttings of poplar trees, you put fire on them, you pour out juniper, you libate beer, prostrate, and do not look backward.’ ‘I have set for you, Ishtar, a pure . . . cake baked in ashes. . . .’
“Prophets, condemning the vile contagion that infested the land during the days of Ahaz and Manasseh, told of ‘them that worship the host of heaven upon the housetops’ and described how ‘the children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead the dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven.’ The southern writer of the Second Book of Kings tells of those who ‘offered incense to Baal, to the sun, and to the moon, and to the constellations, and to all the host of heaven.’ . . .
“. . . Whole elements from the core and periphery of the Assyrian world washed across the hills of Judah, leaving behind gods and goddesses beneath leafy trees, on tall hills, in groves, on rooftops. The southern historian tells us, ‘He built again the high places which Hezekiah his father had destroyed; and he reared up altars for Baal . . . and worshiped all the host of heaven and served them. And he built altars in the house of the Lord. . . . And he made his son pass through the fire, and practiced soothsaying, and used enchantments. . . .’
“Less than a mile from where I write these words is the valley of Hinnom outside the walls of the old city of Jerusalem. There, to the din of drums, with smoke and flames rising through the air, children were offered to the god Molech, another name for the king of heaven. The Greeklike word Gehenna, hell, comes from that place: ge (pronounced gay)—valley, in Hebrew—of Hinnom. . . .
“Within the temple of Solomon the fertility cult . . . flourished as integral elements of the state cult practiced by the people of YHWH. [YHWH is the sacred word that many Jews still do not pronounce. It is translated Jehovah by most Christian writers.] In the countryside the populace too worshiped YHWH along with pagan deities. It is probable that this would in time have made YHWH the head of a pantheon, like El in the tablets of Ugarit. The sins of Manasseh were never forgotten.” (Chaim Potok, Wanderings: Chaim Potok’s History of the Jews, pp. 134–36.)
Manasseh was only twelve years old when he began to reign. Inexperienced as he was, he was easily influenced by the worshipers of Baal and Asherah, or Ashteroth. To the worship of these idolatrous gods Manasseh added a third form of worship: devotion to the heavenly bodies and the constellations. Remnants of this worship are seen today in astrology.
“This worship differed from the Syrophoenician star-worship, in which sun and moon were worshipped under the names of Baal and Astarte as the bearers of the male and female powers of nature, and was pure star-worship, based upon the idea of the unchangeableness of the stars in contradistinction to the perishableness of everything earthly, according to which the stars were worshipped not merely as the originators of all rise and decay in nature, but also as the leaders and regulators of sublunary things.” (C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament, 3:1:469.)
In Judah the stars were worshiped, not by devotions to images, but by simple contemplation in the open air or on the rooftops. Small altars were constructed and incense burned as part of the devotional exercise.
“The line [tape measure] of Samaria” (v. 13) and “the plummet [plumb bob] of the house of Ahab” (v. 13) refer to the destruction of the royal house of Israel. The Lord was saying again that what had happened to the ten tribes of Israel could just as easily happen to Judah—and would, unless they changed their ways.
|
|
|
The ruins of Ahab’s palace symbolize the destruction of the kingdom of Israel. |
Josephus explained who these innocent people were: “But when [Hezekiah’s] son, Manasseh, whose mother’s name was Hephzibah, of Jerusalem, had taken the kingdom, he departed from the conduct of his father, and fell into a course of life quite contrary thereto, and showed himself in his manners most wicked in all respects, and omitted no sort of impiety, but imitated those transgressions of the Israelites, by the commission of which against God, they had been destroyed; for he was so hardy as to defile the temple of God, and the city, and the whole country; for, by setting out from a contempt of God, he barbarously slew all the righteous men that were among the Hebrews; nor would he spare the prophets, for he every day slew some of them, till Jerusalem was overflown with blood.” (Antiquities of the Jews, bk. 10, chap. 3, par. 3.)
Josiah was one of the best of all the kings of Judah since the time of David. Although only eight years of age when his reign began, Josiah continued all his days in righteousness. Verse 2, therefore, is very complimentary.
Some have suggested this book was the book of Deuteronomy; others believe that it was the whole Pentateuch (Genesis to Deuteronomy), written by the prophet Moses (see D. Guthrie and J. A. Motyer, eds., The New Bible Commentary: Revised, p. 365). The account of the great joy at finding the law suggests that the scriptures had been lost for some time. That would partly explain why evil and corruption had become so widespread in Israel.
To rip or tear one’s clothes was to signify profound sorrow and tragedy. When King Josiah heard the law read, it instantly became obvious how far Israel had strayed from what God required of them. Therefore, Josiah rent his clothes to dramatize his profound sorrow and shock at the spiritual state of the nation.
“Nothing further is known of the prophetess Huldah than what is mentioned here. All that we can infer from the fact that the king sent to her is, that she was highly distinguished on account of her prophetical gifts, and that none of the prophets of renown, such as Jeremiah and Zephaniah, were at that time in Jerusalem. Her [husband] Shallum was keeper of the clothes, i.e. superintendent over either the priests’ dresses that were kept in the temple . . . or the king’s wardrobe.” (Keil and Delitzsch, Commentary, 3:1:480.)
Inspired by the words of the book of the law, Josiah ordered the idols and the groves among the Israelites to be destroyed. The grove mentioned in verse 6 was a shrine dedicated to the idol Asherah, the nature goddess or the goddess of the moon. The “hangings” mentioned in verse 7 were coverings or curtains that enclosed the booths where the impure rituals were performed.
|
|
|
The valley of Hinnom |
Adam Clarke wrote that Topheth was in “the valley of the son of Hinnom, or Gehenna. . . . here it appears the sacred rites of Molech were performed, and to this all the filth of the city was carried, and perpetual fires were kept up in order to consume it. Hence it has been considered a type of hell; and in this sense it is used in the New Testament. [See, for example, Matthew 5:22, where “hell fire” is used to translate the Hebrew Gehenna.]” (The Holy Bible . . . with a Commentary and Critical Notes, 2:563.)
Josiah scattered the ashes and powder of the idols and the bones of men on the sacred places of the idolaters to defile them and make them abominable to the idolaters so that they would not want to use them anymore.
“Manasseh is mentioned here and at [2 Kings 24:3 and Jeremiah 15:4] as the person who, by his idolatry and his unrighteousness, with which he provoked God to anger, had brought upon Judah and Jerusalem the unavoidable judgment of rejection. It is true that Josiah had exterminated outward and gross idolatry throughout the land by his sincere conversion to the Lord, and by his zeal for the restoration of the lawful worship of Jehovah, and had persuaded the people to enter into covenant with its God once more; but a thorough conversion of the people to the Lord he had not been able to effect. For, as Clericus has correctly observed, ‘although the king was most religious, and the people obeyed him through fear, yet for all that the mind of the people was not changed, as is evident enough from the reproaches of Jeremiah, Zephaniah, and other prophets, who prophesied about that time and a little after.’ With regard to this point compare especially the first ten chapters of Jeremiah, which contain a resumé of his labours in the reign of Josiah, and bear witness to the deep inward apostasy of the people from the Lord, not only before and during Josiah’s reform of worship, but also afterwards.” (Keil and Delitzsch, Commentary, 3:1:492.)
In the scramble for power that came with Babylonia’s conquest of Assyria, Egypt sought to move north and help Assyria, since they preferred a weak Assyria to a powerful Babylonia. For reasons not named, Josiah sought to stop Pharaoh Necho’s passage through the promised land. It has been suggested that “Josiah’s motives can only be conjectured, but it is probable that in the downfall of Assyria’s power he hoped to extend his authority over what had once been the northern kingdom, and feared that his designs would be foiled by the Egyptian advance. . . . Josiah took up his position here [at Megiddo] to dispute the passage across Carmel. . . . For the sorrow occasioned by Josiah’s death see [2 Chronicles 35:25; Ecclesiasticus 49:2–3].” (J. R. Dummelow, ed., A Commentary on the Holy Bible, p. 246.)
Nebuchadnezzar was the son of Nabopolassar, king of Babylon. Jehoiakim was the king of Judah. At the time that Nebuchadnezzar first laid siege to Jerusalem, Jehoiakim was paying tribute to Pharaoh Necho, king of Egypt, in return for protection against the Babylonians. The ploy did not work. At about 608 B.C. Nebuchadnezzar “was sent by his father against the rulers of several provinces that had revolted; and he took Carchemish and all that belonged to the Egyptians, from the Euphrates to the Nile” (Clarke, Commentary, 2:566). Three years later, about 605 B.C., Jehoiakim revolted, and “a mixed army of Chaldeans, Syrians, Moabites, and Ammonites was sent against him, who ravaged the country, and took three thousand and twenty-three prisoners, whom they brought to Babylon” (Clarke, Commentary, 2:566; see also Jeremiah 52:28). Among the prisoners were probably Daniel and Ezekiel, who wrote the Old Testament books bearing their names. That same year Nebuchadnezzar assumed the throne of Babylon upon his father’s death. (For a more complete discussion of Babylonia and its conquest of Judah see Enrichment G.)
The phrase “slept with his fathers” (v. 6) is a way of stating that Jehoiakim died. It may be taken, in some instances, to mean a peaceful kind of death, but 2 Chronicles 36:6 records that Jehoiakim was bound in fetters to be taken to Babylon, and Jeremiah 22:19 states that the king was given “the burial of an ass [no burial at all], drawn and cast forth beyond the gates of Jerusalem.” It seems possible that while being taken to Babylon as a captive, Jehoiakim rebelled against Nebuchadnezzar’s forces a second time, causing those in charge to kill him and cast his body aside before continuing their journey.
Jehoiakin (also spelled Jehoiachin) was the son and heir of Jehoiakim. Like his father in many respects, “he did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord, according to all that his father had done” (v. 9). Keil and Delitzsch commented on the extent of his evil deeds: “Ezekiel (xix. 5–7) describes him not only as a young lion, who learned to prey and [who] devoured men, like Jehoahaz, but also affirms of him that he knew their (the deceased men’s) widows, i.e. ravished them, and destroyed their cities,—that is to say, he did not confine his deeds of violence to individuals, but extended them to all that was left behind by those whom he had murdered, viz. to their families and possessions.” (Commentary, 3:1:506.)
Verse 13 records that Nebuchadnezzar “carried out thence [from the temple] all the treasures.” Evidence indicates, however, that the temple of Solomon was spoiled three times under Nebuchadnezzar. The first time was when Jerusalem was attacked and Jehoiakim was taken to Babylon. The vessels removed at this time were those that Belshazzar profaned, as recorded in Daniel 5:2, and that Cyrus, the Median-Persian king, permitted the Jews to carry back to Jerusalem when they were released (see Ezra 1:7–11). When Nebuchadnezzar came against Jerusalem a second time, as recorded in Isaiah, he also took spoil. The third time was when Nebuchadnezzar pillaged the temple under Zedekiah, the last king of Judah (see 2 Kings 25:13–17).
|
|
|
Jerusalem, in the hills of Judah (model) |
Mattaniah, better known as Zedekiah, was a brother of Jehoiakim and was, therefore, an uncle of Jehoiakin, the deposed king.
During the last years of Judah’s existence, many prophets were sent to warn the people. Lehi, the first prophet recorded in the Book of Mormon, was one of these prophets sent by the Lord to warn the Jews that they must repent or face the destruction of Jerusalem (see 1 Nephi 1:4). Since neither Zedekiah nor his people heeded the warning voices of God’s messengers (see 1 Nephi 1:20; 2 Chronicles 36:16; Jeremiah 26:8–11), the destruction of Jerusalem was assured (see 2 Nephi 1:4; 6:8).
Josephus recorded an interesting story about Zedekiah and hearkening to the prophets: “Now as to Zedekiah himself, while he heard the prophet [Jeremiah] speak, he believed him, and agreed to every thing as true, and supposed it was for his advantage; but then his friends perverted him, and dissuaded him from what the prophet advised, and obliged him to do what they pleased. Ezekiel also foretold in Babylon what calamities were coming upon the people, which when he heard, he sent accounts of them unto Jerusalem. But Zedekiah did not believe their prophecies, for the reason following: It happened that the two prophets agreed with one another in what they said as in all other things, that the city should be taken, and Zedekiah himself should be taken captive; but Ezekiel disagreed with him [Jeremiah], and said that Zedekiah should not see Babylon [see Ezekiel 12:13], while Jeremiah said to him, that the king of Babylon should carry him away thither in bonds [see Jeremiah 34:3]; and because they did not both say the same thing as to this circumstance, he disbelieved what they both appeared to agree in, and condemned them as not speaking truth therein, although all the things foretold him did come to pass according to their prophecies, as we shall show upon a fitter opportunity.” (Antiquities, bk. 10, chap. 7, par. 2.)
As recorded in 2 Kings 25:7, both prophets were vindicated by subsequent events. After chastising Zedekiah for his unfaithfulness and treachery, Nebuchadnezzar “commanded his sons and his friends to be slain, while Zedekiah and the rest of the captains looked on; after which he put out the eyes of Zedekiah, and bound him, and carried him to Babylon. And these things happened to him, as Jeremiah and Ezekiel had foretold to him, that he should be caught, and brought before the king of Babylon, and should speak to him face to face, and should see his eyes with his own eyes; and thus far did Jeremiah prophesy. But he was also made blind, and brought to Babylon, but did not see it, according to the prediction of Ezekiel.” (Antiquities, bk. 10, chap. 8, par. 2.)
Contrary to the biblical report, at least one of Zedekiah’s sons survived. Mormon recorded that Zedekiah’s son Mulek lived and went to the land now known as America, where he and his people settled in the land north of where Lehi and his posterity settled (see Helaman 6:10; 8:21). This group was discovered by Mosiah and his small group of Nephites (see Omni 1:12–19). Latter-day Saints generally refer to them as Mulekites, although they are not called that in the Book of Mormon itself. Some have seen Ezekiel 12:14 as a prophetic hint of Mulek’s escape.
These verses record that Nebuchadnezzar put to death the leaders of Judah’s revolt against him. All the healthy people were then carried out of the land to Babylon (see v. 21), but “the poor of the land” (v. 12; compare 2 Kings 24:14) were permitted to remain and were given work as vinedressers and husbandmen (planters and herdsmen). Nebuchadnezzar appointed Gedaliah, a Jew, to be governor over Judea, whereupon Ishmael, a zealous Jew of the royal family, undertook to slay Gedaliah for his complicity with the foreigners. Josephus recorded that Ishmael compelled the Jews remaining in the Holy Land to accompany him to the land of the Ammonites. Before their arrival there, however, another Jewish patriot, Johanan, angry with Ishmael for slaying Gedaliah, rescued his countrymen from Ishmael’s grasp and took them to Egypt to settle. This move was contrary to the counsel of Jeremiah, who still resided in Judea and who urged Johanan and the other Jews to do the same. They refused, and they compelled Jeremiah and his scribe, Baruch, to flee to Egypt with them. (See Josephus, Antiquities, bk. 10, chap. 9.)
|
|
|
Jeremiah and his scribe were taken to Egypt. |
After a long imprisonment in Babylon, Jehoiachin, former king of Judah, was released from prison by Evil-merodach, son of Nebuchadnezzar. From that time until his death, the former king was kindly treated by his Babylonian overlords.
The period between the death of Josiah and the final deportation of the Jews to Babylon could be described as the dying time of the kingdom of Judah. The cancer of idolatry was too deep in the hearts of the people for the surgery undertaken by Josiah to have any great effect. After Josiah, Judah began to deteriorate at an even greater rate than before. Nonetheless, spiritual surgeons were sent to proclaim the cure. “And the Lord God of their fathers sent to them by his messengers, rising up betimes and sending [his warnings]; because he had compassion on his people, and on his dwelling place” (2 Chronicles 36:15). Indeed, the nearer the end came, the more voices were lifted up. The Book of Mormon states that by the time of Zedekiah, eleven years after the death of Josiah, “there came many prophets, prophesying unto the people that they must repent” (1 Nephi 1:4). Jeremiah appears to have been the chief of these prophets. His ministry spanned the whole period, but he was assisted by others. Zephaniah was his immediate predecessor and his contemporary. Then came Obadiah, Nahum, Habakkuk, and Lehi—all joining their voices with Jeremiah’s.
The Book of Mormon vividly portrays the feelings of the leaders of the people against these prophets. Their treatment of Lehi appears to have been typical. “The Jews did mock him because of the things which he testified of them. . . . they were angry with him; yea, even as with the prophets of old, whom they had cast out, and stoned, and slain; and they also sought his life, that they might take it away.” (1 Nephi 1:19–20.) Such was the spiritual condition of Judah just before their fall.
How does that condition compare with ours today? Though the prophets were treated violently and martyred in the earlier part of this dispensation, in modern times the Lord’s prophets are for the most part ignored by the world. Apathy brings less direct condemnation upon an individual than violence and murder, and yet the results of ignoring the modern prophets will be the same as they were for Judah. The world is rushing toward a spiritual disaster as great as any it has ever known (see Joel 2:2). Once again the prophets raise their voices, warning of impending disasters and pointing the way for national and personal salvation. And like Judah, the people of the world are unheeding.
Fortunately, in this dispensation spiritual Israel will begin to respond and will receive the promised blessings. Work through the following scripture chain and compare our times with those of Judah.
D&C 1:35. Does our generation face a threat today?
1 Nephi 22:16; D&C 133:48–51. Will the anger of the Lord again be kindled in the last days? Why?
1 Nephi 22:17–19, 22; 2 Nephi 30:10; D&C 1:36; 133:52; Moses 7:61–62. Is there any hope for the world? What?
D&C 1:14, 38; 56:14; 84:36; 90:5; 108:1; 121:16–21. What will determine whether we will be able to pass through these times in safety?
|
|
The word burden, which is used to render the Hebrew massa, may be taken to mean both “a lifting up (of the voice), utterance, oracle” and “a heavy lot or fate” (Oxford English Dictionary, s.v. “burden”). The prophets used massa to describe the prophetic message, or oracles, revealed against a people. In this case the prophecy was against Nineveh, the capital of Assyria.
Jonah fled from the Lord because he did not want to call Nineveh to repentance. But when he finally accepted the Lord’s call, Nineveh repented and was saved (see chapter 9). By Nahum’s time, however, Nineveh had again become extremely wicked. Therefore, Nahum pronounced the Lord’s burden upon the city. Like Judah, Nineveh had repented once and was saved but then forgot the lesson and slid back into wickedness. Now she would have to take the consequences.
1. Use Notes and Commentary below to help you as you read and study the book of Nahum.
2. Complete Points to Ponder as directed by your teacher. (Individual-study students should complete all of this section.)
“The date of Nahum’s activities has to be deduced from certain statements made in the prophecy. In Chapter 3:8–10 reference is made to the destruction of the city of No-Amon, the Egyptian Thebes, as an already accomplished fact. We know Thebes was captured by Assurbanipal, the Assyrian, in 663 B.C. Therefore, Nahum’s prophecy must have been written after that date. And since Nahum’s prophecy deals with the coming destruction of Nineveh, we know it must have been written before 612 B.C., the date of her downfall. We may date Nahum’s ministry with some degree of probability, therefore, between the years 663 B.C. and 612 B.C.” (Sidney B. Sperry, The Voice of Israel’s Prophets, p. 353.)
|
|
|
The Way of the Sphinx at ancient Thebes |
“Nahum was a poet. When he saw in vision the end of Assyria, he poured forth in unrestrained and picturesque Hebrew the relief felt by his people. In many ways his poetry vents the wrath, sighs the relief, and bespeaks the hope of all who have been oppressed when the oppressions at last have ceased and the oppressor is no more. But Nahum was also a prophet; and he saw in Assyria’s downfall an example of the hand of God in justice reaping with a vengeance all the enemies of good, while He preserves in mercy and with patience those who try to do good. . . .
“Envisioning the overthrow of this cruel and mighty empire, whose kings in their own records boast of the captives they have maimed, the realms they have subjected and the treasures they have confiscated, Nahum tells how the doom of the mighty and the wicked is decreed, deserved, and done. [For a detailed description of Assyria’s brutality and cruelty, see Enrichment D.]
“His book begins with an acrostic, with one strophe (stanza) for each of the first fifteen letters of the Hebrew alphabet, with two alterations of the sequence. The first seven strophes (verses 2–5 in English) emphasize God’s power over nature and over His enemies; but the third (verse 3a) interrupts to tell of His goodness and justice. The second seven strophes emphasize His power over all enemies and evils, but again tells by contrast in the third of the series (verse 7) of His goodness and His mercy to those who take refuge in Him. The fifteenth and final strophe (verse 10) provides a summary and a transition to the next subject to be treated: the castigation of Nineveh.
“Assyria and Judah are alternately addressed in the next poem (verses 11–14); the one is to be punished and the other to be redeemed. It concludes with a hopeful verse, speaking of a peaceful age in terms that seem to herald the Messianic age when all oppressors shall have ceased.” (Ellis T. Rasmussen, “Nahum, a Poet-Prophet,” Instructor, Aug. 1962, insert between pp. 270–71.)
Nahum employed imagery usually associated with the Savior’s Second Coming to depict Assyria’s future devastation. Assyria would be as easily burned as dry stubble in a field. Here is yet another example of the prophetic dualism so common in the Old Testament (see Enrichment E).
Still prophesying of Judah’s future, Nahum spoke of one very “wicked counsellor” whose yoke upon Judah, probably a large yearly tribute (see 2 Kings 17:14), was to be broken. Sennacherib, king of Assyria, had invaded Judah with a force of nearly two hundred thousand men. The prophecy foretold that Sennacherib would die shortly, and the house of his gods would become his grave (see Nahum 1:14). While he was worshiping in the temple dedicated to the god Nisrock, Sennacherib’s two sons, Adrammelech and Sharazer, murdered their father as Nahum had prophesied (see 2 Kings 19:37).
In these verses Nahum wrote a taunting hymn of grief at the fall of Nineveh. “Where,” he asked, “is the dwelling of the lions, and the feeding place of the young lions?” (v. 11). This is like saying, Where are those ferocious ones who once discomfited and attacked my people? “I will cut off thy prey from the earth, and the voice of thy messengers shall no more be heard” (v. 13).
These verses pronounce the worst of woes on Nineveh, “the bloody city” (v. 1). She was a harlot, wicked in the extreme, and her punishments were merited because she was a “mistress of witchcrafts, that selleth nations through her whoredoms” (v. 4). In other words, she not only turned to wickedness herself but exported that wickedness to many others through her power and influence.
As other wicked cities had met destruction, so would Nineveh. She was no better than the Egyptian city, No-Amon (Thebes), which was earlier destroyed by Assurbanipal, king of Assyria. Neither of the allies of Thebes, Ethiopia or Libya, had been able to protect her. Nineveh, too, would “seek strength” in allies and find none.
Rasmussen summarized the lesson of Nahum in these words:
“The final poem (chapter 3) opens with a prelude on the evils of the oppressive city, Nineveh. Her lies, rape, and sorcery; her prey in thousands slain; her harlotry and witchcraft and the seduction of the nations all are told. Because of all this, the prophet says she shall become detestable (verses 5–7). Like all others strong but wicked, Nineveh shall fall (verses 8–11); all her defenses shall be useless when her leaders flee like locusts (verses 12–17). Her end has come; there remains for the prophet but to write the epitaph (verses 18–19):
Thy shepherds slumber, O king of Assyria,
Thy worthies are at rest;
Thy people are scattered upon the mountains,
And there is none to gather them.
There is no assuaging of thy hurt,
Thy wound is grievous;
All that hear the report of thee
Clap the hands over thee;
For upon whom hath not thy wickedness passed continually?
[Holy Scriptures, 1946 ed., The Jewish Publication Society of America.]
“Nahum’s message is still true: decadence ends in destruction. Although the Lord is ‘slow to anger,’ He is also ‘great in power, and will not at all acquit the wicked.’ His mercy shall not rob justice, but neither will justice rob His mercy. ‘The Lord is good, a stronghold in the day of trouble; and He knoweth them that trust in Him.’” (“Nahum, a Poet-Prophet,” insert between pp. 270–71.)
|
|
Zephaniah was probably a contemporary of Jeremiah, Lehi, Nahum, and possibly Habakkuk. “The immediate occasion of his preaching appears to have been the advance of an enemy which threatened Judah and its neighbours with sudden and complete destruction. Evidently the dreaded foe is not their old masters, the Assyrians, nor their allies, the Egyptians, but the barbarous Scythians, who had already disturbed the politics of southwestern Asia. . . . A detachment of these ruthless foes, who worshipped their swords and gloried only in murder and plunder, was evidently already sweeping down the eastern shore of the Mediterranean. The prophet had his text, and his audience good reason to listen. Their old complacency was shaken. The awakened national conscience found expression on the lips of the royal prophet. Rising above the terror of the moment, he announced that these pitiless destroyers were Jehovah’s instrument of punishment, and the catastrophe that threatened His day of judgment.” (J. R. Dummelow, ed., A Commentary on the Holy Bible, pp. 592–93.)
C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch pointed out that Zephaniah used the imminent danger to stress the universal nature of God’s judgment: “Zephaniah’s prophecy has a more general character, embracing both judgment and salvation in their totality, so as to form one complete picture. It not only commences with the announcement of a universal judgment upon the whole world, out of which the judgment rises that will fall upon Judah on account of its sins, and upon the world of nations on account of its hostility to the people of Jehovah; but it treats throughout of the great and terrible day of Jehovah, on which the fire of the wrath of God consumes the whole earth [Zephaniah 1:14–18; 2:2; 3:8].” (Commentary on the Old Testament, 10:2:122.) Such a message has meaning for people today as the world prepares for its spiritual and temporal judgment.
1. Use Notes and Commentary below to help you as you read and study the book of Zephaniah.
2. Complete Points to Ponder as directed by your teacher. (Individual-study students should complete all of this sections.)
Zephaniah was commissioned by God to warn Judah and encourage her to repent. He was a contemporary of King Josiah, and his ministry probably played an important part in the reform movement of that time. Israel was at a pivotal point between peril and safety. Zephaniah’s sweeping prose account of God’s judgments upon the wicked and the eventual triumph of His kingdom was the message vacillating Judea needed to hear.
The brief genealogy in verse one traces Zephaniah back to Hizkiah. It is not known whether this individual was the same as Hezekiah the king, and the other names are not of known individuals. Nothing is known of the life of Zephaniah beyond what can be inferred from his book.
Beyond his message for Judah, Zephaniah asserted God’s right and power to judge the whole earth. His design in cataloging all the various forms of life was to stress the complete scope of judgment. The reference to the wicked focuses attention on the main issue: sin and its inevitable consequences. (See D. Guthrie and J. A. Motyer, eds., The New Bible Commentary: Revised, p. 776.)
This prophecy is in keeping with the dualism so common in the writings of Hebrew prophets. Zephaniah both anticipated Judah’s impending disaster and foresaw the final destruction of all the wicked (see Ellis T. Rasmussen, An Introduction to the Old Testament and Its Teachings, 2:273). The phrase “day of the Lord” in Zephaniah 1:7 usually refers in the scriptures to the Second Coming of Jesus Christ.
The imagery of these verses may be difficult to understand because Zephaniah used terms familiar to listeners in his day but unfamiliar to modern readers. The following information will be helpful:
1. The “fish gate” (v. 10) was on the north end of the city. People there would be the first to see an enemy invading from the north.
2. The fish gate opened into the part of the city known as the “second quarter” (v. 10), probably because it was an expansion of the original city of David. This quarter would be the first reached from the north.
3. “Maktesh” (v. 11) was the name of the merchant quarter, which lay in the second quarter; thus, the reference to merchants, “they that bear silver.”
4. To “search with candles” (v. 12) suggests an exhaustive search, since in the poorly lighted houses of those times one would have to use a candle to look for a lost object at night.
5. “Settled upon their lees” (v. 12) is a figure drawn from wine making. The lees are the thick residue of the pulp of the grapes. “Good wine, when it remains for a long time upon its lees, becomes stronger; but bad wine becomes harsher and thicker” (Keil and Delitzsch, Commentary, 10:2:134). The interpretation of the symbol is that wicked men, like bad wine, remain apathetic about the true religion and become increasingly harsh and bitter.
Judah was not the only nation ripe for destruction. The foreign peoples who taunted and reviled Judah were even more worthy of annihilation. Each of them would share in the impending doom. Still, there was some hope.
“Those who see the worst in human nature are often the first to see a gleam of hope. Following the gloom, unmitigated and unrelieved in any way, Zephaniah sends one shaft of light into the darkness. A remnant may yet be saved [see vv. 2–3]. He does not see any way of escape for any but for the humble, whom he mentions in contrast to the proud who have provoked the jealous wrath of God.” (Guthrie and Motyer, New Bible Commentary, p. 777.)
Zephaniah turned again to Jerusalem with both warning and promise. He condemned many groups in Judah’s society, including the political leaders, the judges, the prophets, and the priests. Corruption was at every level. He stressed the constant righteousness and justice of the Lord, who continually brings down wicked people and nations. All hope was not to be lost, however, because there would still be a remnant with whom God could work and bring to pass His righteous purposes. In addition, there is always God’s unbounded mercy. The righteous in any age can take comfort in their righteousness.
The prophet concluded on a note of optimism. The day will come when God’s people “shall not see evil any more” (Zephaniah 3:15). Those who have borne the burden of reproach shall be gathered from afar and become “a name and a praise” (v. 20) among men.
“Zephaniah saw our day and beyond. In it he both suffered and rejoiced. He suffered in spirit because of the desolation and destruction which he saw, but he was able to use this as a warning and threat to his own people. In the redemption and final blessings of Israel he saw a ray of hope to extend to Judah. No prophet has written more clearly or vigorously of the Day of the Lord. Zephaniah must be added to the list of prophets who give us a grave warning of disaster.” (Sidney B. Sperry, The Voice of Israel’s Prophets, p. 388.)
|
|
|
Zephaniah warned unrepentant Jerusalem. |
Do you find the language and imagery of the Old Testament prophets difficult? Many do, but that should not become discouraging. The language and means of expression are far removed from the way we speak today. But gaining an understanding of them is worth the price of extra study, for the message has great application. Even though the prophets spoke to their own people and of their own times, through the inspiration they received they also spoke again and again of the last dispensation. There is great value in studying the writings of these men, for they saw our day and told us how to prepare for it.
|
|
|
The Egyptians were defeated at Carchemish. |
Habakkuk “differs markedly from the other prophetic books. Whereas most of the others contain the words of the Lord addressed to the people, in the Book of Habakkuk the prophet, as the representative of the people, addresses and challenges the Lord. He begins by complaining about the apparent indifference of the Lord to violence, strife, and widespread corruption in Judah. The prophet is puzzled over this indifference, knowing as he does the righteous and holy character of God. The Lord, in answer to this complaining, states that He is about to raise up the Chaldeans to execute judgment. The prophet is only the more perplexed at this answer for he fails to understand why the Lord should use the cruel and fierce Chaldeans to execute judgment upon people who are more righteous than they are. The Lord, however, points out that the Chaldeans are to be but temporarily triumphant; they shall eventually meet with destruction, whereas the righteous shall live by faith. The oppressed nations may begin at once to rejoice over the fall of the Chaldeans; hence the prophet’s ‘taunt-song’ against them, which takes the form of five woes upon the corrupt traits in the enemy’s character and his many cruelties. The book ends in a beautiful anthem of praise, called in the title of Chapter Three ‘A prayer of Habakkuk the Prophet.’” (Sidney B. Sperry, The Voice of Israel’s Prophets, pp. 365–66.)
1. Use Notes and Commentary below to help you as you read and study the book of Habakkuk.
2. Complete Points to Ponder as directed by your teacher. (Individual-study students should complete all of this section.)
Habakkuk most probably served his ministry after the appearance of the Chaldeans in world history. Many scholars believe that he wrote after the battle of Carchemish in which Nebuchadnezzar defeated the Egyptians in 605 B.C. and before the first deportation of the Jews in 597 B.C. From his writing it is also believed he lived in Jerusalem. (See James Hastings, ed., A Dictionary of the Bible, s.v. “Habakkuk.”) If this is the case, then he was a contemporary of Lehi and Jeremiah, prophesying to the same people.
Nothing is known about the man himself other than what may be inferred from his writings. The traditional material that has filtered down concerning him is evidently legendary and cannot be comfortably relied upon. It is known that he was a great prophet who left “one of the noblest and most penetrating words in the history of religion” (J. R. Dummelow, A Commentary on the Holy Bible, p. 587).
Habakkuk, like other prophets through the ages, wondered why the Lord would not answer his prayers. Doubtless everyone who believes in God has felt forsaken at times. Joseph Smith and even Jesus experienced this loneliness at least once in their lives (see D&C 121:1–6; Matthew 27:46). Ellis T. Rasmussen described Habakkuk’s dilemma in this way.
“Habakkuk’s miseries likely arose in the days of Judah’s degeneration, after the time of Assyria’s conquest of northern Israel, and before the time when Babylonia came to carry the remaining tribe, Judah, away into captivity. The religious reforms of Hezekiah in his century, and those of Josiah a hundred years later (about 620 B.C.) had put the just and the right at the helm in Judah for a time. But as always, resurgent corruption in politics, in morals, and in religion swiftly reappeared when the champions of right were gone.
“Religious compromises, induced by the desires of the liberal and the libertine, ever seeking to soften the restrictions and responsibilities of Israel’s covenant faith brought derision and persecution upon the ‘pious’ and the ‘faithful.’ Under these conditions Jeremiah suffered, and it is likely that this was also the setting of Habakkuk’s ministry.
“Thus it is that he cries out against the iniquity, grievance, spoiling, violence, strife, and contention on every side, for the processes of justice and execution of the law seem endlessly delayed when the righteous are encompassed about by the wicked.” (“Habakkuk, a Prophet with a Problem,” Instructor, Sept. 1962, insert between pp. 306–7.)
Habakkuk’s lament is one that has been raised by many: Why does the Lord allow wicked people and nations to operate, and why are they allowed, in some cases, to punish God’s people? Habakkuk did not mention the Babylonians (Chaldeans) in his question (see vv. 1–4), but it is obvious from the Lord’s answer that they were the ones of whom Habakkuk was thinking.
The Lord replied that He intended to use the Chaldeans for His righteous purposes in such a way that it would be difficult for Habakkuk to believe it (see vv. 5–6). The Lord’s response merely increased Habakkuk’s confusion: how could God condone the cruelties of a nation more wicked than Judah? Were the Chaldeans never to get what was due them for their evil ways? Habakkuk’s faith was being tested.
Sperry wrote that this verse “is one of the great passages of the Old Testament. It means essentially this: There is a moral and spiritual distinction between the Chaldeans and the people of Judah. The Chaldeans, puffed up and arrogant, priding themselves in their wealth and power and deceptive in their dealings with other nations, do not possess the moral and spiritual elements which alone can insure permanence and stability. The people of the Lord, on the other hand, [should] possess moral integrity, fidelity, and spiritual insight which insure for them a future. ‘The future belongs to the righteous.’ When the prophet says that ‘the righteous shall live by his faith (more accurately faithfulness)’ he implies permanency.” (Voice of Israel’s Prophets, pp. 371–72.)
A shigionoth may have been a stringed instrument, or perhaps a musical expression used to accompany singers. Possibly this prayer of Habakkuk was set to music and intended for use in the temple. A selah was a cue for the person singing or chanting the words. The use of this word in Psalms is further evidence that Habakkuk’s prayer may have been set to music.
The entire chapter is excellent Hebrew poetry. Habakkuk makes a number of references to events of Moses and Joshua’s time. Anyone familiar with those biblical events will recognize the ones alluded to. The burden of Habakkuk’s prayer is for Jehovah to return and sustain Israel as in days of old. This He will surely do in the latter days. Habakkuk’s trust was fully in God. Rasmussen said of Habakkuk’s song of praise:
“After [his] experience, Habakkuk felt inspired to utter a psalm of praise to God and trust in Him. In awe at the powers and glory of God, he poetically describes the power of Deity over all facets and functions of nature, and speaks of His might to overcome all of His enemies. Then in the spirit expressed also by Job who said, ‘Though He slay me, yet will I trust Him: . . . ,’ Habakkuk lists in six poetic lines the disasters that could come to him, but strongly he avers in his last five lines:
Yet I will rejoice in the Lord,
I will joy in the God of my salvation.
The Lord God is my strength,
and he will make my feet like hinds’ feet,
and he will make me to walk upon mine high places . . .
“It is for this trust in God in spite of the vicissitudes of life that Habakkuk’s message is for us also today a wholesome stimulant.” (“Habakkuk, a Prophet with a Problem,” insert between pp. 306–7.)
Using the book of Habakkuk as your primary source, write an answer for the questions: “Why does God allow the wicked to punish His people? It is true that the people of Israel did some evil things, but were they any worse than things done by Assyria or Babylon? The Nephites in Captain Moroni’s time were not perfect either, but weren’t they living at a higher level than the Lamanites who attacked them? Were the Jews of Jesus’ day less obedient than the Romans who destroyed them?”
As you formulate your answer, you may also wish to consider Doctrine and Covenants 82:3–4 and Doctrine and Covenants 103:5–10.
|
|
|
The Lion Gate of Babylon |
Not many years after Assyria had conquered the Northern Kingdom of Israel and taken the ten tribes captive, the empire began to crumble (see Enrichment D). In the southern part of the empire, the Chaldeans and Babylonians were in the ascendancy, and they quickly seized power from the toppling Assyrians. In 609 B.C., King Nabopolassar, in league with Egypt and Media, attacked and conquered Nineveh, the capital of Assyria. Babylonia became the ruling empire and set about to consolidate its position. Like Assyria before it, Babylonia used a combination of conquest and deportation of whole populations to do so.
Nebuchadnezzar inherited the empire when his father, Nabopolassar, died. Under Nebuchadnezzar’s leadership Babylon reached the summit of its greatness and glory. Using slaves from various areas of the empire, Nebuchadnezzar inaugurated a massive building program and quickly made Babylon the greatest city in the world. Through conquest and commerce, the wealth of the world flowed into Babylon’s treasury, and Nebuchadnezzar used that wealth to glorify the city. The descriptive phrases found in the prophetic writings of the Old Testament describe Babylon’s glory. Daniel called it “this great Babylon” (Daniel 4:30); Jeremiah described it as “the praise of the whole earth” (Jeremiah 51:41); Isaiah said it was “the lady of kingdoms” (Isaiah 47:5), “the glory of kingdoms,” and “the beauty of the Chaldees’ excellency” (Isaiah 13:19).
Ancient historians spoke in detail of Babylon and showed that such descriptive phrases were not exaggerations. A modern scholar wrote that present-day archaeology supports the incredible claims of these writers:
“Herodotus claimed that this wall was eighty-four feet wide and three hundred and thirty-six feet high. He also claimed that small one-story houses were built on the top of the wall on either side, and there was even then space enough between the houses to permit four chariots to drive abreast.
“Herodotus has fared badly at the hands of modern critics, but in this instance the explorers found that this work of antiquity was even larger than he claimed. The outer retaining wall was twenty-three and a half feet thick and was made of baked bricks laid with asphalt. Inside of this there was a filling of sand and gravel which extended sixty-nine feet, and then the inner retaining wall, which was forty-four feet thick. The whole structure, therefore, was one hundred and thirty-six and a half feet wide. They also verified the statement of Diodorus to the effect that many of the bricks of the wall and its citadels were beautifully colored.” (Samuel Fallows, ed., The Popular and Critical Bible Encyclopedia and Scriptural Dictionary, s.v. “Babylon,” pp. 208–9.)
These massive walls encircled the entire city, running an estimated fifty-six miles, about fourteen miles on each side (see Merrill F. Unger, Unger’s Bible Dictionary, s.v. “Babylon,” p. 116).
The walls were not the only amazing structure in Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar married a Persian princess named Amytis. Raised in the mountain highlands around Ecbatana, she found the arid plains of Babylon depressing. Nebuchadnezzar set about to create a mountain paradise within the walls of Babylon to help his wife feel more at home. Thus were built the famous hanging gardens of Babylon, ranked as one of the seven wonders of the ancient world. The sheer size of the undertaking staggers the imagination. Fallows wrote:
“Babylon was all flat; and to accomplish so extravagant a desire an artificial mountain was reared, 400 feet on each side, while terraces one above another rose to a height that overtopped the walls of the city, that is, above 300 feet in elevation. The ascent from terrace to terrace was made by corresponding flights of steps, while the terraces themselves were reared to their various stages on ranges of regular piers, which, forming a kind of vaulting, rose in succession one over the other to the required height of each terrace, the whole being bound together by a wall of 22 feet in thickness. The level of each terrace or garden was then formed in the following manner: the top of the piers was first laid over with flat stones, 16 feet in length and 4 feet in width; on these stones were spread beds of matting, then a thick layer of bitumen; after which came two courses of bricks, which were covered with sheets of solid lead. The earth was heaped on this platform; and in order to admit the roots of large trees, prodigious hollow piers were built and filled with mold. From the Euphrates, which flowed close to the foundation, water was drawn up by machinery. The whole, says Q. Curtius (v:5), had, to those who saw it from a distance, the appearance of woods overhanging mountains. Such was the completion of Nebuchadnezzar’s work when he found himself at rest in his house, and flourished in his palace. The king spoke and said, ‘Is not this great Babylon that I have built for the house of the kingdom by the might of my power, and the honor of my majesty’? [Daniel 4:30], a picture which is amply justified by the descriptions of heathen writers. Nowhere could the king have taken so comprehensive a view of the city he had so magnificently constructed and adorned as when walking on the highest terrace of the gardens of his palace.” (Bible Encyclopedia, s.v. “Babylon,” pp. 204–5.)
As so often happens, Babylon’s wealth and glory were accompanied by moral decay, wickedness, and iniquity. So terrible were the morals of Babylon that the very name became the symbol for worldliness, spiritual wickedness, and Satan’s kingdom. It is “the great whore” (Revelation 17:1); “the mother of harlots and abominations” (Revelation 17:5; see also D&C 133:14; 1:16; 1 Nephi 13:5–9). The secular historians give information that helps to explain why the prophets used the name Babylon to symbolize the antithesis of godliness. Will Durant wrote that “even Alexander, who was not above dying of drinking, was shocked by the morals of Babylon” (Our Oriental Heritage, The Story of Civilization, vol. 1, p. 244).
Fallows also described the great city: “Babylon, as the center of a great kingdom, was the seat of boundless luxury, and its inhabitants were notorious for their addiction to self-indulgence and effeminacy. Q. Curtius (v:I) asserts that, ‘nothing could be more corrupt than its morals, nothing more fitted to excite and allure to immoderate pleasures. The rites of hospitality were polluted by the grossest and most shameless lusts. Money dissolved every tie, whether of kindred, respect, or esteem. The Babylonians were very greatly given to wine, and the enjoyments which accompany inebriety. Women were present at their convivialities, first with some degree of propriety, but, growing worse and worse by degrees, they ended by throwing off at once their modesty and their clothing.’ On the ground of their awful wickedness the Babylonians were threatened with [appropriate] punishment, through the mouths of the prophets; and the tyranny with which the rulers of the city exercised their sway was not without a decided effect in bringing on them the terrific consequences of the Divine vengeance. Nor in the whole range of literature is there anything to be found approaching to the sublimity, force, and terror with which Isaiah and others speak on this painful subject [Isaiah 14:2; 47:1; Jeremiah 51:39; Daniel 5:1].” (Bible Encyclopedia, s.v. “Babylon,” pp. 205–6.)
Abraham foresaw that Israel would be in bondage in Egypt and not have an inheritance in the promised land because, as the Lord revealed, “the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full” (Genesis 15:16; see also v. 13). The Canaanites, of whom the Amorites were a part, had not yet “ripened in iniquity” (see Ether 2:9; 9:20). By the time Joshua led the Israelites into Canaan, however, the Canaanites had become so degenerate that the Lord commanded that they be utterly destroyed (see Deuteronomy 7:1–5).
Of all peoples who ought to have understood that wickedness will be punished, it should have been the people living in the Southern Kingdom of Judah. They had seen the Northern Kingdom fall to Assyria, and they themselves had been miraculously delivered from the Assyrian army because they had heeded the words of Isaiah (see Notes and Commentary on 2 Kings 18–19 and Enrichment D).
God has clearly taught that He is no respecter of persons (see Acts 10:34). He does not show favoritism. All who are obedient receive blessings; all who are ripened in iniquity lose their blessings. As Nephi told his brothers, the Canaanites were destroyed because of their iniquity, and if the Jews were no better, they faced a similar fate (see Leviticus 18:24–28; 1 Nephi 17:32–35).
But Judah did not learn the lesson. After Assyria was overthrown, the pressures on the Southern Kingdom lessened while the new empire, Babylon, consolidated its power. Like her northern sister, Judah was soon deeply entrenched in idolatry and wickedness, so much so that the Lord said that king “Manasseh seduced them [Judah] to do more evil than did the nations whom the Lord destroyed before the children of Israel” (2 Kings 21:9). In that state, Judah lost the promise of divine protection. And Babylon, hungry for power, stood waiting to conquer the world. The Lord sent His prophets to warn the people of their impending destruction. Jeremiah, Lehi, and many others were called (see 1 Nephi 1:4), but their warnings fell on deaf ears.
Under King Josiah (640–609 B.C.), one last attempt was made at reformation (see 2 Kings 22–23), but it was short-lived, and soon the people had forsaken Jehovah. The political rulers looked to Egypt for protection and power against Babylon’s growing influence, even though Jeremiah had again and again warned Judah not to trust in Egypt for deliverance. Thus the stage was set for a second tragedy among the people of Israel.
The events of the twenty or so years that followed Josiah’s reign saw the fruits of Judah’s disobedience brought to maturity. Judah was caught in the power struggle between Egypt and Babylonia. Jehoahaz succeeded his father and reigned three months. Then he was taken to Egypt, and his half brother who was given the throne name of Jehoiakim ruled as an Egyptian vassal. He exacted heavy taxes from his people for Egypt.
Babylon defeated the Egyptians at Carchemish in 605 B.C. Judah became a vassal of the new conquerors. Jehoaikim paid tribute to Babylon for three years before unsuccessfully attempting to free his people. The rebellious king was killed, and many of his people were exiled to Babylon. The king’s wickedness had accelerated the deterioration of the people of Judah. He was succeeded by his young son Jehoiachin, who continued to resist the Babylonians but was defeated within three months.
The Babylonians deported many of the educated, skilled, and religious to weaken the leadership capability of Judah. Jehoiachin was likewise exiled, and his uncle, who took the throne name Zedekiah, ruled in his stead. He pledged loyalty as a vassal king but in time found resistance among the people. A spirit of nationalism rose against the weight of foreign servitude. Revolt in Babylon caused the withdrawal of the caretaker forces from Judah, and a growing patriotic feeling among the people brought Zedekiah to seek the support of Egypt in rebellion against the power of the north.
With matters quieted at home, the Babylonians returned with swift vengeance against Judah. Jerusalem was besieged and other fortresses in the land of Judah were attacked and reduced to rubble. The siege against Jerusalem continued after the rest of the nation had fallen. The conditions during this time were almost beyond imagination.
An eyewitness recorded the following description:
“How is the gold become dim! how is the most fine gold changed! the stones of the sanctuary are poured out in the top of every street. The precious sons of Zion, comparable to fine gold, how are they esteemed as earthen pitchers, the work of the hands of the potter! Even the sea monsters draw out the breast, they give suck to their young ones: the daughter of my people is become cruel, like the ostriches in the wilderness. The tongue of the sucking child cleaveth to the roof of his mouth for thirst: the young children ask bread, and no man breaketh it unto them. They that did feed delicately are desolate in the streets: they that were brought up in scarlet embrace dunghills.” (Lamentations 4:1–5.)
“They that be slain with the sword are better than they that be slain with hunger: for these pine away, stricken through for want of the fruits of the field. The hands of the pitiful women have sodden their own children: they were their meat in the destruction of the daughter of my people.” (Lamentations 4:9–10.)
Bible historian Harry Thomas Frank wrote of the demise of this people and their city:
“In July of 587 Zedekiah sought to surrender the city and end the suffering. Once before, ten years ago, the Babylonians had treated Jerusalem with what was for those days extraordinary mercy. Not now. This time they meant to be done with the center of intrigue. Food ran out. So did the king. In the evening of the day Babylonian soldiers poured into the city, Zedekiah and some of his men fled, making for the Jordan and hoping to escape to safety in the desert. They got as far as Jericho before they were captured. Nebuchadnezzar was in Syria at his headquarters. There the Judahite and his sons were taken. No more Hebrew kings were to live in luxurious exile as Jehoiachin had done. With despatch Zedekiah was brought into the presence of the great king of Babylon, his sons were slain in his presence, and then he was blinded and dragged off northward in chains.
“Jerusalem had meanwhile passed into Babylonian hands. What the Babylonians found in the city, and what they did to what they found does not require a very fertile imagination. At the same time, somewhat surprisingly, there seems not to have been any prior decision as to what should be done with the city when it fell. For a month further horrors and indignities were visited upon the sorely tried people, who must have believed that they were indeed abandoned by God himself. Then Nebuzaradan, chief of Nebuchadnezzar’s bodyguard and thus a person of considerable importance, arrived in Jerusalem. Nebuzaradan was not a herald of good news. Upon his orders high officials of the state, and with them certain leading persons in various professions, were taken to Riblah, the Syrian headquarters, where they were executed. Others were herded together to be taken into exile in Babylonia. Jeremiah 52:29 mentions the number 832. But this doubtless refers only to adult males and likely only to inhabitants of Jerusalem. The number of deportees was much larger. Finally the walls of Jerusalem were leveled, and what remained after a year and a half of siege, and a month of occupation and terror brought by Nebuzaradan, was put to the torch.
“Not for the last time smoke hung heavy over the Judean hills and blew gently across the Mount of Olives and toward the wilderness near the Jordan. But on that day, in the heat of the summer of 587, it rose from Judah’s funeral pyre.” (Discovering the Biblical World, p. 130. See Maps, “The First Exile and Return of Judah,” for a detailed layout of this period of history.)
|
|
|
© Quebecor World Inc. |
It was Jeremiah’s privilege (or burden) to predict and then live through the fall of Judah to Babylon. One of the first things the Lord told Jeremiah was, “I will hasten my word to perform it” (Jeremiah 1:12). Jeremiah, like Mormon, was called to labor among a people for whom there was no hope because they refused to repent, and “the day of grace was passed with them, both temporally and spiritually” (Mormon 2:15). Mormon, after witnessing the destruction of the Nephite nation, cried out for his people (see Mormon 6:17–19). Here was a righteous man, one of the best, lamenting over his people who were so blind, so foolish, so spiritually dead. Jeremiah, too, mourned his people’s wickedness. You may think of Jeremiah as a harsh man as you read his scorching denunciations of the Jewish people and the lives they were living, but he was not. His motivation, like Mormon’s, was love.
A prophet does not select where and when he serves. God chooses when and to whom a prophet is sent. One may be an Enoch and build Zion, or a David O. McKay and preside over the Church in times of peace and prosperity. Another may be a Mormon or a Jeremiah and try in vain to save a rebellious and backsliding people. Each has his calling. Each has his time. Each has his lesson for you to learn. Look for Jeremiah’s lesson as you study this great prophet.
1. Use Notes and Commentary below to help you as you read and study Jeremiah 1–19.
2. Complete Points to Ponder as directed by your teacher. (Individual-study students should complete all of this section.)
Jeremiah, a Levite, came from Anathoth, a town of the priests that lay a few miles northeast of Jerusalem in the tribal territory of Benjamin. He labored in his prophetic calling during the reign of at least four kings of Judah: Josiah, Jehoahaz, Jehoiachin, and Zedekiah. He began his labors as a youth in approximately 627 B.C. and was the leading prophet in Jerusalem, serving with Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Lehi, and others (see 1 Nephi 1:4). Since Lehi and Nephi refer to Jeremiah’s prophecies, it is safe to assume that some of them were recorded on the brass plates (see 1 Nephi 5:14).
“With the exception of Josiah, all of the kings of Judah during Jeremiah’s ministry were unworthy men under whom the country suffered severely. Even during the reign of an earlier king, the wicked Manasseh, the Baal cult was restored among the Jews, and there was introduced the worship of the heavenly planets in accordance with the dictates of the Assyro-Babylonian religion. Jeremiah therefore found idolatry, hill-worship, and heathen religious practices rampant among his people. Heathen idols stood in the temple [Jeremiah 32:34], children were sacrificed to Baal-Moloch (7:31; 19:5; 32:35), and Baal was especially invoked as the usual heathen deity. The worship of the ‘queen of Heaven’ ought also to be mentioned. (7:18; 44:19) The corruption of the nation’s religious worship was, of course, accompanied by all manner of immorality and unrighteousness, against which the prophet had continually to testify. The poor were forgotten. Jeremiah was surrounded on all sides by almost total apostasy. But professional prophets there were aplenty. Says Dr. H. L. Willett:
“‘He was surrounded by plenty of prophets, but they were the smooth, easy-going, popular, professional preachers whose words awakened no conscience, and who assured the people that the nation was safe in the protecting care of God. This was a true message in Isaiah’s day, but that time was long since past, and Jerusalem was destined for captivity. Thus Jeremiah was doomed to preach an unwelcome message, while the false prophets persuaded the people that he was unpatriotic, uninspired, and pessimistic. (14:13, 14).’” (Sidney B. Sperry, The Voice of Israel’s Prophets, p. 153.)
Jeremiah 1:4–5 is a powerful proof of our premortal existence as individuals. The Lord certified to Jeremiah that his calling to a mission as a prophet unto the nations antedated his birth. The phrase “I knew thee” (Jeremiah 1:5) means more than a casual acquaintance. The Hebrew word yada, which is translated knew, connotes a very personal, intimate relationship. (See J. A. Thompson, The Book of Jeremiah, The New International Commentary on the Old Testament, p. 145.) Indeed, Jeremiah’s premortal appointment consisted of being foreordained, sanctified, and sent forth (compare Abraham 3:23).
Jeremiah, like others called by the Lord to such heavy and humbling assignments, expressed his feelings of inadequacy. Compare Jeremiah’s feelings with those of such others as Enoch (see Moses 6:31), Moses (see Exodus 4:10), and Gideon (see Judges 6:15).
In Jeremiah 1:9 the role of a prophet is succinctly set forth. A prophet does not necessarily say what he wants to say, for the Lord puts His own words into the mouth of the prophet. That is why it does not matter whether the word comes direct from God or through His servant: “it is the same” (D&C 1:38).
Jeremiah’s first vision was of a branch of an almond tree (see Old Testament Student Manual: Genesis–2 Samuel [religion 301, 2003], p. 207, for the significance of Aaron’s rod being an almond branch). An almond branch was evidently chosen because it is the first tree to bud in spring. As the almond tree hastens to come into blossom, so would the word of the Lord through Jeremiah hasten to fulfillment.
Next, the vision of a “seething pot” was shown to Jeremiah, symbolizing the disaster and pain which, like the contents of a boiling cauldron, would spill over and run down the kingdoms of the north to overwhelm Judah (see C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament, 8:1:43–44).
The burning of incense (see Jeremiah 1:16) is a symbol of prayer (see Revelation 5:8; 8:3). Far more is implied in the Lord’s accusation than just a ritual of burning incense to false gods. The people were seeking help and guidance from the false gods rather than from the Lord.
Jeremiah was told to stand stout and strong, to brace himself, and to declare the Lord’s word without fear of man. The Lord likened him to an invincible city, preparing Jeremiah to stand firm against the onslaught that would pour out on him on every hand once he started his ministry and condemned the people’s sins.
The sequence of Israel’s spiritual development is outlined in Jeremiah, chapter 2:
• Israel’s early devotion and righteousness (see vv. 2–3).
• Israel’s apostasy (see vv. 4–13). The Lord asked what fault the people found in Him that justified their turning away from Him.
• Tragic results of apostasy (see vv. 14–19). The Lord’s people had forsaken Him, “gone far from” Him (v. 5), and changed “their glory for that which doth not profit” (v. 11).
In verse 13 the two evils committed by Judah are told in figurative terms: They have forsaken the fountain (Jehovah) of living water (life), and they have hewn out broken cisterns (gods) which can hold no water (life). Then the image is changed, and the Lord states that Israel had partaken of the waters of “Sihor” (the Nile) and of “the river” (v. 18) (the Euphrates). In other words, they drank the spiritual waters of Egypt and Babylon and were filled with the lifeless water of idolatry.
Verse 19 teaches the important truth that one is punished by as well as for one’s transgressions. The phrase “my fear is not in thee” (v. 19) refers to the fear of God. Fear in the Hebrew denotes a sense of reverent awe and profound respect. If the Jews had this fear in them, they would not need to learn through the consequences of their transgressions.
|
|
|
Judah, the lion of the Lord, is symbolized on the Lion Gate of Jerusalem. |
Jeremiah used vivid imagery in denouncing Judah:
“Broken thy yoke and burst thy bands” (v. 20). The Lord had delivered them from the bondage of Egypt.
“Playing the harlot” (v. 20). Judah had committed idolatry, or spiritual adultery, with false gods as well as actually engaging in unchaste practices.
“The degenerate plant of a strange vine” (v. 21). This wild vine brought forth poisonous berries, or evil works.
“Wash thee with nitre [lye], and take thee much soap, yet thine iniquity is marked” (v. 22). The most powerful means of purification could not cleanse Judah’s sins.
“In the valley” (v. 23). Probably this valley was the Hinnom Valley, where children were sacrificed to Molech (see Jeremiah 7:31).
“A swift dromedary traversing her ways; a wild ass . . . that snuffeth up the wind at her pleasure” (vv. 23–24). The imagery indicates that as a camel or a wild ass in heat runs back and forth during the mating season, so did Israel run after false gods.
“Withhold thy foot from being shod and thy throat from thirst” (v. 25). In their anxiety to follow after the peoples of the world and worship false gods, they ran out of the house barefoot and would not even stop to slake their thirst.
“Saying to a stock, Thou art my father; and to a stone, Thou hast brought me forth” (v. 27). Israel worshiped images of wood and stone as the gods to whom they owed life and being.
“Where are thy gods?” (v. 28). The Lord challenged Judah to find help from the false idols now that destruction threatened her.
“In vain have I smitten your children” (v. 30). Even the judgments of the past, such as the fall of the Northern Kingdom and the siege of Judah by Assyria, were not enough to bring the people to repentance.
“Your own sword hath devoured your prophets” (v. 30). The people killed the prophets sent by God to warn them.
“Can a maid forget her ornaments?” (v. 32; see also vv. 33–34). Unlike the bride who adorns herself with chastity and faithfulness to her husband, this bride of Judah was found with soiled skirts, which were so obvious that a search was not required to find them. Israel had become so skilled in doing evil that she could teach even the experienced harlots of idolatry (see v. 33).
Jeremiah continued the marriage symbolism he began in Jeremiah 2:32 (see Notes and Commentary on Hosea for other uses of this same symbolism).
Jeremiah 3:1, 6, 9, 14, and 20 show that the children of Israel had broken their vows to the Lord and had “played the harlot” (v. 1) with other gods. Northern Israel (the ten tribes), Judah’s sister, had also committed adultery (idolatry) with false gods, and the Lord had given her a bill of divorcement and sent her out of the land (she was taken captive by the Assyrians).
In the midst of condemning Judah for their apostasy, Jeremiah turned to the future when Israel will again become a faithful wife and be reclaimed. The Lord reminded Israel that He is merciful and that all they need do to be reclaimed is to turn back to Him. The Lord’s promises include the following:
• Missionary work and gathering to Zion (see v. 14).
• Knowledge and understanding taught by faithful pastors (church leaders) (see v. 15).
• The fulfillment of the old covenant and the establishment of a new covenant (see v. 16).
• The restoration of Jerusalem to righteousness (see v. 17).
• The gathering of Israel, including the return of the lost tribes from the north and the reuniting of the children of Judah in the lands of their inheritance (see vv. 18–19; see also Isaiah 11:16; 35:8–10; 51:9–11; D&C 133:26–35).
Circumcision was a token given to Abraham as a sign that a child was born into the covenant and was not accountable for sin until he was eight years old (see JST, Genesis 17:3–12). The Lord taught in numerous places in the scriptures that the true circumcision after a person is accountable is that of the heart (see Deuteronomy 10:16; 30:6; Jeremiah 9:25–26; Romans 2:25–29). One must accept the covenant in his heart and become sinless through faith, repentance, and baptism.
The Lord used various figurative images in Jeremiah 4:5–31 to foretell the catastrophe that was about to befall Judah.
“The lion” (v. 7). Renowned for its destructive killing power, the lion, Babylon, was about to come out of the thicket where it stayed hidden until it sallied forth on the hunt.
The “dry wind” (v. 11). The scorching desert winds were devastating in the Holy Land if they blew very long or hard, for they sucked the moisture from plants, animals, and people with terrible effect. This wind was not the gentle breeze used to fan away the chaff while winnowing grain, but a full, hard wind (see v. 13).
“Clouds” and a “whirlwind” (v. 13). Babylon’s troops would be like a huge thundercloud covering the sky, and its effect would be that of a tornado.
Earth “without form, and void” (v. 23). See Genesis 1:2. So great would be the destruction that it would be as if the Creation had been undone.
Clothed “in crimson” (v. 30). In her extremity, like a harlot rejected by her former lovers, Judah would seek for help from her false gods in an ever more desperate search for relief, but she would find none.
Jerusalem had reached the point of no return. In an offer similar to the one He made to Abraham for the deliverance of Sodom and Gomorrah (see Genesis 18:23–33), the Lord promised to spare Judah if anyone could be found who lived justly or sought the truth (see Jeremiah 5:1).
But in a searing condemnation of Judah, Jeremiah showed that there were none such. Instead of doing righteous works, the people swore falsely (see v. 2); their faces were as hard as rock—they showed no repentance or compassion (see v. 3); they turned to the houses of prostitution in troops (see v. 7); like horses in the mating season, they neighed wildly for their neighbor’s wife (see v. 8); they had “a revolting and a rebellious heart” (v. 23); like those who trap birds, the people laid snares for other men and grew fat with the illegal gains (see vv. 26–28).
Nephi, a contemporary of Jeremiah, taught that the Canaanites in the time of Moses “had rejected every word of God, and they were ripe in iniquity; ... and the Lord did curse the land against them . . . unto their destruction.” He used similar language to describe the children of Israel: “They have become wicked, yea, nearly unto ripeness,” and warned that they too faced destruction (1 Nephi 17:35, 43; emphasis added). It was bad enough that the society of Judah was filled with corrupt prophets and priests, but the real national tragedy, described in Jeremiah’s summary comment, was: “my people love to have it so” (Jeremiah 5:31). Further, in Jeremiah 8:10, the prophet said: “Every one from the least even unto the greatest is given to covetousness, from the prophet even unto the priest every one dealeth falsely.”
Is it any wonder Judah had no hope? Is it surprising that Jeremiah was so scathing in his denunciation?
Speaking of Jeremiah’s time, one scholar said: “The prophets and priests of the day dressed the nation’s wounds, but skin-deep only. Nor did they have any sense of shame for the loathsome deeds they perpetrated. They neither felt shame nor did they know how to blush. They had become completely insensitive to the evils in which they and their nation were immersed. But continued active involvement in evil has a way of dulling the conscience until a point is reached when all awareness of evil is lost. Thereafter leaders fall with the rest of those who fall. In the day of divine reckoning they too would go down, for it would be the day of their own doom.” (Thompson, Book of Jeremiah, p. 258.)
The boldness of Jeremiah’s statement can be realized only when one recalls the importance given to the temple by the reforms of Josiah in 621 B.C. Josiah had made it the sole place of sacrificial worship of Jehovah for all Jews in an attempt to stamp out idol worship. The temple and its priests thus had acquired by this time greater importance than ever before. Then, in the name of Jehovah, Jeremiah issued a challenge that struck at the very existence of the temple. He plainly told the Jews that if they would mend their ways and become righteous, they would be spared; otherwise, not even the temple would save them, because they had made the temple a “den of robbers” (v. 11). Because of the great reverence the people had for the temple, though it was a false reverence, it is not surprising that Jeremiah was quickly arrested and imprisoned (see Jeremiah 26).
The language of Jeremiah 7:11, combined with that of Isaiah 56:7, was used by Jesus when He cleansed the temple (see Matthew 21:13).
|
|
|
The temple at Jerusalem was completely destroyed. |
After the Israelites under Joshua conquered the land of Canaan, the tabernacle, the equivalent of the temple, was set up at Shiloh. Eventually Israel became so wicked that they set up graven images and worshiped them in direct competition with the tabernacle (see Judges 18:30–31). A short time later the Philistines attacked the Israelites and defeated them. They overran Shiloh and took the ark of the covenant in the battle (see 1 Samuel 4:10–12).
The parallel between Israel and Judah should have been evident. For the wicked to look to the temple as a source of protection was foolish. Jeremiah 7:21–23 reminded the people that obedience is more critical to God than the outward rituals of sacrifice performed in the temple.
“For their sins the people must take up a lament. The cutting off of the hair was a symbol of grief (Job 1:20; Mic. 1:16). The Hebrew text reads literally ‘Cut off your crown (nezer).’ The hair was looked on as, in a sense, a diadem. To cut off the hair was to bring down Israel’s pride. But there may be here an overtone of something else. The long hair of the Nazirite was a sign of his consecration to Yahweh [Jehovah] (Num. 6:2–8). The removal of the hair signified an abandonment of his consecration (Judg. 16:15–22). In Jeremiah’s view, Israel, now represented only by Judah and Jerusalem, had abandoned her consecration to Yahweh and was not worthy to wear the crown of her long hair.” (Thompson, Book of Jeremiah, p. 293.)
“In order to pour the utmost contempt upon the land, the victorious enemies dragged out of their graves, caves, and sepulchers, the bones of kings, princes, prophets, priests, and the principal inhabitants, and exposed them in the open air; so that they became, in the order of God’s judgments, a reproach to them in the vain confidence they had in the sun, moon, and the host of heaven—all the planets and stars, whose worship they had set up in opposition to that of Jehovah. This custom of raising the bodies of the dead, and scattering their bones about, seems to have been general. It was the highest expression of hatred and contempt.” (Adam Clarke, The Holy Bible . . . with a Commentary and Critical Notes, 4:276.)
Gilead was famous for its healing ointment (see Genesis 37:25). Nevertheless, no healing ointment, or medication, was available for rebellious Israel. The balm of salvation could be administered only through Israel’s Savior, Jehovah, whom they had rejected.
Except, perhaps, for David’s cry over his son Absalom (see 2 Samuel 18:33), or Jesus’ prophetic lament over Jerusalem (see Matthew 23:37), or the lament of Mormon over the destroyed Nephite nation (see Mormon 6:16–22), few passages lamenting the results of sin in the scriptures are as moving as Jeremiah 9.
In Jeremiah 9:17–22, the Lord referred to the custom in ancient Israel of hiring professional mourners, women who were paid to wail and lament for long periods of time at someone’s death. Jeremiah was told to hire professional mourners to lament over Judah.
To be consumed does not mean to become extinct. Being consumed and destroyed, in the context of the prophecies of the scattering of Israel, meant to be utterly disorganized and disbanded so that Israel’s power, influence, and cohesiveness as a nation was gone. Moses, in Deuteronomy 4:26, told all Israel that they would “utterly be destroyed.” Yet the verses following show that Israel still existed as homeless individuals.
In a profound and yet simple chain of reasoning, Jeremiah showed the stupidity and sheer illogic of worshiping an idol. People take such materials as wood and precious metals which they work and shape at their own will, making all kinds of objects of service. Then they take those same materials, make them into an idol by the work of their own hands, and suddenly expect the idol to be filled with supernatural power and be able to provide miraculous aid for the person who made it.
Jeremiah 11:1–14 refers to the covenant the Lord made with the house of Israel at the time of the Exodus. “I will take you to me for a people, and I will be to you a God” (Exodus 6:7). Even as the Jews’ forefathers broke the covenant, so had their children in Judah (see Jeremiah 11:10). Therefore, none would escape the punishment decreed, nor would the prayers of Jeremiah or those of the people help (see vv. 11–14).
Sperry wrote: “Jeremiah’s warning was in vain. The Lord pointed out to him that there was a conspiracy among the Jews and that they had turned back to the iniquities of their forefathers. Their gods were as numerous as their cities, and the number of altars set up to Baal was according to the number of streets in Jerusalem. But, warned the Lord, their gods would not save them in the time of their trouble. In view of their spiritual condition the prophet was commanded not to pray for the people. Nor would the Lord hear their cries unto Him. (11:9–14).” (Voice of Israel’s Prophets, pp. 165–66; emphasis added.)
Jeremiah raised age-old questions: Why do the wicked sometimes prosper while the righteous do not? (see Jeremiah 12:1). How much time will pass before their wickedness will be punished? (see v. 4; Malachi 3:13–18).
“The enmity experienced by Jeremiah at the hands of his countrymen at Anathoth excites his displeasure at the prosperity of the wicked, who thrive and live with immunity. He therefore begins to expostulate with God, and demands from God’s righteousness that they be cut off out of the land (vers. 1–4); whereupon the Lord reproves him for this outburst of ill-nature and impatience by telling him that he must patiently endure still worse.—This section, the connection of which with the preceding is unmistakable, shows by a concrete instance the utter corruptness of the people; and it has been included in the prophecies because it sets before us the greatness of God’s long-suffering towards a people ripe for destruction.” (Keil and Delitzsch, Commentary, 8:1:219.)
To Jeremiah’s question about why the wicked prosper, the Lord gave a vivid answer that has helped many to build up their courage. Clarke wrote: “If the smallest evils to which thou art exposed cause thee to make so many bitter complaints, how wilt thou feel when, in the course of thy prophetic ministry, thou shalt be exposed to much greater, from enemies much more powerful? Footmen may here be the symbol of common evil events; horsemen, of evils much more terrible. If thou have sunk under small difficulties, what wilt thou do when great ones come?
“I believe the meaning is this, ‘If in a country now enjoying peace thou scarcely thinkest thyself in safety, what wilt thou do in the swellings of Jordan? in the time when the enemy, like an overflowing torrent, shall deluge every part of the land?’
“The overflowing of Jordan, which generally happened in harvest, drove the lions and other beasts of prey from their coverts among the bushes that lined its banks; who, spreading themselves through the country, made terrible havoc, slaying men, and carrying off the cattle.” (Commentary, 4:287.)
Thompson explained the symbol of the speckled bird in this way:
“Israel with her proud plumage has attracted the attention of birds of prey (enemies) who move in to attack her. An alternative translation arises from rendering sabua as a noun, ‘hyena,’ which is possible. This understanding of the word combined with the [Septuagint] substitution of the word ‘cave’ for ‘bird of prey’ leads to the translation:
“‘Is this land of mine a hyena’s lair
“‘With birds of prey hovering all around it? (NEB)’
“The picture that results is of a hyena’s lair with vultures hovering around waiting to swoop down on what is left of a carcass after the hyena has eaten. In either case the people and land are under attack from foes. There is a feast prepared for all the wild beasts (lit. ‘beasts of the field’). The destruction of Judah will provide pickings for all.” (Book of Jeremiah, p. 358.)
|
|
|
Ancient Jerusalem was despoiled and destroyed. |
“The spoilers of the Lord’s heritage are also to be carried off out of their land; but after they, like Judah, have been punished, the Lord will have pity on them, and will bring them back one and all into their own land. And if the heathen, who now seduce the people of God to idolatry, learn the ways of God’s people and be converted to the Lord, they shall receive citizenship amongst God’s people and be built up amongst them; but if they will not do so, they shall be extirpated [pulled out by the roots; wiped out]. Thus will the Lord manifest Himself before the whole earth as righteous judge, and through judgment secure the weal [health or prosperity] not only of Israel, but of the heathen peoples too. By this discovery of His world-plan the Lord makes so complete a reply to the prophet’s murmuring concerning the prosperity of the ungodly (vers. 1–6), that from it may clearly be seen the justice of God’s government on earth.” (Keil and Delitzsch, Commentary, 8:1:228.)
The linen girdle represents the priestly nation of Judea, since linen was used for priestly garments (see Leviticus 16:4). Sperry wrote: “The parable, so it seems to me, should not be pressed too far by logical Westerners. Its general outlines and explanation, however, seem reasonably clear. The girdle represents the whole house of Israel, including Judah. ‘For as the girdle cleaveth to the loins of a man, so have I caused to cleave unto Me the whole house of Israel and the whole house of Judah, saith the Lord, . . .’ (13:11) By reason of the iniquities of the Lord’s people (in this case the Jews), they will become separated from Him. The coming Captivity into Babylon could well be represented by the hiding of the girdle near the Euphrates. The fact that the girdle was ‘marred’ in its hiding place simply indicates that the close relationship between God and the Jews had been strained to the breaking point.” (Voice of Israel’s Prophets, p. 167.)
Skin color, like a leopard’s spots, cannot be changed. But what of Israel’s sins?
“So inured in this corrupt behavior have the people become that they are hopelessly fixed in it. They are no more capable of changing their ways than an Ethiopian could change his skin or a leopard his spots. Therefore they will be scattered, because they forgot the Lord and ‘relied on what was false’ (Moffatt).
“It is hardly necessary to point out that Jeremiah is not speaking in vs. 23 of ‘natural evil’ or of any ‘radical defect in human nature.’ He is not saying that men are so necessarily sinners that they are like the Ethiopian or the leopard and can do nothing about it. He is, however, saying that whether totally black or only spotted the perspective of evil in the people is so fixed that they will do nothing about it. The cause of it is the foundation cause: they have forgotten the Lord. Therefore the disasters come.” (The Interpreter’s Bible, 5:928.)
Jeremiah 14–15 presents a discussion between Jeremiah and the Lord concerning a great drought and the effects attending it. Both people and animals were affected greatly, as Keil and Delitzsch wrote: “The distress arising from a lengthened drought [Jeremiah 14:2–6] gives the prophet occasion for urgent prayer on behalf of his people [Jeremiah 14:7–9, 19–22]; but the Lord rejects all intercession, and gives the people notice, for their apostasy from Him, of their coming destruction by sword, famine, and pestilence [Jeremiah 14:10–18; 15:1–9]. Next, the prophet complains of the persecution he has to endure, and is corrected by the Lord and comforted [Jeremiah 15:10–21]. Then he has his course of conduct for the future prescribed to him, since Judah is, for its sins, to be cast forth into banishment, but is again to be restored [Jeremiah 16:1–17:4]. And the discourse concludes with general considerations upon the roots of the mischief, together with prayers for the prophet’s safety, and statements as to the way by which judgment may be turned aside.” (Commentary, 8:1:242–43.)
Everyone, even the wealthy, was affected by the drought, a calamity to which Judah was often subject. Ordinarily Judah’s summers are dry, for little rain falls from April to the middle of October. This scanty rainfall leaves the rivers low, or even dry, and grass is scarce.
Speaking of the drought of Jeremiah’s day, Keil and Delitzsch wrote that “the country and the city, the distinguished and the mean, the field and the husbandmen, are thrown into deep mourning, and the beasts of the field pine away because neither grass nor herb grows. This description gives a touching picture of the distress into which the land and its inhabitants have fallen for lack of rain. Judah is the kingdom or the country with its inhabitants; the gates as used poetically for the cities with the citizens. Not mankind only, but the land itself mourns and pines away, with all the creatures that live on it; cf. v. 4, where the ground is said to be dismayed along with the tillers of it.” (Commentary, 8:1:244.)
Jeremiah besought God to turn His wrath aside, if only “for thy name’s sake” (Jeremiah 14:7). The Lord refused to do that and instructed Jeremiah to “pray not for this people for their good” (v. 11). But Jeremiah refused to desist because false prophets had lulled the people into sin by assuring them of peace (see v. 13). The Lord rejected the excuse for the people’s sins. Nothing, it seemed, would turn His wrath aside (see vv. 14–18). Still, Jeremiah persisted (see vv. 19–22). Compare Jeremiah’s enduring love for his rebellious people with that of Moses (see Exodus 32:31–32) and Mormon (see Mormon 2:10–14).
Plainly, Judah had reached the point at which the Lord would no longer forgive them. Jeremiah represented the Lord as saying, “I am weary with repenting” (Jeremiah 15:6), that is, with repeatedly relenting and giving Israel another chance. Nothing God did had worked; further delay was useless.
The phrase “mother of the young men” (v. 8) is either a reference to the mother city, Jerusalem (see Clarke, Commentary, 4:295), or to the mothers of the youth or young warriors (see Keil and Delitzsch, Commentary, 8:1:257).
Even Jeremiah himself would be carried “into a land which [he] knowest not” (Jeremiah 15:14).
Jeremiah then began to plead for himself. He, at least, had been faithful, even if Judah had not. “I sat not in the assembly of the mockers” (Jeremiah 15:17), he reminded the Lord. The Lord sustained His prophet: “I will deliver thee out of the hand of the wicked” (v. 21). As it happened, Jeremiah was not taken into Babylon but went into Egypt and probably died there a few years later. The Lord’s promise, however, was more likely a promise of spiritual deliverance, a promise of an eternal reward for his faithfulness, since Jeremiah was taken into Egypt against his will.
Jeremiah’s day was a sad one for Judah. To symbolize that truth, the Lord told His prophet three things that he was not to do:
1. He was not to marry or father children (see Jeremiah 16:2). So universal was the calamity bearing down upon the people that God did not want children to suffer its outrage. This commandment, like the one to Hosea to take a wife of whoredoms (see Hosea 10), may not have been a literal one. Perhaps the meaning is that Jeremiah was not to expect that his people would marry themselves to the covenant again, nor was he to expect to get spiritual children (converts) from his ministry.
2. He was not to lament those in Judah who died by the sword or famine (see Jeremiah 16:5), since they brought these judgments upon themselves.
3. He was not to feast or eat with friends in Jerusalem (see v. 8), since feasting was a sign of celebration and eating together a symbol of fellowship.
In addition, Jeremiah was commanded to explain clearly to the people the reasons for his actions as well as the reasons for their coming punishment.
In a general conference address Elder LeGrand Richards commented on these verses:
“Just contemplate that statement [vv. 14–15] for a few moments. Think how the Jews and the Christians all through these past centuries have praised the Lord for his great hand of deliverance under the hands of Moses when he led Israel out of captivity, and yet here comes Jeremiah with this word of the holy prophet, telling us that in the latter days they shall no more remember that, but how God has gathered scattered Israel from the lands whither he had driven them.
“And Jeremiah saw the day when the Lord would do this very thing, when he would call for many fishers and many hunters, ‘and they shall hunt them from every mountain, and from every hill, and out of the holes of the rocks.’ (Jer. 16:16.) Where do you find those fishers and hunters that we read about in this great prophecy of Jeremiah? They are these 14,000 missionaries of this church, and those who have preceded them from the time that the Prophet Joseph Smith received the truth and sent the messengers out to share it with the world. Thus have they gone out, fishing and hunting, and gathering them from the hills and the mountains, and the holes in the rocks. I think that is more literal than some of us think!” (In Conference Report, Apr. 1971, p. 143; or Ensign, June 1971, pp. 98–99.)
|
|
|
Elder LeGrand Richards |
This chapter is full of metaphors and similes with which the prophet Jeremiah illustrated Judah’s fallen state.
Their sin is written “with a pen of iron and with the point of a diamond” (Jeremiah 17:1). These metaphors speak of how deeply sin was imbedded in Judah’s consciousness.
“O my mountain in the field” (v. 3) is likely a reference to Jerusalem, which is nestled in the hill country of Judea.
The focus of one’s trust determines whether he is cursed or blessed (see vv. 5, 7).
“The heath in the desert” (v. 6) represents Judah as a withered tree without moisture or sustenance.
The Lord searches the heart and tries the reins (the inner self) to determine directions (see v. 10).
Like a bird (partridge) that sits on eggs that will not hatch, so those of Judah who get rich by dishonest means will leave empty-handed (see v. 11).
Jesus Christ (Jehovah in the Old Testament) is the very “hope of Israel,” the “fountain of living waters” (v. 13; see also John 4:9–14). Jesus is the Good Shepherd, a Pastor to those who follow Him (see v. 16; see also John 10:14; Psalm 23:1).
“Living as we do in an age when the spirit of Sabbath observance is so flagrantly violated, it may be well for us to observe the remarkable importance attached by Jeremiah to keeping this day holy. Not only did the prophet command the people to hallow the day and not do any work therein, but he went so far as to promise that the city of Jerusalem would remain or be inhabited forever: . . .
“This teaching of Jeremiah’s . . . gives a strong indication of how important the Lord considers Sabbath observance to be. (Cf. D. & C. 59:9–24) Not only does one have a good opportunity on the Sabbath to meditate on God and His goodness, but also to worship Him and rest both mentally and physically. Moreover, the Sabbath gives men the opportunity of building up love in their own households and of kindling a good spirit in their neighbors. Probably Jeremiah thought that if his people would observe the spirit of the Sabbath they could eventually be turned from their wicked course and be worthy of the promises the Lord made.” (Sperry, Voice of Israel’s Prophets, pp. 172–73.)
“Elder Heber C. Kimball preached at the house of President Joseph Smith, on the parable in the 18th chapter of Jeremiah, of the clay in the hands of the potter, that when it marred in the hands of the potter it was cut off the wheel and then thrown back again into the mill, to go in to the next batch, and was a vessel of dishonor; but all clay that formed well in the hands of the potter, and was pliable, was a vessel of honor; and thus it was with the human family, and ever will be: all that are pliable in the hands of God and are obedient to His commands, are vessels of honor, and God will receive them.
“President Joseph arose and said—’Brother Kimball has given you a true explanation of the parable.’” (History of the Church, 4:478.)
Because of Jeremiah’s boldness, the people entered into a league to punish the prophet. The phrase “let us smite him with the tongue” (v. 18) is better translated “smite him on the tongue.” “Lying and false testimony are punished in the eastern countries . . . by smiting the person on the mouth with a strong piece of leather like the sole of a shoe.” (Clarke, Commentary, 4:303.)
Jeremiah’s discourse in 19:1–15 was delivered during the reign of Jehoiakim. By the breaking of a potter’s bottle or jar, Jeremiah represented the sacking and captivity of Judah. Once broken, the bottle “cannot be made whole again.” Although the Jews did return from Babylonian captivity at the end of 70 years, nearly 1,900 years have elapsed since Jerusalem was destroyed and its inhabitants scattered by the Romans, and Israel is only now finally being gathered back into the covenant.
The grim prediction of cannibalism (see v. 9) was fulfilled during the siege of Jerusalem under Nebuchadnezzar (see Lamentations 4:4–10).
|
|
|
Judah was broken off as a nation and taken to Babylon. |
In his last address before his departure, Moses set before the children of Israel both a blessing and a curse: “If thou shalt hearken diligently unto the voice of the Lord thy God, to observe and to do all his commandments . . . the Lord thy God will set thee on high above all nations of the earth. . . . But . . . if thou wilt not hearken unto the voice of the Lord thy God, to observe to do all his commandments . . . the Lord shall send upon thee cursing, vexation, and rebuke.” (Deuteronomy 28:1, 15, 20.)
The Lord’s word through Jeremiah is the same as that given through other prophets to God’s people throughout history. It holds the promise of doom or destiny, punishment or prosperity, all dependent upon faithfulness to those laws irrevocably decreed by God (see D&C 130:19–20).
Read and consider the following references: Doctrine and Covenants 63:58; 64:34–43; 101:7–16; 103:7–18.
Then read the words of a modern prophet to his own people:
“The growing permissiveness in modern society gravely concerns us. Certainly our Heavenly Father is distressed with the increasing inroads among his children of such insidious sins as adultery and fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism, abortions, pornography, population control, alcoholism, cruelty expressed in wife-beating and child-abuse, dishonesty, vandalism, violence, and crime generally, including the sin of living together without marriage.
“We call upon our Church members everywhere to renew their efforts to strengthen the home and to honor their parents, and to build better communications between parent and child.
“Important as it is, building stronger homes is not enough in the fight against rising permissiveness. We therefore urge Church members as citizens to lift their voices, to join others in unceasingly combating, in their communities and beyond, the inroads of pornography and the general flaunting of permissiveness. Let us vigorously oppose the shocking developments which encourage the old sins of Sodom and Gomorrah, and which defile the human body as the temple of God. . . .
“God will not be mocked. His laws are immutable. True repentance is rewarded by forgiveness, but sin brings the sting of death. . . .
“As we think back upon the experiences of Nineveh, Babylon, Sodom and Gomorrah, we wonder—will history repeat itself? What of our world today? Are we forgetting in our great nations the high and lofty principles which can preserve the nations? . . .
“. . . There are among us those same vices which we have seen wreck empires, and we see them becoming flagrant in all nations. Shall we, like Belshazzar, sow the wind and reap the whirlwind? Shall we permit the home to deteriorate and marriage to become a mockery? Shall we continue to curse God, hate our enemies, and defile our bodies in adulterous and sensuous practices? And when the patience of the Lord with us is exhausted, shall we stand trembling while destruction comes upon us? Or shall we wisely see the handwriting on the wall and profit by the sad experience of the past and return unto the Lord and serve him?” (Spencer W. Kimball, in Conference Report, Oct. 1977, pp. 5–7; or Ensign, Nov. 1977, pp. 5–6.)
|
|
|
Ruins at ancient Babylon |
Jeremiah, left behind in a desolate city by the Babylonian captors, asked some pointed questions. How did it happen that a city once full of people, visited by kings and queens of other nations, now lay desolate and empty? There was no echo of people calling in its streets. Anything of value now rested in other homes, in other temples. How could it happen? Indeed, why do great men and women—like great cities—fail to maintain their greatness and fall short of their destiny?
Jeremiah had the answers to these questions. What he needed was someone to truly listen.
This chapter surveys Jeremiah’s teachings and warnings to his people in the context of the impending Babylonian captivity. (See 2 Kings 24–25.) But Jeremiah was not just a prophet of doom, although it may seem so in this lesson. Like Enoch (see Moses 7:41–69), Jeremiah was allowed to see the coming of the Savior and the restoration of God’s church and people in the latter days. (See chap. 25.)
As you read Lamentations and the historical chapters of Jeremiah, observe the correlation between a nation’s righteousness and its long-term power, the correlation between a people’s leaders and the righteousness of the people, and the relationship between a prophet and God’s dealings with His children.
1. Use Notes and Commentary below to help you as you read and study Jeremiah 20–22; 24–29; 32; 34–35; 52; and Lamentations. These chapters are historical and deal with Judah’s fall and captivity. The prophetic chapters of Jeremiah will be dealt with in the next chapter.
2. Complete Points to Ponder as directed by your teacher. (Individual-study students should complete all of this section.)
Jeremiah 19:14–15 records Jeremiah’s standing in the court of the temple, again reminding the people of the troubles that lay ahead because of their wickedness. When Pashur, the chief overseer of the temple, heard of the incident, he had Jeremiah beaten and placed in stocks. Stocks were an instrument of torture by which the body was forced into an unnatural position, much as the wooden stocks of medieval times confined parts of the body, such as the arms, legs, or head, by means of wooden beams that locked them into place.
Far from being cowed by this harsh treatment, Jeremiah used it as a further opportunity to teach. Pashur, in Hebrew, means “free.” Jeremiah, upon being released, told Pashur that the Lord had a different name for him. Jeremiah said that God had not called him Pashur, or “free,” but Magor-missabib, which means “fear on every side.” (See Jeremiah 20:3–4.)
The great stress the prophetic calling caused Jeremiah is particularly discernible in Jeremiah 20:7–8, 14–18. The Hebrew word translated in verse 7 as “deceived” means literally “enticed” or “persuaded.” The power that persuaded the prophet to continue to preach God’s word at such great personal cost was “as a burning fire shut up in [his] bones” (v. 9). It could not be stayed. Verses 14–18 reflect Jeremiah’s despair over the lonely ministry he was given. Some scholars believe these verses originally were meant to precede verses 7–13 because the tenor of the lament changes in verses 11–13, in which Jeremiah began to praise the Lord.
King Zedekiah sent Pashur to inquire of the Lord through Jeremiah concerning Jerusalem. Jeremiah’s response had three parts: (1) The answer to the king’s hope that the Lord would intervene to save Jerusalem from the Chaldeans (see Jeremiah 21:4–7) was clear: there was no hope. (2) Counsel on how the people and the royal family could preserve their lives by surrendering to the Chaldeans rather than fighting them (see vv. 8–10). (3) A prophecy concerning the house of David (see 21:11–14; 22:1–9), to which Jeremiah gave an alternative: If the king and his people would turn back to righteousness, the throne of David would be preserved (see Jeremiah 22:4), but if not, it would “become a desolation” (v. 5).
Gilead symbolized the richest soil Israel knew, and Lebanon the highest mountain and the finest trees (see v. 6). But the Lord sent His destroyers, and the finest lands were desolated. The reason is given in verse 9.
“Weep not for the dead” (Jeremiah 22:10; see also vv. 11–12) refers to Josiah, king of Israel, who died of a wound received in the battle of Megiddo. “Weep sore for him that goeth away” (v. 10) refers to Shallum, or Jehoahaz, the son of Josiah and successor to the throne, who was carried away to Egypt. (See Enrichment G.)
The major teaching of Jeremiah 22:10–30 is that the Lord’s fairest and most beloved people, Judah, faced great tragedy because of their iniquity. The people were not to mourn for their lost kings. Rather, they should mourn the impending tragedy and turn aside from their evil ways.
Jeremiah rebuked Jehoiakim for his self-centered life and his injustices to his people (see vv. 13–19), which were particularly evident when compared to the righteous deeds of his father, Josiah (see vv. 15–16).
An ass’s burial (see v. 19) meant to be left unburied in the open field. This prophecy probably was fulfilled when Jehoiakim was taken captive during Nebuchadnezzar’s siege of Jerusalem. (See Notes and Commentary on 2 Kings 24:5–7.)
The names Lebanon and Bashan (see Jeremiah 22:20) were used to describe the passage of Israel from Judah into Babylon. Just as the dry wind destroys the grazing land by eating the pastors, or pastures (see v. 22), so would Babylon destroy Judah’s shepherds and leaders.
Verse 23 is somewhat caustic. Because of their loftiness and beauty, the cedars of Lebanon often were used as a symbol of pride. Here they are symbols of Judah’s leaders, who are told to consider just how great they will be when the pains of war come.
Jehoiachin, the son of Jehoiakim, was called Coniah by Jeremiah. Coniah was likened to a signet, which is a seal or ring that is valued both as a symbol of power and as a jewel. Then Coniah, or Jehoiachin, was told that if he were all that God had of value, in Jehoiachin’s present state of unrighteousness, Jehoiachin still would have to be delivered into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar, never to return. (See vv. 25–27.)
Notes and Commentary on Jeremiah 23 are in chapter 25.
It was the Lord’s will that Judah submit to Babylonia, take their punishment, and repent. Those who did so were carried away “for their good” (Jeremiah 24:5). Zedekiah and others, however, refused to submit. Adam Clarke said:
“Under the type of good and bad figs, God represents the state of the persons who had already been carried captives into Babylon, with their king Jeconiah, compared with the state of those who should be carried away with Zedekiah. Those already carried away, being the choice of the people, are represented by the good figs: those now remaining, and soon to be carried into captivity, are represented by the bad figs, that were good for nothing. The state also of the former in their captivity was vastly preferable to the state of those who were now about to be delivered into the hand of the king of Babylon. The latter would be treated as double rebels; the former, being the most respectable of the inhabitants, were treated well; and even in captivity, a marked distinction would be made between them, God ordering it so. But the prophet sufficiently explains his own meaning. . . .
“[The Lord says,] Those already carried away into captivity, I esteem as far more excellent than those who still remain in the land. They have not sinned so deeply, and they are now penitent; and therefore, I will set mine eyes upon them for good, ver. 6. I will watch over them by an especial providence, and they shall be restored to their own land.” (The Holy Bible . . . with a Commentary and Critical Notes, 4:316–17; see also Enrichments G and A.)
Commentary on the phrase “cup of [the Lord’s] fury” is found in Notes and Commentary on Isaiah 51:17–23. Beginning in Jerusalem and the cities of Judah, the bitter cup will be drunk by Egypt, the nations of the west and east, and Babylonia.
The last part of chapter 25 prophetically leaps forward into the future to the time of the battle of Armageddon. That battle is depicted here to show Judah that the wicked nations will not escape the Lord’s judgment. The language of these scriptures shows that what Jeremiah saw was the time when all nations shall gather together against the Lord’s people and be brought into judgment. Elder Joseph Fielding Smith specifically tied the Lord’s controversy with the nations to the last days (see The Signs of the Times, pp. 138–75). And the language of Jeremiah 25:32–33 is similar to other scriptures about Armageddon. (See Notes and Commentary on Ezekiel 38–39; Enrichment I.)
The book of Jeremiah is not arranged chronologically. For example, Jeremiah 25 discusses the fourth year of the reign of Jehoiakim. Then, Jeremiah 26:1–9 discusses the first year of his reign.
Jeremiah compared Jerusalem to Shiloh, which was the first permanent resting place for the tabernacle and the place at which the tribes cast lots for their inheritances. Shiloh was part of Ephraim’s heritage and was the place where Hannah took Samuel to serve Eli. The Lord was saying in Jeremiah 26:1–9 that just as He allowed the tabernacle to be desecrated by the Philistines, so would He allow the temple to be desecrated by the Babylonians. And just as Shiloh was leveled for its wickedness, so would Jerusalem be destroyed. (See Jeremiah 7:12, 14.)
|
|
|
Shiloh, for many years the home of the tabernacle of Moses |
Compare Jeremiah’s words in verses 14–15 with those of Abinadi in Mosiah 17:9–10. Like Abinadi’s, Jeremiah’s message to his enemies was: “Do what you will, my word stands. If you choose to kill me, you will shed innocent blood, but you will not do away with my words.”
The case of Urijah, recounted here at Jeremiah’s trial, shows the wickedness of King Jehoiakim. When Urijah heard of the king’s intent to kill him, he fled into Egypt. But, evidently, Egypt offered him no asylum, for he was extradited and slain by Jehoiakim himself. That this is the only account there is of Urijah and his ministry suggests that there were probably many prophets of whom we know nothing.
Verse 24 implies that Jeremiah, although acquitted, would likely have suffered Urijah’s fate at the hands of the populace had it not been for Ahikam, who protected him.
Although Jeremiah 27:1 dates the prophecy about Judah’s bondage to Jehoiakim’s reign, verses 3 and 12 suggest that it was given during Zedekiah’s reign, not Jehoiakim’s.
Ambassadors from several neighboring countries had come to Zedekiah with the proposal that unitedly they could defeat Babylon. Jeremiah was instructed to take bonds and yokes and wear them to symbolize that it was the Lord’s will that they submit to their would-be conquerors. The message that they not try to change the decrees of God was also given by Jeremiah. Their lands were assigned to Babylon until that country ripened in iniquity and reaped its own reward. A promise to Judah was given in verse 11 that submission was their only hope of retaining their lands.
Not every message that is claimed to be from God truly is (see v. 15), nor does every messenger bring His word. Jeremiah warned Zedekiah that the prophets who were saying that Babylon would not capture Judah should try to preserve the remnant of temple treasures left from the first and second conquests of Nebuchadnezzar. Jeremiah was pointing out that his promises of captivity were realistic, whereas the promises of delivery from Babylon made by the false prophets ignored reality, since the Babylonians had already proven they could conquer Judah with impunity.
The intensity of the debate that raged in Jerusalem is clearly seen in Jeremiah 28. Hananiah claimed to know from God that not only would Zedekiah’s people not go into captivity but that Babylonia’s power (yoke) had been broken and the temple treasures and the captives would be returned within two years (see vv. 1–4).
In verse 6, Jeremiah’s “Amen, the Lord do so,” is sarcastic, a challenge to see whose prophecies would be fulfilled. Moses taught that one test of a true prophet is whether his words come to pass (see Deuteronomy 18:22). Jeremiah had prophesied destruction and captivity; Hananiah, return and restoration. Jeremiah’s response was simply that the prophet whose words come to pass is the one chosen by the Lord (see v. 9).
To dramatize his prophecy, Hananiah broke the yokes off Jeremiah’s shoulders, predicting that God would do the same to Judah’s Babylonian yoke. The Lord’s response was simple and powerful: the yokes of wood would become yokes of iron (see v. 13).
Hananiah’s death, prophesied by Jeremiah (see vv. 15–17), should have convinced Zedekiah and the people which of these two men was the true prophet, but they were too hardened to respond.
“As in Jerusalem, so too in Babylon the predictions of the false prophets fostered a lively hope that the domination of Nebuchadnezzar would not last long, and that the return of the exiles to their fatherland would soon come about. The spirit of discontent thus excited must have exercised an injurious influence on the fortunes of the captives, and could not fail to frustrate the aim which the chastisement inflicted by God was designed to work out, namely, the moral advancement of the people. Therefore Jeremiah makes use of an opportunity furnished by an embassy sent by King Zedekiah to Babel, to address a letter to the exiles, exhorting them to yield with submission to the lot God had assigned to them. He counsels them to prepare, by establishing their households there, for a long sojourn in Babel, and to seek the welfare of that country as the necessary condition of their own. They must not let themselves be deceived by the false prophets’ idle promises of a speedy return, since God will not bring them back and fulfil His glorious promises till after seventy years have passed (vers. 4–14).” (C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament, 8:1:408–9.)
Notes and Commentary on Jeremiah 30–31 are given in chapter 25.
From a strictly political point of view, one can understand why the Jewish leaders reacted so strongly against Jeremiah. In a time of national crisis, he called for surrender and submission to Babylon. But of course Jeremiah was not speaking from a political point of view; he spoke for the Lord. Zedekiah isolated Jeremiah from the people for prophesying in the midst of the siege of Judah’s imminent captivity and the king’s overthrow by the Babylonians (see v. 2). (For commentary on the seeming contradiction of Jeremiah’s prophecy with that of Ezekiel see Ezekiel 12:13; see also Notes and Commentary on 2 Kings 25:1–7.)
Jeremiah purchased his cousin’s estate because he had the right as next of kin (see Leviticus 25:25; Ruth 4). He then sealed the evidence of the purchase in a jar (see Jeremiah 32:11–12) as proof of his faith in God’s promise that “houses and fields and vineyards shall be possessed again in this land” (v. 15). After Jeremiah’s death, the right of ownership would pass to Jeremiah’s closest kin. The rest of chapter 32 is the Lord’s certification to Jeremiah that people would truly return from Babylon to inhabit the land (see vv. 26–44).
Jeremiah clearly signaled a full return of all of the Lord’s people and the establishment of an eternal covenant with them. The fulfillment of this promise is yet to be fully realized in the dispensation of the fulness of times. (See 3 Nephi 20:29–46; 21.)
Notes and Commentary on Jeremiah 33 are found in chapter 25.
Jeremiah 34:1–7 concerns the conquest of the city by Nebuchadnezzar as well as Zedekiah’s captivity and death (see Notes and Commentary on 2 Kings 25:1–7).
“During the early period of the siege of Jerusalem, the men of the city released their Hebrew slaves. This may have been done partly because the old law required the release of slaves as provided for in Exo. 21:1 and Deut. 15:2, and partly because of the need of manpower to defend the besieged city. At any rate, the release was guaranteed by a solemn covenant. Then the advance of the Egyptians seems to have caused the Babylonians to lift the siege. In spite of their solemn oath, and by ignoring the claims of brotherly love and ordinary justice, the men of the city proceeded to re-enslave their unfortunate brethren. This unrighteous act immediately brought down the Lord’s denunciation and terrible condemnation.” (Sidney B. Sperry, The Voice of Israel’s Prophets, pp. 182–83.)
This chapter goes back in time to the reign of Jehoiakim, son of Josiah (see Jeremiah 25). In it Jeremiah set before the Jews the righteous example of the Rechabites who, having made a covenant never to drink wine, refused to drink it when offered it by Jeremiah in the house of God. (These people had moved to Jerusalem to escape the invading Babylonians.)
Jeremiah was commanded to place the example of the Rechabites before the people of Judah (see vv. 13–14). The message was clear: the Rechabites observed their covenants faithfully, even though they were not the covenant people of the Lord. The Jews were transgressors of the Lord’s commands and broke their promises to God at every turn. Thus on the Jews would come “all the evil that I [the Lord] have pronounced against them” (v. 17).
“In the fourth year of the reign of Jehoiakim the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah, bidding him commit to writing all the addresses he had previously delivered, that Judah might, if it were possible, still regard the threatenings and return (vers. 1–3). In accordance with this command, he got all the words of the Lord written down in a book by his attendant Baruch, with the further instruction that this should be read on the fast-day in the temple to the people who came out of the country into Jerusalem (vers. 4–8). When, after this, in the ninth month of the fifth year of Jehoiakim, a fast was appointed, Baruch read the prophecies to the assembled people in the chamber of Gemariah in the temple. Michaiah the son of Gemariah mentioned the matter to the princes who were assembled in the royal palace; these then sent for Baruch with the roll, and made him read it to them. But they were so frightened by what was read to them that they deemed it necessary to inform the king regarding it (vers. 9–19). At their advice, the king had the roll brought and some of it read before him; but scarcely had some few columns been read, when he cut the roll into pieces and threw them into the pan of coals burning in the room, at the same time commanding that Baruch and Jeremiah should be brought to him; but God hid them (vers. 20–26). After this roll had been burnt, the Lord commanded the prophet to get all his words written on a new roll, and to predict an ignominious fate for King Jehoiakim; whereupon Jeremiah once more dictated his addresses to Baruch (vers. 27–32).” (Keil and Delitzsch, Commentary, 8:2:93.)
|
|
|
Jeremiah’s record was read by Baruch. |
When King Jehoiachin rebelled against Babylon, he was deposed and his uncle, Zedekiah, was placed on the throne. By this time it should have been obvious that Jeremiah’s prophecies were coming to pass. Twice Nebuchadnezzar had come, and twice he had humbled Judah. But Zedekiah was no wiser than his brother, Jehoiakim, and his nephew, Jehoiachin. He too began to look for ways to break the Babylonian yoke. Ignoring the repeated warnings of Jeremiah, he rebelled, and once again the Babylonians came against Jerusalem. (See Enrichment G.)
It was in this setting that the events of these chapters took place. Jerusalem was under siege, and Jeremiah’s counsel to surrender was not welcome. He was viewed as a traitor and a subversive. At this point an army of the pharaoh moved north to meet Nebuchadnezzar’s forces (see Jeremiah 37:5). Nebuchadnezzar temporarily pulled away from Jerusalem to meet the threat from the south. The hopes of the Jews soared, but again Jeremiah dashed them to pieces. He prophesied that the Egyptian army would return to Egypt (see v. 7) and that the siege would be reimposed. So helpless would Judah be, according to Jeremiah, that even if the entire Chaldean army were wounded in the battle with Egypt, they would still succeed in destroying Jerusalem (see vv. 8–10).
During the time that the siege was lifted, Jeremiah decided to return to the land of Benjamin, probably to visit his hometown. His enemies seized this opportunity to make their move. Accusing him of fleeing to join the Chaldeans, the Jewish leaders had Jeremiah arrested, beaten, and thrown into prison (see vv. 11–15).
The weak, vacillating character of King Zedekiah manifested itself. He called Jeremiah to him secretly, asking if there was any word from the Lord concerning Jerusalem’s fate (see vv. 16–17). Yet when the other leaders demanded Jeremiah’s death for preaching surrender (see Jeremiah 38:1–4), Zedekiah responded weakly, “Behold, he is in your hand: for the king is not he that can do any thing against you” (v. 5). But when Jeremiah’s friends pleaded for his life, Zedekiah relented and had him secretly delivered out of the prison (see vv. 7–13).
Jeremiah’s sarcastic question to Zedekiah is recorded in Jeremiah 37:19. The false prophets had promised that the Babylonians would not come against Jerusalem and the captives already taken would be returned. At that time Jeremiah cited the words of Moses for determining the true from the false prophets. Now, with the Babylonians surrounding the city, Jeremiah asked where all those other prophets were. Jeremiah’s word had been proven true, and he was in prison. Their word had been proven false, and where were they?
Chapter 39 of Jeremiah details the fall of Jerusalem and the tragic end of Zedekiah and his family. Because Jeremiah had foretold Babylon’s eventual success, he was released by the Chaldeans and allowed to remain in Jerusalem as a free person (see vv. 11–14).
“Earlier, we mentioned the fact that after the fall of Jerusalem Jeremiah was liberated and permitted to stay in Palestine. As a matter of fact, he was first taken in chains with all the other captured Jews as far as Ramah, a town about five miles north of Jerusalem. Here the Babylonian ‘captain of the guard’ loosed his bonds, ‘gave him an allowance and a present,’ and sent him back to Gedaliah, the new governor of Judah, with instructions permitting him to dwell among the people or to go wherever he chose. (40:1–6)
“Following Gedaliah’s appointment as governor of Judah, many Jews in the lands round about regained confidence and returned to their own country. But one of them, Ishmael the son of Nethaniah, seems to have been sent by Baalis, the king of Ammon, for the express purpose of slaying Gedaliah. (40:14) The good governor was warned of this, but he would not believe those who had informed him of the plot. The result was that he and the Jews and Chaldeans with him at Mizpah were slain in cold blood by Ishmael and his fellow conspirators. (41:1–3) Other Jews met their death at the hands of Ishmael, but he escaped to Ammon before he could be apprehended. (41:4–15)
“After this incident, Jeremiah was approached by the people of Judah, who asked him to pray to God in their behalf and ask His advice and counsel. The prophet did pray, and the Lord advised the people to stay in Judah and be blessed. They were told not to be afraid of the king of Babylon; the Lord would save them and deliver them from his hand and have compassion upon them. On the other hand, if they went to Egypt to escape war and hunger, they should be severely disappointed. They were told that famine, pestilence, and the sword would be their terrible lot. (42:1–22) But the stubborn Jews refused to heed the Lord’s words through Jeremiah and proceeded into Egypt, taking the hapless prophet and his scribe Baruch with them. (43:1–7)
“At Tahpanhes, the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah predicting the destruction of Egypt at the hands of the same Nebuchadnezzar who had destroyed Jerusalem: [Jeremiah 43:8–13].
“Thus the disobedient Jews who had escaped from troubles in Judah would meet them head-on in Egypt. (See also 44:12–14.) Jeremiah continued to castigate them for their idolatrous worship of the ‘queen of heaven,’ but they refused to heed his words. (44:15–30).” (Sperry, Voice of Israel’s Prophets, pp. 184–85.)
“The passage is a kind of appendix that belongs with ch. 36, and is valuable for insight it gives into Baruch’s own life. He too could be beset by despair as was Jeremiah, and could say ‘Woe is me’ (v. 3). It may be that as he dictated Jeremiah’s words of judgment, and knew in his heart that they were true and would certainly come to pass, he became depressed at it all and was filled with foreboding about his own future. He was deeply involved in Jeremiah’s affairs. He wrote down his oracles for the first and second scrolls in 605/4 B.C. He certainly continued to record the prophet’s sayings thereafter and went with him to Egypt, where he probably continued his work as a scribe. It is not impossible that Baruch eventually returned to Judah or even journeyed to Babylon to join the exiles there, and was able to relate what took place in Egypt, although there is no evidence one way or the other. At times he was associated with Jeremiah in dangerous situations (36:19, 26; 43:3). Much of the present book of Jeremiah must go back either directly or indirectly to him.” (J. A. Thompson, The Book of Jeremiah, The New International Commentary on the Old Testament, p. 683.)
The last chapter of Jeremiah is a summary of historical material previously covered (see Jeremiah 39) and a record of further events, such as the improved status of Jehoiachin in Babylon (see Jeremiah 52:31–34). Since Jeremiah did not go to Babylon but was taken to Egypt, it is doubtful that this chapter was written by him. Perhaps it was added by his scribe, Baruch. (See 2 Kings 24–25; Jeremiah 39.)
Tradition has long ascribed the book of Lamentations to Jeremiah, though some modern critics question whether all of the book was written by him. Keil and Delitzsch concluded after an extensive examination of the arguments against Jeremiah’s authorship “that the tradition which ascribes the Lamentations to the prophet Jeremiah as their author is as well-founded as any historical tradition whatsoever” (Commentary, 8:2:349–50).
The writer of Lamentations wrote to reveal Judah’s pathetic condition as a despoiled people at the hands of the Babylonians. He likened abandoned Jerusalem to a woman whose husband was dead (see v. 1). All her “lovers” (the false gods she worshiped) abandoned her to her enemies (see vv. 2–3). All of this came about because of Judah’s wickedness (see vv. 5–8). Even the Lord forsook her in the hour of her affliction. Her enemies “mock[ed] at her sabbaths” (v. 7).
The heading to the book of Lamentations in the Hebrew texts is aychah which is translated as “alas! how . . . ” (Keil and Delitzsch, Commentary, 8:2:335). It was customary in ancient Judah to compose and sing lamentations about departed friends or relatives. Jeremiah did the same for his beloved Jerusalem.
The “pleasant things” in verses 10–11 are allusions, in part, to the precious vessels taken from the temple by the enemy. The few valuable items left had been sold to help relieve the hunger and distress that had come upon the people.
Jeremiah employed vivid images to depict Judah’s great distress, likening it to fire in the bones, a net for the feet, a yoke around the neck, the crushing of grapes in a winepress. Each allusion is an apt one. The image of the yoke or bands around the neck is also used in Isaiah 52:2. According to the interpretation given in Doctrine and Covenants 113:10, the bands on Israel’s neck “are the curses of God upon her, or the remnants of Israel in their scattered condition among the Gentiles.” Judah’s seventy-year captivity in Babylon was like that described in these scriptures.
In her captive condition, none appeared to comfort Judah. She put forth her hands in a plea for help, but no one responded (see Lamentations 1:16–17). Her false “lovers” and former allies deserted her (see v. 19). Zion was in great distress. She knew then that her wickedness was the cause of her sorrowful state. (See vv. 20–22.)
Judah’s pitiful condition, caused by her iniquities, had come about by God’s power. In Lamentations 2:1–10, God was credited with having brought about Judah’s present calamity as a punishment for her former wickedness.
“The writer evidently could not get the harrowing scenes out of his mind. The elders or heads of families who shared in the administration were powerless to do anything. Grave magistrates and light-hearted maidens alike were reduced to grief-stricken silence (v. 10).” (D. Guthrie and J. A. Motyer, eds., The New Bible Commentary: Revised, p. 661.)
Jerusalem was an object not only of pity but of scorn. Innocent babies wasted away in her streets, crying in vain for food (see vv. 11–12). The prophets that Judah did listen to were untrue to their task of crying out against iniquity. They spoke flattering words and thus encouraged Judah in her transgressions. Hence, Jerusalem was a hiss and a byword in the eyes of the nations (see vv. 13–14). Clearly, there was nothing about Jerusalem in which to rejoice. In verses 18–22 she called the Lord’s attention to her doleful plight. Her tears were real tears of godly sorrow for her iniquities as well as for her temporal losses to the Babylonians.
|
|
|
The western wall of Jerusalem has been called the Wailing Wall. |
Lamentations 3:1–66 contains the writer’s individual lament over his and his people’s distressed condition. His thoughts were expressed in a Hebrew poetic form.
“In true prophetic vein the elegist puts himself alongside his countrymen and entreats them to return to the Lord and to seek reconciliation with Him. Let them examine themselves in the light of His commandments which they have transgressed, and let the lifting up of their hands to God in heaven be accompanied by the lifting up of their hearts also, i.e. let their prayers for pardon be true and sincere. Let them know too what it feels like to be unpardoned, to be under God’s judgment still (v. 42b), and they will come to appreciate all the more the wonder of His forgiveness.” (Guthrie and Motyer, New Bible Commentary, p. 662.)
Still, it would not be easy to obtain pardon. The rest of chapter 3 indicates that in spite of God’s unwillingness to hear, the petitioner will continue to plead for relief. Verses 61–66 contain a plea that the Lord will also reward Judah’s enemies for their harsh and evil ways.
In Lamentations 4:1–22 the writer returned to his former theme and the mournful dirge began again. Various groups were responsible for Jerusalem’s suffering. First, the “sons of Zion” once “comparable to fine gold” (v. 2) had become inferior vessels like those made of earthen clay. The mothers of Judah, unlike the monsters (whales and other large fish) of the sea who feed their young properly, had neglected their children. Wickedness was everywhere.
Verses 8–10 depict the bitter hunger experienced during the siege of Jerusalem, which finally led some to eat their own children.
Edom, at the time of Jerusalem’s capture, had sought to enrich herself through Judah’s tragedy (compare Obadiah 1:10–16), and her actions at that time were bitterly resented by the Jews (see Ezekiel 25:12–14; Psalm 137:7–9). But the Jews could console themselves with the thought that whereas their own punishment was now accomplished, that of Edom was still to come: “The cup also shall pass through unto thee” (Lamentations 4:21).
Lamentations 5:1–22 is a prayer for aid. The Lord alone held the key to Judah’s deliverance. Her plight was very sad, and her sins had made it so.
“Water and wood are mentioned in ver. 4 as the greatest necessities of life, without which it is impossible to exist. Both of these they must buy for themselves, because the country, with its waters and forests, is in the possession of the enemy. The emphasis lies on ‘our water . . . our wood.’ What they formerly had, as their own property, for nothing, they must now purchase.” (Keil and Delitzsch, Commentary, 8:2:448.)
Jeremiah was a living prophet in his day. The evil people, particularly the leaders of Judah, cast aside his words as naught. He delivered the message that the Lord gave him, but he ended up in prison. Eventually he was driven out of Israel and compelled to live in Egypt. President Ezra Taft Benson has said:
“As a prophet reveals the truth it divides the people. The honest in heart heed his words, but the unrighteous either ignore the prophet or fight him. When the prophet points out the sins of the world, the worldly either want to close the mouth of the prophet, or else act as if the prophet didn’t exist, rather than repent of their sins. Popularity is never a test of truth. Many a prophet has been killed or cast out. As we come closer to the Lord’s second coming, you can expect that as the people of the world become more wicked, the prophet will be less popular with them.” (“Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet,” in 1980 Devotional Speeches of the Year [Provo: Brigham Young University Press, 1981], p. 29).
It is the living prophet who really upsets the world. “Even in the Church,” said Elder Spencer W. Kimball, “many are prone to garnish the sepulchres of yesterday’s prophets and mentally stone the living ones” (“To His Servants the Prophets,” Instructor, Aug. 1960, p. 257).
Why? Because the living prophet tells us what we need to know and do now, and the world prefers that prophets either be dead or mind their own business. Some would-be authorities on politics want the prophet to keep still about politics. Some would-be authorities on evolution want the prophet to keep still about evolution. The list goes on and on.
“How we respond to the words of a living prophet when he tells us what we need to know, but would rather not hear, is a test of our faithfulness” (Benson, “Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet,” p. 28).
Those who covenant with God are bound to Him in righteousness. Ancient Judah cut that tie when she rebelled against the Lord and failed to heed Jeremiah’s words. The result was that she was carried away captive into Babylon.
