John Calvin Commentary Jeremiah 49

We have said that the Ammonites were not only adjacent to the Moabites but had also originated from Lot, and were therefore related to them by blood. Their origin was indeed base and shameful, for they were, as is well known, the offspring of incest. There was, however, the bond of kinship between them, because both nations had the same father. God had spared them when He brought His people up from Egypt; for in remembrance of the holy man Lot, He wanted both peoples to remain unharmed. But ingratitude doubled their crime, for these impious men did not cease to harass the children of Abraham in various ways. For this reason, therefore, Jeremiah now prophesies against them.

And we see here, again, the object of this prophecy and the design of the Holy Spirit in announcing it, namely, that the Israelites might know that they were not so completely cast off by God, but that there remained some remnants of His paternal favor. For if the Moabites and the Ammonites had been free from all evils, it would have been a very grievous trial. It would have been enough to overwhelm weak minds to see a people whom God had adopted, miserably oppressed and severely chastised, while heathen nations were remaining peaceful in the enjoyment of their pleasures, and also exulting over the calamities of others.

God, then, in order to mitigate the grief and sorrow which the children of Israel derived from their troubles and calamities, shows that He would still show them favor, because He would carry on war against their enemies and become the avenger of all the wrongs they had suffered.

It was no common consolation for the Israelites to hear that they were still the objects of God’s care, even though He seemed in various ways to have poured forth His wrath upon them in a full stream. We now see, then, the reason why Jeremiah denounced destruction on the Ammonites, as he had done before on the Moabites.

Then he says, To the children of Ammon: Are there no children to Israel? Hath he no heir? It was a very grievous trial to the miserable Israelites to see a part of the inheritance promised them by God forcibly taken from them by the Ammonites. For what could have come to their minds except that they had been deceived by vain promises? But it had happened that the Ammonites had deprived the children of Israel of a part of their inheritance. Hence the Prophet teaches us here, that though God connived for a time and passed by this robbery, He still would not allow the Ammonites to go unpunished for having taken to themselves what justly belonged to others. Hence it is added, Why doth their king inherit Gad?

I do not know why Jerome rendered מלכם, melkam, as though it were the name of an idol, as the word is found in the Prophet Amos. But it is evident that Jeremiah speaks here of the king, for immediately after he adds, his people. Their king, then, he says, inherits Gad. Gad is not the name of a place, as some think, but Mount Gilead, which had been given to that tribe. The Prophet says that they possessed the country of the Gadites, for they had been ejected from their portion, and the children of Ammon had occupied what had been given by God to them. And this is confirmed by the Prophet Amos, when he says,

For three of the transgressions of the children of Ammon, and for four, I will not be propitious to them, because they have cut off the mountain of Gilead (Amos 1:13).

He speaks there metaphorically, because God had fixed the limits between the tribe of Gad and the children of Ammon, so that both could be satisfied with their own inheritance. But the children of Ammon had broken through and expelled the tribe of Gad from the cities of Mount Gilead. This, then, is what our Prophet now means: namely, that they had taken for themselves that part of the land which had been allotted to the children of Gad. For it immediately follows, and his people dwell in his cities—that is, in the cities which had been given by lot to that tribe. For we know that a possession beyond Jordan had been given to the children of Gad. We now perceive, then, the meaning of the words.

God, then, shows that He had not forgotten His covenant, though He had for a time allowed the Ammonites to invade the inheritance which He had conferred on the children of Israel; yet the Gadites would at length recover what had been unjustly taken from them. For it was an intolerable robbery that the Ammonites should have dared to take for themselves that land—a land which was not the property of men, but rather of God Himself, for He had called it His rest, because He wanted His people to dwell there. And though God inflicted a just punishment on the Gadites when He expelled them from their inheritance, yet He afterwards punished the children of Ammon, just as He is accustomed to chastise His own children by the hand of the wicked, and at length to give the wicked also their just reward.

God testifies here plainly that He would not allow the Ammonites forever to enjoy their unjust plunder. He says that the days would come, in order to sustain with hope the minds of His children: for the Prophet announced his prediction at a time when the Ammonites were in a state of security, and then, some years elapsed while that people enjoyed their spoils.

He therefore holds here the minds of the faithful in suspense, that they might learn patiently to wait until the fixed time of God's vengeance came. For this reason, then, He says that the days would come when God would cause the trumpet of war to resound in Rabbah. He speaks of it as an extraordinary thing, for the Ammonites thought, as we shall see, that they would never be in any danger.

Since they proudly trusted in their own strength, the Prophet speaks here of the trumpet of war in Rabbah, which was the metropolis of the whole land. Some think that it was Philadelphia, a name given to it by Ptolemy. Interpreters, however, do not agree; but the opinion mostly received is that it was Philadelphia. Now, as to the main thing, there is no doubt that it was then the chief seat of government and the capital of the kingdom, because the Prophet, stating a part for the whole, includes the whole land when he speaks of this city.

He says that she would become a heap of desolation. But this was then wholly incredible, because Rabbah was so fortified that no one thought that it could be destroyed. But the Prophet now declares that the whole city would be demolished, so that neither walls nor private houses would remain, but that it would be a deformed mass of ruins. He adds, her daughters shall be burned with fire. By daughters he no doubt understands towns and villages; and thus is confirmed what I have said, that Rabbah was then the chief city of the whole land of Ammon.

At the end of the verse he says, Israel shall possess all who possess them. By these words Jeremiah again confirms what I have slightly referred to: that the calamity of the Ammonites would be a testimony to God’s paternal kindness towards His chosen people, because He resolved to avenge the wrongs done to them. Since God undertook the cause of the Israelites as His own, He sufficiently manifested the favor He had intended for His people, and for no other reason than because He had gratuitously chosen them.

It may be asked, when was this prophecy fulfilled? God, indeed, under David, gave some indication of their future subjection, but Israel never possessed that land. Indeed, from that time Ammon had not been brought low until after the overthrow of Israel. It then follows that what Jeremiah predicted here was not fully accomplished except under the kingdom of Christ.

David humbled that nation because he had received a great indignity from the king of Ammon; and he also took Rabbah, as it is evident from sacred history (2 Samuel 12:29 and following; 1 Chronicles 20:1–2). He was still satisfied with making the people tributary. From that time, they not only shook off the yoke but also exercised authority within the borders of Israel; and that the Israelites had recovered what they had lost, we nowhere read.

Then Israel began to possess power over the Ammonites when the kingdom of Christ was established, by which all heathen nations were not only brought into subjection and under the yoke, but all who were unworthy of mercy were also reduced to nothing. What is added at the end of the verse is not superfluous, for the Prophet introduces God as the speaker, because He speaks of great things, of which it was difficult to be fully convinced.

The Prophet now triumphs, as it were, over the land of Ammon, and according to his accustomed manner, as we have seen before. For if the prophets had spoken without metaphors and simply narrated the things they addressed, their words would have been frigid and inefficient, and would not have penetrated into the hearts of people.

This, then, is the reason why the prophets adopted an elevated style and adorned their prophecies with grandeur. For they never, like rhetoricians, affected eloquence, but necessity so urged them that they represented to the eyes those things which people could not otherwise conceive in their minds.

We have spoken often on this subject already, but I am again constrained to touch on it briefly, because those who are not well acquainted with Scripture and do not understand the design of the Holy Spirit may think that only words are poured forth here. But when we duly weigh what I have said, then we will readily acknowledge that the Prophet did not, without reason, enlarge on what he had previously said.

Howl, thou Heshbon, he says, for Ai is laid waste. These were two neighboring cities; therefore he exhorts Heshbon to howl on seeing the overthrow of another city. He then adds, Cry, or cry aloud, ye daughters of Rabbah. He again repeats what he had previously touched upon regarding the city Rabbah.

Gird yourselves, he says, with sackcloth, or put on sackcloth. He does not here exhort the citizens of Rabbah to repentance, but he speaks according to the customs of the people, as has been stated elsewhere.

Sackcloth was, indeed, a symbol of penitence; when miserable people wished humbly to flee to God’s mercy and confess their sins, they put on sackcloth. But the unbelieving imitated the faithful without discretion or judgment.

Thus, they scattered ashes on their heads and, without any reason, put on sackcloth. What was then commonly done is now mentioned by Jeremiah: Put on sackcloth, he says, lament and run here and there by the fences.

He afterward adds in the third person, for gone is their king into captivity. He expressed this so that the Israelites might know that, although that kingdom flourished for a time, the day of which the Prophet had spoken would still come.

On that day, the condition of the Ammonites would be no better than that of the Israelites, whose king, as was known, had been driven into exile along with the priests and princes.

The Prophet now denounces the same punishment on the Ammonites: not only would their king be driven into another land as a captive, but also their princes and their priests.

Because people's minds continually waver, as they do not adequately consider the infinite power of God, the Prophet, to remove all obstacles that might have made his prophecy doubtful, now declares that the Ammonites gloried in vain in their valleys. Some understand "valleys" to mean a fertile, well-watered land.

But the Prophet, in my opinion, refers instead to fortified places. He then says that they in vain gloried in their deep valleys; since they were surrounded by mountains, they thought they could not be approached. He derides this vain confidence: Why, he says, do you glory in your valleys, or depths?

Your valley has flowed down. By saying that the valley, or depth, had flowed down, he alludes to its situation. For when anyone considers a region situated among mountains, the land appears to be flowing, like a river gliding between its banks. It is then a striking allusion to a deep place when he says that the valley flowed down. This was the same as if he had said, “Your depth has vanished,” or, “It will not be such a protection to you as you think.”

But the meaning is that even though the Ammonites, trusting in their defenses, ignored all enemy attacks, they would still be exposed to plunder. For their mountains and valleys would be of no avail to them, despite the opinion they held that they were so fortified that they could not be attacked.

He calls Ammon a rebellious, or a backsliding, daughter, though he mentions no specific details. But Ezekiel, Amos, and Zephaniah—these three—clearly show why God was so severe towards the Ammonites (Ezekiel 25; Amos 1:13; Zephaniah 2:9): it was because they had uttered blasphemies against Him and His people, rejoiced over the miseries and calamities of the chosen people, and plundered them when they saw them overcome by their enemies. For these reasons, then, our Prophet now calls them a rebellious people: they had proudly exalted themselves against God and exercised cruel tyranny towards the miserable Israelites, who were still, as has been stated, connected with them by blood.

Who trusts in her secret places, or hidden places—rendered by some as “in her treasures.” But since אצר (atser) means to hide, the reference is, in my opinion, to strongholds. For the Prophet, in the next words, explains himself: Who can come to me? It appears, then, that the Ammonites thought themselves so secure because they were not exposed to their enemies but were protected by their mountains, as if they were in hiding places.

This boasting sufficiently shows that they did not trust so much in their treasures as in their hidden places, because they dwelt in recesses. The meaning is that even though the Ammonites boasted that they were beyond the reach of danger, God would still become the avenger of the cruelty they had exercised towards their relatives, the Israelites.

Jeremiah finally concludes his prophecy by saying that God would dissipate the foolish confidence with which the Ammonites were filled with pride, because he would bring a terror on them. He sets terror in opposition to the security in which the Ammonites lay dormant, for they were intoxicated, as it were, with their pleasures. And then the strongholds by which they thought themselves protected so hardened their hearts that they feared no danger.

God then sets this terror in opposition to the false arrogance by which they were inflated: I bring, then, a terror from all around thee. This was not added without reason, for the Ammonites thought that they could escape from some side if enemies pressed hard on them. And, as there were many outlets, they thought it impossible that they would fall into the hands of enemies. But God declares that they would be in every way full of fear, for terror would surround and besiege them, so that they could not escape.

He then adds, Ye shall be driven out, every one to his face, or, before his face. This would be the effect of terror, because God would deprive them of all thought, for when we flee in haste and only pay attention to any opening that may present itself, it is evident that we are driven by terror.

As we say in French, Il court devant soi; so the Prophet says here, Ye shall be driven out, every one before his face, that is, “you shall flee wherever a place may be open to you.” He shows that they would be so full of fear that they would not consider which would be the best way, nor think of a safe retreat; they would, in short, think of nothing but flight.

To the same purpose is what follows: There will be none to gather the dispersed. For when trembling seizes the hearts of the multitude, they can still be recalled if one who has more courage than the rest encourages them to stop. We know that many armies have been saved in this way; for regarding soldiers, when suddenly seized with fear, a leader has often been able to gather them again. But the Prophet, when he says that there would be none to call them back from flight, intimates their destruction. He finally adds—