Bible Commentaries

III. SECOND MAIN DIVISION

The Prophecies Against Foreign Nations

(Chapp46–51)

The prophets of Israel could not avoid bringing the heathen nations also within the sphere of their predictions. They were compelled to this, partly even from their theocratic and particularistic point of view, in so far as the interests of the theocracy were essentially affected by the standing or falling of their heathen neighbors, and partly in a general view, as they represented the idea of the all-embracing divine love and providence. Hence we find declarations concerning heathen nations in most of the prophetic books. We find these prophecies relating to heathen nations, comprising larger groups, in Isaiah, chh13–23, in Ezekiel chh25–32, and here also in Jeremiah 46-51.

The main trunk of these prophecies is formed by a Sepher, which according to its principal part, owes its origin to the period immediately before the battle of Carchemish (comp. rems. on Jeremiah 46:2). As Amos makes his way through a cycle of seven nations to his main goal, the kingdom of Israel ( Jeremiah 1:3 to Jeremiah 2:5), and as Ezekiel predicts a judgment on seven nations, so our Sepher also contains declarations against seven nations: Egypt, Philistia, Moab, Ammon, Edom, Damascus, and Elam. This arrangement is evidently intentional; proceeding from Egypt the prophet advances to the Philistines; from these he springs across to their eastern neighbors and concludes with Elam, as representing the distant East and North. It is evident that these seven utterances form the main trunk of the Sepher against the nations, from two circumstances. First, that in none of them is Nebuchadnezzar or the Chaldeans mentioned. This is the certain and constantly observed sign of composition before the battle of Carchemish. Secondly, that five of them (or six, comp. infra, rems. on Jeremiah 49:34-39) have a similar commencement, viz. לְמוֹאָב, לְמִצְרַיִם, etc. This grammatical form is closely connected with the common superscription, The word of Jehovah which came to Jeremiah against the nations, Jeremiah 46:1. The prefix לְ, viz. expresses the comprehension of the following special prophecies under this general title (comp. Naegelsb. Gr., § 112, 5, b). On this point, however, two things are to be remarked. 1. The prophecy against the Philistines ( Jeremiah 47.) bears a superscription according to a different formula, and provided with a special date. We shall show, on Jeremiah 47:1, that this prophecy is older than the six others of the Sepher against the Nations, that it is indeed the oldest of all the prophecies of Jeremiah against heathen nations. It was therefore already extant, when the Sepher was formed, and was therefore included in it, Just as it was. 2. The prophecy against Elam ( Jeremiah 49:34-38) likewise bears a title differing both in form and purport, by which the utterance is assigned to the fourth year of Zedekiah. With this superscription the case is quite peculiar. In the LXX, viz. Jeremiah 25. continues after Jeremiah 46:13 : ‛̀Α ἐπροφήτευσεν ’Ιερεμίας ἐπὶ τὰ ἐθνη τὰ Αἰλάμ. Hereupon follows the prophecy which we read in the Hebrew text Jeremiah 49:35-38. At the close of this, however, we find the words: ’Εν ἀρχῇ βασιλεύοντος Σεδεκίου βασιλέως ἐγένετο ὁ λόγος οὖτος περὶ Αἰλάμ. The prophecy against Elam in the LXX. thus has a superscription and a postscript, which is unexampled in Jeremiah. Now, however, the double circumstance comes in, that in the LXX. the superscription of Jeremiah 27. is wanting, the same which in the Hebrew text contains the evidently and admittedly false name Jehoiakim, and that in the Hebrew text the prophecy against Elam is in Jeremiah 49:34 assigned to the fourth year of Zedekiah, though Nebuchadnezzar and the Chaldeans are not mentioned, as they usually are in prophecies subsequent to the battle of Carchemish. From this state of the case I draw the following conclusions: 1. The prophecy against Elam must originally have had the superscription לְעֵילָם, in conformity to the superscriptions of the prophecies against Egypt I, Moab, Ammon, Edom and Damascus. For only thus is the abrupt τὰ Αἰλάμ in the superscription of the prophecy in the LXX. explicable. The article τὰ proceeds from the circumstance that they connected Αἰλάμ grammatically with τὰ ἔθνη, to which neither grammar nor criticism give any justification, for they arbitrarily separated נִבָּא יר׳ עַל־הַגּוֹיִם, Jeremiah 25:13, from the previous context, and made it the superscription, then arbitrarily placed לְעֵילָם as if in apposition to הַגּוֹיִם, and finally, with equal arbitrariness, transposed the whole prophecy hither, for it stood originally in another place. From the postscript, viz. we see that 2. the prophecy must originally have stood, as it still does in the Hebrew text, at the close of the Sepher against the nations, but immediately before Jeremiah 27, this postscript being evidently no other than the first verse of Jeremiah 27. (modified according to circumstances), which is entirely wanting in the LXX, and in the Hebrew contains the wrong name of a king. How did this prophecy come by a postscript, since no other prophecy in Jeremiah has such an one? Whence came it that Jeremiah 27:1 is entirely wanting in the LXX.? To say nothing of the circumstance, that the date ἐν ἀρχῇ βασιλεύοντος Σεδεκίου in the prophecy against Elam is as incorrect as Jeremiah 27:1 is undoubtedly alone correct (comp. rems. on Jeremiah 27:1 and Jeremiah 49:34). But how now does verse 1 of Jeremiah 27. come to be the postscript, in the Hebrew the superscription to the prophecy against Elam? Evidently the prophecies against the nations must once have had their place after Jeremiah 25. and before Jeremiah 27:1. They were, however, taken away from this place, and Jeremiah 27:1 went with them, whether it was that it was really taken for the postscript of the prophecy, or by an unintentional error. If this view is correct it is thus determined that the Sepher against the nations then concluded with the prophecy against Elam. Whether the subsequently added prophecies against Egypt II, against the Arabians and against Babylon were then incorporated in the Sepher cannot be ascertained. Where, however, did the Sepher begin, or rather on what portion of our book did it follow? Chapter 25. cannot have preceded it, for it is quite out of the question, that it can ever have had place between chh26. and27. Since that detached verse ( Jeremiah 27:1) is found at the close, or at the beginning of the prophecy against Elam, and not at the close of the passage Jeremiah 25:15-38, it necessarily follows that this passage did not follow, but preceded the Sepher against the nations. Thus the Sepher cannot have been attached to Jeremiah 25:14; Jeremiah 25:13 or12. It can, therefore, have had its place only between Jeremiah 27:1 and Jeremiah 25:38. Both the present form of the text in the LXX, and the purport of Jeremiah 25:13 b, show that it must have been placed in the immediate neighborhood of this verse. For what reason? The verses 12, 13,14 of Jeremiah 25, are directed against Babylon. They treat of the ruin of Babylon with an emphasis and a detail, which do not correspond at all to the historical fact to which Jeremiah 25. owes its origin. The first half of Jeremiah 25:13 decidedly presupposes the prophecy against Babylon, pertaining to the fourth year of Zedekiah (comp. Jeremiah 51:59). From this it follows, that the Sepher against the nations can have been transposed from its original place between Jeremiah 25:38 and Jeremiah 27:1 to that before Jeremiah 25:15, only with the prophecy against Babylon, therefore after its becoming known. We shall not err if we suppose that the words in Jeremiah 25:11, “and these nations shall serve the king of Babylon seventy years,” gave occasion both to the more extended portrayal of the visitation of Babylon only implicitly, intimated as we have it in the verses Jeremiah 25:12-14, and also the transposition hither of the Sepher against the nations now extended by the prophecy against Babylon. The LXX. version flowed from a recension affording this form of the text. For omitting Jeremiah 46:14, it is connected with Jeremiah 46:13, and then gives, though in a different order from the Masoretic text, the prophecies against the nations and as a comprehensive conclusion follows the passage Jeremiah 25:15-38 in Jeremiah 32. From Jeremiah 33. onward the remaining chapters follow in the same order as in the Masoretic text, only that a chapter is not devoted to the prophecy for Baruch, this appearing in the LXX. merely as the conclusion of Jeremiah 51. Another diaskenast (who it was it would be impossible to determine) now found it more to the purpose to separate the prophecies against the nations from the passages relating to the theocracy. And thus they were then, without making any alteration in Jeremiah 25:12-14, transposed to the place, where we now find them in the Masoretic text.—The prophecy against Babylon was, however, the only addition to the original Sepher against the nations. Two new portions were inserted at appropriate places between the original ones, viz.: 1, a second prophecy against Egypt ( Jeremiah 46:13-26) which expressly mentions the name Nebuchadnezzar, Jeremiah 46:13-26; Jeremiah 2. a prophecy against the northern Arabian kingdom ( Jeremiah 49:28-33), in which at any rate Nebuchadnezzar’s name is mentioned in Jeremiah 46:28-28. The insertion of the second prophecy against Egypt after the first, and that against the Arabians after that against Damascus, and before that against Elam, cannot be regarded as other than appropriate.

1. The Superscription

Jeremiah 46:1

1The word of the Lord [Jehovah] which came to Jeremiah the prophet against the Gentiles [The Nations].

This superscription extends over the whole of the prophecies here brought together and forming a סֵפֶר. It thus forms the heading to chh46–51, and introduces the second main division of the Book. The form is the same as in Jeremiah 14:1; Jeremiah 47:1; Jeremiah 49:34. On the grammar, comp. rems. on Jeremiah 14:1

2. The First Prophecy Against Egypt

Jeremiah 46:2-12

2Against [concerning] Egypt, against the army of Pharaoh-necho king of Egypt, which was by the river Euphrates in Carchemish, which Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon smote in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of Judah.

3 Prepare ye the buckler and the shield,

And move ye on to the battle.

4 Harness the horses, and mount ye horsemen,

And stand forth with your helmets,

Furbish¹ the spears, put on coats of mail.²

5 Why, (as) I see, are they dismayed—retreat?

And their heroes are dashed to pieces;

They flee in haste, and turn not again?³

Fear round about!⁴ saith Jehovah.

6 Let not the swift flee away;⁵

Nor let the mighty escape!

Northwards, by the margin of the river Euphrates, they totter, they fall.

7 Who is he who riseth up like the Nile,

His waters roll along like the streams?⁶

8 Egypt riseth up like the Nile,

His waters roll along like the streams;

And he said, I will up, cover the land,

Destroy⁷ the city and them that dwell therein.

9 Mount ye⁸ the horses, and rage, ye chariots;

And let the mighty warriors go forth:

Cush and Phut, who handle the shield,

And Lydians, that handle and tread the bow.⁹

10 And that day is a day of vengeance for the Lord, Jehovah Zebaoth,

That he may avenge himself on his enemies;

And the sword shall devour¹⁰ and be satiate,¹¹

And be drunken with their blood:

For a slain offering has the Lord, Jehovah Zebaoth,

In the land of the North by the river Euphrates.

11 Go up towards Gilead and fetch balm, Virgin daughter of Egypt!¹²

In vain takest thou many medicines;

There is no plaster¹³ for thee.

12 Nations hear of thy shame,

And with thy crying the earth is filled,

For one warrior threw down another,

They are both of them fallen together¹⁴

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

After the double, viz., general and special title ( Jeremiah 46:1-2), two pictures are presented before us. The first ( Jeremiah 46:3-6) is the more general and indefinite; warriors are admonished to equip themselves for battle ( Jeremiah 46:3-4). Then, however, directly follows a description of the defeat and terrible flight, with a statement as to the place of the battle ( Jeremiah 46:5-6). In the second picture not only is Egypt mentioned as the army addressed by the prophet, but it is also portrayed in colors taken from specially Egyptian relations. That we have, moreover, two pictures before us, is seen from the circumstance, that in Jeremiah 46:7-12 the whole course of the struggle from beginning to end is described in its main features: the prophet sees the Egyptian host approaching like the overflow of the Nile ( Jeremiah 46:7-8); he then summons horses, chariots and all warriors (among them the neighboring nations, forming part of the host), to the fight ( Jeremiah 46:9). But the fight does not end well for Egypt: it is a day of the vengeance of Jehovah on Egypt, a sacrificial feast, in which Egypt is the slaughtered victim ( Jeremiah 46:10). The consequences of the lost battle are so fatal to Egypt, that it cannot recover, and the report of its overthrow fills the world ( Jeremiah 46:11-12).—Does this passage contain a prophecy of the battle, or does it presuppose the battle as already fought? I think the former. For according to Jeremiah 46:10 (וְאָֽבְלָה וגו׳), the battle is evidently still future. But the prophet felt himself moved to this prophecy, not during the advance of the Egyptian host from its country, but when it had already taken up a position on the Euphrates and the decisive conflict was there to be expected. This follows clearly from Jeremiah 46:2 in connection with Jeremiah 46:6 b, and Jeremiah 46:10 b, as will be further seen in the exposition of these passages. The prophetic and poetical prediction of the approaching battle comes into the foreground, but this does not exclude brief significant hints with respect to the consequences of the battle for the whole future of Egypt.

Jeremiah 46:2. Against Egypt … of Judah. למצדים, comp. Jeremiah 23:9; Jeremiah 48:1; Jeremiah 49:1; Jeremiah 49:7; Jeremiah 49:23; Jeremiah 49:28. The prefix לְ restricts the general idea expressed in the main superscription to a special part. Comp. Jeremiah 19:13; Ezekiel 44:9; Leviticus 12:6-7. Pharaoh-necho (נְכֹה, 2 Kings 23:29-35) was the sixth king of the twenty-sixth dynasty. He reigned after his father, the great Psammetichus, from B. C, 610–595. Comp. Duncker, I, S. 817, 925; Herzog, R-Enc. X, S. 257.—He came from Egypt by sea, landed to the north of Carmel in the bay of Acco, and defeated Josiah at Megiddo (608). Jehoiakim was his creature (comp. 2 Kings 23:34). He was thus at the time de facto ruler of Judah. After the battle at Megiddo, it must have been easy for him to subjugate Phœnicia and Syria, for who was there to offer him any resistance? The power of the Assyrians, Medes and Babylonians, was concentrated in and around Nineveh. Nineveh fell B. C, 606. Now first did the Babylonian army advance under the leadership of Nebuchadnezzar. It met the Egyptians at Carchemish. The city was situated at the confluence of the Chaboras [Chebar or Khaboor], and the Euphrates, on a peninsula formed by the two rivers. Here was the principal passage across the Euphrates (comp. Niebuhr, S. 205, 369; Herzog, Real-Enc. VII, S. 379), and here as “the extreme line of defence of his new province” (Niebuhr, S. 369), Necho took up his position. He must have lain here for some time, whether because the siege of the city occupied much time, or because it was a part of his plan not to advance further, but here in a favorable position to await the enemy. Observe in the text the double relative sentence which was, etc., and which Nebuchadnezzar, etc. It is doubtless not by accident that by the first of the two, the first mentioned stay of Necho at Carchemish is especially set forth. If the chief emphasis lay on the battle, that first sentence would have been quite superfluous. It would have been enough to say: “which Nebuchadnezzar smote by the Euphrates in Carchemish.” From the emphasis on the stay by the Euphrates it is clear to me that this, and not the battle, was the occasion of the prophecy. When Jeremiah learned that the Egyptian army had taken up a position at Carchemish, he recognized at once the importance of the situation. He knew, that now a collision between the southern and northern empires was inevitable, that there on the Euphrates the destinies of the world would be decided for the proximate future. Egypt on the Euphrates! This was the fatal juncture which summoned him to prophetic utterance. Observe, also, that in the prophecy itself he does not yet mention Nebuchadnezzar (he names him, as I have frequently shown, only after the battle), but he twice mentions in a significant manner the position on the Euphrates ( Jeremiah 46:6 and Jeremiah 46:7); an evident proof that it was this, which led him to speak. He foresees that it would eventuate in a battle. And with equal definiteness, he sees what the result will be ( Jeremiah 46:5-6; Jeremiah 46:10 sqq.). The entire superscription ( Jeremiah 46:2) was added subsequently by the prophet on the writing of the prophecy. In the first relative sentence he indicates the occasion, in the second he declares that the fulfilment followed very speedily in the fourth year of Jehoiakim (B. C605–4) The date refers primarily to “smote,” but it does not follow that the prophecy may not have been made the same year, or sooner. The particulars here are not to be determined, but it is possible that the news of the establishment of the Egyptians on the Euphrates, did not reach Jerusalem before the fourth year of Jehoiakim. Niebuhr is of opinion that the battle had already taken place in the third year of Jehoiakim (Ass. u. Bab, S. 50, 86, 370), and that hence the date here refers to the composition of the poem, not to the historical event of the battle. The chronological relations are not to be investigated here, but exegetically it seems to me as impossible to put a point after smote (Niebuhr, S. 86, Anm.), as to refer in the fourth year to the word, etc., Jeremiah 46:1, as Graf proposes. Apart from their being so far removed from each other, Jeremiah 46:1 is a general title referring to all the following chapters, including Jeremiah 51. The construction too, would then be obscure and forced. We should then have to take לְמִצְרַיִם as a more particular definition: with respect to Egypt, however, in the fourth year; which would give the sense that only this prophecy was uttered against Egypt, in the fourth year of Jehoiakim, which is incorrect.

Jeremiah 46:3-6. Prepare ye … the fall. The first battle-picture commences with the call to the warriors to prepare buckler and shield (the Egyptian monuments show two kinds of shields, a larger [צִנָּה] and a smaller. Comp. Neumann, II, S. 383), to harness the horses (to the chariots) and to mount. פָּרָשִׁים designates the horses for riding in distinction from carriage-horses in 2 Samuel 1:6; 1 Kings 5:6; Joel 2:4; Ezekiel 27:14. This usage being established, and the parallelism favoring the meaning “equi,” I believe that הַפָּדָשִׁים is to be translated not in the vocative, but as in the text: and mount ye riders. Of the other expressions in Jeremiah 46:4, the first, after horses and riders, must refer to the footmen, the rest, as in Jeremiah 46:3, to all species of arms.—In the second act of the first picture, the prophet sees the army defeated: Why, I see, are they dismayed? Comp. Jeremiah 30:6. As הֵמָּה (they) is the nominative and רָאָה requires the accusative after it in a still higher degree than הִנֵּה, our passage cannot, as Graf supposes, be explained by Ezekiel 37:19 coll. Genesis 6:17, but I see must be taken as a parenthetical sentence.—The description closes significantly with two perfects, the prophet sees the tottering and falling as accomplished facts. Comp. Jeremiah 46:12.

Jeremiah 46:7-12. Who is he … fallen together. The second battle picture is more in detail, more concrete, and as it were painted with specifically Egyptian colors. The prophet sees the Egyptian army approaching like the overflowing Nile. The immediate preparations for the battle are described in Jeremiah 46:9, as in Jeremiah 46:4, only still more concretely. Cavalry, chariots and footmen are equally distinguished. I am therefore of opinion that we must render עלוּ ו׳ here as in Jeremiah 46:4 “mount the horses.”—The chariots are to rage (comp. Nahum 2:5), the mighty warriors to go forth on foot. Egypt’s neighboring nations accompany the expedition, and the Ethiopians and Lybians are described as shield-bearers, and therefore masters of close combat (cominus), the Lybians (comp. Genesis 10:13 coll22; Isaiah 66:19; Ezekiel 27:10) as archers. The three nations stand together, as here, as Egyptian auxiliaries in Ezekiel 30:5 coll. Nahum 3:9. On Lydiansלוּד, comp. Arnold in Herzog, Real-Enc., 8, S. 510.

All these preparations, however, do not ensure the victory, it being ordained that the day of battle shall be a day of vengeance for Jehovah, and a bloody sacrificial festival. Egypt both in ancient and more recent times has injured the theocracy, and now stands opposed to the chosen instrument of the Lord, Nebuchadnezzar, and mast therefore be subdued.—Day of vengeance. Comp. Jeremiah 51:6; Isaiah 34:8; Isaiah 61:2; Isaiah 63:4.—Sacrifice. A slain offering, where the original meaning of the verb (comp. Numbers 22:40; 1 Kings 1:19) comes into the foreground, but the word must not be taken in its literal signification. Comp. Isaiah 34:6; Zephaniah 1:7. In the last two verses the consequences of the lost battle are described. Egypt is ironically called upon to fetch balm from Gilead (comp. rems. on Jeremiah 8:22). But the blow was fatal. Therefore remedies are of no avail, to however great extent applied. The fearful defeat cannot of course remain hidden. The nations must learn the shame of Egypt, since the cry of the stricken ones fills the world ( Jeremiah 14:2 coll. Isaiah 42:11). Jeremiah 46:12 b contains a step backwards, an additional statement of reason. This is occasioned by the evident endeavor to close the second picture in correspondence to the first.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

It is acknowledged that these words stand in the original and suitable connection in Jeremiah 30, as well as that they are not necessary to Jeremiah 46, and would not be missed if they were omitted. Still it may be said that every injury befalling the enemies of the theocracy is a corroboration of the latter, and that it cannot be unsuitable also to express in words this mutual relation founded in the nature of the case, the two going constantly hand in hand in chh50, 51. (Comp. Jeremiah 50:4-6; Jeremiah 50:17-19; Jeremiah 50:28; Jeremiah 50:33; Jeremiah 51:5-6; Jeremiah 51:10; Jeremiah 51:35; Jeremiah 51:45; Jeremiah 51:50). But the overthrow of the Babylonian kingdom by Cyrus bore the deliverance of Judah immediately in its womb. This can be said of the conquest of Egypt no more than of that of the other small nations against which chh47–49 are directed. Hence in these three chapters there is no trace of that mutual relation. Why then just here? And how does it agree with the fact that elsewhere in Egypt Jeremiah pronounces only the severest threatenings against the Israelites (chh42–44)? There is much then that is opposed to the genuineness of the passage, while on the other hand it is easy to suppose that a later seer saw fit to oppose this light to the former shadow. Moreover, as we have said, the words are not absolutely unsuitable here, and we cannot therefore deny the possibility, that Jeremiah, who, as is well known, is very fond of quoting himself, himself felt the need of causing the light of Israel to shine brightly on the dark background of their ancient enemy, Egypt.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. Förster states four reasons why the prophets had to proclaim judgment on the heathen nations also. The first is διδασκαλικός: it is to be known that the prosperity of the heathen is not lasting, but that heathendom has no basis of true prosperity. The second reason is παρηγορικός: the pious are not to fear that the heathen will get the upper hand and suppress the church. The third is ἐπανορθωτικός: God’s people are to guard against forming alliances with the heathen and trusting in their help. The fourth is ἐλεγκτικός: a conclusion is to be drawn a minori ad majus: if God does not spare the heathen who are deprived of His light, how much less will He spare His people, if they despise the light of His word.

2. “Jeremiah’s God is also the Lord of all the heathen and makes their destinies. They find it so according to their words and especially their posture towards the chosen people Israel. They haste to their destruction, for one nation only is eternal; this, however, is the nation which has been passed through a thousand sieves and in comparison with others is no nation. That which is in Israel, as in other nations, passes away, and only that which it has above other nations remains eternal. Jeremiah prophesies most against Egypt, Moab and Babylon, in which the wealth, the jealous, scoffing manner of the mean world, and the cavalier spirit of great states is rebuked. … He who rightly understands this sees here not sermons addressed to generations long since passed away, but to the natural humanity streaming through this world, as it is continually presented with new names and yet always with the same carnal impulses and based on the same unreason. To him, who thus understands Jeremiah, he is again alive, and the Jewish legend is fulfilled, that Jeremiah must come again before the Messianic kingdom can bloom up again in glory. Yea, let Jeremiah rise truly for thee to mourn, and Christ, with the hosannas of His eternal hosts of disciples, will not longer be hidden from thee, and in Him thou wilt have all things.” Diedrich.

3. On Jeremiah 46:6. “The race is not to the swift. Ecclesiastes 9:11. Therefore let not the strong man glory in his strength. Jeremiah 9:22. Also are horses and chariots and such like things of no avail: for to those who have not God on their side, all is lost.” Cramer.

4. On Jeremiah 46:10. “God may long delay His reckoning. This Pharaoh-necho had killed the pious Josiah, conquered his son Jehoahaz and laid the land of Judah under tribute. But guilt rusts not, however old, and though God comes slowly He comes surely.” Cramer.

5. On Jeremiah 46:10. “Although the ungodly go free for a long time and rejoice with timbrel and harp and are glad with pipes and spend their days in wealth ( Job 21:12), yet he lets them go free like sheep for the slaughter, and spares them for the day of slaughter ( Jeremiah 12:3).” Cramer.

6. On Jeremiah 46:25. “Bonum confidere in Domino et non in principibus ( Psalm 146). When their help is most needed they lie down and die.” Förster.

7. On Jeremiah 46:27-28. “When God turns things upside down and takes care that neither root nor branch remains, His little flock must be preserved. The punishments which redound to the destruction of the ungodly redound to the amelioration of the godly. For from these He takes the eternal punishment, and the temporal must also redound to their advantage, but the ungodly drink it to the dregs.” Cramer.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

1. On Jeremiah 46:1-12. The power of God in contrast to human power1. Human power confides in its strength; (a) in a qualitative ( Jeremiah 46:3-4; Jeremiah 46:7); (b) in a quantitative respect ( Jeremiah 46:8). 2. The divine power strikes it down, whereby (a) arrogance is chastised ( Jeremiah 46:5-6; Jeremiah 46:11); (b) the righteousness of God is satisfied ( Jeremiah 46:10).

Footnotes