John Calvin Commentary Jeremiah 9

He follows the same subject. During times of tranquility, when nothing but joyful voices were heard among the Jews, he bewails, as one in the greatest grief, the miseries of the people; and not being satisfied with this, he says, Who will set, or make, my head waters, and my eye a fountain of tears? He intimates by these words that the ruin would be so dreadful that it could not be bewailed by a moderate or usual lamentation, since God’s vengeance would exceed common bounds and fill men with more dread than other calamities.

The meaning is that the destruction of the people would be so monstrous that it could not be sufficiently bewailed. Hence, it appears how hardened the Jews had become, for doubtless the Prophet had no delight in such comparisons, as though he wished rhetorically to embellish his discourse. But as he saw that their hearts were inflexible, and that a common way of speaking would be despised or would have no weight and authority, he was constrained to use such comparisons.

And today, there is no less callousness in those who despise God; for however Prophets may thunder, while God spares and indulges them, they promise themselves perpetual quietness. Hence, they ridicule and insult both God and his servants, as though they were treated too harshly.

Since, then, the same impiety prevails in the world now as formerly, we may learn from this what vehemence those whom God calls to the same office of teaching ought to use. Plain teaching, then, will always be deemed frigid in the world, unless it is accompanied with sharp goads, such as we find employed here by the Prophet. He adds—

Here the Prophet entertains another wish: He had before wished that his head were waters, that he might shed tears, and he had wished his eyes to be the fountains of tears; but now, after having carefully considered the wickedness of the people, he sets aside every feeling of humanity, and as one incensed, he desires to move elsewhere, and completely to leave the people; for their ungodliness had so prevailed that he could no longer live among them.

It is indeed certain that the Prophet had no ordinary grief when he perceived that God’s dreadful vengeance was not far distant. It is also certain that he was moved and constrained by their detestable conduct to desire to be removed elsewhere. But he speaks not only for his own sake, for he regards his own nation and expresses his feelings that he might more effectually touch their hearts.

We must then understand that so great was the sympathy of the Prophet that he was not satisfied with shedding tears, but that he wished that his whole head would flow into tears. It also appears that he was so moved with indignation that he wished completely to leave his own people. But, as I have said, his object was to try whether he could restore them to the right way.

He then shows, in this verse, that the Jews had become so detestable, that all the true servants of God wished to be removed far away from them: Who then will set me in the desert? He does not seek for himself another country; he does not desire to dwell in a pleasant situation, or that some comfortable refuge should be offered to him; but he desires to be placed in the desert, or in the lodging of travelers.

He speaks not of those lodgings or inns, which were in villages and towns, but of a lodging in the desert, as is the case when, during a long and tedious journey through forests, some sheds are formed so that when a traveler is overtaken by the darkness of night, he might be protected by some covering and not lie down in the open air.

It is of this kind of lodging that the Prophet speaks: so he undoubtedly means a shed; but as to the word, we may retain, as I have said, its proper meaning. What is meant is, that to dwell in the desert among wild beasts was better than to be among that abominable people.

By expressing this wish he undoubtedly inflamed the fury of the whole people, or at least of most of them; but it was necessary to address them so forcefully: as they submitted to no kind and wholesome warnings and advice, they were to be forcibly stimulated and urged by such reproofs as these.

I will leave my people. This had an emphatic bearing, for one's native soil is delightful to everyone, and it is also delightful to dwell among one’s own people.

Since the Prophet wished to be removed into the desert, and to leave his own people—all his relatives and the nation from which he sprang—and to depart from them, it follows that they must have reached an extreme state.

And the reason is added, For all are adulterers. I take the word מנאפים menaphim, adulterers, in a metaphorical sense, as meaning all those who had departed from God and abandoned themselves to ungodly superstitions, or those who had become so vitiated and corrupt as to retain no integrity. He does not, therefore, call them adulterers because they were given to sexual immorality, but because they were immersed in all kinds of defilements.

He afterwards calls them an assembly of apostates, or of perfidious men. The word עצר, otsar, means to prohibit, to restrain: hence the noun עצרת, ostaret, means a summoned assembly, when, according to an oath or laws, men are forced to meet; and after the assembly is proclaimed, they do not dare to depart.

So the Prophet by this word points out the consent and union that existed among that people, as though he had said that they clung to their sins no less than if by a solemn rite, authority, or ordinance they had been summoned together and were prohibited from departing.

Thus we see that he condemns the impious consent that was among the people, and also their stubbornness, for they could in no way be restored to a right mind. For this reason he also calls them בגדים, begadim, transgressors; for by this word the Hebrews mean not every kind of sinner, but those who are completely wicked. Hence the prophets, when they speak of apostates and revolters, always call them בגדים, begadim, as in this passage. I will not proceed further.

Prayer:

Grant, Almighty God, that since you have been pleased that the prophetic writings should be preserved for our use, that they may continually stir us to repentance, and that since you daily raise up those who urge us by their exhortations, and draw us, as it were by force, to repent—O grant, that such perverseness as we see existed in your ancient people may not be in us; but that we may make ourselves teachable, and be so moved by your threatenings, as to anticipate your judgment, lest we, mistaking your forbearance, should at last be visited with that dread, described to us by your servant Jeremiah, but that we may, on the contrary, find you to the end to be not only a reconcilable but also a most merciful Father, until we at last enjoy a fuller knowledge of your goodness in your celestial kingdom, through Jesus Christ our Lord.—Amen.

Jeremiah confirms what he had said about the near destruction of the people; for, as we have said, the Jews ridiculed threats while they thought themselves far from every danger. But the Prophet shows, from the nature of God Himself, that they must inevitably perish soon; for since God is the judge of the world, and as they were continually advancing in impiety and wickedness, they could no longer be tolerated. This is the meaning.

He first says that they stretched their tongues as a bow for falsehoods. The verb דרך, darek, means to walk and often occurs in this sense; but it also means to stretch, to bend, and is frequently applied to bows. As it is here in Hiphil, some take it in a transitive sense.

In this case, it ought to have י, iod; but such a defect is often found in other places. This sense is the most suitable: that is, that they shot falsehood with their tongues as with a bow. Others improperly construe שקר, shikor, in the genitive case, as though he had said, “the bow of falsehood.” But this gives no meaning, and therefore “the bow of falsehood” cannot be admitted here.

The sense is that they shot falsehood with their tongue as with a bow, or that they made their tongue go to falsehood, or that they stretched their tongue like a bow for falsehood. If the last rendering is approved—that they stretched their tongue, etc.—then the Prophet compares their tongues to bows and falsehoods to arrows.

As to the subject itself, there is no difference whether we read that they shot lies with their tongues or that they stretched their tongues for lies. For the Prophet simply means that their tongues, as he will tell us later, were so pointed that they pierced one another with slanders and falsehoods, as though one stretched a bow and shot an arrow. He then intimates that all their words were deadly, for they were intent on slanders and falsehoods, so that there was no interaction without a mortal wound.

He then adds that they were not strong for the truth. Some read, “They have been strong, but not for the truth”; others, “They have been strong as to the truth,” or “for the truth.” But I think that the Prophet’s meaning is different: that having suppressed the truth, they took more liberty for themselves, as though he had said that they triumphed when all faithfulness and rectitude were destroyed. For by the word אמונה, amune, the Prophet no doubt means that fidelity by which men ought to conduct their affairs with one another.

Since, then, there was no uprightness among them, he says that they marched forth as victorious when they trod underfoot what was just and right. It is indeed a proof of extreme impiety when men, trampling upon faithfulness and equity, allow themselves every kind of licentiousness.

Some give this explanation: that they ruled, not through their faithfulness or virtues, for they had crept into and obtained honors by wicked and deceitful arts.

And it is indeed certain that the Prophet directs his discourse not against the common people but against the chief men, who had attained their power by frauds. But I am satisfied with the view that I have already given: that they had become strong because there was no truth, just as when we say that the blind rule in darkness when everything is in confusion.

The meaning is that they were not only given up to their sins, but they also triumphed over fidelity and justice by allowing themselves every liberty, as there was no one who dared to say a word to restrain them. He says that they thus became strong through the whole land; for he sets forth here the deplorable state of the people in general, as though he had said, “There is no hope of deliverance left, for truth and faithfulness are everywhere oppressed.”

An explanation follows: that they proceeded from evil to evil. That is, they obstinately went on in their evil doings, for “to go forth” means the same as “to pass.” They then passed from evil to evil.

That is, when they had done one evil, no repentance entered their hearts so as to turn back; but they continued their wickedness and accumulated evils upon evils. We now then understand what the Prophet means, for he sets forth their pertinacity in evil deeds and at the same time shows that there was no evidence of amendment, for they passed from one bad deed to another like it.

And me they have not known, says Jehovah. He shows here what is the source of all evils: they had cast aside all knowledge and every thought of God.

We indeed know that when God is truly known, His fear must necessarily influence our hearts; and the knowledge of God begets reverence and a regard for religion.

It is indeed true that God is somewhat known even by the ungodly and the wicked, and that they have some notions respecting Him; but it is no more than an empty knowledge.

When indeed we are fully persuaded that God is the judge of the world, and when we also have a knowledge of His goodness and paternal favor, we necessarily fear Him and spontaneously and willingly worship and serve Him.

Ignorance of God, then, is a kind of madness which carries men headlong to every sort of impiety. On this account, God complains that He was not known by the people, for the fear of Him was not in them.

In this verse, the Prophet describes the extreme wickedness of the people. Although thefts, robberies, frauds, slaughters, perjuries, and sorceries sometimes prevail, some regard for close relatives usually remains. However, it is monstrous when all familial affections are destroyed. Since then, even in the most wicked individuals, some natural affections (called storge by philosophers) remain, it follows that people depart entirely from nature and become like wild beasts when these affections no longer exist. This is the meaning of what is said here.

There is a similar passage in Micah 7:5-6. The idea is indeed more fully expanded there, for the Prophet adds:

“From her who sleeps in your bosom guard the doors of your mouth; for the son lies in wait for his father, and the daughter delivers up her mother to death; and the chief enemies of man are his own domestics.”

The prophets then mainly agree in showing that there was no humanity left among them; for the son, forgetful of his duty, rose up against his father, and everyone was treacherous towards his own friend, and a brother did not spare his own brother.

Let a man then guard himself: this is not an admonition, as if the Prophet exhorted men to be wary. Instead, he only shows that there was no fidelity, for everyone was treacherous and unfaithful towards his own friend, and even a brother acted unjustly towards his own brother.

It therefore follows that the Jews are charged with being natural monsters. They were deservedly objects of detestation when they cast aside all care for their own kin and, as much as they could, destroyed everything resembling humanity.

He says that brothers by supplanting supplanted; that is, they craftily deceived and circumvented their own brothers.

The verb עקב okob, is to be taken metaphorically. It is derived from the heel of the foot and means to oppress the simple by secret arts. He also says that all friends acted fraudulently.

We have spoken of this kind of language in connection with Jeremiah 6:28, for we found the same complaint there. The Prophet then said the Jews were like iron and brass because they had hardened themselves to be capable of any cruelty.

This sort of language often occurs when the word רכיל, rekil, is connected with the verb הלך elak. The most learned linguists say that this word rekil is never found in Scripture except in connection with the verb "to go" or "to walk."

They therefore conclude that a particular type of person is meant: one who goes about veiled or deceitfully, and rambles and runs here and there to find opportunities for deceiving and cheating. It cannot be taken here to mean slandering, as we have also stated regarding chapter six; that interpretation is too weak.

It is indeed found in this sense in Leviticus 19:16: “Go not about a slanderer among your people.”

Some render it there as “a whisperer.” But the Prophet no doubt condemns here the frauds and deceitful crafts by which they deceived and cheated one another, for רכל, recal signifies a merchant.

And as traders often act cunningly and practice crafty artifices, the Hebrews call that man רכיל racal, that is, fraudulent and wickedly crafty, whose object is to deceive and cheat. We see that this is the meaning in this place, as it designates those who circumvented one another. For the Prophet says that those who trusted in brothers or friends were foolish, and he gives the reason: because brothers supplanted one another, and friends went about fraudulently.

Jeremiah continues with the same subject. He says that fidelity had so vanished among the Jews that everyone sought to deceive his neighbor. Therefore, it followed that they were without any shame. Some sense of shame at least remains among people when they deal with their own friends; for though they may be entirely given to gain and to indulge in falsehoods, yet when they conduct business with friends, they retain some regard for equity, and shame restrains their wickedness. But when no distinction is made between friends and strangers, it follows that their character has become entirely brutal. This is what the Prophet meant.

And he adds that they spoke not the truth. He now says that they were liars, not just in this or that particular business, but that they were perfidious and deceitful in everything. This statement, then, is not to be limited to some specific acts of fraud; rather, it is as if he had said that they did not know what truth was, or what it was to act in good faith and to speak honestly to their neighbors, for they were entirely imbued with deceit, and no truth could come from their mouths.

And for the same purpose, he says that they had taught their tongues to speak falsehood. This expression is stronger, for he means that they were entirely devoted to deceit, as through long practice they had trained their tongues for this task. The tongue ought to be the representative of the mind, according to the old saying. For why was the tongue created, if not so that people might communicate with one another? For thoughts are hidden, and they emerge when we speak with each other. But the Prophet says that the order of nature was inverted by them, for they had taught their tongues to lie. We also learn from this that they had no fidelity whatsoever, for their very tongues had been trained to deceive. Just as when anyone has learned anything by practice, he does it readily, so when tongues are formed by continual practice and inured to lying, they can do nothing else.

He says at last that they wearied themselves with evil deeds. This is indeed hyperbolic language, yet the Prophet very aptly portrays the deplorable state of the people—that they practiced evil even to the point of exhaustion. Just as when anyone is seized by some foolish lust, he spares no effort and does himself much harm, but does not feel his exhaustion as long as he is engaged, for his ardor deranges him; so he says now that they were exhausted in doing evil. When a hunter pursues game, he endures much more labor than any common worker or farmer. We see that even kings and courtiers, while hunting, are so blinded that they see no danger nor feel any exhaustion. So we find that those devoted to pleasure, when lust draws them here and there, feel no concern for the greatest exhaustion. In this sense, then, the Prophet says that they were exhausted in doing evil, as if he had said that they were so devoted to wickedness that the pleasure of doing evil entirely blinded them and drove them mad.

We now perceive the Prophet’s meaning: He confirms, as I have said, what he had stated before. He had threatened the people with utter ruin; they were complacent and heedless, and despised all his denunciations. He now shows, from God’s nature and office, that ruin was near them, though they did not fear it and thought themselves perfectly safe. But if God is the judge of the world, as will be proven later, how is it possible for him to connive perpetually at such great wickedness? And to show this he also adds—