John Calvin Commentary Jeremiah 38

The Prophet now shows that he was again dragged from the court of the prison to the inner part, which was dark, filthy, and like a grave. He states the cause of this: it was because four of the princes had heard his words. It is probable that many of the people had come there to hear the Prophet, and that he, having received a message, delivered it to everyone who came to him.

Although he was then shut up in prison, yet the word of God could not be bound, as Paul says, who gloried in the fact that though he was in chains, the truth still spread far and wide (2 Timothy 2:9). This was the case with Jeremiah; though he was held as a prisoner, he still did not cease to discharge his office. And yet, there is no doubt that the king’s purpose was to restrain him in this way. The prison was, as it were, the captivity of prophetic truth. But the king and his counselors were mistaken, for Jeremiah was no less free in the court of the prison than if he had walked through the city all day; indeed, he had many heralds.

But the four princes mentioned here watched him, namely Shephatiah, Gadaliah, Jucal, and Pashur. Then the four princes he names, having insidiously watched what he said, immediately made a commotion. They had, no doubt, contrived the ruin of the Prophet before they came to the king; for we know that the unprincipled and wicked discuss matters together when intent on mischief, and their courtly arts must be taken into account.

Since, then, the four were in authority, they undoubtedly influenced the greater part of the king’s council, and led astray easily influenced men, or those who were not of themselves bent on evil. The matter was eventually brought before the king; and therefore he adds, that they came to the king. But he first explains the doctrine, on account of which these unprincipled men created so much ill will toward him, and endangered his life.

Hence he says that the accusation was that he had not only threatened with ruin all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, but that he had also promised life to all who would go out to the Chaldeans: Every one who abides in the city shall die by the sword, famine, or pestilence; but every one who goes out to the Chaldeans shall live. This was the accusation.

We have seen elsewhere that the Prophet had said the same thing before; it was not, then, a new thing, for he had clearly pronounced the same in the Temple thirty years before that time, and it was then written as a prophecy and fixed to the doors of the Temple.

It was, therefore, nothing new to hear all this from the mouth of Jeremiah. But as I have already said, the king and his courtiers thought that he was so subdued by afflictions that he could hardly open his mouth. In short, they thought that the holy man had, in a way, lost his tongue since he had been in prison. This, then, was the reason why they now accused him so seriously to the king and declared him worthy of death.

He had deserved death many years before, if he had now committed a capital offense. But as I have already stated, they regarded the Prophet as having intentionally despised the king’s authority, and they were indignant because he could not be subdued, even though he was a prisoner and could see danger near every hour. This, then, was the reason why they regarded as a new thing what Jeremiah said, Whosoever abides in the city shall perish, etc.

As for these threats, we have said elsewhere that all those who expected help from the Egyptians were willful despisers of God. For the Prophet had often exhorted them all to bear quietly and submissively that temporary punishment which God had resolved to inflict on them. In their perverseness, they wished to keep God’s judgment at a distance, and then, when they saw that God was their enemy, they considered it enough to have the Egyptians as their friends. It was no wonder then that the Prophet allotted to them the sword, famine, and pestilence.

He then adds, Whosoever passes over to the Chaldeans shall live. The condition, however, was very hard; his soul, he says, shall be for a prey, as though he had said, “He who flees to the Chaldeans shall only save his life but must suffer the loss of all his property.”

This is similar to when a shipwreck is dreaded, and everyone is ready to save their life at the loss of all their goods. Therefore, in extreme danger, merchants are accustomed to cast all that they have into the sea, for they prefer to escape to the harbor empty and destitute of everything, rather than perish together with their riches.

It was, then, a hard condition; but the Prophet shows that they could not escape otherwise. They were to give up their own country and all other things, and could only preserve their life. For this reason he says that their life would be for a prey to them, as when anything is snatched from the fire, or as when one exposed to plunder would be content to take something away by stealth; for otherwise, if he sought to take away many things, he would have to contend with many enemies.

The Prophet then intimates that the Jews could not save themselves from death in any other way than by casting away all they had and by being concerned only with saving life. He again repeats, he shall live. By this repetition, he more pressingly urged them and with more earnestness exhorted them to save their life.

Then follows a confirmation: Given up shall be this city into the hand of the army of the king of Babylon, and they shall take it. The Prophet shows the reason why he exhorted the Jews to flee: because the city would eventually be taken. This is substantially what he says.

Now the princes add, Die let this man, because in this manner, or therefore, that is, on account of his bad counsel, he weakens the hands of the men of war, etc. Here hand is to be taken for valor, for deeds are mainly performed by the hands. Hence to loosen or weaken the hands means the same as to make men inert, or so idle that they do not move a finger.

Then the princes accused Jeremiah on this account: that he terrified the men of war and thus made them listless. It was a specious charge, but the slander had nothing to support it. For Jeremiah could not have been condemned as a public enemy to his country when he earnestly exhorted them to flee and gave no hope to the people, so that they might all, despairing of deliverance, willingly surrender themselves to their enemies.

A question may be raised here: whether it is lawful for a private individual to persuade subjects to violate their oath of allegiance to their king or prince. I now call Prophets private persons, for I have civil order in view. Jeremiah, indeed, sustained a public character, for he was God’s Prophet; but as for the government of the city, he was a private individual, one of the people.

It seems, then, that the Prophet had exceeded the limits of what is right when he persuaded the people to revolt, for that could not have been done without forfeiting allegiance to the king. To this I answer that the Prophet was invested with a special command, and therefore, he did nothing presumptuously or rashly.

Although, then, the people had pledged their faith to the king to the end, yet as God had now delivered the city to the Chaldeans, the obligation of the oath ceased. For when governments are changed, whatever the subjects had promised is no longer binding. For example, when any country has a prince, he binds the whole people to himself by an oath, so that they may all remain in their allegiance.

When anyone invades that country, the subjects incur the charge of perfidy if they do not come forward and assist their prince, as they had promised. But when a foreign enemy takes possession of the whole land, the obligation of the oath ceases, for it is not in the power of the people to set up princes, because it belongs to God to change governments as He pleases.

Since, then, this power belongs to God alone, while a prince rules, the people ought to remain resolutely obedient to him, as their legitimate prince, set over them by God. But this was not the case with the Jews at that time; for though the Chaldeans had not yet entered the city, God had declared that they were its masters.

The people, then, were not to wait until the Chaldeans broke into the city, burned its houses, and killed all they encountered; but it should have been sufficient for them that the Prophet’s prediction was the decree or sentence of God, by which they were given up to the Chaldeans.

The question regarding Jeremiah and all others in similar circumstances is now answered: for when anyone sees only some danger near, he should not, on that account, persuade the people to forsake their prince. Instead, everyone who seeks to be God’s faithful servant will risk his own life in the defense of his king.

When called to his council, he will advise what is useful and right; but he will not stir up commotions and tumults. On the contrary, he would rather die a hundred times than cause the people to revolt either by his counsel or by his influence. But the case of Jeremiah, as has been said, was peculiar, for God had made known His purpose regarding the Chaldeans.

Hence Jeremiah not only prudently persuaded the people to do what he deemed necessary, but he also faithfully discharged his office as a Prophet. Nor did he give any other counsel than what he had been commanded to give; indeed, he commanded them, by authority, to pass over to the Chaldeans, for it was according to God’s will.

The princes, however, brought this charge against him, that he weakened the hands, etc.; and added, In this manner he seeks not the good of the people, when he thus speaks, (peace here is to be taken for what is good or useful,) but he seeks evil. This they slanderously added, for Jeremiah, as far as he could, consulted the public good.

He wished the city to continue safe; had it been in his power, he would have put to flight all the Chaldeans. But he could not carry on war with God, under whose banner the Chaldeans fought.

Jeremiah then sought the good of the people, but he could not resist God, and therefore he yielded to the divine decree. He saw no other remedy than this: that the Jews should undergo a temporary punishment and be chastened by an exile, so that they might return afterward to their own country.

Had it been possible, as I have said, he would have kept the people from every injury. But this was not now practicable, for God had pronounced that it was all over with the kingdom and the city until the Jews were punished by an exile of seventy years.

There was then a second good or benefit, so that exile might be more tolerable for the miserable, or captivity become milder. And this good was to go of their own accord to King Nebuchadnezzar and to allow themselves to be led away to the Chaldeans. This was the second good.

Jeremiah then, seeing that the city, the kingdom, and the Temple were not to stand, was anxious to urge with all his might what remained to be done, so that the city might at least continue as it was while the inhabitants migrated to another land, so that afterward they might return to it. This was the best thing for the people, because God had determined to drive them all into exile. It was then absurd to bring against him this unjust charge, that he sought not the good of the people, but their ruin.

But as we said yesterday, all the sayings and doings of the saints have always been unjustly condemned. And if the same thing happens to us today, let us patiently bear it.

We also see that it has always been objected to the Prophets and faithful teachers, as a crime, that they did not consult the public good, just as all ungodly men today bring the same charge against us. This is especially true of courtiers, who take it for granted that if anything were changed, it would be the cause of all kinds of disturbances; and hence they think that their religion could not possibly fall without ruin to the public good.

Hence it is that the free preaching of the Gospel is disliked by them, as though it brought with it some public calamity. Therefore they call us turbulent; and they say that we go astray through ignorance: though we are not avowedly enemies of the public good, yet we do not understand how kingdoms are to be governed; and hence we rashly stir up the greatest tumults.

All these reproaches we have to bear, as Jeremiah did, when, with a quiet mind, he endured the hatred which the princes unjustly incited against him on account of his doctrine. This doctrine he had announced by God’s command and was necessary for the safety of the city and people, for the Jews could not, against God’s will, remain in their city, from which God had resolved to remove them.

When, therefore, Jeremiah saw that the city could not be defended against the Chaldeans—even if he had been the only counselor of the king and not God’s Prophet—what could he have advised better or more beneficial than to anticipate the extreme cruelty of their enemies? What better counsel than to do all they could, so that the city might not be burned with fire and the slaughter of the people might not be universal, but that they might continue alive, with the loss only of their property?

He could not then have given better counsel. But, as I have already said, nothing is deemed good or useful by the ungodly except the liberty to perversely resist God. This was the reason why they so unjustly accused God’s Prophet.

Zedekiah no doubt knew that wrong was done to the holy Prophet; for though he wished him to remain as he was, yet he knew that the Prophet had not threatened the people from ill will or a hostile mind. He was thus conscious that he was dealing with God rather than with a mortal man.

However this may have been, he knew that Jeremiah was not an enemy to the public safety according to the charge brought by the princes. He might then have wished to deliver the Prophet from their hands, but he submitted to their fury, for he was divested of all royal power and had become, as it were, a slave to his own counselors, on whom the government of the kingdom depended.

Those who think that the king spoke honorably of his counselors wrongly explain this verse, as though he had said that their prudence and dignity were such that nothing could be denied them. They pervert the meaning of the Prophet.

For the king, on the contrary, acknowledges here that he was reduced to such a condition that, as though he were a private individual, he, in short, confessed that he was the servant of servants. “Now I see,” he says, “that I am no king, but that you so rule that, willing or unwilling, I am forced to yield to you, even in the best cause.” There is then no doubt that it was the bitter complaint of the king when he said, The king can do nothing against you.

But Zedekiah deserved this degradation, for he should have been more teachable from the beginning and submitted to God. In the first place, as we have seen, he had despised prophetic doctrine and did not listen to the voice of God.

In the second place, he treacherously revolted from the Chaldean king and thus became guilty of ingratitude; for when his nephew, Jeconiah or Coniah, was dethroned, he obtained royal power through the favor of the king of Babylon. He had therefore been ungrateful in denying him tribute.

But his impiety was the main cause of all evils. Since he had been such a rebel against God, he deserved for the princes to prove rebels to him. He then degraded himself and deprived himself of royal authority when he refused submission to the word of God and also when he denied tribute to the king of Babylon.

It was no wonder, then, that God made him subject to the princes and counselors, who were still his servants.

As for these counselors, their arrogance was inexcusable in daring to condemn Jeremiah, for this was to take away from the king his own right: Let this man die, for he is worthy of death. Why were they not content with accusing him, without also assuming to be his sole judges?

Since they treated the king so disrespectfully, there is no doubt that they were despisers of God when they regarded royal dignity as nothing.

But as for the king, he reaped, as I have said, the fruit of his own impiety, for he had not given God His due honor by embracing the truth taught by the Prophet. It was therefore necessary that he should be treated unworthily and contemptuously, so that he dared not say even one word on behalf of a just and good cause.

This was the reason why he said, He is in your hands, for the king can do nothing against you.

Prayer:

Grant, Almighty God, that since You invite us daily to Yourself with so much kindness, and give us also time to repent, and then offer us the hope of mercy and salvation, if we return to You — O grant that we may not pass by such benevolent warnings with deaf ears, but in due time attend to You, and with true and sincere acknowledgment of all our sins so surrender ourselves to You, that we may find You to be merciful; and that when we return to You we may so continue in obedience to You, that we may be capable of receiving Your constant kindness, until the full fruition of it shall be given us in Your celestial kingdom, through Christ our Lord. Amen.

Here, the extreme presumption as well as cruelty of the princes is narrated; for they cast the holy Prophet into a pit, where he sank in the mire. It was a proof of hardened impiety not to spare so excellent a servant of God; and it was also savage cruelty, when they had no cause for such rage, except that Jeremiah had obeyed God and faithfully performed the duty entrusted to him.

Let us also learn from this example, whenever the Lord chooses to test our patience, to bear with resignation what we see the holy Prophet endured. If, then, we ever shudder at the horrors of the cross, so that bearing persecution may seem hard to us, let us remember this example of the Prophet. In a word, here, on the one hand, the wickedness of the world is shown to us, as in a picture; and on the other, the wonderful steadfastness and also the singular meekness of God’s servant shine forth gloriously.

Jeremiah then says that he was taken by the princes and cast into a pit, which was in the court of the prison; and in that part where one of the counselors lived, even Malchiah the son of Hamelech. He also describes the state of the place: that it was a miry pit, so that he sank down in the mud. He does not mean that he was covered with mud, but that he was fixed in it, as the Hebrew word indicates; and we may thus rightly translate the words, “He lay fixed in the mud.”

Jeremiah relates here how he was delivered from death, for he could not have lived long in the mire; partly because he would have died from lack, and partly because he would have perished from the cold and suffocated from the filth of the dungeon. But God rescued him in a wonderful manner through the aid of Ebed-melech, an Ethiopian. He was a foreigner, and this is expressly stated so that we may know that among the king’s counselors, there was no one who resisted such great wickedness. But one was found, an Ethiopian, who came to the aid of God’s Prophet.

A comparison is therefore implied here between an Ethiopian, a foreigner, and all the Jews, who professed to be the holy seed of Abraham, who had been circumcised, and boasted loudly of God’s law and covenant. Yet, there was not one among them who would stretch out his hand to the holy servant of God!

Perhaps there were some who pitied him, but they lacked courage, so no one dared to open his mouth, for it was considered a disgrace to support the holy man. Therefore, they preferred the favor of the ungodly to their own duty. But there was an Ethiopian so courageous that he dared to accuse all the king’s officials and the other princes.

Undoubtedly, then, the Spirit, by the mouth of the Ethiopian, brought perpetual disgrace upon the king’s princes, who styled themselves as the children of Abraham and boasted greatly of God’s covenant. A similar case is presented by Christ in a parable, where He says that a Levite and a priest passed by a wounded man and disregarded him, but that help was brought to him by a Samaritan (Luke 10:30–35).

Christ’s purpose, no doubt, was to condemn the Jews, even the Levites and the priests, for their barbarity in showing no concern for the life of a miserable man in his extreme distress. So also, in this passage, the Ethiopian is presented to us as an example, for he alone had feelings of kindness and humanity, enough to bring help to the holy Prophet and to rescue him, as it were, from immediate death and the grave.

But we see all the king’s officials either utterly indifferent or influenced by the same spirit of rage and cruelty, so that they were mortal enemies to the holy man because he freely and openly declared to them the command of God.

And Jeremiah says that Ebed-melech heard, etc. From this, we may conclude that he was anxious about the safety of the holy Prophet and that he had friends who watched the proceedings.

It is then added that Ebed-melech was in the palace, but that the king was sitting in the gate of Benjamin. Kings were accustomed to administer justice in the gates, and their tribunal was there; it was also there that the people held their regular assemblies.

The king, then, was sitting in the gate of Benjamin. But, in the meantime, his palace was a place of execution and a den of robbers. We therefore see that the king’s indolence is indicated here, for he apparently performed the proper duties of a king but neglected the principal part of them, as he allowed a holy man to be cast into a pit. Since, then, he thus exposed the Prophet’s life to the will of the princes, it is evident that he was merely an empty shadow, though he stood there as the judge of the people and had a sacred tribunal there.

It now follows that Ebed-melech went forth from the palace and came to the king’s tribunal, so that he might plead the Prophet's cause there. It is right to note this circumstance as well as the previous one. For if Ebed-melech had met the king accidentally, he might have spoken to him in passing. But since he went forth from the palace, it is clear that he had been contemplating his actions and had not felt only a sudden impulse of compassion. Instead, when he could have rested quietly in the palace, he went of his own accord to the king to make his complaint known.

Furthermore, he did not address the king in a room or in some private corner of the palace, but spoke to him in the gate, that is, in a public assembly. Thus, we see that the first circumstance highlights for us this man’s perseverance, for he was not only suddenly moved but persevered in his holy purpose. The second circumstance highlights for us his magnanimity, for he did not shrink from incurring ill-will but openly and boldly spoke for Jeremiah before the people, and he highlighted the Prophet’s excellence by bringing an accusation against the princes.

He no doubt knew that he was bringing himself into danger, but he exposed his own life so that he might aid the Prophet.

He then said that the king’s counselors had done wickedly in all the things which they had done against Jeremiah the Prophet, because they had cast him into the well. Ebed-melech added, There he will die under himself, or as some render it, and rightly, “in” his own place. The expression is striking but cannot be fully conveyed in our language, for Ebed-melech meant that Jeremiah would die even if no one disturbed him, even if no evil or harm were done to him by another.

He will, then, die in his own place, that is, he will die if left where he is, because he lay, as has been shown, sunk in mire. And then Ebed-melech said, He will die through famine; for he had been cast into the pit as into a grave. As scarcity prevailed among all the people, Jeremiah could not have hoped for any aid, and bread, as we shall see later, could not have been thrown to him.

Then Ebed-melech says here, first, that Jeremiah had been unworthily treated because he was God’s Prophet; for Ebed-melech honors him with this title so that he might expose the impiety of the princes. Second, he shows how miserably Jeremiah lay in the pit, because no one could supply him with food, and there was no more bread in the city.

We see here, as I have already said, that the Prophet’s deliverance was entirely from above. The king, stricken with fear, had recently handed over the holy Prophet to the cruelty of his princes and had confessed that he no longer had any authority: “For it is not the king,” he said, “who now governs you.”

Since, then, the king had not dared to contend resolutely against his princes, how was it that he now ventured to extricate Jeremiah from the pit? We therefore see that the king’s mind had been changed. This is clear because he was recently so stunned by fear that he did not dare to plead the cause of the holy man; yet now he commands the Ethiopian to take him out from the pit. It appears, then, that this was overruled by a divine power.

But let us learn from this to be courageous when necessity requires, even if there may not be hope of a favorable outcome. Ebedmelech might have thought to himself that his attempt would be in vain, however strenuously he might have pleaded for Jeremiah.

He might, then, have therefore relinquished the purpose he had so boldly undertaken. For in this way, those who are overly wise are often led, as it were, into inaction, thinking: “What can you accomplish? You are but one, and they are many; and then the matter is already settled. If the king himself has been forced to yield to their fury, and you, being a private individual, with what confidence can you resist them? Furthermore, a tumult will be raised, and you will perish in it; and in the meantime, they will perhaps stone that unfortunate man whom you seek to help.” All these things might have occurred to Ebedmelech, and thus he might have desisted.

But we see that he rested confidently in God’s favor.

Let us, then, remembering his example, hope beyond hope when God requires us to do something—that is, when faith or the obligation of duty demands anything from us. This can be done if we close our eyes to all obstacles and continue in our work, for events are in God’s hands alone, and they will turn out as He pleases.

Meanwhile, it is simply our duty to proceed in our course, even if we may think that our efforts will be in vain and fruitless.

Ebedmelech happily succeeded, and how? Because he acted as a pious and upright man. Thus, God will extend His hand to us; whatever difficulties we may encounter, we will overcome them all by His power and aid.

Then the king commanded Ebedmelech the Ethiopian, Take hence thirty men with thee and extricate Jeremiah from the well. Ebedmelech might even then have relinquished his undertaking, for he might not have been able to overcome so great a power with thirty men, because all the king’s counselors had united, and no doubt they had enlisted many others to their side.

Thus, we see that Ebedmelech did not rely on human aid but, strengthened by invincible confidence, he undertook this task, so that he dared to draw Jeremiah out of the pit.