John Calvin Commentary Jeremiah 31:9

"They shall come with weeping; and with supplications will I lead them: I will cause them to walk by rivers of waters, in a straight way wherein they shall not stumble; for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my first-born." — Jeremiah 31:9 (ASV)

The Prophet still pursues the same subject, but he adds that though they went with weeping into exile, this would be no impediment to God restoring them again to their own country. I take the beginning of this verse, in weeping shall they come, in an adversative sense. Some explain weeping as the effect of joy, because joy, like grief, sometimes brings tears. Some, therefore, think the Prophet means that the joy on their return would be so great that tears would flow from their eyes. But I, on the contrary, think the Prophet means what was afterwards repeated in one of the Psalms:

Going forth they went forth and wept; but coming they shall come with exultation, carrying their sheaves (Psalms 126:6).

For the Prophet compares the exile of the people to sowing. Unless the seed cast on the earth dies, it remains dry and barren and does not germinate; then the death of the seed is the cause of production. Similarly, it was necessary for the people to be cast on the ground by exile, so that their calamity might be a kind of death to them.

But he says that the Jews, when cast forth as a seed—that is, when driven into exile to be, as it were, put to death by God's chastening rod—had come with weeping. Afterwards, however, they returned with joy as in harvest, that is, when liberty to return was granted them. So also the Prophet here speaks, as I think, in an adversative sense concerning the Jews; the particle though is to be understood.

It afterwards follows, With prayers, or mercies, will I lead them. The word תחנונים, techenunim, which is found mostly in the plural, means prayers; and I do not know whether this sense is suitable here.

In Zechariah, the word, being connected with grace, cannot be otherwise explained than as mercy (Zechariah 7:9), and I am inclined to adopt this meaning here: that the weeping of the people would be no hindrance to God at last showing mercy to them and turning their weeping and tears into laughter and joy.

But if anyone prefers to render the word as "prayers," the sense would not be improper; that is, when they began humbly to confess their sins and to flee to God’s mercy, then the time of joy would come.

But weeping then must be applied to blind grief, for the Jews were not yet subdued so as to submit to God, to be humbled and to repent. Therefore, weeping is to be taken in a negative sense, as grief mixed with perverseness, when they murmured against God. The Prophet must then have understood prayers as tokens of repentance—that is, when the Jews, having been truly convinced of their sins by many and continual evils, would begin to flee to God’s mercy.

But he seems rather to contrast God’s mercies with the sorrow in which the Jews were involved when God hid His favor from them.

He adds, I will lead them to fountains of waters, according to what is said in the book of Psalms, that they would find fountains and wells on their journey (Psalms 84:6). For the Jews had to travel through deserts and sterile sands, so they thought that they lived in another world while they were in Chaldea; they remembered how vast was the solitude through which they had passed.

From this, then, came their despair, so that they refused every comfort when the Prophets exhorted them to entertain good hope. God therefore promises to be their leader on their journey, so that they should not lack water in the lonely and barren desert.

And we see that the Prophet, by the various figures he uses, means one and the same thing: that whatever obstacles may confront us to prevent us from tasting God’s goodness and embracing the promises of salvation, they will all vanish if we bear in mind the infinite power of God. I will then lead them by fountains of water.

Then he says, through a straight way, in which they shall not stumble, according to what is said in Isaiah 40:3:

A voice crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of Jehovah, make straight the paths of our God; let every valley be raised and mountain be made low, so that rough places may become plain, and the crooked (or tortuous) become straight ways (Isaiah 40:3).

We thus see how these prophecies harmonize and ought to be regarded as teaching the same thing—that God surmounts all obstacles when it is His purpose to save His Church.

For however much all the elements may unite against the salvation of the godly, God can by one breath dissipate them all, cast down the loftiest mountains that may be in His way, and provide rivers in deserts and dry lands. Thus, He can compel whatever may seem opposed to the salvation of His Church to obey Him.

He afterwards adds, for I shall be a Father to Israel, Ephraim my first-born he, or "shall be"; for הוא, eua, as is well known, is taken in place of a verb. Here Jeremiah points out the cause, and as it were the fountain, of the deliverance of which he has been speaking up to this point: namely, because God would become reconciled to His people.

He also intimates the cause of the exile and of all the evils that had been and would be: because they had provoked God by their sins. God had indeed adopted them as His people in the person of Abraham, but the Prophet intimates an interruption when he says, I will be, though the covenant of God had never been annulled.

He was then always the Father of the Church, but the benefit of adoption did not appear; in outward appearance, the people seemed rejected, as has been said in other places. On this subject, Hosea also speaks in these words:

I will say to her who obtained not mercy, Thou shalt obtain mercy; I will say to the not beloved, Thou art a beloved people (Hosea 2:23).

For nothing could have been said of the Jews when expelled from their inheritance, except that they were wholly alienated from God. He was therefore no Father to them at that time—that is, He did not appear to be so—although He did prove Himself to be a Father really and effectually.

He then began to be a Father when the people returned to their own country, because God’s favor then shone forth, which for a time had been, as it were, extinct.

Prayer: Grant, Almighty God, that as You have so often been pleased to receive into favor Your ancient people, though extremely provoked by their perverse wickedness—O grant, that mercy may also at this day be shown to us. And, though we wholly deserve to perish eternally, may You yet stretch forth Your hand to us and grant to us a testimony of Your favor, so that we may be able with a cheerful mind to call on You as our Father, and always to entertain hope of Your mercy, until we shall be gathered into that kingdom where we shall perfectly render to You the sacrifice of praise, and rejoice in the fruition of that eternal life, which has been procured for us by the blood of Your only-begotten Son.—Amen.

[Exposition continues from previous day's lecture]

We explained yesterday how God began to be a Father to Israel when He restored him from exile. Adoption, with regard to God, indeed remained the same, as has been stated; but according to human judgment, it was abolished. He then began anew to gather His people, so that they might really know Him as their Father.

He afterwards adds that Ephraim would be His first-born. Ephraim is undoubtedly taken here for the whole people; nor does the Prophet here make any distinction between the two kingdoms, but includes even the tribe of Judah in the name Ephraim, as is done in many other places.

But yet it is proper to observe that Ephraim is sometimes taken for all the descendants of Abraham, sometimes for the kingdom of Israel, and sometimes for that tribe itself. When the kingdom of Judah is distinguished from the kingdom of Israel, then Ephraim includes only the ten tribes.

But in this place, the Prophet did not intend to mark the difference between the tribe of Judah and the ten tribes, because it would have been very strange in this case to call Ephraim the first-born. For we know that Ephraim had been rejected out of regard for David, as is said in the Psalms:

And God refused the tribe of Joseph,
and rejected the tabernacles of Ephraim;
He chose the tribe of Judah whom He loved.
(Psalms 78:67–68).

There a comparison is made between the kingdom of Judah, which God had erected (having added a promise), and the kingdom of Jeroboam, which was, as it were, spurious. For the revolt from the family of David had torn the body of the Church, so that it became, as it were, mutilated.

For this reason it is said that Ephraim was rejected: because God regarded David alone and his descendants with paternal favor. And of his whole family it was said:

He shall call me, ‘My Father;’ and I will say to him
‘Thou art my Son.’
(Psalms 89:26).

In this place then, the Prophet speaks generally of the people, as if he had said that the division when the ten tribes formed a kingdom of their own was only temporary, but that they would become one people, so that Ephraim would no longer differ in anything from Judah.

To the same purpose is what is said by Hosea:

When Israel was a child I loved him,
and from Egypt have I called my Son.
(Hosea 11:1).

There the Prophet calls the people Israel; he does not, however, denote only the ten tribes, but he placed David and his descendants in the first rank.

Indeed, the Prophets, when prophesying about the restoration of the Church, direct their eyes to the first unity which God had established among the people, for it was then only the true state of things when the twelve tribes preserved a fraternal union.

We now, therefore, perceive why the Prophet says that Ephraim was God’s first-born.

But it may be asked here, “With respect to whom is he thus called? For it follows that there were other sons of God if Ephraim was the first-born among them.”

But this conclusion is not well-founded. For Mary is said to have brought forth her first-born son, who was yet her only son (Matthew 1:25), and Christ is called elsewhere the first-begotten with reference to all the faithful:

that he might be the first-born among many brethren (Romans 8:29).

But Mary had brought forth her only son. Therefore, the word "first-born" does not prove that others follow—the second and the third in their order. We may say that Ephraim was called the first-born of God with reference to the Gentiles, who eventually became partakers of free adoption.

For we also are the children of Abraham because we have been planted by faith among the elect people. Yet this solution seems to me more refined than solid. I then offer this simple interpretation: Ephraim was called the first-born because he was preferred to all the Gentiles; God was pleased to choose them as His people.

This, then, was the peculiar privilege of the seed of Abraham; for though the human race was one and the same, yet it pleased God to choose and adopt Abraham and his descendants.