John Calvin Commentary Jeremiah 24

The meaning of this vision is that there was no reason for the ungodly to flatter themselves if they continued in their wickedness, even though God bore with them for a time.

King Jeconiah had by then been carried away into exile, together with the leading men and artisans. The condition of the king and the others indeed appeared much worse than that of the people who remained in the country.

For they still retained a hope that the royal dignity would be restored, and that the city would flourish again and enjoy an abundance of every blessing, though it was nearly empty by then. Everything precious had become a prey to the conqueror; and we indeed know how great Nebuchadnezzar's avarice and rapacity were.

The city, then, was at that time almost empty and desolate in comparison with its former splendor. However, those who remained might indeed have hoped for a better state of things, but those who had gone into exile had become like dead bodies.

Therefore, miserable Jeconiah, who was banished and deprived of his kingdom, was apparently undergoing a most grievous punishment, together with his companions who had been led away with him. And the Jews who remained at Jerusalem no doubt flattered themselves, as if God had dealt more kindly with them.

If they had truly repented, they would indeed have given thanks to God for having spared them; but since they had abused His forbearance, it was necessary to set before them what this chapter contains, namely, that they reasoned foolishly when they concluded that God had been more favorable to them than to the others.

But this is shown by a vision: the Prophet saw two baskets of figs; and he saw them full of figs, and they were before the temple of God. The figs in one basket were sweet and delicious, but the figs in the other were so bitter that they could not be eaten.

By the sweet figs, God intended to represent Jeconiah and the other exiles who had left their country; and He compares them to ripe figs, for ripe figs have a sweet taste, while the other figs are rejected because of their bitterness.

Similarly, Jeconiah and the others had, as it were, been consumed; but there were figs still remaining. And he says that the fate of those whom God had punished in due time was better than that of the others who remained, as they were accumulating a heavier judgment through their obstinacy.

For since Nebuchadnezzar had plundered the city and had taken everything valuable from it, those who remained had not stopped adding sins to sins, so that a greater measure of divine vengeance was ready to fall on them.

We now see the purpose of this vision. And he says that God presented the vision to him; and saying this was very necessary, so that his doctrine might carry more weight with the people.

God, indeed, often spoke without a vision; but we have stated elsewhere what the purpose of a vision was: it was a kind of seal to what was delivered.

For so that the Prophet might possess greater authority, they not only spoke but, as it were, sealed their doctrine, as if God had engraved on it, as it were with His finger, a certain mark. But since this subject has been extensively discussed elsewhere, I will pass over it now.

He says, Behold, two baskets of figs set before the temple. The place ought to be noticed. It may be that the Prophet was not allowed to move a step from his own house, and the vision may have been presented to him in the night, during thick darkness.

But the mention of the temple shows that one part of the people had not been taken away without cause, and the other part left in the city, for this had proceeded from God Himself. For God manifested Himself in the temple; and therefore the prophets, when they wished to assail the hearts of the ungodly, often said,

Go forth shall God from His temple (Isaiah 26:21; Micah 1:3).

The temple, then, is to be understood here as the tribunal of God. Therefore, he says that these two baskets were set in the temple, as if he said that the whole people stood at God’s tribunal, and that those who had already been cast into exile had not been carried away by the will of their enemies, but because God intended to punish them.

The time is also mentioned: After Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim had been carried away. For if this had not been added, the vision would have been obscure, and no one today could understand why God had set two baskets before Jeremiah.

A distinction, then, is made here between the exiles and those who lived in their own country. At the same time, they were reduced to great poverty, and the city was deprived of its splendor. There was hardly any magnificence in the Temple, the royal palace was plundered, and the line of David only reigned by permission.

But though the calamity of the city and people was grievous, yet, as has been said, the Jews who remained in the city thought themselves, in a way, happy in comparison with their brothers, who had become, as it were, dead.

For God had expelled the king, and he was treated disdainfully as a captive, and the condition of the others was still worse. This difference, then, between the captives and those who remained in the land is what is represented here.

He now adds that one basket had very good figs, and that the other had very bad figs. If it is asked whether Jeconiah was in himself approved by God, the answer is easy: he was suffering punishment for his sins. Thus, the Prophet speaks here comparatively when he calls some good and others bad.

We must also notice that he speaks here not of persons but of punishment; as though he had said, “You feel a dread when those exiles are mentioned, who have been deprived of the inheritance promised them by God. This seems hard to you, but this is moderate when you consider what end awaits you.”

He then does not call Jeconiah and other captives good in themselves, but he calls them good figs because God had chastened them more gently than He intended to chastise Zedekiah and the others.

Thus he calls the Jews who remained bad figs, not only because they were more wicked (though this was partly the reason), but he was considering the punishment that was near at hand; for God's severity was to be greater towards those whom He had spared and against whom He had not immediately executed His vengeance.

We now perceive the Prophet's meaning. We will defer the rest to the next lecture.

Prayer:

Grant, Almighty God, that since You delay with so much forbearance the punishments which we have deserved and daily draw upon ourselves — O grant that we may not indulge ourselves, but carefully consider how often and in how many different ways we have provoked Your wrath against us, so that we may thus learn humbly to present ourselves to You for pardon, and with true repentance so implore Your mercy, that we may from the heart desire wholly to submit ourselves to You, that whether You chastise us, or, according to Your infinite goodness, forgive us, our condition may be ever blessed, not by flattering ourselves in our sluggishness, but by finding You to be our kind and bountiful Father, being reconciled to us in Your only-begotten Son. Amen.

In the last lecture, we began to explain the meaning of the vision which the Prophet relates. We said that the miserable exiles, whose condition might have appeared to be the worst, are still compared to good figs, and that those who still remained in the country are compared to bad and bitter figs.

We have explained why God showed this vision to His servant Jeremiah: it was because the captives might have otherwise been driven to despair, especially through the weariness of delay. They saw that their brethren were still in possession of the inheritance granted to them by God, while they themselves were driven into a distant country and, as it were, disinherited, so that no one could regard them as God’s people.

Since despair might have overwhelmed their minds, God designed to give them some comfort. On the other hand, those who remained in the land not only exulted over the miserable exiles but also abused the forbearance of God, so that they obstinately resisted all threats and thus hardened themselves more and more against God’s judgment. Therefore, God declared what was contrary to common belief: that those who lived as captives in Babylon had a better lot than those who remained quietly, as it were, in their own nest.

We have said that the badness of the figs is not to be explained as guilt, but as punishment. Jeremiah confirms this when he says, As these good figs, so will I acknowledge the captivity for good, or for beneficence, טובה, thube. It is well known that "captivity" refers to the persons led captive, as it is a collective word. Then he says:

I will acknowledge the captives of Judah, whom I have driven from this people, so as to do them good again.

Since this doctrine was then incredible, God called the attention of the Jews to the final outcome. It was as though He had said that those who took only a present view of things, and did not extend their thoughts to the hope of mercy, were mistaken.

For they reasoned as follows: “It is better to remain in the country where God is worshipped, where the Temple and the altar are, than to live among heathen nations. It is better to have some liberty than to be under the yoke of tyranny. It is better to retain even the name of being a separate people than to be scattered here and there, so as not to be a community at all.”

Consequently, according to their state at that time, they thought their condition was better. But God corrected this wrong judgment, for they ought to have looked to the end, and to what awaited both the exiles and captives, as well as those whom the king of Babylon had for a time spared.

Although it was indeed the Prophet’s object to alleviate the grief of those who had been led away into Chaldea, he also had a special regard for the people over whom he was appointed an instructor and teacher. He was then in Jerusalem, and we know how perverse those were with whom he had to contend, for no people could have been more obstinate.

Since God had delayed His punishment, they supposed that they had completely escaped, especially as they had an uncle as successor to their captive king.

From this, then, came their contempt for threats; from this also came their greater liberty in sinning. They thought that God had taken vengeance on the exiles and that they themselves were saved as being the more excellent portion of the community. The Prophet, therefore, to break down this presumption, which he could not otherwise change, set before them this vision, which had been given to him from above.

So now we see that the doctrine particularly set forth is that God would remember the captives for the purpose of doing them good. It is as though He had said that a wrong judgment was made concerning the calamity of a few years, and that the final outcome was to be considered.

He confirms what he said in the last verse, but in other words, because it was difficult to persuade them that those who were apparently lost were happier than those who still enjoyed some measure of safety. He had said that he would acknowledge them; but he now adds, I will set my eye upon them. He uses a metaphor that often occurs in Scripture, for God is said to turn away his face when he hides his favor; and in the same sense he is said to forget, to depart, not to care, to despise, to cast away.

Then, as God might have seemed to have no more care for this people, he says, I will set my eyes on them. But he goes even further, for he refers to the sentence announced in the last verse. He had said that he was the author of their exile, I have cast them into the land of the Chaldeans, but he now confirms the same thing, though in other words, when he says, Mine eyes will I set on them for good. For God is said to visit men, not only when he manifests his favor toward them, but also when he chastises them and punishes them for their sins. He had then set his eyes on them to execute punishment; he says now that he would act differently, that he would kindly treat the miserable.

He afterwards says, I will restore them. For, as he had sent them away, it was in his power to restore them. As, then, he could heal the wound inflicted by his own hand, this promise ought to have been sufficient to dispel every doubt from the minds of the captives as to their return. Furthermore, the Jews, who as yet remained in Jerusalem and in the land of Judah, ought to have known that they boasted in vain in their good lot, as though God treated them better than their captive brethren, for it was in his power to restore those whom he had banished.

And he adds, I will build and not pull them down, I will plant and not pluck them up. This mode of speaking would not be so significant either in Latin or in Greek; but such a repetition, as is well known, often occurs in Hebrew.

But whenever a negative is added to an affirmative, such a form of expression is to be interpreted this way: “I will be so far from plucking them up, that I will plant them; I will be so far from pulling them down, that I will build them up;” or, “since I had pulled them down, I will now build them up; since I had plucked them up, I will now plant them;” or a perpetuity may be meant, as though God had said, “I will plant them, so as not to pluck them again; I will build them, so as not to pull them down again.” But the most frequent meaning of such expressions is what I first mentioned: “I will not pull them down, but on the contrary build them up; I will not pluck them up, but on the contrary plant them.”

The meaning of the whole is that however sad the calamities of the people in Chaldea might be — they being as exiles reduced to a desolate condition — yet God could gather them again, like one who plants a tree or builds a house.

The metaphor of building is common in Scripture, and also that of planting. God is said to plant men when he introduces a certain order among them, or when he allots to them a certain place to dwell in, or when he grants them peace and quietness.

God is said in Psalm 44:2 to have planted his people; but I will not refer to the many passages that are found everywhere. God often says that he had planted his vineyard (Isaiah 5:2 and following). And then this passage is well known:

The branch of the Lord, and the planting for his glory.
(Isaiah 60:21)

This is said of the preservation of the Church.

The meaning then is that, though God severely chastised the exiles who had been led into Chaldea, yet their condition was not to be estimated by one day, or a month, or a few years, but that a happy end was to be expected. And as God intended at length to show himself reconcilable and propitious, it follows that the calamity that had happened to them was lighter than that which awaited the rest, who resolutely despised God and his prophets, and thus increased the vengeance that had already been pronounced on them.

Here the main benefit is added: God would not only restore the captives, so they could dwell in the land of promise, but would also change them inwardly. For unless God gives us a conviction regarding our own sins, and then leads us by his Spirit to repentance, whatever benefits he may bestow on us will only lead to our greater ruin.

The Prophet has until now spoken of the alleviation of punishment, as if he had said, “God will stretch out his hand to restore his people to their own country.” So, the remission of punishment is what has been promised until now. But now the Prophet speaks of a much more excellent favor: God would not only mitigate punishment, but he would also inwardly change and reform their hearts, so that they would not only return to their own country but would also become a true Church, a name they had vainly boasted of.

For though they had been chosen to be a peculiar people, yet, as they had departed from true religion, they were only a Church in name. But now God promises that he would bring them not only to enjoy temporal and fading blessings but also eternal salvation, because they would truly fear and serve him.

And this is what we should carefully observe, for the more bountiful God is toward men, the more his vengeance is kindled by ingratitude. What, then, would it profit us to abound in all good things, unless we had evidence of God’s paternal favor toward us?

But when we regard this goal—that God testifies to us that he is our Father by his bounty toward us—we then make a right use of all his blessings. God’s benefits cannot lead to our salvation unless we regard them in this light. Therefore, Jeremiah, after speaking of the people’s restoration, justly exalts this favor above everything else: namely, that the people would repent, so that they would not only fully partake of all the blessings they could expect but would also worship God in sincerity and truth.

Now, God says that he would give them a heart to know him. The word 'heart' is to be taken here for the mind or understanding, as it often means in Hebrew. Indeed, it frequently means the seat of the affections, and also the soul of man, as including reason or understanding, and will. But though the 'heart' is often taken for the seat of the affections, it is still applied to designate the other part of the soul, according to these words:

Until now God has not given you a heart to understand (Deuteronomy 29:4).

The Latins sometimes take it in this sense, according to what Cicero shows when he quotes these words of Ennius, “Catus AElius Sextus was a man remarkable in understanding” (Egregie cordatus; Cic. 1 Tuscul.). Therefore, in this passage, the word 'heart' is used for the light of the understanding. Yet another thing must be stated: a true knowledge of God is not, as they say, imaginary, but is always connected with a right feeling.

From the words of the Prophet, we learn that repentance is the unique gift of God.

If Jeremiah had only said that those who had previously been driven by madness into ruin would return to a sane mind, he might have seemed to be establishing free will and placing conversion in the power of man himself. This is according to what the Papists hold, who dream that we can turn to either side, to good as well as to evil, and thus they imagine that, after forsaking God, we can turn back to him by ourselves.

But the Prophet clearly shows here that it is God’s unique gift. For what God claims for himself, he surely does not take away from men, as if he intended to deprive them of any right that might belong to them. This is according to what the Pelagians hold, who seem to think that God appears almost envious when he declares that man’s conversion is in his power; but this is nothing less than a diabolical madness. It is, then, enough for us to know that what God claims for himself is not taken away from men, because it is not in their power.

Since, then, he affirms that he would give them a heart to understand, we therefore learn that men are by nature blind. We also learn that when they are blinded by the devil, they cannot return to the right way, and they cannot be capable of light in any other way than by God illuminating them by his Spirit.

We then see that man, from the time he fell, cannot rise again until God stretches out his hand not only to help him (as the Papists say, for they dare not claim the whole of repentance for themselves, but they divide it between themselves and God) but even to do the whole work from the beginning to the end. For God is not called the helper in repentance, but its author.

God, then, does not say, “I will help them, so that when they raise up their eyes to me, they shall be immediately assisted.” No, he does not say this; but what he says is, I will give them a heart to understand.

And as understanding or knowledge is the main thing in repentance, it follows that man remains wholly under the power of the devil and is, as it were, his slave, until God draws him out from his miserable bondage. In short, we must maintain that as soon as the devil draws us from the right way of salvation, nothing can come to our minds but what sinks us more and more into ruin, until God interposes and thus restores us when we are thinking of no such thing.

This passage also shows that we cannot really turn to God until we acknowledge him to be the Judge; for until the sinner sets himself before God's tribunal, he will never be touched with the feeling of true repentance. Let us then know that the door of repentance is opened to us when God constrains us to look to him.

At the same time, there is more included in the term Jehovah than the majesty of God, for he assumes this principle, which should have been sufficiently known to the whole people: that he was the only true God who had chosen for himself the seed of Abraham, who had published the Law by Moses, and who had made a covenant with the posterity of Abraham.

There is then no doubt that the Prophet meant that when the Jews became enlightened, they would be convinced of what they had forgotten: that is, that they had departed from the only true God. This way of speaking then means the same as if he had said, “I will open their eyes, so that they may at length acknowledge that they are apostates, and thus be humbled when made aware how grievous their impiety was in forsaking me, the fountain of living waters.”

He afterwards adds that they should be to him a people, and that he in his turn would be to them a God; for they would return to him with the whole heart. By these words the Prophet shows more clearly what he had previously referred to: that God’s blessings would then be altogether beneficial when they regarded their Giver.

As long, then, as we regard only the blessings of God, our insensibility produces this effect: the more bountiful he is toward us, the more culpable we become. But when we regard God’s bounty and paternal kindness toward us, we then really enjoy his blessings. This is the meaning of the Prophet’s words when he says:

I shall be to you a God, and you shall be to me a people.

What this way of speaking means has been stated elsewhere.

Though God rules the whole world, he yet declares that he is the God of the Church; and the faithful whom he has adopted, he favors with this high distinction, that they are his people. He does this so that they may be persuaded that there is safety in him, according to what is said by Habakkuk:

You are our God; we shall not die (Habakkuk 1:12).

And Christ Himself is the best interpreter of this sentence when He says that He is not the God of the dead, but of the living (Luke 20:38). He proves by the testimony of Moses that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, though dead, were yet alive.

How so? Because God would not have declared that he was their God if they were not living to him. Since then he regards them as his people, he at the same time shows that there is life for them laid up in him.

In short, we see that what is promised here by God is not a restoration for a short time, but he adds the hope of eternal life and salvation. For the Jews were not only to return to their own country when the time came to leave Chaldea, and liberty was granted them to build their own city, but they were also to become the true Church of God.

And the reason is also added: Because they will return to me, he says, with their whole heart. He repeats what we have already observed: that they would be wise (cordatos) and intelligent, whereas they had for a long time been stupid and foolish, and the devil had so blinded them that they were not capable of receiving sound doctrine.

But these two things—the reconciliation of God with men and repentance—are necessarily connected. Yet repentance ought not to be considered the cause of pardon or reconciliation, as many falsely think who imagine that men deserve pardon because they repent.

It is indeed true that God is never propitious to us unless we turn to him. But the connection, as has already been stated, is not such that repentance is the cause of pardon. Indeed, this very passage clearly shows that repentance itself depends on the grace and mercy of God. Since this is true, it follows that men are anticipated by God’s gratuitous kindness.

From this we further learn that God is not propitious to us in any other way than according to his good pleasure, so that the cause of all is only in himself.

Why is it that a sinner returns to the right way and seeks God from whom he has departed? Is it because he is moved to do so of himself? No, but because God illuminates his mind and touches his heart, or rather renews it. How is it that God illuminates one who has become blind? Surely, for this we can find no other cause than the gratuitous mercy of God.

When God then is propitious to men, so as to restore them to himself, does he not anticipate them by his grace? How then can repentance be called the cause of reconciliation, when it is its effect? It cannot be its effect and cause at the same time.

We should therefore carefully notice the context here. For though the Prophet says that the Jews, when they returned, would be God’s people because they would turn to him with their whole heart, he had previously explained from where this turning or conversion would proceed: namely, because God would show them mercy.

Those who pervert such passages according to their own fancies are not sufficiently acquainted with Scripture to know that there is a twofold reconciliation of men with God. He is first reconciled to men in a hidden manner, for when they despise him, he anticipates them by his grace, and illuminates their minds and renews their hearts. This first reconciliation is what they do not understand.

But there is another reconciliation, known by experience, namely when we feel that the wrath of God toward us is pacified, and are indeed made aware of this by the effects. Reference is made to this in these words:

Turn to me, and I will turn to you (Zechariah 1:3).

That is, “I appear severe and rigid to you; but why is this? It is because you do not cease to provoke my wrath. Return to me, and you shall find me ready to spare you.” God therefore did not first begin to pardon sinners when he does them good, but as he had been previously pacified, he therefore turns them to himself, and afterwards shows that he is really reconciled to them.

By the whole heart, sincerity or integrity is intimated, just as by a 'double heart,' or 'a heart and a heart,' dissimulation is signified. It is certain that no one turns to God in such a way that he puts off all the affections of the flesh, is at once renewed in God’s image, and is freed from every stain. Such a conversion is never found in man. But when the Scripture speaks of the 'whole heart,' it is in contrast with dissimulation:

“With my whole heart I have sought You,” says David; “I have hidden Your words and will keep them: I have prayed for Your favor; I will ask,” etc. (Psalms 119:10–16).

“They will seek me,” as Moses says, “with their whole heart” (Deuteronomy 4:29; Deuteronomy 10:12).

David did not divest himself of everything sinful, for he confesses in many places that he was struggling with many sins; but the clear meaning is that what God requires is integrity. In short, the 'whole heart' means integrity: that is, when we do not deal hypocritically with God, but desire from the heart to give ourselves up to him.

As we have previously refuted the error of those who think that repentance is the cause of God becoming reconciled to us, so now we must know that God will not be propitious to us unless we seek him.

For there is a mutual bond of connection, so that God anticipates us by his grace and also calls us to himself. In short, he draws us, and we feel in ourselves the working of the Holy Spirit. We do not indeed turn unless we are turned; we do not turn through our own will or efforts, but it is the Holy Spirit’s work.

Yet he who, under the pretext of grace, indulges himself, cares not for God, and does not seek repentance, cannot flatter himself that he is one of God’s people; for as we have said, repentance is necessary. What follows—but I cannot finish this part today, for he speaks of the badness of the figs and of the remnant that still remained.

Prayer:

Grant, Almighty God, that as we are placed in this world, while daily receiving so many blessings, we may so pass our time as to regard our end and hasten toward the goal. O grant that the benefits and blessings by which You invite us to Yourself may not be impediments to us and keep us attached to this world, but on the contrary stimulate us to fear Your name as well as to appreciate Your mercy, so that we may thus know You to be our God, and strive on our part to present ourselves to You as Your people, and so consecrate ourselves and all our services to You, that Your name may be glorified in us, through Christ our Lord. Amen.

God, after having promised to deal kindly with the captives, now declares that He would execute heavier punishment on King Zedekiah and all the people who still remained in their own country.

We have stated why God showed this vision to the Prophet: so that He might support the minds of those who saw nothing but reasons for despair, and also, on the other hand, that He might correct the pride of those who flattered themselves about their own situation, because God had delayed His vengeance against them.

Then the Prophet, after giving comfort to the miserable exiles, now speaks against Zedekiah and his people, who boasted that God was favorable to them, and that they had not only been fortunate but also wise in remaining in their own country.

He then says that Zedekiah and his princes, and all who remained in Judea, were like the bad figs, which could not be eaten because of their bitterness. I have said that this refers to punishment and not to guilt. They had sinned, I admit, most grievously; but we are to consider the Prophet's intention. The meaning then is, that though the condition of those who had been driven into captivity was harder at present, yet God would deal more severely with those who remained, because He had spared them for a time, and they did not repent, but hardened themselves more and more in their wickedness.

Now we know that Zedekiah was placed over the kingdom of Judah when Jeconiah surrendered himself to Nebuchadnezzar. He was Jeconiah's uncle and reigned for eleven years; during that time, he ought to have been at least wise at another's expense. For Eliakim, who was also called Jehoiakim, had been punished, and not only once; but Nebuchadnezzar, after plundering the temple, made him tributary to himself on his return to Chaldea.

At last, after being often deceived by him, Nebuchadnezzar became extremely displeased with Jehoiakim. Jehoiakim's son, who had reigned with his father, voluntarily surrendered himself into the power and will of the conqueror three months after his father's death. Mattaniah, of whom the Prophet speaks here, reigned afterwards.

So, he says, will I render Zedekiah (called previously Mattaniah) the king of Judah, and his princes, and the remnants of Jerusalem, who remain in this land (for the greater part had been led into exile), and those who dwell in the land of Egypt, for many had fled there; and we know that they were allied with the Egyptians, and that through a false confidence in them they often rebelled.

And this was also the reason why the prophets so sharply rebuked them: they relied on Egypt's help and sought shelter under its protection. Therefore, when they found themselves exposed to their enemies' will, they fled into Egypt. But Nebuchadnezzar afterwards, as we shall see, conquered Egypt also. Thus it happened that they were only for a short time beyond the reach of danger. But just as fugitive slaves, when recaptured, are then treated more severely by their masters, so also King Nebuchadnezzar's rage became more violent against them.