A verse by verse commentary on Jeremiah 24 dealing with the basket of good figs and the basket of bad figs representing God's favor on some and judgment on others.

1. JEREMIAH 24 COMMENTARY
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
Two Baskets of Figs
1 After Jehoiachin[a] son of Jehoiakim king of
Judah and the officials, the skilled workers and
the artisans of Judah were carried into exile from
Jerusalem to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar king of
Babylon, the Lord showed me two baskets of figs
placed in front of the temple of the Lord.
BARNES, "Omit “were.” “Set before,” i. e put in the appointed place for offerings of
firstfruits in the forecourt of the temple.
Carpenters - “Craftsmen” (see the marginal reference).
CLARKE, "The Lord showed me, and, behold, two baskets of figs - Besides
the transposition of whole chapters in this book, there is not unfrequently a
transposition of verses, and parts of verses. Of this we have an instance in the verse
before us; the first clause of which should be the last. Thus: -
“After that Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon had carried away captive
Jeconiah, the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah, with the carpenters and
smiths from Jerusalem, and had brought them to Babylon, the Lord
showed me, and, behold, two baskets of figs were set before the temple of
the Lord.”
Jer_24:2 - “One basket had very good figs, even like the figs that are first ripe; and
the other basket had very naughty figs, which could not be eaten, they were so bad.”
This arrangement restores these verses to a better sense, by restoring the natural
connection.
This prophecy was undoubtedly delivered in the first year of the reign of Zedekiah.
1

2. Under the type of good and bad figs, God represents the state of the persons who had
already been carried captives into Babylon, with their king Jeconiah, compared with the
state of those who should be carried away with Zedekiah. Those already carried away,
being the choice of the people, are represented by the good figs: those now remaining,
and soon to be carried into captivity, are represented by the bad figs, that were good for
nothing. The state also of the former in their captivity was vastly preferable to the state
of those who were now about to be delivered into the hand of the king of Babylon. The
latter would be treated as double rebels; the former, being the most respectable of the
inhabitants, were treated well; and even in captivity, a marked distinction would be
made between them, God ordering it so. But the prophet sufficiently explains his own
meaning.
Set before the temple - As an offering of the first-fruits of that kind.
Very good figs - Or, figs of the early sort. The fig-trees in Palestine, says Dr. Shaw,
produce fruit thrice each year. The first sort, called boccore, those here mentioned, come
to perfection about the middle or end of June. The second sort, called kermez, or
summer fig, is seldom ripe before August. And the third, which is called the winter fig,
which is larger, and of a darker complexion than the preceding, hangs all the winter on
the tree, ripening even when the leaves are shed, and is fit for gathering in the beginning
of spring.
Could not be eaten - The winter fig, - then in its crude or unripe state; the spring
not being yet come.
GILL, "The Lord showed me,.... A vision, or in a vision, what follows; for by this it
appears that what was seen was not real, but what was exhibited in a visionary way by
the Lord, and represented to the mind of the prophet:
and, behold, two baskets of figs were set before the temple of the Lord; or
"pots", as Jarchi; these do not signify the law and Gospel, or the synagogue and church,
or the Jews and Christians, or hell and heaven, as some have interpreted it, observed by
Jerom; but the Jews that were in captivity with Jeconiah, and those that remained in
Jerusalem with Zedekiah, as it is explained in some following verses. These baskets are
said to be "set before the temple of the Lord", not to be sold there, but to be presented to
the Lord; in allusion to the baskets of firstfruits, which, according to the law, were
thither brought for that purpose, Deu_26:2; and signify, that the two people represented
by them were before the Lord, in his sight, were known to him, and judged by him;
after that Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon had carried away captive
Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, and the princes of Judah,
with the carpenters and smiths, from Jerusalem, and had brought them to
Babylon: this was done when Jeconiah had reigned but little more than three months,
and in the eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign, 2Ki_24:8. This is mentioned, not only
to show the time of this vision, which was a little after this captivity, in the beginning of
Zedekiah's reign; but to let us know who the captives were, signified by the good figs.
The "carpenters" and "smiths" were carried away with the king and the princes, partly
that they might be serviceable to the king of Babylon in his country; and partly that they
might not be assisting to their own country in repairing their fortifications, and making
2

3. instruments of war for them. There were a "thousand" of this sort carried captive, 2Ki_
24:16; where the former of these are called "craftsmen". Jarchi interprets both of the
scholars of the wise men; and Kimchi, of counsellors and wise men. The word for
"carpenters" is used both of carpenters and blacksmiths; and that for "smiths" may be
rendered "enclosers", or "shutters up"; which the Targum understands of porters or
shutters of gates; and some think goldsmiths are meant, that set or enclose precious
stones in gold; and others are of opinion that masons are intended, so called from the
building of walls for the enclosing of places. The Syriac version renders it "soldiers"; but
those are distinguished from them, 2Ki_24:14. The Septuagint version translates it
"prisoners"; but so all the captives might be called; and it adds, what is not in the text,
"and the rich"; and the Arabic version following that; though it is true they were carried
captive; for it is said, "none remained, save the poorest sort of the people of the land",
2Ki_24:14. This, according to Bishop Usher (x), was in the year of the world 3405, and
before Christ 599; and so the authors of the Universal History (y) place it; and Mr.
Whiston (z) also; and Mr. Bedford (a) a year later; and in the same year that this
captivity began was Cyrus the Persian born, who was the deliverer of the Jews from it.
HENRY 1-4, "This short chapter helps us to put a very comfortable construction
upon a great many long ones, by showing us that the same providence which to some is a
savour of death unto death may by the grace and blessing of God be made to others a
savour of life unto life; and that, though God's people share with others in the same
calamity, yet it is not the same to them that it is to others, but is designed for their good
and shall issue in their good; to them it is a correcting rod in the hand of a tender Father,
while to others it is an avenging sword in the hand of a righteous Judge. Observe,
I. The date of this sermon. It was after, a little after, Jeconiah's captivity, Jer_24:1.
Jeconiah was himself a despised broken vessel, but with him were carried away some
very valuable persons, Ezekiel for one (Eze_1:12); many of the princes of Judah then
went into captivity, Daniel and his fellows were carried off a little before; of the people
only the carpenters and the smiths were forced away, either because the Chaldeans
needed some ingenious men of those trades (they had a great plenty of astrologers and
stargazers, but a great scarcity of smiths and carpenters) or because the Jews would
severely feel the loss of them, and would, for want of them, be unable to fortify their
cities and furnish themselves with weapons of war. Now, it should seem, there were
many good people carried away in that captivity, which the pious prophet laid much to
heart, while there were those that triumphed in it, and insulted over those to whose lot it
fell to go into captivity. Note, We must not conclude concerning the first and greatest
sufferers that they were the worst and greatest sinners; for perhaps it may appear quite
otherwise, as it did here.
II. The vision by which this distinction of the captives was represented to the
prophet's mind. He saw two baskets of figs, set before the temple, there ready to be
offered as first-fruits to the honour of God. Perhaps the priests, being remiss in their
duty, were not ready to receive them and dispose of them according to the law, and
therefore Jeremiah sees them standing before the temple. But that which was the
significancy of the vision was that the figs in one basket were extraordinarily good, those
in the other basket extremely bad. The children of men are all as the fruits of the fig-tree,
capable of being made serviceable to God and man (Jdg_9:11); but some are as good
figs, than which nothing is more pleasant, others as damaged rotten figs, than which
nothing is more nauseous. What creature viler than a wicked man, and what more
valuable than a godly man! The good figs were like those that are first ripe, which are
3

4. most acceptable (Mic_7:1) and most prized when newly come into season. The bad figs
are such as could not be eaten, they were so evil; they could not answer the end of their
creation, were neither pleasant nor good for food; and what then were they good for? If
God has no honour from men, nor their generation any service, they are even like the
bad figs, that cannot be eaten, that will not answer any good purpose. If the salt have
lost its savour, it is thenceforth fit for nothing but the dunghill. Of the persons that are
presented to the Lord at the door of his tabernacle, some are sincere, and they are very
good; others dissemble with God, and they are very bad. Sinners are the worst of men,
hypocrites the worst of sinners. Corruptio optimi est pessima - That which is best
becomes, when corrupted, the worst.
III. The exposition and application of this vision. God intended by it to raise the
dejected spirit of those that had gone into captivity, by assuring them of a happy return,
and to humble and awaken the proud and secure spirits of those who continued yet in
Jerusalem, by assuring them of a miserable captivity.
1. Here is the moral of the good figs, that were very good, the first ripe. These
represented the pious captives, that seemed first ripe for ruin, for they went first into
captivity, but should prove first ripe for mercy, and their captivity should help to ripen
them; these are pleasing to God, as good figs are to us, and shall be carefully preserved
for use. Now observe here,
(1.) Those that were already carried into captivity were the good figs that God would
own. This shows, [1.] That we cannot determine of God's love or hatred by all that is
before us. When God's judgments are abroad those are not always the worst that are first
seized by them. [2.] That early suffering sometimes proves for the best to us. The sooner
the child is corrected the better effect the correction is likely to have. Those that went
first into captivity were as the son whom the father loves, and chastens betimes,
chastens while there is hope; and it did well. But those that staid behind were like a child
long left to himself, who, when afterwards corrected, is stubborn, and made worse by it,
Lam_3:27.
JAMISON, "Jer_24:1-10. The restoration of the captives in Babylon and the
destruction of the refractory party in Judea and in Egypt, represented under the type
of a basket of good, and one of bad, figs.
Lord showed me — Amo_7:1, Amo_7:4, Amo_7:7; Amo_8:1, contains the same
formula, with the addition of “thus” prefixed.
carried ... captive Jeconiah — (Jer_22:24; 2Ki_24:12, etc.; 2Ch_36:10).
carpenters, etc. — One thousand artisans were carried to Babylon, both to work for
the king there, and to deprive Jerusalem of their services in the event of a future siege
(2Ki_24:16).
K&D, "The Two Fig Baskets-an emblem of the future of Judah's people. - Jer_24:1.
"Jahveh caused me to see, and behold two baskets of figs set before the temple of
Jahveh, after Nebuchadrezzar had carried captive Jechoniah, the son of Jehoiakim,
king of Judah, and the princes of Judah, and the work-people and the smiths from
Jerusalem, and had brought them to Babylon. Jer_24:2. One basket had very good figs
like the early figs, the other basket very bad figs, which could not be eaten for badness.
Jer_24:3. And Jahveh said to me: What seest thou, Jeremiah? and I said: Figs; the
4

5. good figs are very good, and the bad figs very bad, which cannot be eaten for badness.
Jer_24:4. Then came the word of Jahveh unto me, saying: Jer_24:5. Thus saith
Jahveh, the God of Israel: Like these good figs, so will I look on the captives of Judah,
whom I have sent out of this place into the land of the Chaldeans, for good; Jer_24:6.
And I will set mine eye upon them for good, and will bring them back again to this
land, and build them and not pull down, and plant them and not pluck up. Jer_24:7.
And I give them an heart to know me, that I am Jahveh; and they shall be my people,
and I will be their God; for they will return unto me with their whole heart. Jer_24:8.
And as the bad figs, which cannot be eaten for badness, yea thus saith Jahveh, so will I
make Zedekiah the king of Judah, and his princes and the residue of Jerusalem, them
that are left remaining in this land and them that dwell in Egypt. Jer_24:9. I give them
up for ill-usage, for trouble to all kingdoms of the earth, for a reproach and a by-word,
for a taunt and for a curse in all the places whither I shall drive them. Jer_24:10. and I
send among them the sword, the famine, and the plague, till they be consumed from off
the land that I gave to them and to their fathers."
This vision resembles in form and substance that in Amo_8:1-3. The words: Jahveh
caused me to see, point to an inward event, a seeing with the eyes of the spirit, not of the
body. The time is, Jer_24:1, precisely given: after Nebuchadnezzar had carried to
Babylon King Jechoniah, with the princes and a part of the people; apparently soon after
this deportation, at the beginning of the reign of Zedekiah, the king set up by
Nebuchadnezzar over Judah. Cf. 2Ki_24:14-17. - The Lord caused the prophet to see in
spirit two baskets of figs (‫ים‬ ִ‫א‬ ָ‫,דּוּד‬ from ‫י‬ ַ‫,דּוּד‬ equivalent to ‫,דּוּד‬ Jer_24:2), ‫ים‬ ִ‫ֲד‬‫ע‬‫מוּ‬
(from ‫ד‬ַ‫ָע‬‫י‬) in the place appointed therefor (‫ד‬ֵ‫ע‬ ‫(מ‬ rofereh) before the temple. We are
not to regard these figs as an offering brought to Jahveh (Graf); and so neither are we to
think here of the place where first-fruits or tithes were offered to the Lord, Exo_23:19.,
Deu_26:2. The two baskets of figs have nothing to do with first-fruits. They symbolize
the people, those who appear before the Lord their God, namely, before the altar of
burnt-offering; where the Lord desired to appear to, to meet with His people (‫ד‬ַ‫ע‬ ‫,נ‬ Exo_
29:42.), so as to sanctify it by His glory, Exo_29:43. ‫ים‬ ִ‫ֲד‬‫ע‬‫מוּ‬ therefore means: placed in
the spot appointed by the Lord for His meeting with Israel.
BI, "The princes of Judah, with the carpenters and smiths from Jerusalem.
The nobility of work
I. All labour becomes truly noble regarded as the service of God. To regard labour simply
as a stern necessity of human life is to convert the workman into a slave, and his toil into
drudgery. The glory of the angels is found in the fact they are messengers of God. And all
the work of our hand attains its highest glory wrought out in the love and fear of God.
The apostle gives us the true point of view (Eph_6:6-8). Here we have God the
Taskmaster. “Doing the will of God.” Not only what we are pleased to call our highest
work for Him, but our lowliest toil also, serving Him with two brown hands as Gabriel
serves in the presence of the throne with two white wings. Here we have also God the
Paymaster. “Whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the
Lord.” God is a grand paymaster, He is a sure one, and rich beyond all hope are they who
do His bidding. In the class-meeting a poor man said to me, “It was very strange, sir, but
the other day, whilst I was looking after my horses, God visited me and wonderfully
blessed me; it was very strange He should visit me like this in a stable.” “Not at all,” said
5

6. I, “it is a fulfilment of the prophecy: ‘In that day shall there be upon the bells of the
horses Holiness unto the Lord,’” &c. In an old book I was reading the other day the
writer laughed at some commoner who had just been made a peer, because he had his
coat of arms burned and painted even upon his shovels and wheelbarrows. In my
reckoning, that was a very fine action, and full of significance. If a man is a true man he
is a man of God, a prince of God; and he ought to pat the stamp of his nobility on the
commonest things with which he has to do.
II. All labour becomes truly noble regarded as a ministry to humanity. Few men,
comparatively, realise the social bearing of their toil, and therefore know it as an insipid
thing, when in truth it is their rich privilege to taste in all their work the joy of a good
Samaritan, for all conscientious work is an essential philanthropy. With one hand we
work for ourselves, with the other for the race, and it is one of the purest joys of life to
remember this. Let us be blind workers no more, but consciously, lovingly, do our daily
work, rejoicing in the social glory and fruitfulness of it. Princes, smiths, carpenters, let
us not forget we too toil for the larger happiness of all men, so shall we prove in our toil
some of the sublime pleasure Howard knew when he opened the door of the prison, that
Wilberforce felt striking off the fetters of the slave, that Peabody tasted when he built
homes for the poor.
III. All labour becomes truly noble regarded as a discipline to our higher nature. Many,
alas! sink with their work, but the Divine design in the duty of life was the perfection of
the worker. Our toil is to develop our whole nature. Our physical being. Our work is
neither to pollute nor destroy, but to purify and build up the temple of the body. Sweat
does not mean blood, and there is a blessing in the curse. Our work should develop our
intellectual self also. Much of our business may become a direct mental education, and it
need never hinder the flowering of the mind. But chiefly the work of life ought to
subserve our spiritual perfecting. In all true work the soul works and gains in purity and
power by its work. The carpenter’s work tests his moral qualities, and Whilst he builds
with brick and stone, timber and glass, he may build up also character with silver, gold,
and precious stones; the smith fashions his soul whilst he shapes the iron on ringing
anvil; the husbandman may enrich his heart whilst he adorns the landscape; and the
weaver at the loom weave two fabrics at once, one that the moth shall fret, the other of
gold and fine needlework, immortal raiment for the spirit. The King of glory has
consecrated the workshop by His presence and glorified work by His example. (W. L.
Watkinson.)
CALVIN, "The meaning of this vision is, that there was no reason for the ungodly to
flatter themselves if they continued in their wickedness, though God did bear with
them for a time. The King Jeconiah had been then carried away into exile, together
with the chief men and artisans. The condition of the king and of the rest appeared
indeed much worse than that of the people who remained in the country, for they
still retained a hope that the royal dignity would again be restored, and that the city
would flourish again and enjoy abundance of every blessing, though it was then
nearly emptied; for everything precious had become a prey to the conqueror; and
we indeed know how great was the avarice and rapacity of Nebuchadnezzar. The
city then was at that time almost empty, and desolate in comparison with its former
splendor. They however who remained might indeed have hoped for a better state of
6

7. things, but those who had gone into exile were become like dead bodies. Hence
miserable Jeconiah, who was banished and deprived of his kingdom, was apparently
undergoing a most grievous punishment, together with his companions, who had
been led away with him; and the Jews who remained at Jerusalem no doubt
flattered themselves, as though God had dealt more kindly with them. Had they
really repented, they would indeed have given thanks to God for having spared
them; but as they had abused his forbearance, it was necessary to set before them
what this chapter contains, even that they foolishly reasoned when they concluded,
that God had been more propitious to them than to the rest.
But this is shewn by a vision: the Prophet saw two baskets or flaskets; and he saw
them full of figs, and that before the temple of God; but the figs in one were sweet
and savory; and the figs in the other were bitter, so that they could not be eaten. By
the sweet figs God intended to represent Jeconiah and the other exiles, who had left
their country: and he compares them to the ripe figs; for ripe figs have a sweet taste,
while the other figs are rejected on account of their bitterness. In like manner,
Jeconiah and the rest had as it were been consumed; but there were figs still
remaining; and he says that the lot of those was better whom God had in due time
punished, than of the others who remained, as they were accumulating a heavier
judgment by their obstinacy. For since the time that Nebuchadnezzar had spoiled
the city and had taken from it everything valuable, those who remained had not
ceased to add sins to sins, so that there was a larger portion of divine vengeance
ready to fall on them.
We now see the design of this vision. And he says that the vision was presented to
him by God; and to say this was very necessary, that his doctrine might have more
weight with the people. God, indeed, often spoke without a vision; but we have
elsewhere stated what was the design of a vision; it was a sort of seal to what was
delivered; for in order that the Prophet might possess greater authority, they not
only spoke, but as it were sealed their doctrine, as though God had graven on it, as it
were by his finger, a certain mark. But as this subject has been elsewhere largely
handled, I shall now pass it by.
Behold, he says, two baskets of figs set before the temple. (123) The place ought to
be noticed. It may have been that the Prophet was not allowed to move a step from
his own house; and the vision may have been presented to him in the night, during
thick darkness: but the temple being mentioned, shews that a part of the people had
not been taken away without cause, and the other part left in the city; for it had
proceeded from God himself. For in the temple God manifested himself; and
therefore the prophets, when they wished to storm the hearts of the ungodly, often
said,
“Go forth shall God from his temple.” (Isaiah 26:21; Micah 1:3.)
The temple then is to be taken here for the tribunal of God. Hence, he says, that
these two baskets were set in the temple; as though he said, that the whole people
7

8. stood at God’s tribunal, and that those who had been already cast into exile had not
been carried away at the will of their enemies, but because God designed to punish
them.
The time also is mentioned, After Yeconiah the son of Jehohoiakim had been carried
away; for had not this been added, the vision would have been obscure, and no one
at this day could understand why God had set two baskets in the presence of
Jeremiah. A distinction then is made here between the exiles and those who dwelt in
their own country; and at the same time they were reduced to great poverty, and the
city was deprived of its splendor; there was hardly any magnificence in the Temple,
the royal palace was spoiled, and the race of David only reigned by permission. But
though the calamity of the city and people was grievous, yet, as it has been said, the
Jews who remained in the city thought themselves in a manner happy in comparison
with their brethren, who were become as it were dead; for God had ejected the king,
and he was treated disdainfully as a captive, and the condition of the others was still
worse. This difference then between the captives and those who remained in the
land is what is here represented.
COFFMAN, "Verse 1
JEREMIAH 24
TWO BASKETS OF FIGS
The approximate date of this vision is shortly after the deportation of Jeconiah and
the nobles and craftsmen to Babylon following the first capture of Jerusalem by
Babylon in 597 B.C.
Keil considered the vision recounted here as symbolical of "the future of Judah's
people."[1] Jamieson stated the purpose of the chapter a little more fully. "This
chapter was designed to encourage the despairing exiles, and to reprove the people
left in Jerusalem, who prided themselves as superior and more highly favored than
the exiles."[2] The ones remaining in Judah had appropriated all of the possessions
left behind by the exiles; and they were no doubt congratulating themselves on how
lucky they were. The approximate date of this vision is shortly after the deportation
of This little parable of the two baskets of figs was designed to show them how
wrong they were.
Jeremiah 24:1-3
"Jehovah showed me, and, behold, two baskets of figs set before the temple of
Jehovah, after that Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon had carried away captive
Jeconiah the son of Jehoiachim, king of Judah, and the princes of Judah, and the
craftsmen and smiths from Jerusalem, and had brought them to Babylon. One
basket had very good figs, like figs that are first-ripe; and the other basket had very
bad figs, which could not be eaten, they were so bad. Then said Jehovah unto me,
8

9. What seest thou, Jeremiah? And I said, Figs; the good figs very good; and the bad,
very bad, that cannot be eaten, they are so bad."
"Baskets of figs set before the temple ..." (Jeremiah 24:1) The great lesson here,
which is missed by many of the commentators, has nothing whatever to do with
"first-fruits"[3] The lesson that thunders from the parable is that "proximity to the
temple" is no sign whatever of the holiness or acceptability of the people living in
the vicinity of the Jewish temple. The people in Jerusalem were close to the temple,
all right, but they were not close to God! They were exactly like that basket of rotten
figs on the very steps of the temple.
"The king ... the princes ... the craftsmen and smiths ..." (Jeremiah 24:1). The cream
of the nation had already been deported. All of the skilled artisans and craftsmen
and presumably all of the people with special skills. The meaning of "smiths" is
uncertain; but the general import of the verse is plain enough. Both Ezekiel and
Daniel were also in that first group of captives. See 2 Kings 24:10-17 of the Biblical
record of who went to Babylon. The teaching of the parable is that the people left in
Judah were inferior to the captives who went to Babylon. Barnes stated that, "Those
left behind were not worth taking."[4]
This estimate proved to be correct. Zedekiah surrounded himself with a group of
citizens who persuaded him to form an alliance with Egypt and to resist any further
submission to Babylon. That policy, of course, brought on the second siege of
Jerusalem, the murder of the vast majority of the population, the destruction of the
temple, and the reduction of the whole city to a ruin. In the long ran, the ones
remaining in Judah would have by far the worst fate. The one and one half year
siege they endured was one of the worst in history, the inhabitants even being
reduced to cannibalism.
"The good figs ... the bad figs ..." (Jeremiah 24:2-3) It seems that so simple a vision
should not need much comment; but commentators always find something to write
about. We are told that the good figs came from the early crop of a variety that
produced two or three crops a year, the first one being far superior to the other two.
The bad figs were described as "rotten" by Harrison, and probably the "sycamore
fig" by Smith. That variety needed to be pricked during the ripening process; and
the failure to provide that treatment made the figs inedible!
This little parable is very much like that of the basket of summer fruit in Amos
8:1-3. We refer the reader to our exegesis of that parable in Vol. 1 of the Minor
Prophets Series.
ELLICOTT, " (1) The Lord shewed me . . .—The chapter belongs to the same
period as the two preceding, i.e., to the reign of Zedekiah, after the first capture of
Jerusalem and the captivity of the chief inhabitants. The opening words indicate
that the symbols on which the prophet looked were seen in vision, as in Amos 7:1-4;
Amos 7:7; Zechariah 1:8; Zechariah 2:1, and the symbols of Jeremiah 1:11;
9

10. Jeremiah 1:13; or, if seen with the eyes of the body, were looked on as with the
prophet-poet’s power of finding parables in all things. The fact that the figs were set
before the Temple of the Lord is significant. They were as a votive offering, first-
fruits (Exodus 23:19; Deuteronomy 26:2) or tithes brought to the Lord of Israel. A
like imagery had been used by Amos (Amos 8:1-2) with nearly the same formulæ.
The carpenters and smiths.—See 2 Kings 24:14. The word for “carpenters” includes
craftsmen of all kinds. The deportation of these classes was partly a matter of policy,
making the city more helpless by removing those who might have forged weapons or
strengthened its defences, partly, doubtless, of ostentation, that they might help in
the construction of the buildings with which Nebuchadnezzar was increasing the
splendour of his city. So Esar-haddon records how he made his captives “work in
fetters, in making bricks” Records of the Past, iii. p. 120). So, from the former point
of view, the Philistines in the time of Samuel either carried off the smiths of Israel or
forbade the exercise of their calling (1 Samuel 13:19). The word for “smith” is found
in Isaiah 24:22; Isaiah 42:7 in the sense of “prison,” but, as applied to persons, only
here and in the parallel passage of 2 Kings 24:14; 2 Kings 24:16. It has been
differently interpreted as meaning “locksmiths,” “gatekeepers,” “strangers,” “hod-
carriers,” and “day-labourers.” Probably the rendering of the E.V. is right.
TRAPP, "Jeremiah 24:1 The LORD shewed me, and, behold, two baskets of figs
[were] set before the temple of the LORD, after that Nebuchadrezzar king of
Babylon had carried away captive Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah, and
the princes of Judah, with the carpenters and smiths, from Jerusalem, and had
brought them to Babylon.
Ver. 1. The Lord showed me.] By showing as well as by saying, hath God ever
signified his mind to his people; by the visible as well as by the audible word, as in
sacrifices and sacraments, for their better confirmation in the faith.
And, behold, two baskets.] Dodaim, so called from dodim, breasts, because these two
baskets resembled two breasts.
Were set before the temple.] Either visionally, or else actually there set; whether
presented for firstfruits, {as Deuteronomy 26:2} or set to be sold in such a public
place.
Before the temple.] To show that the Jews of both sorts gloried in the same God, but
were differently regarded by him, and accordingly sentenced.
After that Nebuchadnezzar.] This then was showed to Jeremiah about the beginning
of Zedekiah’s reign.
Had carried away captive Jeconiah.] Who was therefore and thenceforth called
Jeconiah Asir, [1 Chronicles 3:16] that is, Jeconiah the Prisoner. He was a wicked
prince, and therefore written childless, and threatened with deportation. [Jeremiah
10

11. 22:30] Howbeit, because by the advice of the prophet Jeremiah he submitted to
Nebuchadnezzar (who carried him away to Babylon, where, say the Rabbis, he
repented, and was therefore at length advanced by Evilmerodah, as Jeremiah
52:31), he and his company are here comforted, and pronounced more happy,
however it might seem otherwise, than those that continued still in the land; and
this, say the Hebrews, (a) was not obscurely set forth also by those two baskets of
figs, whereof that which was worst showed best, and the other showed worst, till
they came to be tasted.
With the carpenters,] Or, Craftsmen. [2 Kings 24:14; 2 Kings 24:16]
And smiths.] Heb., Enclosers - that is, say some, goldsmiths, whose work it is to set
stones in gold; and these, thus carried away, are as a type of such, saith
Oecolampadius, as are penitent and patient till the Lord shall turn again their
captivity as the streams in the south.
COKE, "Jeremiah 24:1. The Lord shewed me— This vision happened after the
carrying away of Jeconiah, and under the reign of Zedekiah, the last king of Judah.
The prophet himself sufficiently explains the meaning of the vision, in which two
such baskets of figs were presented to his view as used to be offered up for first-
fruits at the temple. The good figs signified those who were already gone into
captivity; and the bad figs those who remained and were exposed to the second
famine and pestilence.
PARKER, " Figs Good and Bad
Jeremiah 24
There was an immense advantage in living in Old Testament times. The evidence of
that advantage is to be found on every page of the Old Testament itself. Men had a
living Lord then. They spoke with him in a very reverent familiarity; although they
named his name every day, never does the familiarity go below the point of
reverence. You could not speak to an Old Testament man without hearing
something about "The Lord"; for he said, with a child"s frankness, The Lord said;
The Lord told me; I saw the Lord; The Lord sent me; The Lord afflicted me; The
Lord gave me deliverance; The Lord healed my diseases, and loaded me with
benefits. There was nothing strained about the confession: it was simply, sweetly,
gratefully uttered. Where is that Lord today? He was a great Lord; it required the
Hebrew tongue to furnish epithets and descriptives by which he could be adequately
set forth to the imagination. Is it language we are short of? or is the Lord God
himself absent from our thinking? Is it possible to think much about him, and never
mention his name? Is it possible to perform the miracle of being so absorbed in the
claims of God as never to mention the King? Has it come to this crowning miracle,
the devil the miracle-worker, that men can love Christ, and never acknowledge
him? We are not insensible to the plea that we must beware of what is denominated
for no known reason "cant." But love surely is inventive enough to find ways of self-
11

12. expression and self-revelation; surely love must now and then have courage enough
to test a popular fear, and to lift itself up in noble testimony, notwithstanding those
who would affright it into silence. We now have theories, hypotheses even—things
so useless as hypotheses! we have laws, persistent forces, marvellous, all-grinding
continuity: would God we had the living Father, the gentle, benignant, merciful,
redeeming Saviour! It was better to be an old prophet, who even dreamed himself
into this sublime association with motive, thought, and destiny eternal, than to be
crammed, filled with notions we cannot understand, and theories we never think of
applying.
"What seest thou, Jeremiah?" "Two baskets of figs set before the temple." What is
the meaning of these baskets? We cannot tell. Perhaps they were votive offerings.
The people who set them there had some object in view. The same baskets are
standing in the same place today. Did the Lord see only the baskets of figs? When
does the Lord put a final meaning to anything? There is no final meaning to the
humblest bird that flutters in the air; it is a minister of Providence, a minister of
grace. There is no end to the meaning of a field of wild flowers. We can run past
that marvellous display of power, Wisdom of Solomon , and goodness; but God
himself is still there, nourishing every root, and filling every cup as with the wine of
beauty. Things mean more than they seem to mean: it is the interpreter that is
wanting. It is even so with the Bible. We do not want a new writing, we want a new
reading; we do not want a new Bible, we simply need the old one to be properly
read. The Bible is in the reader: you get out of the Bible what you bring to it. So it is
with everything. If this were a philosophical law relating to the Bible only, we might
question it because of its uniqueness and singularity, but this law holds good
everywhere. We get what we give: our prayers are their answers; no man can pray
above the answer he has already in his heart Why do we not see? To look is one
thing; to see is another. We have not the same drapery that we find in Oriental
narrative or parable, but that is an advantage rather than a disadvantage, because
poor readers, superficial observers, never get further than the drapery. They never
see the prodigal son; if they saw him they would fall upon his neck before he left his
father"s house, and would have the battle out then. The drapery conceals, not
reveals, unless we have the living, penetrating eye that pierces through all clothing
and accident, and fixes itself intelligibly and critically upon the core, the meaning
that roots in the heart. There are many who have seen nothing but clouds in the sky:
there are some who have never seen the sky. There are some who have never seen
their own children. There are blind hearts, blind understandings, that never see
anything as it Isaiah , in all its outgoing of suggestion, poetry, apocalypse,
possibility: what wonder that they have become the victims of monotony and
complain cf commonplace and weariness and tedium, and are always sighing for
something that will simply startle them out of the degradation into which they have
brought every faculty?
What is the abiding quantity? Remove the drapery, with all its amplitude and
colouring, and get at the heart of things, and what is the permanent quantity, which
the world might hold as stock to trade with? What is it which around this simple
12

13. fellowship gathers in order that it may wisely calculate, expend, record its accounts,
and divide its balances? The central quantity is History,—events, actions,
providence. The baskets are not here, the particular literal figs are not here, but all
the meaning is present with us through enduring time. History must be read, events
must be looked at; for now the world has grown a history; the world has grown a
library. Jeremiah had none, Isaiah and Ezekiel had to look around at nature, and
endeavour through nature to look telescopically upon infinite distances; in their day
there was nothing of what we call with modern significance a literature, a history.
Now God is taking shape in events, is robed with incidents, deliverances,
interpositions—all the marvellous garment which we denominate by the name of
Providence. We see only the detail, and therefore we are lost, and sometimes we are
almost atheists. If we would see anything like an outline of the sum-total, we must
pray, and fear, and trust, and love. We have a mischievous habit of breaking up our
lives into little morsels, and looking only at the disintegration; we have not yet:
learned the mystery of putting things together into all their meaning, and getting
into the rhythm of the divine movement: otherwise there would be no atheists, there
would be fewer agnostics, there would be a marvellous multiplication of
worshippers; men would be brought to say, Explain it how you will, there are
invisible fingers at work in all this machinery of things: history is an argument,
history is a theology, history is a Bible: of another kind, yet rooted in the old Bible
as to all its philosophies, possibilities, reverences, and divinest outlook and outcome.
Thus through the vestibule of history men can walk arm-inarm a thousand strong,
saying, Let us enter into the Temple, for it is the hour of prayer, and bless the God
of history for the other Temple which he is building, and by which he is vindicating
his throne and his providence. If men would read history, Christianity would be
safe. If men would read their own history, there would be less need of argument.
Some of us have come to a point at which we have perfect rest in God. There may be
those who need to have an elaborate and irrational and unintelligible argument by
which to prove the existence of God; but no man who has lived a reflective life can
look back upon his yesterdays without saying, They came as links, but they have
been welded or attached or connected into chains; each day came, it was taken up,
looked at, used, laid down; but the days are now a thousand in number, multiplied
by ten, and by fifty, and lo! they are not links but chains, golden, strong, and by a
mysterious process they uplift themselves, and are hooked on to something stronger
than rocks, something brighter than planets.
Who then can wonder at the young being eccentric, having a tendency to intellectual
vagary and vagabondage—who can wonder? A man cannot read other people"s
history until he has read his own; we cannot understand biography until we
understand autobiography. We hear the words: the eloquent lecturer expounds the
ways historical, the mysteries of course and consequence, and we listen as students
wonderingly—our principal wonder being why he ever began: but as we advance in
life we see that there is an under-current, an under-building, an outer structure, and
when we compare the outer with the inner, the material with the spiritual, history
with the Bible, we say, All things are one; there is at the heart of all life"s wondrous
mystery a Power, inspiring, guiding, shaping, refining, spiritualising,—call it by
13

14. what name you may, at last you will come to call it by the name divine. Why do men
not read events? If they would read events they would be believers in providence.
Events are divided. "What seest thou?" I see two kinds of events, one good, and the
other vile: and there they are in life. It is so in families: how do you account for it
that one son prays, and the other never saw the need of prayer? The one is filial; the
other has a heart of stone. The one is always at home; the other never was at home
in all his life—the meaning of that term in music he never understood. Look at life
broadly. What seest thou, O prophet, O man of the piercing eyes, what seest thou?
Two events, or series of events, one excellent, the other vile; one leading upward, the
other downward. What seest thou? Heaven—hell. The vision is still before us; we
need to have our attention called to it. He who deals in singularities, in isolations,
never enters into the philosophy of providence, the method of the sublime
organisation which is denominated the universe. We have perhaps been unjust to
the idea of individualism. A man says he can read the Bible at home. We have
denied this. He can read it there if he has no other opportunity of reading it; but let
him come into the great fellowship, and he will find another reading, in another
tone, and he will feel that he needed that marvellous, inexplicable thing called touch,
sympathy, fellowship, in order to make him see himself, in the real quality and
quantity of his being. We must have public prayer. We can pray alone and must
pray there; but we can only pray there with sufficient profitableness for the holy
exercise in proportion as we crowd our solitude with memories of the great
congregation. How difficult it is for any man to see the intercessor in another man!
When we listen to prayer in the public congregation we are not listening to one
Prayer of Manasseh , we are not listening to a man confessing his own sins, we are
not reduced to that contemptible relation to the universe; if the man who is praying
be an intercessor, one to whom is given the gift of public expression, we hear in his
voice a thousand voices—when he sobs it is because a thousand hearts have broken,
when he cries for mercy it is because the world is on its knees. So with events,
processes of events, marvellous action and interaction: we must see the whole if we
would really say, How awful is this place! this is none other than the house of God,
and this is the gate of heaven.
In Old Testament times the Lord communicated his will to special men. Here we
have Jeremiah as representing that whole thought. This would be peculiar, and
would be open to a species of objection, if it did not hold good in all the relations of
life. Here again we come upon the marvellous distribution of the figs, excellent and
vile, full of noble meaning, and full of distressing suggestion. Jeremiah was called to
interpret the symbols. Men are called today who have the faculty of interpretation.
They do not speak from the point of information, else then they would be but
articulate newspapers; they speak from the point of inspiration, consciousness,
communion with the Eternal; therefore there is about their words an aroma not to
be found otherwhere. One man is a poet, and another—not to put it offensively—is
not a poet: how is that? One man weeps when he sees the morning come: the dawn
is so tender, so condescending, so hospitable, so full of promise, and so full of that
which cannot at once be apprehended: what is that dawn? Is it an opening
14

15. battlefield? is it a sick-bed? is it a bright opportunity for doing noble things? The
poet cannot tell, but he says, God will be in the centre of it, and if he will reveal
himself the day shall be a blessing, though it be full of battle, or though it be quiet
with the spirit of peace. One man is a statesman, and another is not; one man can
see the whole question, and the other can hardly see any part of it. The man who can
only see one point gets credit for being very definite. Poor soul! he gets a reputation
for being very clear. If he could see a horizon instead of a point, he would hesitate,
he would look about for another and larger selection of words; he would be critical,
he would pause between two competitive terms, not knowing which exactly held all
the colour of his thought. Some heads are vacant temples. What then? Let us be
thankful to God for the Isaiahs, Jeremiahs, Ezekiels, Pauls, and Johns, who have
risen to tell us what the Lord meant. Who was it that saw the Lord first on that
marvellous morning referred to in the fourth Gospel? It was John. There was a
figure on the seashore, a mere outline, a spectre; the people in the boat wondered
what it was, and John said, "It is the Lord." It required John to turn that figure
into a Christ: but this is the faculty divine, this is the prophetic function, this is the
inworking of that mystery which we call inspiration. It required God to see his own
image and likeness in the dust; it required Christ in the very agony of his love to
turn common supper wine into sacramental blood. Let us be thankful tor our
teachers. Some of us are but echoes—we can only tell what we have heard other men
say: but let us maintain our friends who have the gift of prayer; if we cannot join
them we can listen to them, and say, Hear how he knows us, how he loves us, how he
interprets our desires, how by some gift we: cannot understand he puts into words
the very thoughts that have been burning in our hearts. These are the men who
should lead the civilisation of the world.
The Lord says he will send his people into captivity "for their good,"—"Thus saith
the Lord, the God of Israel; Like these: good figs, so will I acknowledge them that
are carried away captive of Judah, whom I have sent out of this place into the land
of the Chaldeans for their good." How marvellous is the action of love! The parent
sends away the child he cannot live without for the child"s good; men undertake
long and perilous and costly journeys that they may accomplish a purpose that is
good. Jesus Christ himself said to his wondering disciples, "It is expedient for you
that I go away." Who can understand this action of love? It would seem to us to be
otherwise: that it would be best for Jesus to remain until the very last wanderer is
home; it would seem to our poor reason, which has everything but wings, that it
would be best for Jesus Christ to remain upon the earth until he saw the very last
little lamb enfolded on the mountains of Israel—then he himself could come to be
shepherd of the flock. Yet he was hardly here before he said, "It is expedient for you
that I go away." Are we not sent away? have we not lost fortune, station, standing?
have we not been punished in a thousand different ways—chastised, humiliated,
afflicted? have we not been suddenly surrounded with clouds in which there was no
light—yea, and clouds in which there was no rain, simply darkness, sevenfold night?
Yet it was for our good; it was that our vanity might be rebuked, that the centre of
dependence might be found, that the throne of righteousness might be seen and
approached. "It was good for me that I was afflicted: before I was afflicted I went
15

16. astray." Let us look upon our afflictions, distresses, and losses in that light. Life is
not easy; life is a sacrifice, an agony, a battle that ends only to begin again, a fight
mitigated, not ended, by a night"s repose. Are we to live always the accidental life,
the life of mere detail, the life that only happens? or are we to live the life that is
governed by law, inspired by a purpose, riveted in God, and travelling through
infinite circuits back again to the fountain of its origin? This is the religious life.
What became of the evil figs? The Lord himself could not cure them. The only
mercy that could be shown to them was to destroy them. How is it with ourselves?
There would seem to be men who cannot be cured, healed, restored; God himself
has wasted his omnipotence upon them. There are men who have resisted the Cross,
who have gone to perdition over a place called Calvary. Did they see it on the road?
Yes. Did they know who died upon that central cross? Yes. Did they hear his voice
of love? Yes, outwardly. How have they come to perdition? By pressing their way
past the Father, the Song of Solomon , and the Holy Ghost; if you go back all the
miles they have travelled you will find that they crushed under their feet father,
mother, home, pastor, friend, companion, wife, child, Bible, altar: what can become
of them? God himself can do no more. He is at the gate of the vineyard now, saying,
as he looks upon the wild grapes, What could I do for my vineyard more than I have
done? Be just, be honest, and say in clear, articulate terms that your soul can hear, I
am self-ruined, I am a suicide.
But who can end here? who can turn aside and say, This is the end? May it not be
that one more appeal will succeed? may not God himself be surprised by the
returning prodigal? may not Omniscience be startled into a new consciousness? We
are obliged to use these terms with human meanings: but may it not be that some
who are thought to be lost are not lost after all? To be in God"s house is a proof that
the loss is not complete. To have even intellectual attention bestowed upon an appeal
is to show that life is not extinct. "Turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will
ye die?" "As I live, saith the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the
wicked." If any man dies it will be because God cannot help it.
PETT, "Verses 1-10
The Two Baskets of Figs - Zedekiah And Jerusalem Are Fated To Destruction And
Exile (Jeremiah 24:1-10).
The subsection opened with a report concerning the future of Zedekiah and
Jerusalem, and it now closes with the same, the two forming an inclusio for the
subsection. Jeremiah is shown two baskets of figs by YHWH, one containing good
figs and the other bad figs. The good figs represent the cream of the people who had
been carried off to Babylon (including Daniel and Ezekiel among others). The bad
figs represent Zedekiah and those who had remained behind in Jerusalem. The good
figs would one day be restored to the land and built up there, and would once again
become His people with Him being their God. But the bad figs would be gathered up
by Nebuchadrezzar and scattered among the kingdoms to become a reproach
16

17. wherever they were found, and prior to that would first suffer sword, famine and
pestilence. In other words for Zedekiah and his ilk there was to be no future.
Jeremiah 24:1
‘YHWH showed me, and, behold, two baskets of figs set before the temple of
YHWH, after Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon had carried away captive Jeconiah
the son of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, and the princes of Judah, with the craftsmen
and smiths, from Jerusalem, and had brought them to Babylon.’
The chapter commences with YHWH showing Jeremiah two baskets of figs which
had been set before the Temple of YHWH, indicating either that they were being
brought before YHWH for Him to pass judgment on them, or that they were an
offering to YHWH, either as a firstfruit or a tithe (a remnant). Compare Amos
8:1-2. This took place after Nebuchadrezzar had carried Jehoiachin, together with
the princes of Judah (the tribal and clan leaders) and the cream of the people away
to Babylon (2 Kings 24:10-17).
The inclusion of craftsmen of all kinds was an indication that these exiles were more
than hostages. Nebuchadrezzar was stripping Jerusalem of all who could have
contributed to its being built up again into a strong city, and at the same time
assuring himself of a constant stream of craftsmen for his own building projects.
Many would in fact settle in Babylon and not want to return.
PULPIT, "Verses 1-10
EXPOSITION
Again Jeremiah's ungrateful task is to take up an attitude of direct opposition to the
king (comp. Jeremiah 22:13-30), though, indeed, Zedekiah personally is so weak and
dependent on others that he neither deserves nor receives a special rebuke. He and
all the people that are left are likened to very bad figs, the good figs—the exiles—
having been picked out and sent to Babylon, whence they will one day be restored.
The vision is purely an interior process. This is indicated, not only by the phrase,
"Jehovah showed me" (comp. Amos 7:1, Amos 7:4, Amos 7:7; Amos 8:1), but by the
contents of the vision.
Jeremiah 24:1
Two baskets of figs were set before, etc. (comp. Amos 8:1-3). The description is
apparently based on the law of firstfruits (comp. Deuteronomy 26:2), where the
"basket" is mentioned, though not the word here used. The baskets were set down
in readiness to be examined by the priests, who rigorously rejected all fruit that was
not sound. The princes of Judah. A short phrase for all the leading men, whether
members of the royal family or heads of the principal families (comp. Jeremiah
27:20). The carpenters and smiths; rather, the craftsmen and smiths ("craftsmen"
17

18. includes workers in stone and metal as well as wood; the Hebrew word is rendered
"smith" in 1 Samuel 13:19).
PULPIT, "Two baskets of figs.
I. MORALLY MEN ARE DIVISIBLE INTO TWO DISTINCT CLASSES. The two
baskets of figs represent two classes of Jews: the basket of good figs, Jeconiah and
his followers; the basket of bad figs, Zedekiah and his party. The great distinction
between these was moral. There were princes in both classes; yet the one stood far
higher in the sight of God than the other.
1. The deepest line of cleavage which runs down through all sections of mankind is
moral; all other separating marks are more superficial.
2. There are in the main but two classes—the good and the bad—though, of course,
within each of these great varieties occur.
3. Both of these classes tend to grow extreme. The good figs are very good, the bad
are very bad. Character is tendency. As character develops it moves further on
along the lines on which it is founded. Good men incline to grow better and bad men
worse. Like the rivers which flow down the two sides of a great watercourse, lives
that begin in similar circumstances and are near together for a season, if they once
diverge, are likely to separate more widely as the years pass.
II. THE REST MEN MAY BE THE GREATEST SUFFERERS. The good figs
represent the Jews who suffered most severely from the invasion of
Nebuchadnezzar, who were torn from their homes, robbed of their property, driven
into captivity; the bad figs represent the seemingly more fortunate Jews over whose
head the tide of invasion passes, leaving them still in their homes and in quiet, and
also those who escaped from it entirely by a flight into Egypt. We may often notice
that very good people are not only not spared, but suffer the most severe calamities.
The sinless One was a "man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief." No greater
mistake can be made than that of the three friends of Job. Great misfortunes are
certainly not indications of great guilt; often of the reverse.
1. High character may directly invoke trouble. It rouses the opposition of the
wicked; it feels called to dangerous tasks and to a mission which excites enmity; it
maintains a fidelity that excludes many avenues of escape which would be open to
men of lower moral principles.
2. God may bless and honor his better children by sending to them the severer trials.
Whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth. Therefore chastisement is an evidence of
God's love. Good men should understand this, and not be surprised at the advent of
trouble, but expect it; not be dismayed at the incongruity of it, but recognize its
fitness; not despair of themselves, and think that they must be hypocrites after all,
nor doubt and distrust God, but submit to what is clearly foretold and wisely
18

19. arranged.
III. GOD LOOKS FAVORABLY ON THOSE WHO SUBMIT TO HIS
CHASTISEMENTS. The good figs represent those Jews who obey the message of
Jeremiah and submit to the invasion of the Chaldeans as to a Divine chastisement;
the bad figs stand for those Jews who resist. It requires faith to recognize the
wisdom and duty of submission. On the face of it such conduct would appear
unpatriotic and cowardly, while resistance would seem noble and brave. It may take
more courage, however, to submit than to resist. There is a yielding which is calm
and reasonable and really brave, since it involves the curbing of instinctive
combativeness and the pursuit of an unpopular course-one sure to be misunderstood
and to provoke calumny. The sole guide must be sought in the question of what is
right, what is God's will. We are not called to a fatalistic passiveness. There are
circumstances in which self-defense or flight may be evidently right. What we are to
submit to is not all opposition, all possible trouble, but God's will, the trouble which
we know he has sanctioned. All the good fruit of chastisement will be lost if we rebel
against it. No greater proof of faith in the goodness of God and loyalty to the
majesty of God can be found than a quiet, unmurmuring acceptance of his harder
requirements.
IV. THE HARDEST SUFFERING MAY LEAD TO THE HAPPIEST RESULTS.
The captives are to be restored. Those Jews who remain in the land are ultimately to
be driven forth as "a reproach and a proverb, a taunt and a curse." The short,
sharp suffering will end in ultimate good. The temporary escape will be followed by
final ruin.
1. God's chastisements are temporary; they will give place to lasting blessedness.
The present affliction is light just because it endures "but for a moment" (2
Corinthians 4:17). Even if they outlast the present life, what is this brief span of
earthly trial compared with the blessedness of an eternity?
2. God's chastisements work our good. They directly tend to produce the happier
future. The tearful sowing is the cause of the joyful harvest. The spiritual
improvement wrought in the soul by the discipline of sorrow is at once a source of
future blessedness and a justification for it. "It is good for a man that he bear the
yoke in his youth."
3. A culpable avoidance of Divine chastisement is highly dangerous. The escape
from temporary trouble must incur greater future trouble; for
2 One basket had very good figs, like those that
19

20. ripen early; the other basket had very bad figs, so
bad they could not be eaten.
BARNES, "Fig-trees bear three crops of figs, of which the first is regarded as a great
delicacy.
GILL, "One basket had very good figs, even like the figs that are first ripe,....
As there are some figs that are ripe sooner than others, and which are always the most
desirable and acceptable; and such were they that were presented to the Lord, Mic_7:1;
these signified those that were carried captive into Babylon with Jeconiah, among whom
were some very good men, as Ezekiel, and others; and all might be said to be so, in
comparison of those that were at Jerusalem, who were very wicked, and grew worse and
worse:
and the other basket had very naughty figs, which could not be eaten, they
were so bad; as nothing is more sweet and luscious, and agreeable to the taste than a
sound ripe fig, and especially a first ripe one; so nothing is more nauseous than a
naughty rotten one: these signified the wicked Jews at Jerusalem indulging themselves
in all manner of sin; so those who seemed to be the worst, through their being carried
captive, were the best; and those who, seemed to be the best, by their prosperity, were
the worst. This is to be understood in a comparative sense, as Calvin observes; though
this does not so much design the quality of persons, as the issue of things, with respect
unto them. The captivity of the one would issue in their good, and so are compared to
good figs; when the sins of the other would bring upon them utter ruin and destruction
without recovery, and therefore compared to bad figs that cannot be eaten.
JAMISON, "figs ... first ripe — the “boccora,” or early fig (see on Isa_28:4).
Baskets of figs used to be offered as first-fruits in the temple. The good figs represent
Jeconiah and the exiles in Babylon; the bad, Zedekiah and the obstinate Jews in Judea.
They are called good and bad respectively, not in an absolute, but a comparative sense,
and in reference to the punishment of the latter. This prophecy was designed to
encourage the despairing exiles, and to reprove the people at home, who prided
themselves as superior to those in Babylon and abused the forbearance of God (compare
Jer_52:31-34).
K&D, ""The one basket very good figs" is short for: the basket was quite full of very
good figs; cf. Friedr. W. M. Philippi, on the Nature and Origin of the Status constr. in
Hebrew (1871), p. 93. The comparison to early figs serves simply to heighten the idea of
very good; for the first figs, those ripened at the end of June, before the fruit season in
August, were highly prized dainties. Cf. Isa_28:4; Hos_9:10.
20

21. BI 2-3, "One basket had very good figs.
Two baskets of figs
I. The same nation may contain two distinct characters, yet both may be equally
involved in a national visitation. There are laws of retribution m operation in relation to
nations which, so far as the outward condition is concerned-, are no respecters of
persons.
II. Submission to Divine chastisement will lead, in time, to deliverance from it, while
resistance will bring ruin. Two members of a family may be suffering from the same
disease; the physician will insist upon submission to his treatment from both his
patients. If one refuses, he must not complain of the physician, supposing he grows
worse. God desired to heal the Jewish nation of its idolatrous tendencies; for this
purpose He had decreed that it should go into captivity. Those who submitted willingly
are hem promised that the discipline should be “for their good,” and that they should be
brought again to their own land; while those who resisted, would be “consumed from off
the land that He gave unto them and their fathers.”
III. Lessons,
1. In this life retribution to nations is more certain than to individuals. God can deal
with individual characters in any world, therefore we sometimes find the greatest
villains apparently unmarked by Him now.
2. Outward circumstance is no standard by which to judge God’s estimate of
character. Job’s friends were not afflicted as he was, but God esteemed him far more
highly than He did them.
3. Moral crime is commercial ruin to a nation. Israel lost God first, and then her
national prosperity and greatness. A body soon decays when the life has departed,
and a putrid carcase will soon be visited by the birds of prey. (A London Minister.)
What seest thou, Jeremiah?—
Reflections on some of the characteristics of the age we live in
It is not difficult to see the force and application of this homely but sententious little
allegory. Jeremiah lived in those days of declension and disaster in which the invasion of
Judea by the King of Babylon was not only threatened, but actually took place. He saw
the departure of “the King of Judah, and the princes of Judah, with the carpenters and
smiths, from Jerusalem,” and these were all “carried away captive” to Babylon.
Nevertheless, many of every class were left behind, and these were placed under the
government of that weak and wicked king, Zedekiah. Those who were “carried away”
comprised the best of the population with regard to intelligence, religious feeling, and
patriotism. Their sorrows and afflictions humbled them, so that they repented of their
idolatries and obtained mercy of the Lord. In due time the way was prepared for the
return of the exiles to their own land; and there, under the leadership of such men as
Ezra, Nehemiah, and Zerubbabel, they founded afresh a pious commonwealth, in which
the worship of the true God was ever afterwards main-rained down to the time of the
coming of Christ. In them was fulfilled the promise contained in verses 4-7. On the other
hand, the Jews who remained at home with Zedekiah “and his princes” revolted against
God more and more. They abandoned themselves openly to licentiousness and idolatry.
21

22. Their temper fiery and mutinous, their language blasphemous, their whole conduct
infamous. (See verses 8-13.) These were the evil figs, so evil that they could not be eaten.
The point suggested to us by Jeremiah’s vision is, that there occur periods, or special
circumstances, in the religious life of nations, which tend to develop and force the
maturation of character with unusual energy and astonishing rapidity. In such times,
you do not find people merely good or bad; but the good are very good, and the evil very
evil. Now, it is evident that no parallel whatever can be drawn between our position and
circumstances in England at the present time and those of Judea in the days of
Jeremiah. We are not, as a nation, suffering either from internal anarchy or from
external assault. But still it may be, that other influences and conditions of society are at
work, producing an exactly analogous result to that at the time referred to in the text.
I. Certain peculiarities of our times and position my be noted.
1. This is an age of extraordinary intellectual and social activity. The most absolute
liberty of speech exists, and men shrink from the utterance of no opinion, the
broaching of no speculation. This unusual activity and daring of thought produces
rapid and extraordinary changes in both political and ecclesiastical affairs. Amid the
astonishment and whirl of such events, it requires a great effort to keep the mind
calm, and hold fast in our judgments, utterances, and actions to the sober
requirements of sound principle and acknowledged truth (Pro_17:27, margin).
2. The very full and clear religious light which we enjoy.
3. The corresponding increase of activity in the Church. All manner of special
devices are being tried and carried out vigorously whereby to reach all classes, to
instruct the most ignorant and reform the most vicious, whilst ancient and ordinary
means of grace are sustained with unprecedented interest and efficiency.
II. What do all these things import? and what do they necessitate on our part
individually? Truly we find here divers potent and stimulating agencies in operation,
calculated to arouse us up to repentance and godly solicitude, and then to prompt us on
to vigorous Christian life and action. If we yield to them, how fast and far may we soon
be carried in the path of faith, in a career of usefulness! What bold, what firm, what
fruitful Christians we must become if we enter fully into “the spirit of the times,”
considered as engaged on the side of Christ and His Gospel! But if we refuse to do so, if
we set ourselves to resist these powerful influences, how strenuous must that resistance
be! how determined and how self-conscious that action of the will which still fights
against God and clings to worldliness and sin! Facts are in harmony with these
reasonings. Illustrations abound on every side. In this earnest age you find earnest men
both for good and evil. Was ever war conducted on so fearful a scale as we have lately
witnessed? In our day, we have also seen such specimens of commercial roguery and
robbery, conceived on so magnificent a scale, and executed under so clever and
admirable a cloak of hypocrisy, as no previous age has ever presented to the world. On
the other hand, look at the men who stand foremost in the van of religion and
philanthropy. These are God’s heroes; men are still living amongst us worthy of
comparison with the spiritual heroes of ancient times, in regard to all that is noble in
faith, self-denying in zeal, munificent in giving, or abundant in labours. These, indeed,
are among the good figs, which by God’s grace are very good: and to the production of
such instances of exalted and matured piety, the present times are not in the least
unfavourable. One might speak of books, as well as men. And if, on the other hand, it be
true that infidelity and immorality were never so speciously or so boldly advocated as
22

23. now, in sensational novels, in shallow critiques, or in vulgar serials; so, again, we defy
any age to show such noble and masterly treatises as are now written by men of
sanctified learning and genius, either in exposition of the Scriptures, or in vindication of
their contents. Then there are public institutions and societies to be looked at. If chapels
are multiplied, so are theatres. Look at the state of our large towns and cities. Were ever
such facilities for evil doing? such criminal attractions for the young? so many places
where vice is seductive and sin made easy? The kingdom of Satan is as active and roused
up to new exertions as is the kingdom of Christ. It is said that, in the early colonisation
of Van Diemen’s Land, one man took a hive of bees, and soon the island was filled with
swarms, and both the trees and rocks dropped with honey; another took a handful of
thistle-down, and ere long the country was overrun with prickly and gigantic weeds. Like
such actions, are the deeds of all men now. Shall we, then, multiply honey-hives, or
scatter thistles in the earth? Let us seek to be good, and do good: and then, behold what
glorious possibilities belong to us, of being pre-eminently holy, blest and useful! (T. G.
Horon.)
Figs good and bad
Events are divided. “What seest thou?” I see two kinds of events, one good, and the other
vile: and there they are in life. It is so in families: how do you account for it that one son
prays, and the other never saw the need of prayer? The one is filial; the other has a heart
of stone. Look at life broadly. What seest thou, O prophet, O man of the piercing eyes,
what seest thou? Two events, or series of events, one excellent, the other vile; one
leading upward, the other downward. What seest thou? Heaven—-hell. The vision is still
before us; we need to have our attention called to it. He who deals in singularities, in
isolations, never enters into the philosophy of Providence, the method of the sublime
organisation which is denominated the universe. (J. Parker, D. D.)
CALVIN, "He now adds, that one basket had very good figs, and that the other had
very bad figs. If it be asked whether Jeconiah was in himself approved by God, the
answer is easy, — that he was suffering punishment for his sins. Then the Prophet
speaks here comparatively, when he calls some good and others bad. We must also
notice, that he speaks not here of persons but of punishment; as though he had said,
“ye feel a dread when those exiles are mentioned, who have been deprived of the
inheritance promised them by God: this seems hard to you; but this is moderate
when ye consider what end awaits you.” He then does not call Jeconiah and other
captives good in themselves; but he calls them good figs, because God had chastened
them more gently than he intended to chastise Zedekiah and the rest. Thus he calls
the Jews who remained bad figs, not only for this reason, because they were more
wicked, though this was in part the reason, but he had regard to the punishment
that was nigh at hand; for the severity of God was to be greater towards those whom
he had spared, and against whom he had not immediately executed his vengeance.
We now perceive the meaning of the Prophet. The rest we shall defer to the next
Lecture.
23

24. TRAPP, "Jeremiah 24:2 One basket [had] very good figs, [even] like the figs [that
are] first ripe: and the other basket [had] very naughty figs, which could not be
eaten, they were so bad.
Ver. 2. One basket had very good figs.] Maturas et praecoquas, ripe and ready
early, bursas melle plenas, as one once called such good figs, purses full of honey.
“ Ficus habet lactis nivei, rutilique saporem
Mellis, et ambrosiae similes cum nectare succos. ”
- Passerat.
The other basket had very naughty figs.] Sour and ill-tasted, because blasted, haply,
or worm eaten, &c. Of the Athenians Plutarch (a) saith, that they were all very good
or stark naught; no middle men: like as that country also produceth both the most
excellent honey and the most deadly poison. Sure it is that non sunt media coram
Deo, neque placet tepiditas, before God every man is either a good tree yielding
good fruit, or an evil tree bearing evil fruit. He that is not with Christ is against him.
He acknowledgeth not a mediocrity, he detesteth an indifference in religion; hot or
cold he wisheth men, and threateneth to "spue the lukewarm out of his mouth."
[Revelation 3:15-16] The best that can be said of such neuter passives is that which
Tacitus saith of Galba, Magis extra vitia quam cum virtutibus, that they are rather
not vicious than virtuous; their goodness is merely negative. The world crieth them
up for right honest men, but God decrieth them for naught, stark naught; they may
not be endured, they are so naught. See Luke 16:15.
COKE, "Jeremiah 24:2. Like the figs that are first ripe— Dr. Shaw speaks of three
sorts of figs; the first of which he calls the boccore, (being those here spoken of)
which comes to maturity towards the middle or latter end of June; the second the
kermez, or summer fig, which seldom ripens before August; and the third, which he
calls the winter fig: this is usually of a much longer shape and darker complexion
than the kermez, hanging and ripening upon the tree even after the leaves are shed;
and provided the winter proves temperate, is gathered as a delicious morsel in the
spring. Shaw's Travels, p. 370 fol.
PETT, "Jeremiah 24:2
‘One basket had very good figs, like the figs that are first-ripe, and the other basket
had very bad figs, which could not be eaten, they were so bad.’
Of the baskets of figs one contained very good figs, like first ripe figs (signifying the
very best, compare Isaiah 28:4; Hosea 9:10). and one contained very bad figs, which
were so bad that they could not be stomached. This may suggest that they had been
brought before YHWH to be tested, or it may be saying that what Jerusalem is now
offering to YHWH is fruit that has gone off, in contrast with what it had previously
24

25. offered, fruit which had potential.
EXPOSITOR'S BIBLE COMMENTARY, "SOCIAL AND RELIGIOUS
CORRUPTION
"Very bad figs too bad to be eaten."- Jeremiah 24:2; Jeremiah 24:8; Jeremiah 29:17
PROPHETS and preachers have taken the Israelites for God’s helots, as if the
Chosen People had been made drunk with the cup of the Lord’s indignation, in
order that they might be held up as a warning to His more favoured children
throughout after ages. They seemed depicted as "sinners above all men," that by
this supreme warning the heirs of a better covenant may be kept in the path of
righteousness. Their sin is no mere inference from the long tragedy of their national
history, "because they have Suffered such things"; their own prophets and their
own Messiah testify continually against them. Religious thought has always singled
out Jeremiah as the most conspicuous and uncompromising witness to the sins of his
people. One chief feature of his mission was to declare God’s condemnation of
ancient Judah. Jeremiah watched and shared the prolonged agony and
overwhelming catastrophes of the last days of the Jewish monarchy, and ever and
anon raised his voice to declare that his fellow countrymen suffered, not as martyrs,
but as criminals. He was like the herald who accompanies a condemned man on the
way to execution, and proclaims his crime to the spectators.
What were these crimes? How was Jerusalem a sink of iniquity, an Augean stable,
only to be cleansed by turning through it the floods of Divine chastisement? The
annalists of Egypt and Chaldea show no interest in the morality of Judah; but there
is no reason to believe that they regarded Jerusalem as more depraved than Tyre, or
Babylon, or Memphis. If a citizen of one of these capitals of the East visited the city
of David he might miss something of accustomed culture, and might have occasion
to complain of the inferiority of local police arrangements, but he would be as little
conscious of any extraordinary wickedness in the city as a Parisian would in
London. Indeed, if an English Christian familiar with the East of the nineteenth
century could be transported to Jerusalem under King Zedekiah, in all probability
its moral condition would not affect him very differently from that of Cabul or
Ispahan.
When we seek to learn from Jeremiah wherein the guilt of Judah lay, his answer is
neither clear nor full: he does not gather up her sins into any complete and detailed
indictment; we are obliged to avail ourselves of casual references scattered through
his prophecies. For the most part Jeremiah speaks in general terms; a precise. and
exhaustive catalogue of current vices would have seemed too familiar and
commonplace for the written record.
The corruption of Judah is summed up by Jeremiah in the phrase "the evil of your
doings," and her punishment is described in a corresponding phrase as "the fruit of
your doings," or as coming upon her "because of the evil of your doings." The
25

26. original of "doings" is a peculiar word occurring most frequently in Jeremiah, and
the phrases are very common in Jeremiah, and hardly occur at all elsewhere. The
constant reiteration of this melancholy refrain is an eloquent symbol of Jehovah’s
sweeping condemnation. In the total depravity of Judah, no special sin, no one
group of sins, stood out from the rest. Their "doings" were evil altogether.
The picture suggested by the scattered hints as to the character of these evil doings
is such as might be drawn of almost any Eastern state in its darker days. The
arbitrary hand of the. government is illustrated by Jeremiah’s own experience of the
bastinado [Jeremiah 20:2; Jeremiah 37:15] and the dungeon, (chapters 37, 38) and
by the execution of Uriah ben Shemaiah. [Jeremiah 26:20-24] The rights of less
important personages were not likely to be more scrupulously respected. The
reproach of shedding innocent blood is more than once made against the people and
their rulers; [Jeremiah 2:34; Jeremiah 19:4; Jeremiah 22:17] and the more general
charge of oppression occurs still more frequently. [Jeremiah 5:25; Jeremiah 6:6;
Jeremiah 7:5]
The motive for both these crimes was naturally covetousness; [Jeremiah 6:13] as
usual, they were specially directed against the helpless, "the poor," [Jeremiah 2:34]
"the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow"; and the machinery of oppression was
ready to hand in venal judges and rulers. Upon occasion, however, recourse was had
to open violence-men could "steal and murder," as well as "swear falsely";
[Jeremiah 7:5-9] they lived in an atmosphere of falsehood, they "walked in a lie."
[Jeremiah 23:14] Indeed the word "lie" is one of the keynotes of these prophecies.
The last days of the monarchy offered special temptations to such vices. Social
wreckers reaped an unhallowed harvest in these stormy times. Revolutions were
frequent, and each in its turn meant fresh plunder for unscrupulous partisans.
Flattery and treachery could always find a market in the court of the suzerain or the
camp of the invader. Naturally, amidst this general demoralization, the life of the
family did not remain untouched: "the land was full of adulterers." [Jeremiah
23:10; Jeremiah 23:14] Zedekiah and Ahab, the false prophets at Babylon are
accused of having committed adultery with their neighbours’ wives. [Jeremiah
29:23] In these passages "adultery" can scarcely be a figure for idolatry; and even if
it is, idolatry always involved immoral ritual.
In accordance with the general teaching of the Old Testament, Jeremiah traces the
roots of the people’s depravity to a certain moral stupidity; they are "a foolish
people, without understanding," who, like the idols in Psalms 115:5-6, "have eyes
and see not" and "have ears and hear not." In keeping with their stupidity was an
unconsciousness of guilt which even rose into proud self-righteousness. They could
still come with pious fervour to worship in the temple of Jehovah and to claim the
protection of its inviolable sanctity. They could still assail Jeremiah with righteous
indignation because he announced the coming destruction of the place where
Jehovah had chosen to set His name. (chapters 7, 26) They said that they had no sin,
and met the prophet’s rebukes with protests of conscious innocence: "Wherefore
hath Jehovah pronounced all this great evil against us? or what is our iniquity? or
26

27. what is our sin that we have committed against Jehovah our God?" [Jeremiah
16:10]
When the public conscience condoned alike the abuse of the forms of law and its
direct violation, actual legal rights would be strained to the utmost against debtors,
hired labourers, and slaves. In their extremity, the princes and people of Judah
sought to propitiate the anger of Jehovah by emancipating their Hebrew slaves;
when the immediate danger had passed away for a time, they revoked the
emancipation. (Chapter 34) The form of their submission to Jehovah reveals their
consciousness that their deepest sin lay in their behaviour to their helpless
dependents. This prompt repudiation of a most solemn covenant illustrated afresh
their callous indifference to the well-being of their inferiors. The depravity of Judah
was not only total, it was also universal. In the older histories we read how Achan’s
single act of covetousness involved the whole people in misfortune, and how the
treachery of the bloody house of Saul brought three years’ famine upon the land;
but now the sins of individuals and classes were merged in the general corruption.
Jeremiah dwells with characteristic reiteration of idea and phrase upon this
melancholy truth. Again and again he enumerates the different classes of the
community: "kings, princes, priests, prophets, men of Judah and inhabitants of
Jerusalem." They had all done evil and provoked Jehovah to anger; they were all to
share the same punishment. [Jeremiah 32:26-35] cf. "Characteristic Expressions."
(chapter 3) They were all arch rebels, given to slander; nothing but base metal;
corrupters, every one of them. [Jeremiah 6:28] "The universal extent of total
depravity is most forcibly expressed when Zedekiah with his court and people are
summarily described as a basket of "very bad figs, too bad to be eaten." The dark
picture of Israel’s corruption is not yet complete-Israel’s corruption, for now the
prophet is no longer exclusively concerned with Judah. The sin of these last days is
no new thing; it is as old as the Israelite occupation of Jerusalem. "This city hath
been to Me a provocation of My anger and of My fury from the day that they built it
even unto this day"; from the earliest days of Israel’s national existence, from the
time of Moses and the Exodus, the people have been given over to iniquity. "The
children of Israel and the children of Judah have done nothing but evil before Me
from their youth. [Jeremiah 32:26-35] Thus we see at last that Jeremiah’s teaching
concerning the sin of Judah can be summed up in one brief and comprehensive
proposition. Throughout their whole history all classes of the community have been
wholly given over to every kind of wickedness.
This gloomy estimate of God’s Chosen People is substantially confirmed by the
prophets of the later monarchy, from Amos and Hosea onwards. Hosea speaks of
Israel in terms as sweeping as those of Jeremiah. "Hear the word of Jehovah, ye
children of Israel; for Jehovah hath a controversy with the inhabitants of the land,
because there is no truth, nor mercy, nor knowledge of God in the land. Swearing
and lying and killing and stealing and committing adultery, they cast off all
restraint, and blood toucheth blood." As a prophet of the Northern Kingdom, Hosea
is mainly concerned with his own country, but his casual references to Judah
include her in the same condemnation. Amos again condemns both Israel and
27

28. Judah: Judah, "because they have despised the law of Jehovah, and have not kept
His commandments, and their lies caused them to err, after the which their fathers
walked"; Israel, "because they sold the righteous for silver and the poor for a pair
of shoes, and pant after the dust of the earth on the head of the poor and turn aside
the way of the meek." [Amos 2:4-8] The first chapter of Isaiah is in a similar strain:
Israel is "a sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evil-doers"; "the
whole head is sick, the whole heart faint. From the sole of the foot even unto the
head there is no soundness in it, but wounds and bruises and putrefying sores."
According to Micah, "Zion is built up with blood and Jerusalem with iniquity. The
heads thereof judge for reward, and the priests thereof teach for hire, and the
prophets thereof divine for money." [Micah 3:10-11]
Jeremiah’s older and younger contemporaries, Zephaniah and Ezekiel, alike
confirm his testimony. In the spirit and even the style afterwards used by Jeremiah,
Zephaniah enumerates the sins of the nobles and teachers of Jerusalem. "Her
princes within her are roaring lions; her judges are evening wolvesHer prophets are
light and treacherous persons: her priests have polluted the sanctuary, they have
done violence to the law." [Zephaniah 3:3-4] Ezekiel 20:1-49 traces the defections of
Israel from the sojourn in Egypt to the Captivity. Elsewhere Ezekiel says that "the
land is full of bloody crimes, and the city is full of violence"; (Ezekiel 7:23 :; Ezekiel
7:9; Ezekiel 22:1-12) Jeremiah 22:23-30 he catalogues the sins of priests, princes,
prophets, and people, and proclaims that Jehovah "sought for a man among them
that should make up the hedge, and stand in the gap before Me for the land, that I
should not destroy it: but I found none."
We have now fairly before us the teaching of Jeremiah and the other prophets as to
the condition of Judah: the passages quoted or referred to represent its general tone
and attitude; it remains to estimate its significance. We should naturally suppose
that such sweeping statements as to the total depravity of the whole people
throughout all their history were not intended to be interpreted as exact
mathematical formulae. And the prophets themselves state or imply qualifications.
Isaiah insists upon the existence of a righteous remnant. When Jeremiah speaks of
Zedekiah and his subjects as a basket of very bad figs, he also speaks of the Jews
who had already gone into captivity as a basket of very good figs. The mere fact of
going into captivity can hardly have accomplished an immediate and wholesale
conversion. The "good figs" among the captives were presumably good before they
went into exile. Jeremiah’s general statements that "they were all arch rebels" do
not therefore preclude the existence of righteous men in the community, Similarly,
when he tells us that the city and people have always been given over to iniquity,
Jeremiah is not ignorant of Moses and Joshua, David and Solomon, and the kings
"who did right in the eyes of Jehovah"; nor does he intend to contradict the familiar
accounts of ancient history. On the other hand, the universality which the prophets
ascribe to the corruption of their people is no mere figure of rhetoric, and yet it is by
no means incompatible with the view that Jerusalem, in its worst days, was not more
conspicuously wicked than Babylon or Tyre; or even, allowing for the altered
circumstances of the times, than London or Paris. It would never have occurred to
28

29. Jeremiah to apply the average morality of Gentile cities as a standard by which to
judge Jerusalem; and Christian readers of the Old Testament have caught
something of the old prophetic spirit. The very introduction into the present context
of any comparison between Jerusalem and Babylon may seem to have a certain
flavour of irreverence. We perceive with the prophets that the City of Jehovah and
the cities of the Gentiles must be placed in different categories. The popular modern
explanation is that heathenism was so utterly abominable that Jerusalem at its worst
was still vastly superior to Nineveh or Tyre. However exaggerated such views may
be, they still contain an element of truth; but Jeremiah’s estimate of the moral
condition of Judah was based on entirely different ideas. His standards were not
relative, but absolute; not practical, but ideal. His principles were the very antithesis
of the tacit ignoring of difficult and unusual duties, the convenient and somewhat
shabby compromise represented by the modern word "respectable." Israel was to
be judged by its relation to Jehovah’s purpose for His people. Jehovah had called
them out of Egypt, and delivered them from a thousand dangers. He had raised up
for them judges and kings, Moses, David, and Isaiah. He had spoken to them by
Torah and by prophecy. This peculiar munificence of Providence and Revelation
was not meant to produce a people only better by some small percentage than their
heathen neighbours.
The comparison between Israel and its neighbours would no doubt be much more
favourable under David than under Zedekiah, but even then the outcome of Mosaic
religion as practically embodied in the national life was utterly unworthy of the
Divine ideal; to have described the Israel of David or the Judah of Hezekiah as
Jehovah’s specially cherished possession, a kingdom of priests and a holy nation,
[Exodus 19:6] would have seemed a ghastly irony even to the sons of Zeruiah, far
more to Nathan, Gad, or Isaiah. Nor had any class, as a class, been wholly true to
Jehovah at any period of the history. If for any considerable time the numerous
order of professional prophets had had a single eye to the glory of Jehovah, the
fortunes of Israel would have been altogether different, and where prophets failed,
priests and princes and common people were not likely to succeed.
Hence, judged as citizens of God’s Kingdom on earth, the Israelites were corrupt in
every faculty of their nature: as masters and servants, as rulers and subjects, as
priests, prophets, and worshippers of Jehovah, they succumbed to selfishness and
cowardice, and perpetrated the ordinary crimes and vices of ancient Eastern life.
The reader is perhaps tempted to ask: Is this all that is meant by the fierce and
impassioned denunciations of Jeremiah? Not quite all. Jeremiah had had the
mortification of seeing the great religious revival under Josiah spend itself,
apparently in vain, against the ingrained corruption of the people. The reaction, as
under Manasseh, had accentuated the worst features of the national life. At the
same time the constant distress and dismay caused by disastrous invasionstended to
general license and anarchy. A long period of decadence reached its nadir.
But these are mere matters of degree and detail; the main thing for Jeremiah was
29

30. not that Judah had become worse, but that it had failed to become better. One great
period of Israel’s probation was finally closed. The kingdom had served its purpose
in the Divine Providence; but it was impossible to hope any longer that the Jewish
monarchy was to prove the earthly embodiment of the Kingdom of God. There was
no prospect of Judah attaining a social order appreciably better than that of the
surrounding nations. Jehovah and His Revelation would be disgraced by any
further association with the Jewish state.
Certain schools of socialists bring a similar charge against the modern social order;
that it is not a Kingdom of God upon earth is sufficiently obvious; and they assert
that our social system has become stereotyped on lines that exclude and resist
progress towards any higher ideal. Now it is certainly true that every great
civilisation hitherto has grown old and obsolete; if Christian society is to establish
its right to abide permanently, it must show itself something more than an improved
edition of the Athens of Pericles or the Empire of the Antonines.
All will agree that Christendom falls sadly short of its ideal, and therefore we may
seek to gather instruction from Jeremiah’s judgment on the shortcomings of Judah.
Jeremiah specially emphasises the universality of corruption in individual
character, in all classes of society and throughout the whole duration of history.
Similarly we have to recognise that prevalent social and moral evils lower the
general tone of individual character. Moral faculties are not set apart in watertight
compartments. "Whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, is
guilty of all," is no mere forensic principle. The one offence impairs the earnestness
and sincerity with which a man keeps the rest of the law, even though there may be
no obvious lapse. There are moral surrenders made to the practical exigencies of
commercial, social, political, and ecclesiastical life. Probably we should be startled
and dismayed if we understood the consequent sacrifice of individual character.
We might also learn from the prophet that the responsibility for our social evils
rests with all classes. Time was when the lower classes were plentifully lectured as
the chief authors of public troubles; now it is the turn of the capitalist, the parson,
and the landlord. The former policy had no very marked success, possibly the new
method may not fare better.
Wealth and influence imply opportunity and responsibility which do not belong to
the poor and feeble; but power is by no means confined to the privileged classes;
and the energy, ability, and self-denial embodied in the great Trades Unions have
sometimes shown themselves as cruel and selfish towards the weak and destitute as
any association of capitalists. A necessary preliminary to social amendment is a
General confession by each class of its own sins. Finally, the Divine Spirit had
taught Jeremiah that Israel had always been sadly imperfect. He did not deny
Divine Providence and human hope by teaching that the Golden Age lay in the past,
that the Kingdom of God had been realised and allowed to perish. He was under no
foolish delusion as to "the good old times"; in his most despondent moods he was
not given over to wistful reminiscence. His example may help us not to become
30

31. discouraged through exaggerated ideas about the attainments of past generations.
In considering modern life it may seem that we pass to an altogether different
quality of evil to that denounced by Jeremiah, that we have lost sight of anything
that could justify his fierce indignation, and thus that we fail in appreciating his
character and message. Any such illusion may be corrected by a glance at the
statistics of congested town districts, sweated industries, and prostitution. A social
reformer, living in contact with these evils, may be apt to think Jeremiah’s
denunciations specially adapted to the society which tolerates them with almost
unruffled complacency.
PULPIT, "Like the figs that are first ripe. The early spring fig was considered a
special delicacy (comp. Isaiah 27:4; Hosea 9:10); "ficus praecox," Pliny calls it
('Hist. Nat.,' 15.19, quoted by Trench). Tristram suggests that the "bad figs" were
those of a sycamore tree.
3 Then the Lord asked me, “What do you see,
Jeremiah?”
“Figs,” I answered. “The good ones are very good,
but the bad ones are so bad they cannot be eaten.”
GILL, "Then said the Lord unto me, what seest thou, Jeremiah?.... This
question is put, in order that, upon his answer to it, he might have an explication of the
vision:
and I said, figs; the good figs, very good; and the evil, very evil,
that cannot be eaten, they are so evil; or "so bad", or "because of badness" (b);
which may be applied to mankind in general; who may be distinguished into good and
bad: those that are good, who are made so by the grace of God; for none are so by nature,
or of themselves; they are very good: they have many good things in them; they have a
good heart, a new and a clean heart, and a right spirit created in them; they have a good
understanding of spiritual things; they have a good will to that which is good, and good
affections for God and Christ, and divine things; they have the good Spirit of God and his
31