Jeremiah 7 presents a prophetic sermon delivered at the temple gate during Jehoiakim's reign, warning the people of Judah about their false confidence in the temple's security amidst their moral decay. The sermon condemns the people's hypocrisy, urging them to amend their ways and not to trust in the physical sanctuary of the temple, which could face destruction like Shiloh due to their wickedness. Ultimately, Jeremiah's message emphasizes repentance as the only hope for averting impending judgment on the nation.

1. JEREMIAH 7 COMME TARY
EDITED BY GLE PEASE
False Religion Worthless
1 This is the word that came to Jeremiah from the
Lord:
BAR ES 1-2, "In Jer. 7–10 he addresses the people as they flocked into Jerusalem
from the country, to attend the solemn services in the temple upon a fastday. Jehoiakim
Jer. 26 had just ascended the throne, and was so incensed at this sermon that he would
have put Jeremiah to death but for the influence of Ahikam. With the accession of
Jehoiakim all hope of averting the ruin of the country had passed away. He represented
the reverse of his father’s policy, and belonged to that faction, who placed their sole hope
of deliverance in a close alliance with Pharaoh-Necho. As this party rejected the
distinctive principles of the theocracy, and the king was personally an irreligious man,
the maintenance of the worship of Yahweh was no longer an object of the public care. At
this time upon a public fast-day, appointed probably because of the calamities under
which the nation was laboring, Jeremiah was commanded by Yahweh to stand at the
gate of the temple, and address to the people as they entered words of solemn warning.
The whole sermon divides itself into three parts;
In Jer. 7–10 he addresses the people as they flocked into Jerusalem from the country,
to attend the solemn services in the temple upon a fastday. Jehoiakim Jer. 26 had just
ascended the throne, and was so incensed at this sermon that he would have put
Jeremiah to death but for the influence of Ahikam. With the accession of Jehoiakim all
hope of averting the ruin of the country had passed away. He represented the reverse of
his father’s policy, and belonged to that faction, who placed their sole hope of
deliverance in a close alliance with Pharaoh-Necho. As this party rejected the distinctive
principles of the theocracy, and the king was personally an irreligious man, the
maintenance of the worship of Yahweh was no longer an object of the public care. At this
time upon a public fast-day, appointed probably because of the calamities under which
the nation was laboring, Jeremiah was commanded by Yahweh to stand at the gate of the
temple, and address to the people as they entered words of solemn warning. The whole
sermon divides itself into three parts;
(1) It points out the folly of the superstitious confidence placed by the people in the
temple, while they neglect the sole sure foundation of a nation’s hope. A sanctuary long
polluted by immorality must inevitably be destroyed Jer. 7:2–8:3.
(2) complaints follow of a more general character, in which the growing wickedness of
the nation and especially of the leaders is pointed out Jer. 8:4–9:24.
(3) lastly the prophet shows the possibility of averting the evils impending upon the

2. nation Jer. 9:25–10:25.
Jer_10:1-2. The temple had several entrances 2Ch_4:9; and the gate or door here
mentioned is probably that of the inner court, where Baruch read Jeremiah’s scroll Jer_
36:10. The prophet stood in the doorway, and addressed the people assembled in the
outer court.
All ye of Judah - Better, literally all Judah (compare Jer_26:2).
CLARKE, "The word that came to Jeremiah - This prophecy is supposed to
have been delivered in the first year of the reign of Jehoiakim, son of Josiah, who, far
from following the example of his pious father, restored idolatry, maintained bad priests
and worse prophets, and filled Jerusalem with abominations of all kinds.
GILL, "The word that came to Jeremiah,.... The Word of prophecy, as the
Targum:
from the Lord, saying; this begins a new prophecy. This verse, and the beginning of
the next, are wanting in the Septuagint version.
HE RY, "These verses begin another sermon, which is continued in this and the two
following chapters, much to the same effect with those before, to reason them to
repentance. Observe,
I. The orders given to the prophet to preach this sermon; for he had not only a general
commission, but particular directions and instructions for every message he delivered.
This was a word that came to him from the Lord, Jer_7:1. We are not told when this
sermon was to be preached; but are told, 1. Where it must be preached - in the gate of
the Lord's house, through which they entered into the outer court, or the court of the
people. It would affront the priests, and expose the prophet to their rage, to have such a
message as this delivered within their precincts; but the prophet must not fear the face
of man, he cannot be faithful to his God if he do. 2. To whom it must be preached - to the
men of Judah, that enter in at these gates to worship the Lord; probably it was at one of
three feasts, when all the males from all parts of the country were to appear before the
Lord in the courts of his house, and not to appear empty: then he had many together to
preach to, and that was the most seasonable time to admonish them not to trust to their
privileges. Note, (1.) Even those that profess religion have need to be preached to as well
as those that are without. (2.) It is desirable to have opportunity of preaching to many
together. Wisdom chooses to cry in the chief place of concourse, and, as Jeremiah here,
in the opening of the gates, the temple-gates. (3.) When we are going to worship God we
have need to be admonished to worship him in the spirit, and to have no confidence in
the flesh, Phi_3:3.
JAMISO , "Jer_7:1-34. The seventh through ninth chapters. Delivered in the
beginning of Jehoiakim’s reign, on the occasion of some public festival.
The prophet stood at the gate of the temple in order that the multitudes from the
country might hear him. His life was threatened, it appears from Jer_26:1-9, for this
prophecy, denouncing the fate of Shiloh as about to befall the temple at Jerusalem. The
prophecy given in detail here is summarily referred to there. After Josiah’s death the

3. nation relapsed into idolatry through Jehoiakim’s bad influence; the worship of Jehovah
was, however, combined with it (Jer_7:4, Jer_7:10).
K&D, "The vanity of trusting in the temple. - Jer_7:1. "The word that came to
Jeremiah from Jahveh, saying, Jer_7:2. Stand in the gate of the house of Jahveh, and
proclaim there this word, and say, Hear the word of Jahveh, all ye of Judah, that enter
these gates to worship before Jahveh: Jer_7:3. Thus hath spoken Jahveh of hosts, the
God of Israel, Make your ways and your doings good, and I will cause you to dwell in
this place. Jer_7:4. Trust ye not in lying words, when they say, The temple of Jahveh,
the temple of Jahveh, the temple of Jahveh, is this. Jer_7:5. But if ye thoroughly make
your ways good, and your doings; if ye thoroughly execute right amongst one another;
Jer_7:6. Oppress not stranger, fatherless, and widow, and shed not innocent blood in
this place, neither follow after other gods to your hurt; Jer_7:7. Then I cause you to
dwell in this place, in the land which I have given unto your fathers, from eternity unto
eternity. Jer_7:8. Behold, ye trust in lying words, though they profit not. Jer_7:9.
How? to steal, to murder, and commit adultery, and swear falsely, and offer odours to
Baal, and to walk after other gods whom ye know not? Jer_7:10. And then ye come and
stand before my face in this house, upon which my name is named, and think, We are
saved to do all these abominations. Jer_7:11. Is then this house become a den or
murderers, over which my name is named, in your eyes? I too, behold, have seen it,
saith Jahveh. Jer_7:12. For go ye now to may place which was at Shiloh, where I
formerly caused my name to dwell, and see what I have done unto it for the wickedness
of my people Israel. Jer_7:13. And now, because ye do all these deeds, saith Jahve, and
I have spoken to you, speaking from early morning on, and ye have not heard; and I
have called you, and ye have not answered; Jer_7:14. Therefore I do unto this house,
over which my name is named, wherein ye trust, and unto the place which I have given
to you and to your fathers, as I have done unto Shiloh. Jer_7:15. And cast you away
from my face, as I have cast away all your brethren, the whole seed of Ephraim."
COFFMA , "Verse 1
JEREMIAH 7
JEREMIAH'S TEMPLE SERMO
Another title of this chapter would be, "Repentance the Only Hope of Israel." God
commanded Jeremiah to stand in the gate, or entrance, to the Temple and to
denounce the grievous sins and debaucheries of the people, probably upon one of
the great festive occasions when the crowds were thronging to the temple.
How strange it is that the people denounced by this address were the very people of
whom it might be supposed that they were the true worshippers of God. The
symbolism is dramatic. The temple itself was a stronghold of false priests, "a den of
thieves and robbers," even as Christ referred to it at a far later date. The picture is
startling. Jeremiah, the true preacher of God's Word, cannot get into the temple at
all. He must stand in the gate, on the steps, at the entrance!
We shall observe the following chapter divisions. First, there is a statement of the
case against Judah, coupled with a reiteration of the Law of God and a ringing

4. command for the people of God to repent of their apostasy (Jeremiah 7:1-7). Then
there is a further description of the people's apostasy and of their rejection of God's
Word (Jeremiah 7:8-12). This is followed by the announcement of God's judgment
against them (Jeremiah 7:13-15). There follows an attack against the false worship
of the Queen of Heaven (Jeremiah 7:16-20). The prophet denounced their
supposition that sacrifices could be substituted for true obedience to God's Word
(Jeremiah 7:21-28). The chapter concludes with a vehement condemnation of the
sacrifice of children to Molech in the Valley of Hinnom, and other evil practices
(Jeremiah 7:29-34).
Jeremiah 7:1-3
"The word that came to Jeremiah from Jehovah, saying, Stand in the gate of
Jehovah's house, and proclaim there this word, and say, Hear the word of Jehovah,
all ye of Judah that enter in at these gates to worship Jehovah. Thus saith Jehovah
of hosts, the God of Israel, Amend your ways and your doings, and I will cause you
to dwell in this place."
Cook spoke of the date of this appeal as follows:
"This prophecy was spoken in the first year of Jehoiachim, when the probation of
Judah was virtually over, and it constitutes the final solemn appeal to the conscience
of the people, and a protest while the new king was still young upon his throne,
against the ruinous course upon which he so immediately entered."[1]
Why did Judah so desperately need the stern admonition of the prophet here which,
in short, demanded that they immediately and completely change their behavior!
Why? They were a nation of evil doers, violating every commandment in the
Deca1ogue, and yet frequenting the temple services and making the customary
sacrifices, supposing that these external activities would assure their safety and
protection from God, no matter what evil deeds they were guilty of.
There was also a wide-spread opinion among the people that as long as the Temple
stood the whole nation was guaranteed by God Himself of their safety and security.
Ash noted that, "The reforms of Josiah (superficial as they were) had focused
attention on the temple, and had apparently created the illusion that God would
never let it be destroyed."[2] Also as Robinson observed, "The remarkable
deliverance of the city from Sennacherib in 701 B.C. had contributed to the belief
that Jerusalem was inviolable."[3]
The correction of such erroneous opinions on the part of the populace was surely
one of the purposes of Jeremiah's address.
COKE, "Verse 1-2
Jeremiah 7:1-2. The word that came to Jeremiah— We have here a new discourse,
which reaches to the 13th chapter, wherein the prophet declaims against the vices of
Judah and Jerusalem, particularly their hypocrisy and false confidence in their

5. religious principles; delivering also some threats against Edom, Moab, Ammon, and
the people of Arabia: see chap. Jeremiah 9:26. Jeremiah pronounced this discourse
at the east gate of the temple, which led directly to it, before all the people who
entered there. See Calmet.
BE SO , "Jeremiah 7:1. The word of the Lord, &c. — The date of this new
sermon is not precisely marked, but it is probable it was delivered not long after the
preceding one, and on the following occasion. “Besides the prophets who were
commissioned to announce the approaching calamities of Judah and Jerusalem,
there were others who took upon themselves to flatter the people with opposite
predictions. They taught them to look upon such threats as groundless, since God,
they said, would have too much regard to his own honour, to suffer his temple to be
profaned, and the seat of his holiness to be given up into the hand of strangers.
Jeremiah is therefore commanded openly to reprove the falsehood of these
assertions, and to show, by an example in point, that the sanctity of the place would
afford no security to the guilty; but that God would assuredly do by his house at
Jerusalem what he had done unto Shiloh; and cast the people of Judah out of his
sight as he had already cast off the people of Israel for their wickedness.” — Blaney.
ELLICOTT, "(1) This chapter and the three that follow form again another great
prophetic sermon, delivered to the crowds that flocked to the Temple. There is
nothing in the discourse which absolutely fixes its date, but the description of
idolatry, as prevalent, and, possibly, the reference to the presence of the Chaldæan
invader in Jeremiah 8:16; Jeremiah 10:22, fit in rather with the reign of Jehoiakim
than with that of Josiah; and from the special reference to Shiloh in Jeremiah 26:6;
Jeremiah 26:9, as occurring in a prophecy delivered at the beginning of that reign, it
was probably this discourse, or one like it, and delivered about the same time, that
drew down that king’s displeasure (see Jeremiah 7:14).
PETT, "Verses 1-15
Judah Must ot Trust In The Presence Of The Temple For Security Because As A
Result Of Their Evil Ways YHWH Intends To Do To The Temple What He Did To
His House At Shiloh, Destroy It (Jeremiah 7:1-15).
As a result of the amazing deliverance of Jerusalem with its Temple from the
Assyrians in the time of Hezekiah, and what had in contrast happened to
neighbouring temples, the myth had grown up that the security of Jerusalem was
guaranteed by the presence of the Temple among them. Their view had become that
YHWH would not allow His Temple to be destroyed so that the Temple was
inviolable. In consequence they had gained the false confidence that they too would
be secure in Jerusalem, whatever their behaviour. In this passage therefore YHWH
calls on Jeremiah to dispel that myth and make clear to all Judah that such
dependence was totally false. Indeed the truth was that unless they repented He
intended to do to the Temple precisely what He had done to His previous house at
Shiloh (something that they had overlooked), allow it to be utterly destroyed.
On the basis of Jeremiah 26:1 it is accepted by many that these words were spoken

6. at the commencement of the reign of Jehoiakim in around 609 BC. They argue that
the similarities are too striking to be ignored. Others, however, disagree and argue
that the similarities are not such as to demand that the incidents are the same and
that Jeremiah might well have given the substance of this message a number of
times, even in the time of Josiah. It is then especially pointed out that here there is
no indication of a violent response by the priests, something which is very
prominent in chapter 26. That is seen as indicating the restraining hand of Josiah.
Furthermore, they say, here the message was given in the gate of YHWH’s house,
while in chapter 26 it was in the court of YHWH’s house
Jeremiah 7:1
‘The word that came to Jeremiah from YHWH, saying,’
For the idea behind these words see Jeremiah 1:4, (the word of YHWH came to me
saying’); Jeremiah 2:4, (hear you the word of YHWH --); Jeremiah 3:6, (moreover
YHWH said to me in the days of Josiah the king’). It was introductory to a new
series of prophecies. And it stressed that what Jeremiah was proclaiming was the
true word of YHWH.
BI 1-7, "Stand in the gate . . . and proclaim.
Boldness in preaching
Some preachers are traders from port to port, following the customary and approved
course; others adventure over the whole ocean of human concerns. The former are
hailed by the common voice of the multitude, whose cause they hold, the latter blamed
as idle, often suspected of hiding deep designs, always derided as having lost all guess of
the proper course. Yet, of the latter class of preachers was Paul the apostle. Such
adventurers, under God, this age of the world seems to us especially to want. There are
ministers now to hold the flock in pasture and in safety, but where are they to make
inroads upon the alien, to bring in the votaries of fashion, of literature, of sentiment, of
policy, and of rank? Truly, it is not stagers who take on the customary form of their office
and go the beaten round of duty, and then lie down content; but it is daring adventurers,
who shall eye from the grand eminence of a holy and heavenly mind all the grievances
which religion underlies, and all the obstacles which stay her course, and then descend
with the self-denial and faith of an apostle to set the battle in array against them.
(Edward Irving.)
Enter in at these gates to worship the Lord.—
The character required in those the would worship God
The heathen had a notion that the gods would not like the service and sacrifice of any
but such as were like themselves, and therefore to the sacrifice of Hercules none were to
be admitted that were dwarfs; and to the sacrifice of Bacchus, a merry god, none that
were sad and pensive, as not suiting their genius. An excellent truth may be drawn from
their folly: he that would like to please God must be like God. (H. G. Salter.)

7. Amend your ways and your doings.—
Religion, the best security to Church and State
I. Religion, and the general practice of it in a nation, is the surest establishment of states
and kingdoms.
1. This is true in a natural way; because the duties of religion have a natural tendency
to those things which are the foundations of that establishment, namely, peace,
unity, and order.
2. But besides a natural tendency in virtue and goodness to the establishment of
states and kingdoms, as many as believe religion must likewise believe that the
general practice of it in a nation will be always attended with a supernatural blessing
from God. For this is the result of all the declarations of God, as to the manner and
rule of His dealings with mankind, whether persons or nations, that as many as
faithfully serve and obey Him, shall be assuredly intituled to His favour and
protection.
II. In every nation it is the proper business of the civil magistrates, as such, to vindicate
and maintain the honour of religion. And when I am speaking of authority, and the
vigorous application thereof by the magistrate, I cannot omit one thing, which is a
mighty enforcement of it, a good example; which, in its nature, is the most forcible way
of teaching and correcting, and without which, neither the instructions of ministers, nor
the authority of magistrates, can avail, to the effectual discouragement and suppression
of vice.
III. Without a serious regard to the moral and spiritual duties of religion, the greatest
zeal in other matters, even though it be for the established worship of God, will not
secure the Divine favour and protection, either to persons or nations. The external rites
of religion are good helps to devotion, and proper means of maintaining order and
decency in the public worship; and a zeal to preserve them, with a serious regard to
those pious and wise ends, is very laudable: but to believe that zeal for them will atone
for a neglect of the moral and spiritual duties of religion is a dangerous error. (E. Gibson,
D. D.)
The temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, are
these.
The folly of trusting in external privileges
I. We are to show the extreme folly of trusting to any religious privileges, while our
hearts remain unrenewed and our lives unholy. On what ground can we rely on the
continuance of God’s favour under such circumstances? Should we, because a friend had
conferred many benefits upon us, and forgiven us many offences, be justified in
supposing that there would be no limit to his endurance? Yet the Jews—and their case is
not singular—seemed to claim a special right to the continued favour of God, in virtue of
their religious privileges; not considering that those privileges were a free gift; that they
might at any time be withdrawn, without a shadow of injustice; and that while they
lasted they were intended to operate, not as inducements to presumption, but as motives
to love and thankfulness and obedience. They had in themselves no spiritual efficacy.
Neither the character of God, nor His promises, held out any ground of hope on which to
build such a conclusion. It would not have been consistent with His holiness, or wisdom,
or justice, that the sinner should escape under the plea of any national or personal

8. privileges, however great. And His promises, both temporal and spiritual, were all made
in accordance with the same principle. “If ye walk in My statutes, and keep My
commandments and do them . . . then I will walk among you, and I will be your God;. .
.but if ye will not hearken unto Me, and will not do all these commandments,. . .I will set
My face against you.” The whole tenor of God’s providential dispensations is likewise to
the same effect. And accordingly, the Jews, great as were their national mercies, found
on numerous occasions that they were not exempt from the just displeasure of their
Divine Governor. Yet, with all these proofs of God’s righteous judgments, their constant
cry was, “The temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord”: they caught hold, as it were, of
the horns of the altar with unhallowed hands; and, notwithstanding the threatenings of
the Almighty, were ever prone to trust in those external privileges. At the very time when
they were committing the grievous enormities of which the prophet Jeremiah convicts
them, they were zealous for the outward worship of God, and boasted highly of their
religious profession. But could any folly be greater than that of supposing that this
insincere worship could satisfy Him who searcheth the heart and trieth the reins? The
prophet forcibly points out the extreme folly and delusiveness of such expectations:
“Go,” he says, “unto My place which was in Shiloh, where I set My name at the first; and
see what I did to it for the wickedness of My people Israel. And now, because ye have
done all these works, saith the Lord, and I spake unto you, rising up early and speaking,
but ye heard not; and I called unto you, but ye answered not; therefore will I do unto this
house, which is called by My name, wherein ye trust, and unto the place which I gave to
you and to your fathers, as I have done to Shiloh.” Having thus considered the extreme
folly of trusting to external privileges, while the heart is unrenewed and the life unholy,
we are—
II. To show that this folly is too common in all ages; and that we ourselves, perhaps, are
guilty of it. How many pride themselves in being zealous Protestants, or strict members
of the Established Church, or regular attendants on public worship, while they live in the
spirit of the world, and without any scriptural evidence of being in a state of favour with
God! How many trust to the supposed orthodoxy of their faith; or to their zeal against
infidelity, enthusiasm; while they are ignorant of the scriptural way of salvation, and
indifferent to the great concern of making their calling and election sure! How many
cherish a secret hope from the prayers of religious parents, the zeal and piety of their
ministers. In short, innumerable are the ways in which persons deceive themselves on
these subjects; fancying that the temple of the Lord is among them; and on this vain
surmise remaining content and careless in their sins, and ignorant of all true religion.
Now let us ask ourselves, in conclusion, whether such is our own case. On what are we
placing our hopes for eternity? Are we resting upon anything superficial or external;
upon anything short of genuine conversion of heart to God? True piety is not anything
that can be done for us; it must be engrafted in us; it must dwell in our hearts, and show
its blessed effects in our conduct. (Christian Observer.)
2 “Stand at the gate of the Lord’s house and there
proclaim this message:

9. “‘Hear the word of the Lord, all you people of
Judah who come through these gates to worship
the Lord.
BAR ES, "In Jer. 7–10 he addresses the people as they flocked into Jerusalem from
the country, to attend the solemn services in the temple upon a fastday. Jehoiakim Jer.
26 had just ascended the throne, and was so incensed at this sermon that he would have
put Jeremiah to death but for the influence of Ahikam. With the accession of Jehoiakim
all hope of averting the ruin of the country had passed away. He represented the reverse
of his father’s policy, and belonged to that faction, who placed their sole hope of
deliverance in a close alliance with Pharaoh-Necho. As this party rejected the distinctive
principles of the theocracy, and the king was personally an irreligious man, the
maintenance of the worship of Yahweh was no longer an object of the public care. At this
time upon a public fast-day, appointed probably because of the calamities under which
the nation was laboring, Jeremiah was commanded by Yahweh to stand at the gate of the
temple, and address to the people as they entered words of solemn warning. The whole
sermon divides itself into three parts;
In Jer. 7–10 he addresses the people as they flocked into Jerusalem from the country,
to attend the solemn services in the temple upon a fastday. Jehoiakim Jer. 26 had just
ascended the throne, and was so incensed at this sermon that he would have put
Jeremiah to death but for the influence of Ahikam. With the accession of Jehoiakim all
hope of averting the ruin of the country had passed away. He represented the reverse of
his father’s policy, and belonged to that faction, who placed their sole hope of
deliverance in a close alliance with Pharaoh-Necho. As this party rejected the distinctive
principles of the theocracy, and the king was personally an irreligious man, the
maintenance of the worship of Yahweh was no longer an object of the public care. At this
time upon a public fast-day, appointed probably because of the calamities under which
the nation was laboring, Jeremiah was commanded by Yahweh to stand at the gate of the
temple, and address to the people as they entered words of solemn warning. The whole
sermon divides itself into three parts;
(1) It points out the folly of the superstitious confidence placed by the people in the
temple, while they neglect the sole sure foundation of a nation’s hope. A sanctuary long
polluted by immorality must inevitably be destroyed Jer. 7:2–8:3.
(2) complaints follow of a more general character, in which the growing wickedness of
the nation and especially of the leaders is pointed out Jer. 8:4–9:24.
(3) lastly the prophet shows the possibility of averting the evils impending upon the
nation Jer. 9:25–10:25.
Jer_10:1-2. The temple had several entrances 2Ch_4:9; and the gate or door here
mentioned is probably that of the inner court, where Baruch read Jeremiah’s scroll Jer_
36:10. The prophet stood in the doorway, and addressed the people assembled in the
outer court.

10. All ye of Judah - Better, literally all Judah (compare Jer_26:2).
CLARKE, "Stand in the gate of the Lord’s house - There was a show of public
worship kept up. The temple was considered God’s residence; the usual ceremonies of
religion restored by Josiah were still observed; and the people were led to consider the
temple and its services as sacred things, which would be preservatives to them in case of
the threatened invasion.
GILL, "Stand in the gate of the Lord's house,.... That is, of the temple, and the
court of it. This gate, as Kimchi says, was the eastern gate, which was the principal gate
of all; see Jer_26:2,
and proclaim there this word, and say; with a loud voice, as follows:
hear ye the word of the Lord, all ye of Judah; the inhabitants of the several parts
of Judea, which came to the temple to worship; very probably it was a feast day, as
Calvin conjectures; either the passover, or pentecost, or feast of tabernacles, when all the
males in Israel appeared in court:
that enter in at these gates to worship the Lord; there were seven gates belonging
to the court, three on the north, three on the south, and one in the east, the chief of all,
as Kimchi, Abarbinel, and Ben Melech observe; and this agrees with the account in the
Misna (k). The names of them were these; on the south side were these three, the
watergate, the gate of the firstlings; or the gate of offering, and the gate of kindling; on
the north were these three, the gate Nitzotz, called also the gate of the song, the gate
Korban, sometimes called the gate of women, and Beth Moked; and the gate in the east
was the gate Nicanor, and this gate was the most frequented; and therefore Jeremiah
was ordered to stand here, and deliver his message.
JAMISO , "the gate — that is, the gate of the court of Israel within that of the
women. Those whom Jeremiah addresses came through the gate leading into the court
of the women, and the gate leading into the outer court, or court of the Gentiles (“these
gates”).
K&D, "Jer_7:2
The gate of the temple into which the prophet was to go and stand, is doubtless one of
the three gates of the inner or upper court, in which he could stand and address the
people gathered before him, in the outer court; perhaps the same in which Baruch read
Jeremiah's prophecies to the people, Jer_36:10 (Schmid, Hitz.). The gates through
which the people entered to worship are those of the outer court. The form of address:
All Judah, ye who enter, etc., warrant us in assuming that Jeremiah delivered this
discourse at one of the great annual festivals, when the people were wont to gather to
Jerusalem from the length and breadth of the land.

11. CALVI , "Here the Prophet gives a short account of the sermon, in which he
severely reproved the people, because his labor had been useless, though he had
sharply and severely reproved them. He says then, that he had a command from
above to stand at the gate of the Temple. This was indeed usually done by the
prophets: but God seems to have intended that this reproof should be heard by all.
He says further, that he was commanded to address the whole tribe of Judeah
It is hence probable, and what may be easily concluded, that this discourse was
delivered on a feast — day, when there was the usual assembly of the people. He
could not indeed have made this address on other days; for then the inhabitants of
the city only frequented the Temple. But on the feast — days they usually came
from the neighboring towns and from the whole country to celebrate God’s rightful
worship, which had been prescribed in the law. Since then Jeremiah addressed the
whole tribe of Judah, we hence conclude, that he spoke not only to the inhabitants of
the city, but also to the whole tribe, which came together to keep the feast — day.
ow the object of his sermon was, to exhort them seriously to repent, if they wished
God to be reconciled to them. So the Prophet shews, that God did not regard their
sacrifices and external rites, and that this was not the way, as they thought, of
appeasing him. For after they had celebrated the feast, every one returned home, as
though they all, after having made an expiation, had God propitious to them. The
Prophet shews here, that the way of worshipping God was very different, which was
to reform their lives.
COKE, "Jeremiah 7:4. The temple of the Lord are these— These gates, in which
Jeremiah was commanded to stand: so in the Gospel our Savour says, See you all
these things? pointing to the temple, of which one stone was not to be left upon
another. The threefold repetition of the temple of the Lord, expresses great
vehemence, and an extreme presumption in these people. The prophet in
apostrophizing Judaea, chap. Jeremiah 22:29 makes use of a like threefold
repetition.
TRAPP, "Jeremiah 7:2 Stand in the gate of the LORD’S house, and proclaim there
this word, and say, Hear the word of the LORD, all [ye of] Judah, that enter in at
these gates to worship the LORD.
Ver. 2. Stand in the gate of the Lord’s house.] The east gate, which was the most
famous and most frequented of the people, and therefore fittest for the purpose.
And proclaim there this word.] Stand there with this word (as once the angel with a
terrible sword did at the porch of paradise) to excommunicate, as it were, this
hypocritical people; and do it verbis non tantum disertis sed et exertis, plainly and
boldly.
BE SO , "Jeremiah 7:2. Stand in the gates of the Lord’s house — amely, the east
gate of the temple, which led directly to it, where he delivered this discourse, before

12. all the people who entered there. And proclaim there this word — Proclaiming
signifies both the authority by which he spake, and the divulging of what he spake
plainly and boldly. And as it was in so public a place, namely, at the entrance of the
court of the people, not of that of the priests, that he uttered this prophecy, so
possibly it might be at one of the three feasts, when all the males from all parts of
the country were to appear before the Lord in the courts of his house. In that case
he would have many collected together to preach to, and that was the most
seasonable time to admonish them not to trust in their privileges.
ELLICOTT, "(2) The gate of the Lord’s house.—As a priest, Jeremiah would have
access to all parts of the Temple. On some day when the courts were thronged with
worshippers (Jeremiah 7:10), probably a fast-day specially appointed, he stands at
the inner gate of one of the courts, possibly, as in Jeremiah 17:19, that by which the
king entered in ceremonial state, and looking about on the multitudes that thronged
it, speaks to them “the word of the Lord,” the message which he had been specially
commissioned to deliver.
PETT, "Jeremiah 7:2
“Stand in the gate of YHWH’s house, and proclaim there this word, and say, ‘Hear
the word of YHWH, all you of Judah, who enter in at these gates to worship
YHWH.’ ”
Jeremiah was called on to stand in the gate of YHWH’s house. This was probably
the gate that led into the inner court, (the court that would later become the court of
the priests), and it may well have been seen as a place for the making of
proclamations. He was probably looking outwards from the raised gateway towards
the crowds gathered in the outer court, presumably during one of the main feasts of
Israel.
PULPIT, "Stand in the gate; i.e. not an outer gate (for the outer court would be
filled with the people whom Jeremiah was to address), but one of the three gates
which led from the inner court to the outer. Probably it was the gate where Baruch
recited the prophecies of Jeremiah at a later period, and which is designated "the
new gate of the Lord's house," and said to have been situated in the "upper" i.e.
inner court (Jeremiah 36:10; comp. Jeremiah 26:10). We may conjecture that either
one of the three great festivals or some extraordinary fast had brought a large
number of people together at the temple.
3 This is what the Lord Almighty, the God of
Israel, says: Reform your ways and your actions,

13. and I will let you live in this place.
BAR ES, "If the people repented, instead of being led into captivity, God would
maintain their national existence. It is a promise of the continuance of an old blessing.
GILL, "Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel,.... The Lord of armies
above and below in general, and the God of Israel in particular; wherefore they ought to
hearken to what he was about to say, and to be obedient to him:
amend your ways and your doings; or, "make them good" (l); which shows that
they were bad, and were not agreeable to the law and will of God, to which they ought to
have been conformed; and the way to amend them was to act according to the rule of the
divine word they were favoured with:
and I will cause you to dwell in this place; to continue to dwell in Jerusalem, and
in Judea, the land of their nativity, and in the temple, the house of God, and place of
religious worship; but, if not, it is suggested that they should not continue here, but be
carried captive into a strange land.
HE RY 3-7, "The contents and scope of the sermon itself. It is delivered in the name
of the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, who commands the world, but covenants with his
people. As creatures we are bound to regard the Lord of hosts, as Christians the God of
Israel; what he said to them he says to us, and it is much the same with that which John
Baptist said to those whom he baptized (Mat_3:8, Mat_3:9), Bring forth fruits meet for
repentance; and think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father.
The prophet here tells them,
1. What were the true words of God, which they might trust to. In short, they might
depend upon it that if they would repent and reform their lives, and return to God in a
way of duty, he would restore and confirm their peace, would redress their grievances,
and return to them in a way of mercy (Jer_7:3): Amend your ways and your doings.
This implies that there had been much amiss in their ways and doings, many faults and
errors. But it is a great instance of the favour of God to them that he gives them liberty to
amend, shows them where and how they must amend, and promises to accept them
upon their amendment: “I will cause you to dwell quietly and peaceably in this place,
and a stop shall be put to that which threatens your expulsion.” Reformation is the only
way, and a sure way to ruin. He explains himself (Jer_7:5-7), and tells them particularly,
(1.) What the amendment was which he expected from them. They must thoroughly
amend; in making good, they must make good their ways and doings; they must
reform with resolution, and it must be a universal, constant, preserving reformation -
not partial, but entire - not hypocritical, but sincere - not wavering, but constant. They
must make the tree good, and so make the fruit good, must amend their hearts and
thoughts, and so amend their ways and doings. In particular, [1.] They must be honest
and just in all their dealings. Those that had power in their hands must thoroughly

14. execute judgment between a man and his neighbour, without partiality, and according
as the merits of the cause appeared. They must not either in judgment or in contract
oppress the stranger, the fatherless, or the widow, nor countenance or protect those
that did oppress, nor refuse to do them justice when they sought for it. They must not
shed innocent blood, and with it defile this place and the land wherein they dwelt. [2.]
They must keep closely to the worship of the true God only: “Neither walk after other
gods; do not hanker after them, nor hearken to those that would draw you into
communion with idolaters; for it is, and will be, to your own hurt. Be not only so just to
your God, but so wise for yourselves, as not to throw away your adorations upon those
who are not able to help you, and thereby provoke him who is able to destroy you.” Well,
this is all that God insists upon.
JAMISO , "cause you to dwell — permit you still to dwell (Jer_18:11; Jer_26:13).
K&D, "Jer_7:3-4
Jer_7:3 contains the central idea of the discourse: it is only morally good endeavours
and deeds that give the people a sure title to a long lease of the land. ‫יב‬ ִ‫יט‬ ֵ‫ה‬ is not merely,
amend one's conduct; but, make one's way good, i.e., lead a good life. The "ways" mean
the tendency of life at large, the "doings" are the individual manifestations of that
tendency; cf. Jer_18:11; Jer_26:13. "In this place," i.e., in the land that I have given to
your fathers; cf. Jer_7:8 and Jer_14:13 with Jer_7:15, Jer_24:5-6. Positive exhortation
to a pure life is followed by negative dehortation from putting trust in the illusion: The
temple, etc. The threefold repetition of the same word is the most marked way of laying
very great emphasis upon it; cf. Jer_22:29, Isa_6:3. "These," these halls, the whole
complex mass of buildings (Hitz.), as in 2Ch_8:11; and here ‫ה‬ ָ ֵ‫ה‬ has the force of the
neuter; cf. Ew. §318, b. The meaning of this emphatic way of mentioning the temple of
the Lord is, in this connection, the following: Jerusalem cannot be destroyed by enemies,
because the Lord has consecrated for the abode of His name that temple which is in
Jerusalem; for the Lord will not give His sanctuary, the seat of His throne, to be a prey to
the heathen, but will defend it, and under its protection we too may dwell safely. In the
temple of the Lord we have a sure pledge for unbroken possession of the land and the
maintenance of the kingdom. Cf. the like discourse in Mic_3:11, "Jahveh is in our midst,
upon us none evil can come." This passage likewise shows that the "lying words" quoted
are the sayings of the false prophets, whereby they confirmed the people in their secure
sinfulness; the mass of the people at the same time so making these sayings their own as
to lull themselves into the sense of security.
CALVI , "Make good, he says, your ways and your doings, then will I dwell in this
place (189) This promise contains an implied contrast; for the Prophet intimates,
that the people would not long survive, unless they sought in another way to pacify
God. “I will dwell, “he seems to say, — in this place, when your life is changed.” It
then follows on the other hand, “God will drive you into exile, except you change
your life: in vain then do you seek a quiet and happy state through offering your
sacrifices. God indeed esteems as nothing this external worship, except it be
preceded by inward sincerity, unless integrity of life accompanies your profession.”
This is one thing.

15. TRAPP, "Jeremiah 7:3 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, Amend
your ways and your doings, and I will cause you to dwell in this place.
Ver. 3. Amend your ways and your doings.] Heb., Make good your ways, sc., by
repentance for and from your sins, and by believing the Gospel. Defaecantur enim
mores, ubi medullitus excipitur evangelium. Amendment of life is an upright,
earnest, and constant endeavour to do all that God commandeth, and to forbear
what he forbiddeth.
BE SO , "Jeremiah 7:3. Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel — As
creatures, we are all bound to regard the Lord of hosts; as members of the visible
church, the God of Israel; what he said to them he says to us; and it is much the
same with that which John the Baptist said to those whom he baptized, Matthew
3:8-9. Bring forth fruits meet for repentance, and think not to say, within
yourselves, We have Abraham for our father. Amend your ways and your doings —
This implies that there had been much amiss in their ways and doings, but it was a
great instance of the goodness of God to them, that he gave them liberty to amend,
showed them wherein and how they must amend, and promised to accept them upon
their amendment. And I will cause you to dwell in this place — amely, quietly and
peaceably. You shall not go into captivity, but a stop shall be put to that which
threatens your expulsion. Observe, reader, reformation is the only way, and a sure
way to prevent ruin.
PETT, "Jeremiah 7:3
“Thus says YHWH of hosts, the God of Israel, ‘Amend your ways and your doings,
and I will cause you to dwell in this place.’ ”
His words commenced with a call from YHWH of hosts, as ‘the God of Israel’,
addressed to what remained of ‘Israel’, requiring them to amend their ways,
accompanied by an assurance that if they did so He would enable them to continue
dwelling in the land, and in Jerusalem. So even at this point there was hope for them
if they truly repented.
‘In this place.’ That is, in this land, compare Jeremiah 7:7; Jeremiah 7:20.
Alternately in context it might indicate the Temple, repointing the text to read, ‘I
will dwell with you in this place’. For this place’ compare the stress in Deuteronomy
12 on ‘the place which YHWH your God will choose’.
4 Do not trust in deceptive words and say, “This is
the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, the

16. temple of the Lord!”
BAR ES, "The temple of the Lord - Thrice repeated, to emphasize the rejection
of the cry ever upon the lips of the false prophets. In their view the maintenance of the
temple-service was a charm sufficient to avert all evil.
These - The buildings of the temple, to which Jeremiah is supposed to point. The
Jews put their trust in the material buildings.
CLARKE, "The temple of the Lord - In the Chaldee the passage stands thus: -
“Do not trust in the words of lying prophets, which say, Before the temple of the Lord ye
shall worship; Before the temple of the Lord ye shall sacrifice; Before the temple of the
Lord ye shall adore; thrice in the year ye shall appear before it.” This the Targumist
supposes to have been the reason why the words are here thrice repeated. They rather
seem to express the conviction which the people had, that they should be safe while their
temple service continued; for they supposed that God would not give it up into profane
hands. But sacred places and sacred symbols are nothing in the sight of God when the
heart is not right with him.
GILL, "Trust ye not in lying words,.... In the words of the lying prophets, as the
Targum; and to the same purpose is the Arabic version,
"do not trust in lying words, for the false prophets do not profit you in anything;''
the things in which they trusted, and in which the false prophets taught them to place
their confidence, were their coming up to the temple at certain times for religious
exercises, and their attendance on temple service and worship, offering of sacrifices, and
the like. The Septuagint version is, "trust not in yourselves, in lying words"; see Luk_
18:9, in their external actions of devotion, in their ritual performances, taking them for
righteousness; and adds, what is not in the Hebrew text, "for they altogether profit you
not"; in the business of justification before God, and acceptance with him:
saying, the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, the temple of the
Lord, are these; that is, the people that hypocritically worshipped there, as the false
prophets told them; and so the Syriac version, "ye are the temple of the Lord"; though
that begins the next verse, with the last clause of this,
if ye amend your ways, &c. see 1Co_3:16 or rather the temple of the Lord are those
gates through which they entered, Jer_7:2 or those buildings which were pointed at with
the finger; or ‫,המה‬ "these", is a clause by itself; and the sense is, these are the lying words
that should not be trusted in, namely, the temple and temple services; when all manner

17. of sin and wickedness were committed by them, which they thought to atone for by
coming to the temple and worshipping there. The mention of these words three times is,
as Jarchi thinks, in reference to the Jews appearing in the temple three times a year, at
the feast of passover, pentecost, and tabernacles; and so the Targum,
"who say (i.e. the false prophets), before the temple of the Lord ye worship; before the
temple of the Lord ye sacrifice; before the temple of the Lord ye bow; three times in a
year ye appear before him.''
Kimchi's father, R. Joseph, is of opinion, that it refers to the three parts of the temple,
the porch, the holy place, and the holy of holies; but Kimchi himself takes it that these
words are trebled for the greater confirmation of them; and they may denote the
vehemence and ardour of affection for the temple.
JAMISO , "The Jews falsely thought that because their temple had been chosen by
Jehovah as His peculiar dwelling, it could never be destroyed. Men think that ceremonial
observances will supersede the need of holiness (Isa_48:2; Mic_3:11). The triple
repetition of “the temple of Jehovah” expresses the intense confidence of the Jews (see
Jer_22:29; Isa_6:3).
these — the temple buildings which the prophet points to with his finger (Jer_7:2).
CALVI , "Then the Prophet comes closer to them when he says, Trust ye not in
words of falsehood. For had not this been expressly said, the Jews might, according
to their usual way, have found out some evasion: “Have we then lost all our labor in
celebrating our festivals with so much diligence, in leaving our homes and families
to present ourselves before God? We have spared no expense, we have brought
sacrifices and spent our money; and is all this of no value before God?” For
hypocrites always magnify their trumperies, as we find in the fifty-eighth chapter of
Isaiah, where they expostulated with God, as though he were unkind to them, “We
have from day to day sought the Lord.” To this the Lord answered, “In vain ye seek
me from day to day and search for my ways.” Hence the Lord disregarded that
diligence with which hypocrites sought to render him propitious without real
sincerity of heart. It is for the same purpose that the Prophet now adds, Trust ye
not, etc. It is an anticipation in order to prevent them from making their usual
objection, “What then? Has the Temple been built in vain?” But he says, “Is not
God worshipped here in vain? They are words of falsehood, when religious sincerity
is absent.”
We hence see that external rites are here repudiated, when men seek in a false way
to gain favor before God, and seek to redeem their sins by false compensations,
while yet their hearts continue perverse. This truth might be enlarged upon, but as
it often occurs in the prophets, I only notice it shortly. It is enough to regard the
main point, — that while the Jews were satisfied with the Temple, the ceremonies
and the sacrifices, they were self — deceivers, for their boasting was fallacious: “the
words of falsehood” are to be taken as meaning that false and vain glorying in
which the Jews indulged, while they sought to ward off God’s vengeance by external
rites, and at the same time made no effort to return into favor by ameliorating their
life.

18. With regard to the expressions The Temple, etc. , some explain them thus, — they
were “words of falsehood, “when they said that they came to the Temple; and so the
supplement is, “when they said that they came, “for the pronoun demonstrative is
plural. (190) Hence they understand this of the people; not that the Jews called
themselves the Temple of God, but that they boasted that they came to the Temple
and there worshipped God. But I rather agree with others, who explain this of the
three parts of the Temple. There was, we know, the court, then the Temple, and,
lastly, the interior part, the Holy of holies, where was the Ark of the Covenant. The
prophets often speak of the Temple only; but when they spoke distinctly of the form
of the Temple, they mentioned the court, as I have said, where the people usually
offered their sacrifices, and then the holy place, into which the priests entered alone;
and, lastly, the secret place, which was more hidden, and was called the Holy of
holies. It seems then that this passage of the Prophet is to be understood as meaning
that the people said that the court, the Temple, and the interior part, were the
Temples of God, as though they had a triple Temple.
But we must observe the design of the Prophet, which interpreters have omitted.
The Prophet then made this repetition especially, because the Temple was as it were
a triple defense to hypocrites, like a city, which, when surrounded, not by one, but
by three walls, is deemed impregnable. Since, then, the Jews exalted their Temple,
consisting of three parts, it was the same as they set up a triple wall or a triple
rampart against God’s judgments! “We are invincible; how can enemies come to us?
how can any calamity reach us? God dwells in the midst of us, and here he has his
habitation, and not one and single fort, but a triple fort; he has his court, his
Temple, and his Holy of holies.” We now then understand why the Prophet made
this repetition, and used also the plural number.
Trust ye not in those who speak falsehood, saying, —
The Temple of Jehovah, the Temple of Jehovah, The Temple of Jehovah, are these.
The Septuagint, the Syriac, and the Arabic, have “the Temple of the Lord” only
twice, and the verb is in the singular number, “The Temple of the Lord, the Temple
of the Lord it is.” The verb is the same in the Vulgate, only the words, as in Hebrew,
and also in the Targum, are repeated thrice. The paraphrase of the latter is rather
singular, — “Trust not in the words of the prophets of falsehood, who say, Before
the Temple of the Lord ye worship, before the Temple of the Lord ye sacrifice,
before the Temple of the Lord ye offer praise; three times a year ye appear before
him.”
“These” mean, as Gataker thinks, these places or buildings; and Lowth and Blayney
think the same. The repetition seems to denote the frequency with which the Jews
used the words: they continually boasted of having God’s Temple among them.
“The Prophet,“ says Henry, “repeats it, because they repeated it upon all occasions.
It was the cant of the times. If they heard an awakening sermon, they lulled
themselves asleep again with this, ‘We cannot but do well, for we have the Temple of
the Lord among us.’ It is common for those that are farthest from God to boast

19. themselves most of their being near to the Church.” — Ed.
COFFMA , "Verse 4
"Trust ye not in lying words, saying, The temple of Jehovah, the temple of Jehovah,
the temple of Jehovah, are these. For if ye thoroughly amend your ways and your
doings; if ye thoroughly execute justice between a man and his neighbor; if ye
oppress not the sojourner, the fatherless, and the widow, and shed not innocent
blood, neither walk after other gods to your own hurt: then will I cause you to dwell
in this place, in the land that I gave to your fathers, from of old, even forevermore."
ote the triple repetition of "The temple of Jehovah." It appears that the people
were using these words as a kind of charm or talisman to protect and bless them
even in the pursuit of their wicked ways. As Matthew Henry stated it, "It was the
cant of the times; it was in their mouths upon all occasions. If they received bad
news, they lulled themselves to sleep again, saying, `We cannot but do well, we have
the temple of the Lord among us.'"[4]
Jeremiah's breaking in upon that crowd of arrogant, overconfident, hypocrites with
the stinging words of Jehovah, commanding them either to repent or perish must
have been resented like a plague of smallpox. "Is it any wonder that this `temple
sermon' caused a terrific uproar and almost cost Jeremiah his life (Jeremiah
26:7ff)?" [5]
"Shed not innocent blood in this place ..." (Jeremiah 7:6). Cook and other scholars
believe that the reference here is to, "The innocent blood shed there judicially. Of
one such judicial murder, Jehoiachim had already been guilty (Jeremiah 26:23)."[6]
There were probably many other such crimes.
The particular sins mentioned here, which God through Jeremiah commanded the
Jews to cease from committing, were merely a representative list; and the list will be
greatly expanded in later verses. All of these sins of lustful selfishness were the
result of Judah's having first rejected their primary obligation to Jehovah as spelled
out in the Mosaic covenant at Sinai. "All of their sins were the consequence of their
breach of the covenant and their rejection of God's sovereignty."[7] We consider
this statement from Thompson as a profoundly accurate declaration. Many people
seem to be unaware that once man's primary obligation to Almighty God is either
neglected or forsaken, all of the other sins may be expected to follow immediately.
They are merely the consequences of man's violation of that higher obligation to his
Creator.
"The land that I gave to your fathers forever and ever ..." (Jeremiah 7:7). "This is
the very strongest formula in the Hebrew tongue for a perpetual gift, meaning,
`from forever unto forever.' Why then do not the Jews still possess the land
eternally given to them? Because God never bestows anything unconditionally."[8]
The Jews received the land of Canaan under the terms of a covenant, itself called a

20. covenant of eternity (Genesis 17:7); but that covenant had conditions which the
Jews were obligated to observe, as spelled out in the closing chapters of
Deuteronomy, with the divine warning that if they rebelled against the covenant
God would indeed "pluck them off the land" (Deuteronomy 28:63). In this
connection, be sure to read Jeremiah 18:5-10.
TRAPP, "Jeremiah 7:4 Trust ye not in lying words, saying, The temple of the
LORD, The temple of the LORD, The temple of the LORD, [are] these.
Ver. 4. Trust ye not in lying words.] Or, Matters, sc., that will deceive you. The ships
Triumph or Good Speed may be ventorum ludibrium, mocked by the wind and
miscarry upon the hard rocks or soft sands; so fair shows and bare titles help not.
Vatinius, that wicked Roman, professed himself a Pythagorean: (a) and vicious
Antipater wore a white cloak, the ensign of innocence. This was virtutis stragulum
pudefacere, said Diogenes wittily, to put honesty to an open shame.
The temple of the Lord, the temple - are these,] i.e., These buildings, or these three
parts of the temple, viz., the most holy place, the sanctuary, and the outer court. To
these are made the promises of God’s perpetual residence; [Psalms 132:14] therefore
we are safe from all danger while here we take sanctuary. See Micah 3:11. The
Romish crew, in like manner, have nothing in their mouths so much as the Church,
the Church, the Catholic Church; (b) and therein, like oyster wives, they outcry us.
Many also among ourselves cry, "The temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord,"
who do yet nothing care for the Lord of the temple. They glory in external
privileges, and secure themselves therein, as the Jews fable that Og, King of Bashan,
escaped in the flood by riding astride upon the ark without. But what profiteth it
“ Respicere ad phaleras, et nomina vana Catonum? ”
Esse Christianum grande est, non videri, saith Jerome. It is a great privilege to be a
Christian, but not to seem only to be so; an empty title yieldeth but an empty
comfort at last.
BE SO , "Jeremiah 7:4. Trust ye not in lying words — Do not flatter yourselves
with an opinion that you can be safe and happy on any other terms than those which
God points out. Saying, The temple of the Lord, &c., are these — As much as to say,
God hath placed his name here, Jeremiah 7:10, and chose these stately buildings as
the place of his peculiar residence, and what reason is there to believe that he will
ever forsake it, and give it up to be destroyed by strangers and idolaters? Thus,
Jeremiah 18:18, they express their confidence that the law would not perish from
the priests, nor counsel from the wise, nor the word from the prophet. And Micah
3:11, they are said to lean on the Lord, saying, Is not the Lord among us? o evil
can come upon us. These were the lying words on which they trusted, and against
trusting in which the prophet here solemnly cautions them. The Targum intimates
that the reason of the three-fold repetition of the words, The temple of the Lord,
was, because every Jew was obliged to visit the temple thrice a year. But it seems

21. more likely that they are thus repeated, to express the confident and reiterated
boasts of the temple, which were in the people’s mouths, and their extreme
vehemence and unreasonable presumption.
ELLICOTT, "(4) Trust ye not in lying words . . .—The emphatic threefold
repetition of the words thus condemned, “The temple of the Lord,” points to its
having been the burden of the discourses of the false prophets, possibly to the
solemn iteration of the words in the litanies of the supplicants. With no thought of
the Divine Presence of which it was the symbol, they were ever harping on its
greatness, identifying themselves and the people with that greatness, and predicting
its perpetuity. So in Matthew 24:1 the disciples of our Lord point, as with a national
pride, to the buildings of the later Temple. The plural “these” is used rather than
the singular, as representing the whole complete fabric of courts and porticoes. The
higher truth that the “congregation” of Israel was the living Temple (1 Corinthians
3:16; 1 Peter 2:5), was not likely to be in the thoughts of those whom Jeremiah
rebuked.
ISBET, "DELUDED FORMALISTS
‘The temple of the Lord, The temple of the Lord, The temple of the Lord, are these.’
Jeremiah 7:4
I. Religious formalism.—When Jeremiah threatened Israel with the coming of the
king of Assyria, the false prophets minimised the terror of his utterances by pointing
to the Temple and assuring the people that there was no reason to anticipate the
overthrow of their city, since it was the custodian of the holy shrine of Jehovah. ‘Ye
have the Temple in your midst, surely then you are a religious people. You cannot
be as bad as this pessimistic prophet alleges, and God cannot very well dispense with
you.’
II. But men may perform the most sacred rites, and yet perpetrate the grossest
crimes. The presence of a Temple with all its priests and rites does not necessarily
denote holiness, but often the contrary. In some countries brigands will seek the
blessing of heaven on their plans of murder and plunder. Our safety lies, not in
outward rites, but in amending our ways and doings, in executing judgment, and
refusing to walk after other gods. ot in having sprung from godly parents, nor in
engagedness in holy things, nor in the practice of religious rites, will help come, but
in being genuinely right with God. Real religion consists not in temple-rites, but in
humility, unselfishness, and godliness.
Illustration
‘Men are always prone to attribute to the externals of religion a saving efficacy,
imagining that a rigorous attention to these will condone for the commission of sins
like those enumerated in the earlier verses. It is a terrible thing for a soul when,
beneath an outward decorum of behaviour, the heart is filled with all manner of
abominations, as the Temple was filled with robbers (Jeremiah 7:11. See also
Matthew 21:13).’

22. PETT, "Jeremiah 7:4
“Do not trust in lying words, saying, ‘The temple of YHWH, the temple of YHWH,
the temple of YHWH, are these.’ ”
But if they were to continue dwelling in the land it would be necessary for them to
cease deceiving themselves into thinking that somehow the presence of the Temple
of YHWH made Jerusalem inviolable, and that YHWH would not allow His holy
hill to be approached by the enemy. There was no point in their continually saying,
“‘The temple of YHWH, the temple of YHWH, the temple of YHWH are these
(miscellany of buildings)” as though that could keep the enemy at bay by continual
emphasis, unless they also amended their ways, for such thinking was invalid.
Compare Micah 3:11 where the heads of Judah, the priests and the prophets also
erroneously claimed, ‘Is not YHWH in the midst of us? o evil will come on us.’
The threefold repetition of ‘the Temple of YHWH’ possibly indicates Jeremiah’s
weariness with constantly hearing the false prophets declaring Judah’s inviolability
because of the presence of the Temple of YHWH in that he is bringing out that they
keep on saying it again and again. ‘Are these.’ That is, are all these buildings,
furniture and courts making up the Temple complex.
Alternately it may be intended as a sardonic comparison with the ‘holy, holy, holy’
of the Seraphim as depicted in Isaiah 6:3 (and repeated in Revelation 4:8). Instead
of drawing attention to the holiness of YHWH, they were concentrating their hopes
on the physical presence of what was virtually a mascot. Indeed the words may have
formed part of a self-comforting liturgy by which they assured themselves of their
own security.
One of the most remarkable evidences of the corruption of men’s hearts is that they
can have a high estimate of ‘holy things’, and even of a holy God, and yet not
recognise the demand that it lays on them to be equally ‘holy. (‘You shall be holy,
for I am holy’). They have the ability to appreciate God’s holiness and believe that it
offers them some kind of protection, especially from people ‘worse’ than they are,
while at the same time excusing themselves from the need to be equally holy. As long
as by their own standards they are not guilty of what they see as major sins (even
when in fact they are, but they see it as excusable in their case) they consider that
they have done all that can reasonably be expected of them, while at the same time
being hard on those who stir up their consciences or do things that they cannot
condone. They hate those who make them feel guilty and they ‘condone the sins they
are inclined to, by condemning those they have no mind to.’ And then they think
that all is well. They overlook the fact that at the centre of the Scriptural conception
of the holiness of YHWH is the idea morally speaking that He is pure and beyond
reproach, (as is revealed by His covenant), and that He requires the same of His
people. They forget that, as Psalms 24 makes clear (compare also Psalms 15), only
what is truly pure and righteous is acceptable in His presence. It was because of this
strange spiritual blindness that they were able in this situation to have a high view
of The Temple and its importance to God, without it having any real moral effect on

23. their lives. It was the folly of such thinking that Jeremiah was seeking to bring home
to them.On The Other Hand If They Do Amend Their Ways They Will Be Inviolate.
PULPIT, "The temple of the Lord. otice the iteration of the phrase, as if its very
sound were a charm against evil. It reminds us of the performances of the howling
dervishes at Cairo, who "sometimes remain for hours, incessantly shouting the
Muslim confession of faith (la ilaha, etc.)". The phrase is repeated three times to
express earnestness of the speakers (comp. Jeremiah 22:29, "O earth, earth, earth").
These false prophets evidently retained a large amount of the old materialistic faith
of the Semitic nations (to whom the Israelites belonged by race), which localized the
presence and the power of the divinity. The temple was, in fact, their palladium, and
as long as it stood, the national independence appeared to them to be secured. They
faithfully handed on the teaching of those prophets of the last generation, who, as
Micah tells us (Micah 3:11), were wont to "lean upon the Lord, and say, Is not the
Lord among us? none evil can come upon us." How Isaiah met this error we may
collect from Isaiah 28:16 (see my Commentary). Are these; i.e. these buildings.
5 If you really change your ways and your actions
and deal with each other justly,
CLARKE, "If ye throughly amend your ways - Literally, If in making good ye
fully make good your ways. God will no longer admit of half-hearted work. Semblances
of piety cannot deceive him; he will not accept partial reformation; there must be a
thorough amendment.
GILL, "For if ye thoroughly amend your ways and your doings,.... Or, "if ye
make your ways good, and do your works well", which is what is exhorted to Jer_7:3,
and respects the duties of the moral law; which are more acceptable to God than legal
sacrifices, when done from right principles, and with right views, from love, in faith, and
to the glory of God; which is doing good works well; the particulars of which follow:
if you thoroughly execute judgment between a man and his neighbour;
without respect to persons, without favour and affection, without bribery and
corruption; passing a righteous sentence, and making an equitable decision of the case
between them, according to the law of God, and the rules of justice and equity: this

24. respects judges and civil magistrates.
JAMISO , "For — “But” [Maurer].
judgment — justice (Jer_22:3).
K&D, "Jer_7:5-7
Over against such sayings Jeremiah puts that which is the indispensable condition of
continued sojourn in the land. ‫י‬ ִⅴ, Jer_7:5, after a preceding negative clause, means: but
on the contrary. This condition is a life morally good, that shall show itself in doing
justice, in putting away all unrighteousness, and in giving up idolatry. With ‫ם‬ ִ‫א‬ begins a
list of the things that belong to the making of one's ways and doings good. The adjunct to
‫ט‬ ָ ְ‫שׁ‬ ִ‫,מ‬ right, "between the man and his neighbour," shows that the justice meant is that
they should help one man to his rights against another. The law attached penalties to the
oppression of those who needed protection - strangers, orphans, widows; cf. Exo_22:21.,
Deu_24:17., Jer_27:19; and the prophets often denounce the same; cf. Isa_1:17, Isa_
1:23; Isa_10:2; Eze_22:7; Zec_7:10; Mal_3:5; Psa_94:6, etc. for '‫ּא־ת‬‫ל‬ is noteworthy, but
is not a simple equivalent for it. Like ου ʆ µή, ‫ב‬ʆ‫כ‬ implies a deeper interest on the part of
the speaker, and the sense here is: and ye be really determined not to shed innocent
blood (cf. Ew. §320, b). Hitz.'s explanation, that ‫ל‬ፍ is equal to ‫ר‬ ֶ‫שׁ‬ ֲ‫א‬ ‫ּא‬‫ל‬ or ‫ם‬ ִ‫א‬ ‫ּא‬‫ל‬, and that it
her resumes again the now remote ‫ם‬ ִ‫,א‬ is overturned by the consideration that ‫ל‬ፍ is not
at the beginning of the clause; and there is not the slightest probability in Graf's view,
that the ‫ל‬ፍ must have come into the text through the copyist, who had in his mind the
similar clause in Jer_22:3. Shedding innocent blood refers in part to judicial murders
(condemnation of innocent persons), in part to violent attacks made by the kings on
prophets and godly men, such as we hear of in Manasseh's case, 2Ki_21:16. In this place
(Jer_7:7), i.e., first and foremost Jerusalem, the metropolis, where moral corruption had
its chief seat; in a wider sense, however, it means the whole kingdom of Judah (Jer_7:3
and Jer_7:7). "To your hurt" belongs to all the above-mentioned transgressions of the
law; cf. Jer_25:7. "In the land," etc., explains "this place." "From eternity to eternity" is a
rhetorically heightened expression for the promise given to the patriarchs, that God
would give the land of Canaan to their posterity for an everlasting possession, Gen_17:8;
although here it belongs not to the relative clause, "that I gave," but to the principal
clause, "cause you to dwell," as in Exo_32:13.
CALVI , "Interpreters do not agree as to the meaning of this passage. Some render
‫אם‬ ‫,כי‬ ki am, “But rather, “or, “But.” I indeed allow that it is so taken in many
places; but they are mistaken who read ‫אם‬ ‫,כי‬ ki am, as one word; for the Prophet,
on the contrary, repeats what he had said, and that is, that God would not be
propitious to the Jews except their life proved that they had really repented. The
words are sometimes taken as one in Hebrew, and mean “but;” yet in other places
they are often taken as separate words, as we found in the second chapter, “Though
thou washest thyself with nitre;” and for the sake of emphasis the particle “surely,
“is put before “though.” But in this place the Prophet simply means, that the Jews

25. were deceived in seeking to prescribe a law for God according to their own will, as it
belongs only to him either to approve or to reject their works. And this meaning is
confirmed by the latter part of the verse, for we read not there ‫אם‬ ‫,כי‬ ki am, but ‫,אם‬
am; “ If by doing ye shall do judgment;” and then in the same form he adds, “If ye
will not oppress the stranger, the orphan, and the widow;” and at last he adds,
“Then (a copulative I allow is here, but it is to be taken as an adverb) I will make
you to dwell in this place.”
The purport of the whole is, — that sacrifices are of no importance or value before
God, unless those who offer them wholly devote themselves to God with a sincere
heart. The Jews sought to bind God as it were by their own laws: he shews that he
was thus impiously put under restraint. He therefore lays down a condition, as
though he had said, “it belongs to me to prescribe to you what is right. Away, then,
with your ceremonies, by which ye think to expiate your sins; for I regard them not,
and esteem them as nothing.” What then is to be done? He now shews then, “If you
will rightly order your life, ye shall dwell in this place.”
For yesterday the Prophet exhorted the people to repent; and he employed the
sentiment which he now repeats. He commanded the people to come to God with an
upright and pure mind; he afterwards added another sentence, “Trust not in words
of falsehood, saying, The Temple of the Lord, “etc. He now again repeats what he
had said, “If ye will make your ways good.” He shews now more clearly that no
wrong was done to the people when God repudiated their ceremonies; for he
required a pure heart, and external rites without repentance are vain and useless.
This then is what the Prophet had in view: “Though God seems to treat you with
great severity, he yet promises to be kind to you, if you order your lives according to
his law: is this unjust? Can the condition which is proposed to you by God be liable
to any calumnies, as though God treated you cruelly!” This then is the meaning of
the Prophet.
If ye will make good your ways, that is, if your life be amended; and if ye will do
judgment, etc. He now comes to particulars; and first he addresses the judges,
whose duty it was to render to every one his right, to redress injuries, to pronounce
what was just and right when any contention arose. If then, he says, ye will do
justice between a man and his neighbor, that is, if your judgments be right, without
favor or hatred, and if no bribes lead you from what is right and just, while
pronouncing judgment on a case between a man and his brother.
BE SO , "Jeremiah 7:5-7. For if ye thoroughly amend your ways, &c. — In these
verses the prophet tells them particularly what the amendment was which was
necessary that they might escape destruction. It must be a thorough amendment, a
universal, continued, persevering reformation; not partial, but entire; not
hypocritical, but sincere; not wavering, but constant. They must make the tree good,
and so make the fruit good; must amend their hearts and thoughts, and so amend
their ways and doings. In particular, 1st, They must be honest and just in all their
dealings. They who had power in their hands must thoroughly execute judgment

26. between a man and his neighbour, without partiality. They must not, either in
judgment, or in matters of contract, oppress the stranger, the fatherless, or the
widow — or countenance or protect those that did oppress them, nor refuse to do
them right when they sought for it. They must not shed innocent blood — And with
it defile the temple, the city, and the land wherein they dwelt. 2d, They must keep
close to the worship of the true God only, neither walking after other gods, nor
hearkening to those that would draw them into communion with idolaters. Then will
I cause you to dwell in this place, &c. — Upon this condition I will establish and fix
you in this land for ever and ever — That is, from age to age, and you shall possess
it, as your fathers did before you, from the days of Joshua until now.
PETT, "Jeremiah 7:5-7
“For if you thoroughly amend your ways and your doings; if you thoroughly execute
justice between a man and his neighbour; if you do not oppress the sojourner, the
fatherless, and the widow, and do not shed innocent blood in this place, nor walk
after other gods to your own hurt, then will I cause you to dwell in this place, in the
land that I gave to your fathers, from of old even for evermore.”
What was needed was for them to genuinely amend their ways and doings, by
submitting to God’s covenant and ensuring that people obtained true justice in the
everyday affairs of life, that the more helpless in society were not oppressed or being
taken advantage of (something very important to God - see Jeremiah 27:19; Exodus
22:21 ff.; Deuteronomy 24:17 ff.; Isaiah 1:17; Isaiah 1:23; Isaiah 10:2; Ezekiel 22:7;
Zechariah 7:10; Malachi 3:5; Psalms 94:6, etc.), that the blood of innocent people
was not being shed (by judicial murder, by attacks on the righteous, including the
prophets, and by general violence), and that idolatry, which could only cause them
harm, was being put to one side. If they did this, walking in accordance with His
covenant, He would then ensure that they were able to continue dwelling in the land
continually for ever, the land which He had given to their forefathers from of old.
The corollary was that being allowed to live in the land depended on covenant
obedience.
‘To your own hurt.’ This covered all the failures mentioned, not just the last one,
compare Jeremiah 25:7.
‘From of old even for evermore.’ This could theoretically be translated ‘from
everlasting to everlasting.’ It could not be literally true, for the land had not existed
from everlasting, nor would it exist for evermore. Thus it includes within it the seed
idea of the new heavens and the new earth, where Abraham and his descendants
will receive ‘a better country’ (Hebrews 11:10-14), thus ensuring that His final
promises of the land to them will be fulfilled in a way better than they could ever
have dreamed of.

27. 6 if you do not oppress the foreigner, the
fatherless or the widow and do not shed innocent
blood in this place, and if you do not follow other
gods to your own harm,
BAR ES, "A summary of the conditions indispensable on man’s part, before he can
plead the terms of the covenant in his favor.
Jer_7:6
In this place - i. e., in Jerusalem. The prophet refers to innocent blood shed there
judicially. Of one such judicial murder Jehoiakim had already been guilty Jer_26
GILL, "If ye oppress not the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow,.... Who
have none to help them, and who ought to have mercy and compassion shown them, as
well as justice done them; and should not be injured by private men in their persons and
properties, and much less oppressed in courts of judicature by those who should be the
patrons and defenders of them:
and shed not innocent blood in this place: in the temple, where the sanhedrim, or
great court of judicature, sat; for this does not so much respect the commission of
murder by private persons, as the condemnation of innocent men to death by the judges,
which is all one as shedding their blood; and by which actions they defiled that temple
they cried up, and put their trust in; to shed innocent blood in any place, Kimchi
observes, is an evil; but to shed it in this place, in the temple, was a greater evil, because
this was the place of the Shechinah, or where the divine Majesty dwelt:
neither walk after other gods to your hurt; the gods of e people, as the Targum;
"for this", as the Arabic version renders it, "is pernicious to you"; idolatry was more
hurtful to themselves than to God; and therefore it is dissuaded from by an argument
taken from their own interest.
JAMISO , "this place — this city and land (Jer_7:7).
to your hurt — so Jer_7:19; “to the confusion or their own faces” (Jer_13:10; Pro_
8:36).
CALVI , "Then he adds, if ye will not oppress the stranger and the orphan and the
widow This also belonged to the judges: but God no doubt shews here generally,
that injustice greatly prevailed among the people, as he condemns the cruelty and
perfidy of the judges themselves.
As to strangers and orphans and widows, they are often mentioned; for strangers as
well as orphans and widows were almost destitute of protection, and were subject to

28. many wrongs, as though they were exposed as a prey. Hence, whenever a right
government is referred to, God mentions strangers and orphans and widows; for it
might hence be easily understood of what kind was the public administration of
justice; for when others obtain their right, it is no matter of wonder, since they have
advocates to defend their cause, and they have also the aid of friends. Thus every
one who defends his own cause, obtains at least some portion of his right. But when
strangers and orphans and widows are not unjustly dealt with, it is an evidence of
real integrity; for we may hence conclude, that there is no respect of persons among
the judges. But as this subject has been handled elsewhere, I only touch on it lightly
here.
And if ye will not shed, he says, innocent blood in this place Here the Prophet
accuses the judges of a more heinous crime, and calls them murderers. They had,
however, no doubt some plausible pretences for shedding the blood of the innocent.
But the Prophet, speaking here in the name of God and by the dictates of his Spirit,
overlooks all these as altogether vain, though the judges might have thought them
sufficient excuses. By saying, in this place, he shews how foolish was their
confidence in boasting of God’s worship, sacrifices, and Temple, while yet they had
polluted the Temple with their cruel murders. (191)
He then passes to the first table of the law, If ye will not walk after foreign gods to
your evil By stating a part for the whole, he condemns every kind of impiety: for
what is it to walk after alien gods but to depart from the pure and legitimate
worship of the true God and to corrupt it with superstitions? We see then what the
Prophet means: he recalls the Jews to the duty of observing the law, that they might
thereby give a veritable evidence of their repentance: “Prove, “he says, “that you
have repented from the heart.” He shews how they were to prove this, even by
observing the law of God. And, as I have said, he refers to the first Table by stating
a part for the whole. As to the second Table, he mentions some particulars which
were intended to shew that they violated justice and equity, and also that cruelty
and perfidiousness, frauds and rapines, prevailed greatly among them.
7 then I will let you live in this place, in the land I
gave your ancestors for ever and ever.
BAR ES, "Jer_7:7

29. Why then do not the Jews still possess a land thus eternally given them? Because God
never bestows anything unconditionally. The land was bestowed upon them by virtue of
a covenant Gen_17:7; the Jews had broken the conditions of this covenant Jer_7:5-6,
and the gift reverted to the original donor.
GILL, "Then will I cause you to dwell in this place,.... In the land of Judea, and
not suffer them to be carried captive, which they had been threatened with, and had
reason to expect, should they continue in their sins, in their impenitence and vain
confidence:
in the land that I gave to your fathers; to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, by promise;
and to the Jewish fathers in the times of Joshua, by putting them in actual possession of
it:
for ever and ever: for a great while; a long time, as Kimchi explains it; from the days
of Abraham for ever, even all the days of the world, provided they and their children
walked in the ways of the Lord. This clause may either be connected with the word
"dwell", or with the word give; and the sense is, either that they should dwell in it for
ever and ever; or it was given to their fathers for ever and ever.
HE RY, "He tells them what the establishment is which, upon this amendment, they
may expect from him (Jer_7:7): “Set about such a work of reformation as this with all
speed, go through with it, and abide by it; and I will cause you to dwell in this place, this
temple; it shall continue your place of resort and refuge, the place of your comfortable
meeting with God and one another; and you shall dwell in the land that I gave to your
fathers for ever and ever, and it shall never be turned out either from God's house or
from your own.” It is promised that they shall still enjoy their civil and sacred privileges,
that they shall have a comfortable enjoyment of them: I will cause you to dwell here;
and those dwell at ease to whom God gives a settlement. They shall enjoy it by covenant,
by virtue of the grant made of it to their fathers, not by providence, but by promise. They
shall continue in the enjoyment of it without eviction or molestation; they shall not be
disturbed, much less dispossessed, for ever and ever; nothing but sin could throw them
out. An everlasting inheritance in the heavenly Canaan is hereby secured to all that live
in godliness and honesty. And the vulgar Latin reads a further privilege here, Jer_7:3,
Jer_7:7. Habitabo vobiscum - I will dwell with you in this place; and we should find
Canaan itself but an uncomfortable place to dwell in if God did not dwell with us there.
JAMISO , "The apodosis to the “if ... if” (Jer_7:5, Jer_7:6).
to dwell — to continue to dwell.
for ever and ever — joined with “to dwell,” not with the words “gave to your fathers”
(compare Jer_3:18; Deu_4:40).
CALVI , "Then follows the latter part, Then I will make you to dwell, (192) etc.
God sets this clause in opposition to the false confidence of the people, as though he
had said, “Ye wish me to be propitious to you; but mock me not by offering
sacrifices without sincerity of heart, without a devout feeling; be consistent; and
think not that I am pacified by you, when ye come to the Temple with empty
display, and pollute your sacrifices with impure hands. I therefore do not allow this
state of things; but if ye come on the condition of returning into favor with me, then

30. I will make you to dwell in this place and in the land which I gave to your fathers.”
The last part of the verse, from age to age, ought to be connected with the verb, “I
will make you to dwell, “ ‫,שכנתי‬ shekanti, “I will make you to dwell from age to age,
“that is, As your fathers dwelt formerly in this land, so shall you remain quiet in the
same, and there shall be to you a peaceable possession; but not in any other place.
We must bear in mind the contrast which I noticed yesterday; for he indirectly
denounces exile on the Jews, because they had contaminated the land by their vices,
and gloried only in their sacrifices. It now follows —
8 But look, you are trusting in deceptive words
that are worthless.
GILL, "Behold, ye trust in lying words,.... What they are dissuaded from, Jer_7:4,
is here affirmed they did, and which is introduced with a note of asseveration, attention,
and admiration; it being a certain thing that they did so; and was what was worthy of
their consideration and serious reflection upon; and it was astonishing that they should,
since so to do was of no advantage to them, but the contrary:
that cannot profit; temple worship and service, legal sacrifices and ceremonies, could
not take away sin, and expiate the guilt of it; or justify men, and render them acceptable
to God; these, without faith in the blood and sacrifice of Christ, were of no avail; and
especially could never be thought to be of any use and profit, when such gross
abominations were indulged by them as are next mentioned.
HE RY, "What were the lying words of their own hearts, which they must not trust
to. He cautions them against this self-deceit (Jer_7:4): “Trust no in lying words. You are
told in what way, and upon what terms, you may be easy safe, and happy; now do not
flatter yourselves with an opinion that you may be so on any other terms, or in any other
way.” Yet he charges them with this self-deceit arising from vanity (Jer_7:8): “Behold, it
is plain that you do trust in lying words, notwithstanding what is said to you; you trust
in words that cannot profit; you rely upon a plea that will stand you in no stead.” Those
that slight the words of truth, which would profit them, take shelter in words of
falsehood, which cannot profit them. Now these lying words were, “The temple of the
Lord, the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord are these. These buildings, the
courts, the holy place, and the holy of holies, are the temple of the Lord, built by his
appointment, to his glory; here he resides, here he is worshipped, here we meet three
times a year to pay our homage to him as our King in his palace.” This they thought was
security enough to them to keep God and his favours from leaving them, God and his
judgments from breaking in upon them. When the prophets told them how sinful they

31. were, and how miserable they were likely to be, still they appealed to the temple: “How
can we be either so or so, as long as we have that holy happy place among us?” The
prophet repeats it because they repeated it upon all occasions. It was the cant of the
times; it was in their mouths upon all occasions. If they heard an awakening sermon, if
any startling piece of news was brought to them, they lulled themselves asleep again with
this, “We cannot but do well, for we have the temple of the Lord among us.” Note, The
privileges of a form of godliness are often the pride and confidence of those that are
strangers and enemies to the power of it. It is common for those that are furthest from
God to boast themselves most of their being near to the church. They are haughty
because of the holy mountain (Zep_3:11), as if God's mercy were so tied to them that
they might defy his justice. Now to convince them what a frivolous plea this was, and
what little stead it would stand them in,
JAMISO , "that cannot profit — Maurer translates, “so that you profit nothing”
(see Jer_7:4; Jer_5:31).
K&D, "Jer_7:8
In Jer_7:8 there is a recurrence to the warning of Jer_7:4, under the form of a
statement of fact; and in Jer_7:9-11 it is expanded to this effect: The affirmation that the
temple of the Lord affords protection is a sheer delusion, so long as all God's
commandments are being audaciously broken. ‫י‬ ִ ְ‫ל‬ ִ‫ב‬ ְ‫ל‬ ‫יל‬ ִ‫ּוע‬‫ה‬, lit., to no profiting: ye rely on
lying words, without there being any possibility that they should profit you.
CALVI , "He again teaches what we observed yesterday, — that the glorying of the
Jews was foolish, while they boasted of the Temple and of their sacrifices to God. He
calls their boastings the words of falsehood, as we have explained, because they
wholly turned to a contrary end what God had instituted. It was his will that
sacrifices should be offered to him in the Temple — to what purpose? To preserve
unity of faith among the whole people. And sacrifices, what was their design? To
shew the people that they deserved eternal death, and also that they were to flee to
God for mercy, there being no other expiation but the blood of Christ. But there was
no repentance, they were not sorry for their sins; nay, as we shall presently see, they
took liberty to indulge more in them on account of their ceremonies, which yet ought
to have been the means of leading them to repentance. They were then the words of
falsehood when they separated the signs from their ends. The reality and the sign
ought indeed to be distinguished the one from the other; but it is an intolerable
divorce, when men lay hold on naked signs and overlook the reality. There was in
the sacrifices the reality which I have now mentioned: they were reminded by the
spectacle that they were worthy of eternal death; and then, they were to exercise
penitence, and thus to flee to God’s mercy. As there was no account made of Christ,
no care for repentance, no sorrow for sins, no fear of God, no humility, it was an
impious separation of what ought to have been united.
We now then more clearly see why the Prophet designates as words of falsehood,
that false glorying in which hypocrites indulge, in opposition to God, when they
would have him satisfied with naked ceremonies. Hence he adds, that they were

32. words that could not profit, as though he had said, “As ye seek to trifle with God, so
he will also frustrate your design.” It is indeed certain that they dealt dishonestly
with God, when they attempted to satisfy his judgment by frigid ceremonies. He
therefore shews that a reward was prepared for them; for they would at length find,
that no fruit would come from their false dealings. It follows —
COFFMA , ""Behold, ye trust in lying words that cannot profit. Will ye steal,
murder, and commit adultery, and swear falsely, and burn incense unto Baal, and
walk after other gods that ye have not known, and come and stand before me in this
house, which is called by my name, and say, We are delivered; that ye may do all
these abominations? Is this house, which is called by my name, become a den of
robbers in your eyes? Behold, I, even I, have seen it, saith Jehovah."
The sins enumerated here constituted violations of the Decalogue as given in Exodus
and Deuteronomy. The specific commandments broken were the 1st, 2nd, 6th, 7th,
8th, and 9th, with the necessary inference that the 10th also was broken, stealing
and adultery both being a direct result of the covetousness forbidden in the last
commandment. As Green noted, "This amounted to a near-total breach of the
covenant stipulations." [9]
"Here is further and conclusive evidence of Jeremiah's deep anchorage in the
Mosaic faith."[10]
"We are delivered ..." (Jeremiah 7:10). The Jews actually believed that merely
because they frequented the temple and brought their sacrifices as usual, that, they
were fully protected in the commission of every crime in the catalogue, "all of this
on the mere grounds of their external presentation of themselves before God at the
place called by his name."[11] They deluded themselves into thinking they were safe
no matter what they did.
"Behold, I, even I have seen it, saith Jehovah ..." (Jeremiah 7:11). Anchor Bible
suggests a paraphrase here: "God says, Look! I'm not blind! Of course, I've seen
it!"[12]
"Is this house ... become a den of robbers ..." (Jeremiah 7:11)? These very words
were spoken by Christ himself as a solemn indictment of the temple during his
personal ministry, "Ye made it (the temple) a den of robbers" (Matthew 21:13).
This is a reference to the blasphemous manner in which the Jews used that temple.
The Hebrew word here "actually means a robber's `cave,' "[13] The figure is that of
a den, or cave, or some other supposedly safe and secure place to which robbers
retired after each of their crimes. What a terrible misuse of holy religion was this
abuse by the Jews.
BE SO , "Jeremiah 7:8-11. Behold, ye trust in lying words — Uttered by your
false prophets, who promise you peace, and sooth you up in your impenitence. Will
ye steal, murder, &c. — Jeremiah does not charge them with the transgression of

33. the ritual law of Moses, but with the breach of the weightier matters of the moral
law. Thus the prophets showed the Jews a more excellent way of serving God than
by relying upon external ceremonies of their worship, which might have prepared
their minds for the reception of the gospel. And come and stand before me, &c. —
Will ye be guilty of the vilest immoralities, even such as the common interest, as well
as the common sense, of mankind must reprobate? Will ye swear falsely? — A crime
which all nations have always held in abhorrence? Will ye burn incense to Baal? —
A dunghill deity, that sets up as a rival with the great Jehovah; and, not content
with that, will you walk after other gods too, whom ye know not — And by all these
crimes put a daring affront upon the Lord of hosts? Will you exchange a God, of
whose power and goodness you have had such long experience, for gods of whose
ability and willingness to help you know nothing? And when you have thus done the
most you can to affront and insult the infinite and eternal Jehovah, your creator and
preserver, your governor and judge, will you have the effrontery and impudence to
come and stand before him in this house, which is called by his name, and in which
his name is called upon, under a pretence of worshipping and serving him — stand
before him as servants, waiting his commands, as suppliants, expecting his favour?
Will you act in open rebellion against him, and yet rank yourselves among his
subjects, among the best of them? By this it would seem you think that either he
doth not discover, or doth not dislike your wicked practices; to imagine either of
which is to put the highest indignity possible upon him. It is as if you should say, We
are delivered to do all these abominations — If they had not the face to say this in so
many words, yet their actions spoke it aloud. God had many times delivered them,
as they could not but acknowledge, and had been a present help to them when
otherwise they must have perished. By these means he designed to bring them to
himself; by his goodness to lead them to repentance; but they, resolving
notwithstanding to persist in their abominations, said, in effect, in direct
contradiction to God’s true intent, in showing them this kindness, that he had
delivered them to put them again into a capacity of rebelling against him. Will ye,
says the prophet, interpret the deliverances God hath formerly vouchsafed you, as
so many licenses to commit new crimes? Or, do you think, when you offer your
propitiatory sacrifices, that they will wipe away the guilt of all your past offences,
and that you may securely return to your former wicked practices, having such a
certain and easy method of obtaining pardon? Is this house, &c., become a den of
robbers in your eyes? — Do you think it was built, not only to be a rendezvous of,
but a place of shelter to, the vilest malefactors; who perform an outward service to
me there, that they may continue the more securely in their sins? Mark well, reader,
those that think to excuse themselves in unchristian practices, with the Christian
name, and sin the more boldly and securely, because there is a sin-offering provided,
do in effect make God’s house of prayer a den of thieves; as the priests did in
Christ’s time, Matthew 21:13. But could they thus impose upon God? no, Behold, I
have seen it, saith the Lord — Have seen the real iniquity through the counterfeit
and dissembled piety. Though men may deceive one another with the show of
devotion, yet they cannot deceive God.
ISBET, "Verse 8

34. ‘A REFUGE OF LIES’
‘Lying words, that cannot profit.’
Jeremiah 7:8
I. God tears open the ‘lying words’ of many who worship Him, and what does He
find?—Hypocrisy, fraud, a festering mass of corruption, a fixed determination that
nothing shall be true which interferes with their pleasures, their emoluments, their
privileges. Love, brotherhood, humility, mercy, faith; these things they do not
believe in. What they seek is the maintenance of their own position, the
advancement of their own interest. To all such He says, ‘Ye shall become as Shiloh,’
bankrupt, deserted, lost.
II. So let me be true, for I worship the God of truth.
(1) True to myself. In my thoughts seeking honestly to gain the verity and certainty
of things, especially the things which are highest and deepest. In my speech uttering
only what I feel. In my life, abhorring the very appearance of dissimulation and
craft.
(2) True to my neighbour, and, most of all, true to my God. Trusting Him with a
clinging trust. Feeling for Him a fervent affection. Following hard after Him
whatever the cost may be. Begging Him daily to see if there is any wicked way in me,
and to lead me in the way everlasting.
Illustration
‘The privileges of a form of godliness are often the pride and confidence of those
that are strangers and enemies to the power of it. It is common for those that are
furthest from God to boast themselves most of their being near to the Church.’
PETT, "Jeremiah 7:8
“Behold, you trust in lying words, which cannot profit.”
But the problem was that instead they believed in the words of false teachers and
false prophets, words which said otherwise, giving them assurances based on false
premises. Such words could not possibly be profitable for them, for they would
simply hasten their destruction.
9 “‘Will you steal and murder, commit adultery
and perjury,[a] burn incense to Baal and follow
other gods you have not known,

35. CLARKE, "Will ye steal, murder - Will you continue to commit such
abominations, and pretend to worship me; and thus defile the place that is called by my
name; and so make my house a den of robbers? I have seen this, - and can you expect to
escape condign punishment? Ye shall not escape.
GILL, "Will ye steal, murder, and commit adultery, and swear falsely,.... At
the same time they offered sacrifices, and trusted in them, they did those things, which
would not be grateful to the Lord, nor profitable to them; or, "ye do steal", &c.; so the
Septuagint, and all the Oriental versions; and likewise the Targum; as charging them
with them; these are sins against the second table of the law, as what follow are against
the first:
and burn incense to Baal, and walk after other gods whom ye know not; for
they not only burnt incense to Baal, which was an act of idolatrous worship; but served
other strange gods they had not known before; whose names they had never heard of,
and of whose help and assistance they now had no experience, nor received any benefit
from, as they had on the one and only true God; and therefore it was great folly and
ingratitude in them to forsake the Lord, and walk after these.
HE RY 9-11, " He shows them the gross absurdity of it in itself. If they knew any
thing either of the temple of the Lord or of the Lord of the temple, they must think that
to plead that, either in excuse of their sin against God or in arrest of God's judgment
against them, was the most ridiculous unreasonable thing that could be. [1.] God is a
holy God; but this plea made him the patron of sin, of the worst of sins, which even the
light of nature condemns, Jer_7:9, Jer_7:10. “What,” says he, “will you steal, murder,
and commit adultery, be guilty of the vilest immoralities, and which the common
interest, as well as the common sense, of mankind witness against? Will you swear
falsely, a crime which all nations (who with the belief of a God have had a veneration for
an oath) have always had a horror of? Will you burn incense to Baal, a dunghill-deity,
that sets up as a rival with the great Jehovah, and, not content with that, will you walk
after other gods too, whom you know not, and by all these crimes put a daring affront
upon God, both as the Lord of hosts and as the God of Israel? Will you exchange a God
of whose power and goodness you have had such a long experience for gods of whose
ability and willingness to help you you know nothing? And, when you have thus done the
worst you can against God, will you brazen your faces so far as to come and stand before
him in this house which is called by his name and in which his name is called upon -
stand before him as servants waiting his commands, as supplicants expecting his favour?
Will you act in open rebellion against him, and yet herd among his subjects, among the
best of them? By this, it should seem, you think that either he does not discover or does
not dislike your wicked practices, to imagine either of which is to put the highest
indignity possible upon him. It is as if you should say, We are delivered to do all these
abominations.” If they had not the front to say this, totidem verbis - in so many words,
yet their actions spoke it aloud. They could not but own that God, even their own God,

36. had many a time delivered them, and been a present help to them, when otherwise they
must have perished. He, in delivering them, designed to reduce them to himself, and by
his goodness to lead them to repentance; but they resolved to persist in their
abominations notwithstanding. As soon as they were delivered (as of old in the days of
the Judges) they did evil again in the sight of the Lord, which was in effect to say, in
direct contradiction to the true intent and meaning of the providences which had
affected them, that God had delivered them in order to put them again into a capacity of
rebelling against him, by sacrificing the more profusely to their idols. Note, Those who
continue in sin because grace has abounded, or that grace may abound, do in effect their
idols. Note, Those who continue in sin because grace has abounded, or that grace may
abound, do in effect make Christ the minister of sin. Some take it thus: “You present
yourselves before God with your sacrifices and sin-offerings, and then say, We are
delivered, we are discharged from our guilt, now it shall do us no hurt; when all this is
but to blind the world, and stop the mouth of conscience, that you may, the more easily
to yourselves and the more plausibly before others, do all these abominations.” [2.] His
temple was a holy place; but this plea made it a protection to the most unholy persons:
“Has this house, which is called by my name and is a standing sign of God's kingdom of
sin and Satan - has this become a den of robbers in your eyes? Do you think it was built
to be not only a rendezvous of, but a refuge and shelter to, the vilest of malefactors?” No;
though the horns of the altar were a sanctuary to him that slew a man unawares, yet they
were not so to a wilful murderer, nor to one that did aught presumptuously, Exo_21:14;
1Ki_2:29. Those that think to excuse themselves in unchristian practices with the
Christian name, and sin the more boldly and securely because there is a sin-offering
provided, do, in effect, make God's house of prayer a den of thieves, as the priests in
Christ's time, Mat_21:13. But could they thus impose upon God? No: Behold, I have seen
it, saith the Lord, have seen the real iniquity through the counterfeit and dissembled
piety. Note, Though men may deceive one another with the appearances of devotion, yet
they cannot deceive God.
JAMISO , "“Will ye steal ... and then come and stand before Me?”
whom ye know not — Ye have no grounds of “knowing” that they are gods; but I
have manifested My Godhead by My law, by benefits conferred, and by miracles. This
aggravates their crime [Calvin] (Jdg_5:8).
K&D, "Jer_7:9
The query before the infin. absoll. is the expression of wonder and indignation; and
the infinitives are used with special emphasis for the verb. fin.: How? to steal, kill, etc., is
your practice, and then ye come....
CALVI , "The meaning seems to be suspended in the first verse, when he says,
Whether to steal, to kill, and to commit adultery, etc.; but there is nothing
ambiguous in the passage. For though there is something abrupt in the words, we
yet infer this to be the meaning, “Will you steal, “etc.? Verbs in the infinitive mood,
we know, are often to be considered as verbs in the future tense: “Will you steal,
murder, commit adultery, burn incense to Baal, “etc.? The Prophet shews how
foolishly the Jews sought to make an agreement with God, so that they might with
impunity provoke him by their many vices. When they entered the Temple, they

37. thought him to be under a necessity to receive them, as though that was a proper
reconciliation. But the Prophet exposes this folly. For what can be more absurd than
that God should allow men to commit murders, thefts, and adulteries, with
impunity? Hypocrites do not in words express this; but when they make external
ceremonies a sort of expiation, and seek by such means to bury their sins, do they
not make God their associate? Do they not make him a partaker, as it were, with
them, when they would have him to cover their adulteries? When they take
sacrifices from their plunders, to expiate their crimes, do they not make him a
participator in their robberies? The Prophet, therefore, plainly condemns
hypocrites in this place, because they acted most contumeliously towards God, in
implicating him in their own vices, as though he was the associate of thieves,
murderers, and adulterers.
Will you steal, he says, and then, will you kill, commit adultery, and swear falsely?
These four sins are against the Second Table, in which God forbids us to steal, to
kill, to commit adultery, and to deceive our neighbors by false swearing. These four
vices are mentioned, in order that the Prophet might shew that all the duties of love
were wholly disregarded by the Jews. He then adds things which belong to the First
Table, even the offering of incense to Baal, and the walking after alien gods, which
yet were unknown to them. By these two clauses he proves their impiety. He
mentions one kind of idolatry, — that they offered incense to Baal. The Prophets
often refer in the plural number to Baalim, regarded by the Jews as advocates, by
whose intercession, as they thought, they gained favor with God; as the case is at
this day under the Papacy, whose Baalim are angels and dead men: for they regard
them not as gods, but think that by employing these as advocates they conciliate
God, and obtain his favor. Such was the superstition which prevailed among the
Jews. But the Prophet here includes all idols under the word Baal. There is
afterwards a general complaint, — that God was neglected, and that they had
perfidiously departed from him, for they walked after alien gods; and he
exaggerates the crime by saying that they were unknown
The Prophet, no doubt, intimates here a contrast with the sure knowledge, which is
the basis of true religion: for God had given evident proofs of his glorious power by
many miracles, when the Israelites were redeemed; and he had afterwards
confirmed the same by many blessings; and the law had been proclaimed,
accompanied with many signs and wonders. (Exodus 20:18; Deuteronomy 5:22.)
Hence the Jews could not have pleaded involuntary error, for after so many proofs
there could have been no excuse on the ground of ignorance. ow, as to alien gods,
how came they to know that they were gods? There was no proof, they had no
reason to believe them to be so. We hence see how grievously wicked were the Jews;
for they had departed from the worship of the true God, who had made himself
known to them by many miracles, and who had confirmed the authority of his law,
so that it could not be questioned, and they had gone after unknown gods!
TRAPP, "Jeremiah 7:9 Will ye steal, murder, and commit adultery, and swear
falsely, and burn incense unto Baal, and walk after other gods whom ye know not;

38. Ver. 9. Will ye steal, murder, &c.] Heb., Will ye stealing steal, murdering murder,
&c. - i.e., drive a trade with the devil by these foul practices allowed and wallowed
in, quasi examen malorum facinorum nihil obsit, modo domum Dei ingrederemini,
as if you could set off with me, and make amends by your good deeds for your bad.
BI 9-10, "Will ye steal, murder, and commit adultery, and swear falsely . . . and say,
We are delivered to do all these abominations?
Fate
“It is my fate,” is the excuse for many a career of shame and sin. I do not think that most
persons who practically rest satisfied with this explanation of the evil of their lives put it
actually into words. They are content with a vague undefined feeling that some excuse or
explanation of the sort is possible. Perhaps we should all escape many perils and evils if
we more frequently took care to formulate our undefined thoughts into language, and
carefully examine their nature.
1. Our idea of God’s dealings with us is very largely influenced by the condition of the
age in which we live. The language of inspiration will be interpreted by us according
to the meaning which, in other directions, we already attach to the words which it
must employ; and thus the government of communities by laws has so modified our
thought of the Divine government that we no longer have the rude conception of a
Divine Ruler acting from caprice; we have now rather the idea of a Being who acts
through the operation of great universal laws. That conception of God is so far true,
and that interpretation of the words of revelation so far accurate; but there has
grown up with it the thought that God acts only thus, which is false. We attribute to
the action of the All-wise God the imperfections—the necessary imperfections which
belong to human institutions. Now, we must not transfer to God our own finality and
failure. God’s laws are universal and general; God’s dealings with men are particular
and individual As, in the physical world, we find that equilibrium is produced by the
action of two equal and opposite forces, so in the moral world we have universal
irresistible laws, and we have tender loving individualisation, and the resultant of the
two is God’s calm and equable government of men. Everywhere we see man
demanding, and by his conduct showing that he possesses that liberty of action and
power of control in the material world which, to palliate his sin, he denies to belong
to him in the moral world. You know that the application of heat to certain
substances will generate a powerful destructive force. You know such to be a physical
law, and what do you do? Do you sit down and say, It is a law of nature, and I cannot
resist it? No. You say, “I find it to be a law, and I shall take care either that it shall not
come into operation, or if it does come into operation, I shall construct machinery to
direct its force, and so make it operate only in the direction which I choose.” You
ascertain certain laws of health, that infection will spread a certain disease, and do
you say, The disease must spread, I cannot fight against a law? No. You take care to
keep the infection away from you, to disinfect, and so prevent the operation of that
law; and yet that same man when he finds that there are places which will taint his
moral nature with disease, that there are scenes or pleasures which will generate in
his soul a destructive force, says, “I cannot help it, these things will act so; I have no
liberty.” You have no liberty to prevent their acting so on you, I admit, no more than
you have power to prevent fire igniting powder; but you have power to keep away
from them; you have power to prevent those conditions arising under which alone
the law will operate. Oh! when we know and feel the evil in the physical world, we

39. take every precaution against its recurrence. How much less zeal and determination
do we display concerning our souls!
2. To say that you have a peculiar kind of nature which cannot resist a particular
class of sin is to offer to God an excuse which you would never accept from your
fellow man. You treat every one of your fellow men as having power to resist the
inclination of his natural disposition, so far as its indulgence would be injurious to
you. If a man rob you or assault you, no explanation of a natural desire for
acquisition or for aggression would be listened to by you as a reasonable excuse. To
admit the truth of such principles of uncontrollable natural impulse would at once
shake society and destroy all human government. And do you think that such
excuses as you would not admit are to be accepted as excuses for, or even
explanations of those sins which do not happen to fall within the category of legal
crimes, but which, much more than those crimes for which the law imprisons and
hangs, are destroying the moral order of God’s universe, and outraging the highest
and noblest principles of truth, and purity, and love? But it cannot be denied that we
have strong natural dispositions and passions which we have been given
independently of ourselves, and for the possession of which we cannot with justice
be held responsible? Certainly—and you never find fault with a man for any faculty
or temper which he may have—but you do hold him responsible for the direction and
control of it. We can point to countless noble careers to show how the strong
impulses of individual natures are indeed irresistible, but their action is controllable.
The great heroes whom we justly reverence, who rise above us as some snow-capped
mountain towers above the dead level of a low-lying plain, are not those who have
destroyed, but those who have preserved and used aright the natural impulses and
passions which had been given them. That is the true meaning of such lives as those
of St. Paul, or Martin Luther—St. Augustine, or John Bunyan. Ay, and there are
many still amongst us who use their natural dispositions and their natural affections,
their natural passions—even their natural beauty, which might have been used to
lure souls to hell—to win many a one to a nobler and purer life. What a solemn
responsibility, then, is the right use of our natural disposition and talents, for others
as well as for ourselves. To you, my young friends, especially, I would say, Do try and
begin early to recognise the solemnity of life. Do not be downhearted or dismayed if,
after you have felt the power of Christ’s death, and when you would do good, evil is
present with you. Do not let such moments harden you. Try and realise then all the
love and mercy and tenderness with which the crucified Lord looks upon you, as He
once looked on the fallen apostle, and, like him, “go forth and weep bitterly.” Then it
will be well with you. Sin shall not reign in you, though for the moment it seems to
have conquered you. (T. T. Shore, M. A.)
On necessity
I. Men are very fond of ascribing their sins to the temptations of the devil, and in such a
way as, in the main, to put the responsibility upon him. It is surely taught in the Word of
God that evil spirits do foment wickedness; that they suggest it; that they persuade men
to it. It is not taught that they infuse it, and perform it in men. It is taught that Satan
persuades men to sin; but the men do the sinning—not he. The power of temptation
depends upon two elements: first, the power of presenting inducement or motive on the
part of the tempter; and, secondly and mainly, the strength in the victim of the passion
to which this motive is presented. No one could tempt to pride a man that had not
already a powerful tendency to pride. The chord must be there before the hand of the

40. harper can bring out the tone. No one could be tempted to avarice that had not a
predisposition to the love of property. No man could be tempted to hatred, or to cruelty,
or to appetites, one or many, unless there pre-existed a tendency in that direction.
Hence, the simple fact of temptation is, that you do wrong, while Satan merely asks you
to do it. It is your act. It may be his suggestion, it may be his thought; but it is your
performance. And you do it with plenary freedom, urged, fevered, it may be, by him.
II. Men relieve themselves, or seek to do so, from the sense of guilt and responsibility,
by attributing their sins to their fellow men. They admit the wrong, but they put in the
plea that the circumstances were such that they could not help committing it. The
example and impunity of other men in transgression are pleaded, the persuasions and
influences of other men are pleaded, certain relations to other men are pleaded, as if
these things were compulsory. Men attribute their sins to public sentiment, to the
customs of the times, to the habits of the community. Are they intemperate?
Intemperance is customary in the circle in which they walk. Are they unscrupulous in
their dealings? Unscrupulousness is the law of the profession which they follow. And
when they have been charged with continuous sinning—with the violation of conscience,
with the violation of purity, with the violation of temperance, with the violation of
honesty or honour—they have still pleaded, “Yes, we have sinned; but we are not
exceptional; we do not stand alone; we are nouns of multitude; all men do these
things”—as if the inference was, “Because all men do them, they are not so culpable in
us.” Men may sin by wholesale; but they are punished by retail. There were never such
dividends in any bank on earth as are apportioned in the court of conscience. There
every man not only is particeps criminis in the transgression which he joins others in
committing, but he is responsible for the whole sin, though thousands and millions
participate with him in it. It is an exceedingly fashionable habit at present to put upon
society the guilt of the transgressions of men. Are men idle, and is there deduced from
idleness the accustomed fruit? Society has not made the suitable provisions for these
men, or they would not have been idle! Are men insubordinate, and do they violate the
laws? Society has not made proper laws for such men! They have not by society been
rightly educated, or they would not have been insubordinate! Are men full of vices and
crimes that spring from fertile ignorance? Society, as a schoolmaster, ought not to have
let them be ignorant! Do men murder? Society is to blame! Do men steal? Society is the
responsible scapegoat for thieves! You shall find philosophers on every side that wag
their heads and say, “Now you see that society does not fulfil its duties and functions:
society ought to have stepped these things.” I will admit that in society there are many
things that men ought to do which are left undone, and many things that they ought to
leave undone which are done; but to say that upon society is to be put the
responsibilities of the individual characters of all its citizens, is to imply that you give to
society power to enforce those responsibilities; and if you give to society that power, you
give it a power such as was never contemplated even by the extremest despotic theory of
government. Society may in some instances be the tempter, and may in some instances
have its individual part in the wrong-doing of its citizens; but it does not take away from
any man that does wrong, the whole, undivided, personal responsibility of that wrong.
III. The last class of the category of excuses is that of fatality. “We are delivered to
commit sin; we are bound over to do it; we cannot help doing it”—so say some men. On
the one hand, men are apt to be jealous of their liberty; but to avoid responsibility for
transgression they disclaim their liberties, and plead a want of power to choose; a want
of power to do that which they have chosen; or a want of power to reject that which they
have determined to reject.
1. One class of men regard thought and volition as the inevitable effect of natural

41. causes. They are no more avoidable, they say, than are the phenomena of nature.
Effect follows cause as irresistibly in the one case as in the other. And so man is just
as helpless as a mill wheel, which is made to turn over, and over, and over, by a
power that is not under its control. Against this theory, we oppose the universal
consciousness of men in the earlier stages of their moral character. Men know
perfectly well that they have no plenary liberty; that they have only limited liberty. It
is certainly true that, if blue is presented to my eye, I cannot prevent the impression
of blue being made on my mind. It is true that, if light is presented to my eye, I
cannot prevent the inevitable effect that light produces. But if, for any reason I prefer
not to have light, although when it shines I cannot hinder the happening of its actual
effects, I can prevent my eyes from coming where the light falls. There is profound
Divine wisdom in that part of the Lord’s Prayer which seems strange to our youth—
“Lead us not into temptation.” Well might powder pray, “Deliver me from the fire”;
for if the fire touches it, there is no help for it—there must be an explosion. And there
are many circumstances in which, if inflamed passions, inflamed tempers, in the
soul’s warfare in life, subject themselves to certain causes, they will lead a man to sin.
Therefore the plea is, “Lead me not into temptation: let it not come upon me.” Men
are responsible for their volitions, and for those conditions which produce
volitions—and this is the opinion of men generally.
2. A more frequent and more subtle plea of irresponsibility is founded on the
modern doctrine of organisation. One man says, “I may lie; but I was delivered to do
it when I was created with such an inordinate development of secretiveness.”
Another man says, “I may be harsh and cruel; but I was delivered to be so from my
mother’s womb; there is such immense destructiveness in my organisation.” Another
man says, “You that have largo intellectual developments, and are able to see and
foresee, may be responsible for falling into sin; but I have no such development; I
cannot foresee anything; I have to take things as they find me, and I am not
responsible.” At first it would look as though this was very rational; but it is not. It is
not phrenological. It is not philosophical. And that is not all; the men that use these
pleas do not themselves believe in them. There are abundant proofs of the falsity of
the claim which they set up; but for my present purpose it is quite sufficient to say
that, when men sin and plead fatalism or organisation as a justification of their
wrong-doing, they do not believe the doctrine that they themselves advance. No man
will accept an insult from another on the plea that that other man cannot help giving
it. If a man deals you a blow in the street, not accidentally, but because, as he says, he
is naturally irritable, having large combativeness, and cannot help it, you do not
listen calmly to the explanation, and say, “All right, sir; all right.” No man admits for
one single moment any such thing as that men are to be excused for all sorts of
misdemeanours, because they happen to be peculiarly organised. The whole
intercourse of man with man would be destroyed; the community would be
dissolved; society would rush, like turbulent streams in the midst of spring rains,
down to destruction, if you were to take away the doctrine that a man can control his
conduct, his thought, his will. It does not follow that, because a man follows his
strongest faculty, he must follow it to do wrong with it. Here is the fallacy—or one of
the fallacies—which men run into. If a man has large secretiveness, it does not follow
that he should lie. A man may be secretive, and not transgress. Secretiveness may
leaven every faculty of the mind, and that without making one of them commit sin. It
has a broad sphere, and a wholesome sphere; and if you say, “I must follow my
strongest faculty,” I reply that it does not follow that you must follow it contrary to
moral law—contrary to what is right. Then another thing to be considered is the

42. determining influence. A man is either sane or insane; and the distinction is this: If a
man can no longer control his action by the antagonism of faculties; if, for instance,
by the antagonism of reason and the affections he cannot control the passions; if the
antagonism among themselves of the balanced faculties is so weak that the
individual is incapable of governing himself, then he is insane. But if a man is not
insane, there is in him a power proceeding from the balance of faculties, by which the
erring one or ones may be controlled. So that every man, up to the point of insanity,
has latent in him, if he pleases to educate it and exercise it, the power of controlling
by other forces in his mind those which incline him to go wrong. Well, now, if there
be this antagonistic power, it becomes a question of dynamics. Men say, “I have such
a powerful tendency to go wrong that you ought not to punish me.” It is not to
punish you, so much as it is to stimulate the dormant faculty from whose inactivity
that tendency proceeds, that you are made to suffer. If when my child is convicted of
wrong, he having been tempted by vanity to break down into lies, I severely chastise
him, and put him to shame, I inflict pain upon him not only as a punishment, but as
a restorative. For I say to myself, if that child’s conscience is so feeble, I must give
him some stimulus. If his fear is so influential in the wrong way, I must spring it in
the other direction. In other words, just the opposite of the popular pleading is true.
The weaker the child is to resist evil, the more powerful must be the motive that is
brought to bear upon him to do well. I remark, in view of these statements and
reasonings—
1. Sin is bad enough ordinarily. I do not refer to its influence upon others, but to its
reactionary influence upon our own moral state. Not only is it bad enough, but
ordinarily it is made worse by the mode in which men treat it. If men stopped,
whenever they did wrong, and measured it, and called it by its proper name, and
turned away from it, although the process of recovery would be slow, it would in
many respects be salutary, by way of strengthening and educating the mind; but
when men commit sin, and institute a special plea, and defend their wrong-doing,
and conceal it, and equivocate concerning it, they are corrupted even more by the
defence than by the wrong-doing itself. How sad is that condition in which the
compass will not point to the polar star! If there be fatal attractions on the ship, and
if the shipmaster has steered by a compass that is not true in its directions, it would
be better if he had thrown it overboard; because he has perfect confidence in it, and
it has been lying all the time. And if the conscience, that is the compass of the soul, is
perverted, and does not point to truth and right, and men are guiding themselves by
it, how fatally are they going down to destruction!
2. What is the reason of the stress that is laid in the Word of God on the subject of
confessing and forsaking sin? “Let him that stole steal no more,” etc. “Confess your
faults one to another.” This doctrine was the great recuperative element. It was the
preaching of John. It was the initial preaching of Christ. It was the preaching of the
apostles. It is the annunciation of the Gospel. Confess and forsake your sin. Own that
it is sin. Be honest with yourself. Make at last to yourself a full and clear
acknowledgment that wrong is wrong. All men fail, and come short of their duty; but
some justify, and palliate, and excuse, and deny, while others confess, and repent,
and forsake—and these last are the true men. (H. W. Beecher.)
Organisation and responsibility
That men are variously constituted is a fact not merely profoundly interesting to the

43. speculative philosopher, but of the greatest practical consequence to the Christian
philanthropist. While the genus, man, is founded on a common basis, the individual is
marked by characteristics singular to himself. Let us look at some special instances of
peculiar organisation, and then consider them in relation to personal responsibility. For
example, take the man whose dominating characteristic is acquisitiveness. That man’s
creed is a word, and that word is but a syllable: his creed is Get; nothing less, nothing
more,—simply Get! With him benevolence is a matter of weights and scales; with him
buying and selling and getting gain are the highest triumphs of mortal genius. Ask him
why. Instantly he recurs to his organisation. He says, “God made me as I am; He did not
consult me as to the constitution of my being; He made me acquisitive, and I must be
faithful to my organisation; and I will go forward to meet Him at the day of judgment,
and tell Him to His face that He has me as He made me, and I disclaim all
responsibility.” The organisation of another man predominates in the direction of
combativeness. The man is litigious, quarrelsome, cantankerous, violent: Ask him why.
He says, “I must be faithful to my constitution; my whole manhood is intensely
combative; I did not make myself; God has made me as He made me, and I disown all
laws of obligation.” Here is a man with little hope. He sees a lion on every way; he dreads
that ruin will be the end of every enterprise; he knows not the sweetness of contentment
or the repose of an intelligent hope; he is always mourning, always repining; his voice is
an unceasing threnody, his face a perpetual winter. Ask him why. He says, “God so made
me; if He had put within me the angel of hope, I should have been sharer of your
gladness; I should have been your companion in the choir; I should have been a happier
man: He covered me with night that owns no star; He gave my fingers no cunning art of
music; He meant me to look at Him through tears and to offer my poor worship in
sighs.” We cannot enter into all the questions which may lie between God and man on
the subject of organisation. Let us take one or two such cases as have just been outlined.
We found the acquisitive man getting gold, getting at all risks; getting till his conscience
was seared and his understanding darkened. In that case ought we to sympathise with
the man, saying, “We are sorry for you; we lament that your organisation compels you to
be avaricious: we know you cannot help it, so we exempt you from all responsibility”?
No! we would say as in thunder; No! we do not find fault with the organisation of the
acquisitive man; but if he pleads the excuse already cited, we openly charge him with
having degraded and diabolised that constitution; he has not used it, but abused it; he
has not been faithful, but faithless, and must be branded as a criminal. The man’s
organisation is acquisitive; be it so: that circumstance in itself does not necessitate
crime. There are two courses open to the acquisitive man. To him we say, Do be faithful
to your organisation, do get, get money by right means, get exaltation by legitimate
processes; but with all thy getting, get understanding, “for the merchandise of it is better
than the merchandise of silver,” etc. The combative man; what of him? Do we
sympathise with him? “Sir, your case demands commiseration, inasmuch as you must be
faithful to your organisation, and that organisation happens to be a dreadful one”? No!
to the combative man we say, There are two courses open to you: you can fight with
muscle, and steel, and gunpowder; you may train yourself to be pitiless as a tiger; you
may be petulant, resentful, hard-hearted: the choice is before you to pronounce the
elective word! Or, there is another course open: you may choose weapons that are not
carnal; you may resist the devil; you may “wrestle not against flesh and blood, but
against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world,
against spiritual wickedness in high places.” The argument which the fatalist bases upon
organisation is self-annihilating when applied to the common relations of life. All human
legislation assumes man’s power of self-regulation, and grounds itself on the grand
doctrine of man’s responsibility to man. At this point, then, Divine revelation meets

44. human reason, and insists upon the same principle in relation to God. (J. Parker, D. D.)
10 and then come and stand before me in this
house, which bears my ame, and say, “We are
safe”—safe to do all these detestable things?
BAR ES, "We are delivered - Jeremiah accuses them of trusting in the
ceremonial of the temple instead of leading holy lives. “You break,” he says, “the Ten
Commandments, and then you go to the Temple; and when the service is over you say,
We are delivered. We have atoned for our past actions, and may start afresh with easy
minds upon a new course of wickedness.”
GILL, "And come and stand before me in this house,.... In the temple; this they
did after they had been guilty of such immoralities and idolatry; thinking by their
appearance there, and their performance of a few ceremonies, and offering of some
sacrifices, that all were atoned for: or this denotes their impudence, that, after the
commission of such notorious crimes, they should have the front to come into the house
of God, and stand before him, as if they had never departed from him, and were his
people, and the true worshippers of him:
which is called by my name; the temple of God, the house of God, the sanctuary of
the Lord; and where his name was also called upon, being a house of prayer; or where
prayer was made to the Lord:
and say, we are delivered; from the punishment of the above sins, by coming into
the temple, and standing before the Lord in it; by calling on his name, and offering
sacrifices, though with impure hearts and hands, and in a hypocritical way
to do all these abominations; before mentioned; theft, murder, adultery, perjury,
and idolatry. The sense is, either we are delivered and freed from punishment, that we
may do these things with impunity; this is the use we make of, and the inference we draw
from, our deliverance from evil: or we are delivered, though we commit these
abominations, and therefore in them: or, seeing we are delivered, therefore do we these
things; not that they really said these words, but this was the language of their actions.
The Syriac version is, "deliver us, while we commit all these sins".
JAMISO , "And come — And yet come (Eze_23:39).
We are delivered — namely, from all impending calamities. In spite of the prophet’s

45. threats, we have nothing to fear; we have offered our sacrifices, and therefore Jehovah
will “deliver” us.
to do all these abominations — namely, those enumerated (Jer_7:9). These words
are not to be connected with “we are delivered,” but thus: “Is it with this design that ye
come and stand before Me in this house,” in order that having offered your worthless
sacrifices ye may be taken into My favor and so do all these abominations (Jer_7:9) with
impunity? [Maurer].
K&D, "Jer_7:10
Breaches of almost all the commandments are specified; first the eighth, sixth, and
seventh of the second table, and then two commandments of the first table; cf. Hos_4:2.
Swearing falsely is an abuse of God's name. In "offer odours to Baal," Baal is the
representation of the false gods. The phrase, other gods, points to the first
commandment, Exo_20:3; and the relative clause: whom ye knew not, stands in
opposition to: I am Jahveh your God, who hath brought you out of Egypt. They knew not
the other gods, because they had not made themselves known to them in benefits and
blessings; cf. Jer_19:4. While they so daringly break all God's commands, they yet come
before His face in the temple which Jahveh has chosen to reveal His name there. '‫ר‬ ֶ‫שׁ‬ ֲ‫א‬
‫א‬ ָ‫ר‬ ְ‫ק‬ִ‫נ‬ is not: which bears my name (Hitz.); or: on which my name is bestowed, which is
named after me (Graf). The name of Jahveh is the revelation of Himself, and the
meaning is: on which I have set my glory, in which I have made my glorious being
known; see on Deu_28:10 and Amo_9:12. We are saved, sc. from all the evils that
threaten us, i.e., we are concealed, have nothing to fear; cf. Eze_14:16, Eze_14:18; Amo_
3:12. The perfect denotat firmam persuasionem incolumitatis. Chr. B. Mich. By
changing ‫נוּ‬ ְ‫ל‬ ַ ִ‫נ‬ into ‫נוּ‬ ֵ‫ל‬ ְ ַ‫,נ‬ as Ewald, following the Syr., reads, the sense is weakened. '‫ן‬ ַ‫ע‬ ַ‫מ‬ ְ‫ל‬
‫ּות‬‫שׂ‬ ֲ‫ע‬ ‫וגו‬ is neither: as regards what we have done, nor: because = while or whereas ye have
done (Hitz.), but: in order to do that ye may do. ‫ן‬ ַ‫ע‬ ַ‫מ‬ ְ‫ל‬ with the infin., as with the perf., has
never the signif., because of or in reference to something past and done, but always
means, with the view of doing something; English: to the end that. The thought is simply
this: Ye appear in my temple to sacrifice and worship, thinking thus to appease my
wrath and turn aside all punishment, that so ye may go on doing all these (in Jer_7:9
enumerated) abominations. By frequenting the temple, they thought to procure an
indulgence for their wicked ongoings, not merely for what they had already done, but for
what they do from day to day.
CALVI , "The Prophet now adds, Ye come, that is, after ye have allowed
yourselves to steal, and to murder, and to commit adultery, and to corrupt the whole
worship of God, — at last, Ye come and stand before me in this temple. God
proceeds with the same subject; for it was not only his purpose in this place to
condemn the Jews as murderers, and thieves, and adulterers, but he proceeds
farther, even to shew their shameless effrontery in coming with an unblushing front
and entering the Temple, as though they were the true worshippers of God. “What
do you mean, “he says, “by this? Ye bring with you murders, and thefts, and
adulteries, and abominable filth; ye are contaminated with the most disgraceful
things: by and bye ye enter the Temple, and think that you are at liberty to do

46. anything.” Similar is the language we find in the first chapter of Isaiah, verses 12
and 15 (Isaiah 1:12): God complains there that they trod the pavement of his
Temple, and brought hands polluted with blood. So also in this place, Ye come, he
says, intimating his detestation, and ye stand before me in this Temple Though God
was not inclosed in that Temple, yet we know that the Ark of the Covenant was the
symbol of his presence. Hence, we often meet in the law with this expression, “Ye
shall stand before me.” Here then, God shews that it was a detestable and monstrous
thing, that the Jews dared to rush into his presence, when polluted and
contaminated with so many vices.
And he adds, In this house, on which is called my name, that is, which has been
dedicated to me; for to call God’s name on the Temple, means nothing else, but that
the Temple was consecrated to him, so that he was there worshipped. When God is
truly worshipped, they who seek him find that he himself is present by his grace and
power. As then God had commanded the Temple to be built for him, that he might
there be worshipped, he says his name was there called, that is, according to its first
and sacred appointment. Absurdly indeed did the Jews call on his name, for there
was in them no religion, no piety: but according to God’s institution, his name was
called upon in the Temple, as he had consecrated it to himself. Hence God reminds
them of the first institution, which was holy and ought to have continued inviolable:
“Know ye not, that this place has been chosen by me, that my name might be there
invoked? Ye stand before me in the holy place, and ye stand polluted; and though
polluted, not with one kind of vices, but my whole law has been violated by you, and
my Tables despised, ye yet stand!” We hence see the design of the Prophet: for he
condemns the effrontery and frowardness of the Jews, because they thus dared to
rush into God’s presence in all their pollutions.
And ye say, he adds, that is, while standing in the Temple; ye say, O, we are freed to
do all these abominations; that is, “Ye think that the Temple is a covert for you to
hide all your vices; and so ye think, that you have escaped from my hand, as though
no account is any more to be made of your sins, my Temple being regarded by you
as an asylum, under whose shade ye take shelter.” It is indeed certain, that the Jews
did not thus speak; for had they been asked whether their life was abominable, they
would have denied it to be so. He speaks of the fact itself, and he speaks in the
person of God, and according to his command. He therefore condemns hypocrites
for thinking themselves freed, because they came to the Temple, and for thinking
that all those abominations which he had mentioned, their impiety towards God and
their injustice towards their neighbors, would be unpunished. (193)
8.Behold, ye trust in words of falsehood to no profit, —
9.The thief, murderer, and adulterer, And the false swearer and incense-burner to
Baal, And the walker after foreign gods, Whom ye have not known;
10.And ye come and stand before me In this house, on which is called my name, And
ye say, “We are freed To do all these abominations,”

47. Or,
And ye say, “He has made us free To do all these abominations.”
Blayney, following the Syriac, has rendered the words, —
And say, Deliver us, that we may practice all these abominations.
But what is most consistent with the passage is to consider the sentence as
declarative, and not as a prayer. They considered themselves freed from guilt when
they had offered their sacrifices. They thought themselves then at liberty to be
immoral and also to be idolatrous. We might think such a state of blindness and
infatuation impossible; but it has existed among those calling themselves Christians,
and it exists now. Gataker mentions a common saying among ignorant Papists of the
same import with what is said here, “We must sin to be shriven, and shriven to sin.”
The turning of the grace of God into lasciviousness is the same thing. — Ed.
TRAPP, "Jeremiah 7:10 And come and stand before me in this house, which is
called by my name, and say, We are delivered to do all these abominations?
Ver. 10. And come and stand before me in this house.] This was worse than to do as
the Circassiaus, a kind of mongrel Christians of the Greek Church of this day, who,
as they baptize not their children till the eighth year, so they enter not into the
Church, the gentlemen especially, till the sixtieth year, but hear divine service
standing without the temple - that is to say, till through age they grow unable to
continue their rapines and robberies, to which sin that nation is exceedingly
addicted. (a)
And say, We are delivered,] i.e., Licensed. Hoc idem dicunt qui cogitationes inter
peccata non numerant, saith Oecolampadius.
ELLICOTT, "(10) And come and stand.—Better, and then have ye come, and stood
before me.
We are delivered.—Taking the word as it stands (a different punctuation adopted
by some commentators and versions gives Deliver us, as though reproducing, with
indignant scorn, the very prayer of the people), the sense seems to be this. The
people tried to combine the worship of Baal and Jehovah, and passed from the one
temple to the other. They went away from the fast or feast in the house of the Lord
with the feeling that they were “saved,” or “delivered.” They had gone through their
religious duties, and might claim their reward. The prophet seems to repeat their
words in a tone of irony, They were “delivered,” not from their abominations, but as
if set free to do them.
PARKER, "Organisation and Responsibility

48. Jeremiah 7:10
That men are variously constituted is a fact not merely profoundly interesting to the
speculative philosopher, but of the greatest practical consequence to the Christian
philanthropist. While the genus, Prayer of Manasseh , is founded on a common
basis, the individual is marked by characteristics singular to himself. We are rooted
in the same soil, yet each seems to develop according to a law of his own. We have
much in common, yet are individualised by the strongest contrasts. All men bear the
same image, yet no two men are alike; the superscription upon all is the writing of
God, yet the pronunciation of all that superscription is as varied as the dialects of
Babel. We are one, yet many; we are many, yet one; distinct as the waves, yet one as
the sea; lonely as the stars, yet united as the firmament; diversified as the
mountains, yet one as the globe. In all this contrast and antithesis, all this many-
coloured and many-toned variousness of humanity, we have distinctness and vitality
of personal character. In this view of humanity we obtain an indistinct and
incomplete, yet instructive hint of what is comprehended in the Infinite Life of God.
While all men have a common life, each man appears to have a portion of life
peculiarly and specially his own; and Song of Solomon , going through all the
uncounted generations of humanity, and taking note not only of the common centre,
but of all the individual radii, we feel how full, how vast, how infinite, must be the
vitality of God!
Let us look at some special instances of peculiar organisation, and then consider
them in relation to personal responsibility. For example, take the man whose
dominating characteristic is Acquisitiveness. That man"s creed is a word, and that
word is but a syllable: his creed is Get; nothing less, nothing more,—simply Get! His
very hand is a crook that may be used for plucking fruit off the highest trees, or
plunging into the deepest streams. He is ever seeing his way clear to more and more
property. He would turn heaven itself into a market-place, and drive sharp bargains
with the angels. While other men are inhaling the poetry which breathes around the
mountain range, he sees how it could be drained and utilised up to the very top,—
that solemn top which has heard no eloquence but the thunder, and known no
plough but the lightning. He calls the gift of womanly devotion—"waste"; and being
quick at mental arithmetic he soon finds that the ointment given by the hand of
uncalculating and ungrudging love "might have been sold,"— think of that, "might
have been sold, and given to the poor:" see how this man of dust puts the
possibility,—he says it might have been "sold" and "given," as if it could not have
been "given" without first being "sold": with him benevolence is a matter of
weights and scales; with him the true way to heaven is over the counter; with him
buying and selling and getting gain are the highest triumphs of mortal genius. Ask
him why. Instantly he recurs to his organisation. He says: "God made me as I am;
he did not consult me as to the constitution of my being; he made me acquisitive,
and I must be faithful to my organisation; and I will go forward to meet him at the
day of judgment, and tell him to his face that he has me as he made me, and I
disclaim all responsibility."

49. The organisation of another man predominates in the direction of Combativeness.
The man is litigious, quarrelsome, cantankerous, violent. He is "such a son of Belial,
that a man cannot speak to him." His breast is a volcano. He alienates his friends;
he thrice slays his foes. He is so sensitive as to be wounded by a passing shadow. He
imagines that creation is continually pronouncing judgment upon him. In a moment
the burning word of defiance is on his lips, and his wrath is expressed without
restraint. Ask him why. He says: "I must be faithful to my constitution; my whole
manhood is intensely combative; I did not make myself; God has me as he made me,
and I disown all laws of obligation."
Here is a woman whose countenance expresses the most urgent curiosity; her face is
a mark of interrogation; she is always prying into forbidden matters, and the
moment any subject assumes mystery or secrecy her whole nature is stirred into the
most anxious agitation. She puts forth her hand eagerly to the forbidden tree: if it
had not been forbidden, she would not have troubled it; but the interdict enkindled
every passion, and she cannot rest until her inquisitiveness is satisfied. The word
"Why?" is continually on her tongue. She would cross-examine the angels, and open
the sealed books of God. She feels the burning of a perpetual thirst; a thirst which
cannot be slaked at vulgar streams, but must be quenched at the fountain which
springs from the distant hills. Ask the reason; she answers: "I must be myself; God
gave me my organisation; he determined the temperature of my blood; I shall
cultivate his gifts, and if any injury arise the blame shall be charged upon himself.
Here is a man with little Hope. He sees a lion on every way; he dreads that ruin will
be the end of every enterprise; he knows not the sweetness of contentment or the
repose of an intelligent hope; he is always mourning, always repining; his voice is an
unceasing threnody, his face a perpetual winter. He sees no angel-forms in the glad,
laughing spring; summer itself is chilled into winter by his icy breath; he reads no
writing of God in the rainbow; there is no dimple of joy in the soft young cheek of
May; and all June"s wealth of light shows him nothing but corresponding shadows.
His life is a mournful plaint. o lyric charms him from his sadness; no minstrelsy
tempts his sullen heart into rhythmic throbs. Ask him why. He says: "God so made
me; if he had put within me the angel of Hope, I should have been sharer of your
gladness; I should have been your companion in the choir; I should have been a
happier man: he covered me with night that owns no star; he gave my fingers no
cunning art of music; he meant me to look at him through tears and to offer my
poor worship in sighs."
These instances may suffice to show, from one point of view, the relation of
organisation to responsibility. The argument in brief Isaiah , that men must be
faithful to their constitution; that if God meant men to be poets, they would be
poets; if soldiers, soldiers; if accumulators, accumulators; and so forth, the question
being simply one of organisation,—organisation for which the men themselves are
not responsible.
We cannot enter into all the questions which may lie between God and man on the
subject of organisation. Let us take one or two such cases as have just been outlined.

50. We found the acquisitive man getting gold, getting at all risks; getting till his
conscience was seared and his understanding darkened. In that case ought we to
sympathise with the Prayer of Manasseh , saying, "We are sorry for you; we lament
that your organisation compels you to be avaricious: we know you cannot help it, so
we exempt you from all responsibility"? o! we would say as in thunder; o! we do
not find fault with the organisation of the acquisitive man; but if he pleads the
excuse already citied, we openly charge him with having degraded, prostituted, and
diabolised that constitution; he has not used it, but abused it; he has not been
faithful, but faithless, and must be branded as a criminal. The man"s organisation is
acquisitive; be it so: that circumstance in itself does not necessitate crime. There are
two courses open to the acquisitive man. He can rake in the mud and burrow in the
drains of the city; he can covet the one ewe lamb or the poor man"s acre of
vineyard; he can grind the face of honest poverty, and oppress him who has no
helper; he may leave no "handfuls of purpose" for the needy gleaner; he may "go
over" the olive boughs until not one particle of fruit remains for "the stranger, the
fatherless, or the widow:" all that he may do; the course is open—the choice is his
own! But is that all? Truly, blessedly, o! He may carry the full force of his
acquisitions in another direction; he may listen to the invitations of wisdom; he may
enrich himself with heavenly spoil. To him we say, Do be faithful to your
organisation, do get, get money by right means, get exaltation by legitimate
processes; but with all thy getting, get understanding, "for the merchandise of it is
better than the merchandise of silver, and the gain thereof than fine gold; she is
more precious than rubies, and all the things thou canst desire are not to be
compared unto her."
Here there are two courses: the one goes downward into dust, into mire, into hell;
the other goes upward, into Wisdom of Solomon , into light, into heaven. We are not
responsible for our organisation, but for the use we make of it; we are not
responsible for the faculty of speech, but we are responsible for the manner in which
we employ it; we can use it in unholy communications, such as "defile the Prayer of
Manasseh ," or we can "open our mouth for the dumb," and "plead the cause of the
poor and needy."
The combative man; what of him? We found him fighting, storming, raging. His life
was hot with passion, and his eye glared with a murderous intent. Do we sympathise
with him? " Sirach , your case demands commiseration, inasmuch as you must be
faithful to your organisation, and that organisation happens to be a dreadful one?
" o! to the combative man we say: There are two courses open to you: you can fight
with muscle, and steel, and gunpowder; you may train yourself to be pitiless as a
tiger; you may be petulant, resentful, hard-hearted: the choice is before you to
pronounce the elective word! Or, there is another course open: you may choose
weapons that are not carnal; you may resist the devil; you may "wrestle not against
flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, again:;t the rulers of the
darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places." You need not
throw off the panoply of war and assume the attire of peace. Put on the whole
armour of God. Helmet, breastplate, sword, shield, girdle, sandals,—put it on! and
shout the war-cry through the devil"s camp. There is scope enough for

51. combativeness—your organisation need not be dormant. Which course do you
adopt? You are not responsible for your organisation, but you are responsible for
the use you make of it; you can make yourself a plague and a terror, or you may
become a valiant champion, whose foot shall be upon the neck of the enemies of
God! Take the case of inordinate inquisitiveness. There are two courses open to the
inquisitive person; to him we say: You can meanly pry into concerns which are not
your own; you can be found under the eaves overhearing the sacred words of
confidence; you can be hunting for forbidden prey within the hallowed enclosure of
social trust;—in that ignoble way you may display the chief characteristic of your
mental nature, prowling about in the darkness, robbing your friends of their
innermost treasures. There is another course open; God has set before every man an
ample domain, in which he may exercise inquiry: you may watch the worlds and
inquire into the mysteries of their relations, how they warm themselves and others
by revolution, and brighten themselves by continual activity; ask them questions,
plead for answers; sit down by the side of summer, and inquire diligently of her
wondrous cunning and inexhaustible fertility; ask how she weaves the garland, or
moulds the blossom, or covers the nakedness of the forest; acquaint yourself with all
the minstrels which fill the air with truest music; interrogate the sea, ask the secret
of its eternal sob, and inquire concerning its palace-caves, fashioned without craft or
cunning of man: or exercise your inquisitiveness in other directions; go from nature
to humanity; inquire after your brother"s well-being; seek out the lurking places of
guilt, and go in search of the balm which can heal the soreness of the heart; and
when men ask you how you employ your inquisitive faculty, you can answer: "I
inquired for Wisdom of Solomon , and sought out the dwelling-place of
understanding; I was eyes to the blind, and feet was I to the lame; I was a father to
the poor; and the cause which I knew not, I searched out."
The argument which the fatalist bases upon organisation is self-annihilating when
applied to the common relations of life. The fatalist himself does not believe in his
own doctrine; in speculative reasoning he is eager to charge moral crime upon
organic defect; yet, in practical magistracy, he arraigns and condemns the criminal
to punishment. But how monstrous an outrage is this upon his own creed! The
criminal was compelled through stress of organisation to commit the crime, yet the
fatalist punishes him for doing what he could not help! Let the principle of the
fatalist be admitted, and there is an end to all legislation—an end, indeed, to the
social compact itself. All associated life is regulated by a system of restraints; but
restraint implies self-control, and self-control is directly opposed to fatalism. Let a
criminal plead that he could not help committing a certain crime; and if the judge
allow the plea, he will at once treat the criminal as a lunatic, and instruct the officers
of justice accordingly. Magistracy proceeds upon the principle that men can "help"
committing crime. All human legislation assumes man"s power of self-regulation,
and grounds itself on the grand doctrine of man"s responsibility to man. At this
point, then, divine revelation meets human reason, and insists upon the same
principle in relation to God. Theology says, You hold yourselves responsible to one
another on all social matters; you punish the criminal; you ignore the plea of
fatalism on all questions of property, order, and security; now go farther, heighten
your own social base, carry out to their logical issues your own principles and

52. methods, and you will reach all that God requires of man.
If it be urged that God gave the criminal his organisation, the objection does not
touch the argument. The argument Isaiah , that in human consciousness the plea of
fatalism is ignored on all practical matters; away beyond all written statutes there is
a conviction that man can regulate his actions, and ought to be held responsible for
such regulation: man himself thus, by his own conduct and his own laws, acquits
God of all charge upon this matter; the very recognition by the magistrate, of man"s
responsibility, is itself a direct acquittal of God from the accusations of fatalism.
God need not be interrogated upon the subject, for the magistrate himself, faithful
to the consciousness of universal humanity, treats the fatalistic theory as an
absurdity.
The practical issue of the argument, then, is that in human consciousness and
experience it is a settled principle that men are responsible to each other, and that
the doctrine of social irresponsibility is a lie; so that without opening the Bible, we
find this principle recognised by man the individual, man the proprietor, and man
the magistrate. Revelation does not establish a new law—does not impose upon man
an obligation foreign to his nature; but, on the contrary, takes human consciousness
as it Isaiah , and educates and sanctifies the moral instincts. Where, then, is the
unreasonableness of the scriptural doctrine of responsibility? Any other doctrine
would directly antagonise the consciousness, the experience, and the magisterial
instincts of the race, and therefore must presumptively be untrue; but this doctrine
appeals to the profoundest consciousness of human nature, finds in that a witness to
its own reasonableness, and is therefore presumptively true. It may be concluded,
then, that on the question of moral obligation to God, revelation simply interprets,
exalts, and sanctifies the consciousness and experience of the world.
PETT, "Jeremiah 7:9-10
“Will you steal, murder, and commit adultery, and swear falsely, and burn incense
to Baal, and walk after other gods that you have not known, and come and stand
before me in this house, which is called by my name, and say, ‘We are delivered,’
that you may do all these abominations?”
The Hebrew text is a little more stark. ‘To steal, to murder and commit adultery, to
swear falsely and to burn incense to Baal, and to walk after other gods that you
have not known, and then you come and stand before me in this house which is
called by My ame, and say “we are delivered” so that you may do all these
abominations.’ The unspoken comment required is that ‘it is preposterous!’
So the basic question was, did they really think that they could continue stealing,
murdering, committing adultery, giving false testimony (for these four compare
Hosea 4:2 and Exodus 20:13-16), and burning incense to Baal in the Temple and in
their high places, and walking after other gods, (compare Exodus 20:3-5) thus
breaking so many of the stipulations in His covenant, and then come and stand
before Him in the house which was called by His ame and claim that He would
deliver them? If so they had a strange idea of YHWH, for He abominated all these

53. things and would rather bring them into account for them.
‘The house which is called by My ame.’ The fact that it was called by His ame
made it ‘holy’, because it connected it with the very nature of God as revealed in His
ame, so that only those who were compatible with God in that way could be
welcomed there (Psalms 15; Psalms 24), simply because the behaviour of those who
worshipped there reflected on His ame and reputation. To worship in YHWH’s
house was a serious matter, for the worshippers of any god revealed by their lives
the nature of that god. Thus in the house which was called by His ame
unrepentant and disobedient sinners were not welcome (compare Isaiah 57:15). It
was for the true-hearted only.
‘Burning incense to Baal.’ The burning of incense to Baal took place in all the high
places and under every green tree. It was the popular expression of Canaanite
worship similar to the burning of joss sticks at high places in many Asian countries
today. I remember myself often going up the small mountain behind my flat in Hong
Kong island, and coming to a natural sanctuary formed by a rock formation where
joss sticks were still smouldering, left by local people. It was a ‘high place’ well
known to all the locals, and indeed for miles around. But in Palestine ‘high places’
could also be artificial ones set up in cities, and a number of incense altars where
such offerings were made have been discovered there.
The ‘gods that they had not known’ were presumably the Assyrian and Babylonian
gods (e.g. the queen of heaven in Jeremiah 7:18; compare also Ezekiel 8), and other
gods not familiar in the land of Canaan, but introduced into the Temple from
outside, partly but not wholly as a political requirement, although the description
may also have included the Canaanite pantheon.
It is one of the evidences of the fallen state of man that he does actually think that
God does not really mind about his sins, and that he can continue in them blatantly
while still retaining a relationship with God, and that in spite of God’s declaration
that it is not so. They go on about God’s active love and forgiveness, and overlook
the fact that both are dependent on repentance because of God’s antipathy to sin.
They forget that by His nature God cannot be fully merciful to the unrepentant. He
can give them sun and rain, but He cannot give them forgiveness. What was to
happen to Judah was to be a lesson for all time that God really does mind about our
sins, sufficiently to allow such an extreme judgment to come on those who, in spite
of being supposedly His people, broke His commandments.
11 Has this house, which bears my ame, become

54. a den of robbers to you? But I have been
watching! declares the Lord.
BAR ES, "Robbers - literally, tearers, those who rob with violence. The temple was
the place which sheltered them. It had been consecrated to God. Now that it harbors
miscreants, must it not as inevitably be destroyed as a den of robbers would be by any
righteous ruler?
GILL, "Is this house, which is called by my name,.... Meaning the temple:
become a den of robbers in your eyes? or do you look upon it, and make use of it,
as thieves do of dens; who, when they have robbed and murdered men, betake
themselves to them, not only to share their spoil, but to hide themselves? just so those
thieves, murderers adulterers, perjurers, and idolaters, after they had committed such
gross enormities, came into the temple and offered sacrifices; thinking hereby to cover
their sins, and expiate the guilt of them, and to be looked upon as good men, and true
worshippers of God, when they were no better than thieves and robbers; and such were
the Pharisees in Christ's time, and such was the temple as made by them; see Mat_21:13,
behold, even I have seen it, saith the Lord; not only all the abominations
committed by them, but the use they made of the temple and the worship of it; all the
hypocrisy of their hearts, and the inward thoughts of them, and their views and
intentions in their offerings and sacrifices; as well as what ruin and destruction the Lord
designed to bring shortly upon them, and upon that house which they had made a den of
robbers; as follows:
JAMISO , "den of robbers — Do you regard My temple as being what robbers
make their den, namely, an asylum wherein ye may obtain impunity for your
abominations (Jer_7:10)?
seen it — namely, that ye treat My house as if it were a den of thieves. Jehovah
implies more than is expressed, “I have seen and will punish it” (Isa_56:7; Mat_21:13).
K&D, "Jer_7:11
To expose the senselessness of such an idea, God asks if they take the temple for a den
of robbers? "In your eyes" goes with ‫ה‬ָ‫י‬ ָ‫ה‬ : is it become in your eyes, i.e., do ye take it for
such? If thieves, murderers, adulterers, etc., gathered to the temple, and supposed that
by appearing there they procured the absolution of their sins, they were in very act
declaring the temple to be a robbers' retreat. ‫יץ‬ ִ‫ר‬ ָ , the violent, here: the house-breaker,

55. robber. I, too, have seen, sc. that the temple is made by you a den of thieves, and will
deal accordingly. This completion of the thought appears from the context.
CALVI , "He afterwards adds, Is this house, which is called by my name, a den of
robbers? This is the conclusion of the passage, which contains an amplification of
their vices. For the Prophet had allowed the Jews to form a judgment, as though he
had been discussing an obscure or doubtful subject, “Behold, be ye yourselves
judges in your own case; is it right for you to steal, to murder, and to commit
adultery? and then to come into this Temple, and to boast that impunity is granted
to you as to all your evils?” This indeed ought to have been enough; but as the
obstinacy and stupor of the Jews were so great, that they would not have given way
without being most fully and in various ways proved guilty, the Prophet adds this
sentence, Is this house, which is called by my name, a den of robbers? that is, “Have
I chosen this place for myself, that ye might worship me, in order that ye might be
more licentious than if there was no religion? For what purpose is religion? Is it not
that men may by this bridle restrain themselves, that they may not be libertines?
For surely the worship and fear of God are the directors of equity and justice. ow,
would it not be better to have no Temple and no sacrifices, than that men should
take more liberty to sin by making their ceremonies as an excuse? Away then with
your ceremonies: conscience shews that it is a wretched thing to oppress or injure a
neighbor; all are constrained by common sense to own that adultery is a filthy and a
detestable thing; and men think the same of rapines and murders. As to
superstitions, when they are seen as such, all are constrained to allow the worship of
God ought to be preserved in its purity. Well then, had there been no Temple among
you, this truth must have been impressed on your minds, — that God ought to be
worshipped in purity. ow, because the Temple has been built at Jerusalem,
because ye offer sacrifices there, ye are thieves, ye are adulterers, ye are murderers;
and ye think that I am in some sort blind, that I am no longer the avenger of so
many and of such atrocious evils. A den of robbers then is my house become to you.”
But this sentence is to be read interrogatively, “Can it be, that this Temple, this
sanctuary, is become a den of robbers?” (194)
But we must consider the import of the comparison: Robbers, though they are most
audacious and wholly savage, do not yet dare openly to use their sword; they dare
not kill helpless men. Why? they fear the punishment allotted to them by the laws;
they are cautious. But when they seize on men in some hidden place, then they take
more liberty in their robberies; they kill men, and then take their property. We
hence see that dens and hidden places have in them more safety for robbers. The
comparison then is most suitable, when the Prophet says that the Jews made the
Temple of God the den of robbers: for had there been no Temple, some integrity
might have remained, secured by the common feeling of men. But when they
covered their baseness with sacrifices, they thought that they thus escaped all
judgment.
And hence, Christ applied this prophecy to his time; for the Jews had even then
profaned the Temple. Though they presumptuously and falsely called on God’s
name, they yet sought the Temple as an asylum for impurity. This folly Christ

56. exposed, as the Prophet had done.
He afterwards adds, Even I, behold I see, saith Jehovah Jeremiah here no doubt
touches ironically on the false confidence with which the Jews deceived themselves:
for hypocrites seem to themselves to know whatever is necessary. And hence also it
is, that as they think themselves to be acute, they are bolder and more
presumptuous in contriving deceitful schemes, by which they seek to delude God
and men. And hence the Prophet here tauntingly touches them to the quick, by
intimating that they wished to make God as it were blind, Even I, behold I see, he
says. It would not yet be sufficiently evident how emphatical the phrase is, were it
not for a similar passage in Isaiah 29:15,
“I also am wise.” The Prophet had said, “Woe to the crafty and the wise, who have
dug pits for themselves.”
He there condemns ungodly men, who thought that they could somehow by their
falsehoods deceive God; which seems to be and is monstrous: and yet it is an evil
which commonly prevails among men. For hardly a man in a hundred can be found
who does not seek coverings to hide himself from the eyes of God. This is the case
especially with courtiers and clever men, who assume to themselves so much clear-
sightedness, that God sees nothing in comparison with them. The Lord therefore, by
Isaiah, gives this answer, “I also am wise: if ye are wise, allow me at least some
portion of wisdom, and think not that I am altogether foolish.” So also in this place,
“Before my eyes, this house is made a den of robbers;” that is, “If there be any sense
in you, does it not appear evident that you have made a den of robbers of my
Temple? and can I be yet blind? If you think that you are very clear-sighted, I also
do see, saith the Lord.”
We hence see what force there is in the particle ‫,גם‬ gam, also, and in the pronoun
‫,אנכי‬ anoki, I, and in ‫הנה‬ , ene, behold; for these three words are heaped together,
that God might shew that he was not unobservant, when the people so audaciously
ran headlong into all kinds of vices, and sought by their falsehoods to cover his eyes,
that he might not see anything. (195)
The words “Which is called by my name,“ are literally, “Which called is my name
upon it,“ an idiomatic mode of speaking, with which the Welsh exactly corresponds,
—
(lang. cy) Yr hwn y gelwir fy enw arno.
The pronoun relative without a preposition is afterwards followed by a pronoun
substantive with a preposition prefixed. — Ed.
I also, behold, seen have I, saith Jehovah.
That is, He had seen all they did. If anything be put after “seen,“ it should be “these
things,“ and not “it;” for the reference is to the particulars before mentioned. See

57. Psalms 10:14; Ezekiel 8:12. — Ed.
TRAPP, "Jeremiah 7:11 Is this house, which is called by my name, become a den of
robbers in your eyes? Behold, even I have seen [it], saith the LORD.
Ver. 11. Is this house, which is called by my name.] Is it become impiae gentis
arcanum? as Florus afterwards spitefully called it; or a professed sanctuary of
roguery? as the Papists maliciously say of Geneva; or a receptacle of all
abominations? (a) as Pompey’s theatre in Rome was once said to be.
Become a den of robbers?] To such it should have been said by the porters, Gressus
removete profani. In the mystical sacrifices of Ceres, no profane person was to be
admitted, for the priest going before uttered these words, εκας εκας οστις αλιτρος -
that is, be packing every wicked person. So the Roman priests had their procul, O
procul este, profani.
ELLICOTT, "(11) A den of robbers.—The words had a special force in a country
like Palestine, where the limestone rocks presented many caves, which, like that of
Adullam (1 Samuel 22:1-2), were the refuge of outlaws and robbers. Those who now
flocked to the courts of the Temple, including even priests and prophets, were as
such robbers, finding shelter there, and soothing their consciences by their worship,
as the brigands of Italy do by their devotions at the shrine of some favourite
Madonna. It had for them no higher sanctity than “a den of robbers.” The word for
“robber” implies the more violent form of lawless plunder. The words are
memorable, as having re-appeared in our Lord’s rebuke of the money-changers and
traffickers in the Temple (Matthew 21:13; Mark 11:17; Luke 19:46); and, taken
together with the reference at the last Supper to the ew Covenant of Jeremiah
31:31, suggest the thought that our Lord was leading His disciples to see in the
prophet’s work a foreshadowing of His own relation to the evils of His time, and
more than a foreshadowing of the great remedy which He was to work out for them.
PETT, "Jeremiah 7:11
“Is this house, which is called by my name, become a den of robbers in your eyes?
Behold, I, even I, have seen it, says YHWH.”
He therefore asks them whether in fact they saw the house which was called by His
ame as a ‘den of robbers’, a den of covenant breakers, a place where those who
were planners of mischief were welcome? That was the impression that they were
giving. For they gathered there as people who were corrupt and dishonest, as
though they had a right to be there in spite of their failings. Did they really think
that He, YHWH, could be a companion of thieves and blatant sinners? Was this not
very much the opposite of what was revealed in the Psalms, where it says ‘who shall
ascend into the hill of YHWH, and who shall stand in His holy place? Even he who
has clean hands and a pure heart, who has not lifted up his soul to what is vain (any
form of idolatry especially included) nor sworn deceitfully in matters related to his
neighbour’ (Psalms 24:3-5). The truth was that only the pure in heart and the

58. penitent (Isaiah 1:11-18; Isaiah 57:15) could find a welcome in His house, whilst
they were the very opposite.
And yet it was that kind of attitude (seeing His house as a gathering place for evil
men) that YHWH, in all His holiness, had plainly seen in them. He could see that
they really did think that it did not matter how they behaved, or what possessed
their hearts, as long as they followed the recognised Temple rituals. They seemingly
did think that His house would welcome even those who were violent and dishonest
and had no intention of relinquishing those ways, as long as they offered the
appropriate sacrifices. Well, they were in for a rude awakening.
Let Them Consider What Had Happened To Shiloh.
Shiloh where YHWH’s Tabernacle had been established for a considerable time had
been familiar with such behaviour. There too the worship of YHWH had been
corrupted (see 1 Samuel 2:12-36). And let them consider what had happened there.
12 “‘Go now to the place in Shiloh where I first
made a dwelling for my ame, and see what I did
to it because of the wickedness of my people
Israel.
BAR ES, "Go ye unto my place in Shiloh - This argument roused the
indignation of the people Jer_26:8-9, Jer_26:11. The ark, Jeremiah shows, had not
always been at Jerusalem. The place first chosen, as the center of the nation’s worship,
was Shiloh, a town to the north of Bethel, situated in the powerful tribe of Ephraim
(Jos_18:1 note). The ruin of Shiloh is ascribed Psa_78:58-64 to the idolatry which
prevailed in Israel after the death of Joshua; a similar ruin due to similar causes should
fall on Jerusalem Jer_7:14. The site of Shiloh is identified with Seilun, the ruins of which
are so insignificant as to bear out Jerome’s remark, “At Silo, where once was the
tabernacle and ark of the Lord, there can scarcely be pointed out the foundation of an
altar.”
At the first - In the first stage, the first period of the existence of the Jewish
commonwealth, Shiloh was to the Judges what Jerusalem subsequently was to the kings;

59. and as the fall of Shiloh through the wickedness of Eli’s sons marked the period when
the government by Judges was to pass away, and the second stage begin; so the power of
the kings perished at the fall of Jerusalem, and left the way clear for the third stage of
Jewish polity, government by the scribes.
CLARKE, "But go ye now unto my place which was in Shiloh - See what I did
to my tabernacle and ark formerly: after a long residence at Shiloh, for the iniquity of the
priests and the people, I suffered it to fall into the hands of the Philistines, and to be
carried captive into their land, and to be set up in the house of their idols. And because
of your iniquities, I will deal with you and this temple in the same way; for as I spared
not Shiloh, though my ark was there, but made it a victim of my wrath, so will I do to
Jerusalem and her temple.
GILL, "But go ye now unto my place, which was in Shiloh,.... A city in the tribe
of Ephraim, on the north of Bethel, and the south of Lebonah, and not far from
Shechem, Jdg_21:19 here were the tabernacle, the ark and altar of the Lord, and the
sacrifices; and therefore the tabernacle is called the tabernacle of Shiloh, Psa_78:60, and
here the Lord calls it his place; the place of the house of his Shechinah, as the Targum
paraphrases it; and where he would have those people go; which is not to be understood
locally, but of their taking this place into the consideration of their minds, and observe
what was done to it, and became of it; though it was once the place where the Lord
dwelt, and where his name was called formerly; as follows:
where I set my name at the first; when the children of Israel first entered into
Canaan's land, the tabernacle was set up and established in Shiloh, in Joshua's time,
Jos_18:1 and there it continued to the times of Eli:
and see what I did to it, for the wickedness of my people Israel; he refused and
forsook his tabernacle there; he suffered the ark, which was fetched from thence in the
times of Eli, to be taken and carried captive, and that because of the sins of his people,
Psa_78:60. Jerom (m) says, in his time, the altar that was pulled down was shown,
though scarce the foundations of it were to be seen. Now the Lord would have these
people consider what was done to Shiloh; that though this was the first place where the
tabernacle was set in the land of Canaan, and so the inhabitants of it had antiquity on
their side; yet this did not secure them, nor the tribe it was in, from being rejected by the
Lord, when they sinned against him; nor should the tribes of Judah and Benjamin think
themselves secure because of the temple of the Lord, since they might expect he would
do to them for their sins what he had done to others before.
HE RY 12-15, "He shows them the insufficiency of this plea adjudged long since in
the case of Shiloh. [1.] It is certain that Shiloh was ruined, though it had God's sanctuary
in it, when by its wickedness it profaned that sanctuary (Jer_7:12): Go you now to my
place which was in Shiloh. It is probable that the ruins of that once flourishing city were
yet remaining; they might, at least, read the history of it, which ought to affect them as if
they saw the place. There God set his name at the first, there the tabernacle was set up
when Israel first took possession of Canaan (Joh_18:1), and thither the tribes went up;

60. but those that attended the service of the tabernacle there corrupted both themselves
and others, and from them arose the wickedness of his people Israel; that fountain was
poisoned, and sent forth malignant streams; and what came of it? No; God forsook it
(Psa_78:60), sent his ark into captivity, cut off the house of Eli that presided there; and
it is very probable that the city was quite destroyed, for we never read any more of it but
as a monument of divine vengeance upon holy places when they harbour wicked people.
Note, God's judgments upon others, who have really revolted from God while they have
kept up a profession of nearness to him, should be a warning to us not to trust in lying
words. It is good to consult precedents, and make use of them. Remember Lot's wife;
remember Shiloh and the seven churches of Asia; and know that the ark and candlestick
are moveable things, Rev_2:5; Mat_21:43. [2.] It is as certain that Shiloh's fate will be
Jerusalem's doom if a speedy and sincere repentance prevent it not. First, Jerusalem
was now as sinful as ever Shiloh was; that is proved by the unerring testimony of God
himself against them (Jer_7:13): “You have done all these works, you cannot deny it:”
and they continued obstinate in their sin; that is proved by the testimony of God's return
and repent, rising up early and speaking, as one in care, as one in earnest, as one who
would lose no time in dealing with them, nay, who would take the fittest opportunity for
speaking to them early in the morning, when, if ever, they were sober, and had their
thoughts free and clear; but it was all in vain. God spoke, but they heard not, they
heeded not, they never minded; he called them, but they answered not; they would not
come at his call. Note, What God has spoken to us greatly aggravates what we have done
against him. Secondly, Jerusalem shall shortly be as miserable as ever Shiloh was:
Therefore I will do unto this house as I did to Shiloh, ruin it, and lay it waste, Jer_7:14.
Those that tread in the steps of the wickedness of those that went before them must
expect to fall by the like judgments, for all these things happened to them for ensamples.
The temple at Jerusalem, though ever so strongly built, if wickedness was found in it,
would be as unable to keep its ground and as easily conquered as even the tabernacle in
Shiloh was, when God's day of vengeance had come. “This house” (says God) “is called
by my name, and therefore you may think that I should protect it; it is the house in
which you trust, and you think that it will protect you; this land is the place, this city the
place, which I gave to you and your fathers, and therefore you are secure of the
continuance of it, and think that nothing can turn you out of it; but the men of Shiloh
thus flattered themselves and did but deceive themselves.” He quotes another precedent
(Jer_7:15), the ruin of the kingdom of the ten tribes, who were the seed of Abraham, and
had the covenant of circumcision, and possessed the land which God gave to them and
their fathers, and yet the idolatries threw them out and extirpated them: “And can you
think but that the same evil courses will be as fatal to you?” Doubtless they will be so; for
God is uniform and of a piece with himself in his judicial proceedings. It is a rule of
justice, ut parium par sit ratio - that in similar cases the same judgment should
proceed. “You have corrupted yourselves as your brethren the seed of Ephraim did, and
have become their brethren in iniquity, and therefore I will cast you out of my sight, as I
have cast them.” The interpretation here given of the judgment makes it a terrible one
indeed; the casting of them out of their land signified God's casting them out of his sight,
as if he would never look upon them, never look after them, more. Whenever we are cast,
it is well enough, if we be kept in the love of God; but, if we are thrown out of his favour,
our case is miserable though we dwell in our own land. This threatening, that God would
make this house like Shiloh, we shall meet with again, and find Jeremiah indicted for it,
Jer_26:6.

61. JAMISO , "my place ... in Shiloh — God caused His tabernacle to be set up in
Shiloh in Joshua’s days (Jos_18:1; Jdg_18:31). In Eli’s time God gave the ark, which had
been at Shiloh, into the hands of the Philistines (Jer_26:6; 1Sa_4:10, 1Sa_4:11; Psa_
78:56-61). Shiloh was situated between Beth-el and Shechem in Ephraim.
at the first — implying that Shiloh exceeded the Jewish temple in antiquity. But
God’s favor is not tied down to localities (Act_7:44).
my people Israel — Israel was God’s people, yet He spared it not when rebellious:
neither will He spare Judah, now that it rebels, though heretofore it has been His people.
K&D, "Jer_7:12-14
The temple is to undergo the fate of the former sanctuary at Shiloh. This threat is
introduced by a grounding ‫י‬ ִⅴ, for. This for refers to the central idea of the last verse, that
they must not build their expectations on the temple, hold it to be a pledge for their
safety. For since the Lord has seen how they have profaned and still profane it, He will
destroy it, as the sanctuary at Shiloh was destroyed. The rhetorical mode of utterance,
Go to the place, etc., contributes to strengthen the threatening. They were to behold with
their own eyes the fate of the sanctuary at Shiloh, that so they might understand that the
sacredness of a place does not save it from overthrow, if men have desecrated it by their
wickedness. We have no historical notice of the event to which Jeremiah refers. At
Shiloh, now Seilân (in ruins) the Mosaic tabernacle was erected after the conquest of
Canaan (Jos_18:1), and there it was still standing in the time of the high priest Eli, 1Sa_
1:1-3; but the ark, which had fallen into the hands of the Philistines at the time of their
victory (1 Sam 4), was not brought back to the tabernacle when it was restored again to
the Israelites. In the reign of Saul we find the tabernacle at Nob (1Sa_21:2.). The words
of Jer_7:12 intimate, that at that time "the place of God at Shiloh" was lying in ruins. As
Hitz. justly remarks, the destruction of it is not to be understood of its gradual decay
after the removal of the ark (1Sa_4:11; 1Sa_7:1.); the words imply a devastation or
destruction, not of the place of God at Shiloh only, but of the place Shiloh itself. This is
clearly seen from Jer_7:14 : I will do unto this house (the temple), and the place which I
gave to your fathers, as I have done unto Shiloh. This destruction did not take place
when the Assyrians overthrew the kingdom of the ten tribes, but much earlier. It may,
indeed, be gathered from Jdg_18:20, Jdg_18:31 (see the comment. on this passage),
that it was as early as the time of Saul, during a Syrian invasion. By the destruction of the
place of God at Shiloh, we need not understand that the tabernacle itself, with its altar
and other sacred furniture (except the ark), was swept away. Such a view is contradicted
by the statement in 1Ch_21:29; 2Ch_1:3, according to which the tabernacle built by
Moses in the wilderness was still standing at Gibeon in David's time, and in the
beginning of Solomon's reign; cf. with 2Ch_1:5, when the brazen altar of burnt-offering
is expressly mentioned as that which was made by Bezaleel. Hence it is clear that the
Mosaic tabernacle, with its altar of burnt-offering, had been preserved, and consequently
that it must have been moved first from Shiloh to Nob, and then, when Saul sacked this
town (1 Sam 22), to Gibeon. The destruction of the place of God in Shiloh must
accordingly have consisted in this, that not only was the tabernacle with the altar carried
off from thence, but the buildings necessary in connection with the maintenance of the
public worship which surrounded it were swept away when the city was plundered, so
that of the place of the sanctuary nothing was left remaining. It is clear that about the
tabernacle there were various buildings which, along with the tabernacle and its altars,
constituted "the house of God at Shiloh;" for in 1 Sam 3 we are told that Samuel slept in
the temple of Jahveh (1Sa_3:3), and that in the morning he opened the doors of the

62. house of God (1Sa_3:15). Hence we may gather, that round about the court of the
tabernacle there were buildings erected, which were used partly as a dwelling-place for
the officiating priests and Levites, and partly for storing up the heave-offerings, and for
preparing the thank-offerings at the sacrificial meals (1Sa_2:11-21). This whole system of
buildings surrounding the tabernacle, with its court and altar of burnt-offering, was
called the "house of God;" from which name Graf erroneously inferred that there was at
Shiloh a temple like the one in Jerusalem. The wickedness of my people, is the Israelites'
fall into idolatry in Eli's time, because of which the Lord gave up Israel into the power of
the Philistines and other enemies (Jdg_13:1; cf. 1Sa_7:3). "These deeds" (Jer_7:13) are
the sins named in Jer_7:9. ‫ר‬ ֵ ַ‫ד‬ ֲ‫א‬ָ‫ו‬ is a continuation of the infinitive sentence, and is still
dependent on ‫ן‬ ַ‫ע‬ַ‫.י‬ Speaking from early morn, i.e., speaking earnestly and unremittingly;
cf. Gesen. §131, 3, b. I have called you, i.e., to repent, and ye have not answered, i.e., have
not repented and turned to me.
CALVI , "The Prophet confirms by an example what he said yesterday, — that the
Jews deceived themselves in thinking that they were covered by the shadow of the
Temple, while yet they disclosed themselves, and when the whole world were witness
of their impious rebellion. He therefore mentions what had before happened. The
Ark of the Covenant, as it is well known, had long rested in Shiloh. ow the Temple
did not excel in dignity on its own account, but on account of the Ark of the
Covenant and the altar. It was indeed splendidly adorned; but the holiness of the
Temple was derived from the Ark of the Covenant, the altar, and the sacrifices. This
Ark had been in Shiloh. (196) Hence Jeremiah shews how foolish were the Jews in
being proud, because they had among them the Ark of the Covenant and the altar,
for the first place, where sacrifices had been offered to God, was not preserved in
safety. This is the import of the whole.
But he did not in vain say, Even go to Shiloh The ‫,כי‬ ki, here, though commonly a
causal particle, seems to be taken as explanatory. If yet it be viewed only as an
affirmative, I do not object, “Well, go to Shiloh.” But the language in this case is
ironical, “Ye glory in the Temple; forsooth! go to Shiloh.” And God calls it his place
— my place, in order that the Jews might understand that it had nothing superior in
itself. The Ark of the Covenant had indeed been removed into Mount Sion, and
there God had chosen a perpetual habitation for himself; but the other place was
superior as to antiquity. This is the reason why he calls it “my place, “and adds,
Where I made my name to dwell, that is, where I designed the Ark to be: for the
Ark of the Covenant and the altar, with all their furniture, were properly the name
of God; nor was it by chance that all the tribes had placed the Ark in Shiloh; but it
was God’s will to be there worshipped for a time. Hence he says, that the place was
sacred before Jerusalem; and therefore he says at the first, ‫,בראשונה‬ berashune; that
is, the Shilomites are not only equal with you, but antiquity brings them a greater
honor: if then a comparison is made, they excel you as to what is ancient.
See, he says, what I did to that place for the iniquity of my people Israel. He calls
here Israel his people, not for honor’s sake, but that he might again remind the Jews
that they were only equal to the Israelites; and yet that it profited all the tribes
nothing, that they were wont to assemble there to worship God. (197) For when we

63. reason from example, we must always see that there be no material difference.
Jeremiah then shews that the Israelites were equal to the Jews, and that if the Jews
claimed a superiority, the claim was neither just nor right, for Israel were also the
people of God, inasmuch as it was God’s will to fix there the Ark of the Covenant,
that sacrifices might be there offered to him; and then antiquity was in its favor, for
it was a holy place before it was known that God had chosen Mount Sion as a
situation for his Temple.
Hence he draws this conclusion, ow, then, as ye have done all these works, that is,
as ye have become like the Israelites, therefore, etc. But he first amplifies their
crime, — that they had not only imitated the wickedness of the twelve tribes, but
had also perversely despised all warnings, I spake to you, he says, and rose up early
By this metaphor he intimates, that he was as solicitous for preserving the kingdom
of Judah, as parents are wont to be for the safety of their children: for as a father
rises early to see what is necessary for his family, so also God says, that he rose
early, inasmuch as he had been assiduous in exhorting them. He appropriates to his
own person what properly belonged to his prophets: but as he had roused them by
his Spirit and employed them in their work, he justly claims to himself whatever he
had done by them as his instruments: and it was an exaggeration of their guilt, that
they were slothful, nay, stupid, when God sedulously labored for their safety.
He adds, I spoke, and ye heard not; I cried to you, and ye did not answer, he
inveighs more at large against their hardness; for had he only once warned them,
some pretense might have been made; but as God, by rising early every day, labored
to restore them to himself, and as he had not only employed instruction, but also
crying, (for by crying he doubtless means exhortations and threatenings, which
ought to have produced greater effect upon them,) there appeared in this contumacy
the highest degree of mad audacity. The meaning is, — that God had tried all means
to restore the Jews to a sound mind, but that they were wholly irreclaimable; for he
had called them not only once, but often; and he had also endued his prophets with
power to labor strenuously in the discharge of their office: he had not only shewed
by them what was useful and necessary, but he had cried, that is, had employed
greater vehemence, in order to correct their tardiness. Since then God, in using all
these means, could effect nothing, what remained for them was miserably to perish,
as they willfully sought their own destruction.
COFFMA , ""But go ye now to my place which was in Shiloh, where I caused my
name to dwell at first, and see what I did to it for the wickedness of my people
Israel. And now, because ye have done all these works, saith Jehovah, and I spake
unto you, rising up early and speaking, but ye heard not; and I called you, but ye
answered not, therefore will I do unto the house which is called by name, wherein ye
trust, and unto the place which I gave to you and to your fathers, as I did to Shiloh.
And I will cast you out of my sight, as I have cast out all your brethren, even the
whole seed of Ephraim."
"My place which was in Shiloh ..." (Jeremiah 7:12). God's challenge to the Jews
because they were trusting in the physical existence of God's temple in their midst,

64. was blunt and dramatic. Go to Shiloh! My name was once there; but it did not
protect Israel in their wickedness; and neither will the current temple protect you.
God here prophesied both (1) the destruction of the temple, just like he had
destroyed Shiloh, and (2) the carrying away of Judah just as he had already
deported the whole seed of Ephraim.
After the conquest of Canaan, the ancient tabernacle was set up at Shiloh, "some
eighteen miles north of Jerusalem,"[14] where it remained throughout practically
the whole period of the Judges. In the days of Eli and Samuel, when Eli's reprobate
sons were actually committing adultery in the temple itself (Yes, there were
buildings there also), God permitted the Philistines to ravage and destroy the place
and capture the ark of the covenant itself. (See Joshua 18:l; 22:12; Judges 21:19; 1
Samuel 1:9,24; 4:1-11).
The Bible has no description of the destruction of Shiloh; but archaeological
discoveries during this century (1929) have concluded that it did indeed take place,
"After the Battle of Ebenezer by the Philistines about 1050 B.C."[15] Since, after its
destruction, "Shiloh was not rebuilt until about 300 B.C.,"[16] the ruins of the place
were surely evident in Jeremiah's day witnessing the destruction that took place
about a half millennium earlier.
Albright, Thompson, and Unger all make mention of the excavations that have
disclosed the destruction of Shiloh. This destruction of Shiloh, where once God's
name was recorded, proved the wretched error of the people in their foolish faith
that God was irrevocably committed to the preservation of any place regardless of
the moral state of the Chosen People.
"There not only existed the ancient tabernacle at Shiloh, but also substantial
buildings as proved by excavations, so it is called `the temple of Jehovah' (1 Samuel
1:9)."[17] Evidently, therefore, the Philistines who destroyed Shiloh did not consider
the tabernacle valuable enough to be carried away, for it still existed in the days of
David, who, when he contemplated building the temple, said, "I dwell in a house of
cedar, but the ark of God dwelleth in curtains" (2 Samuel 7:2).
The terrible lesson from Shiloh applies to all generations. o church, however
careful to observe the outward forms of holy religion, can be acceptable to God
unless the moral character of the people corresponds to their holy profession. o
mere formal observances of worship and devotion can take the place of true
repentance and sincere worship of God.
COKE, "Jeremiah 7:12. But go ye now unto my place which was in Shiloh— Shiloh
was the place where, upon the first coming of the Israelites into Canaan, the
tabernacle, in which was the ark of God's presence, was set up, by divine
appointment no doubt; and there it continued for a long space of time until the days
of Samuel. It was during this residence, that the Israelites received that signal defeat
from the Philistines, when the ark of God was taken, as related 1 Samuel 4:10-11 the

65. pathetic description of which disaster made by the Psalmist, Psalms 78:60-64 has
caused it to be generally believed, that an allusion to it was likewise designed upon
this occasion. But a due consideration of the context will, I think, lead us rather to
conclude in favour of a more recent event, the vestiges of which were still fresh to be
seen. Shiloh was in the tribe of Ephraim; and this place, once so favoured and
sanctified by God's particular residence, had shared the fate of the rest of the
kingdom of Israel, and was become a scene of misery and ruin. This they might
literally "go and see" at present; and this, says God, "have I done because of the
wickedness of my people Israel." In which words Israel, meaning the ten tribes, is
acknowledged to have been God's people no less than Judah; and Shiloh, it is
observed, had once enjoyed the same privileges which now belonged to the temple at
Jerusalem. But as God spared not Shiloh, but made it the victim of his wrath; so he
says he would do to Jerusalem and her temple; and would cast off Judah for their
wickedness from being his people, in like manner as he had already cast off their
brethren, whom he distinguishes by the name of the children of Ephraim.
TRAPP, "Jeremiah 7:12 But go ye now unto my place which [was] in Shiloh, where
I set my name at the first, and see what I did to it for the wickedness of my people
Israel.
Ver. 12. But go ye now.] on passibus sed sensibus. Summon the sobriety of your
senses before your own judgments, and consider what I did of old to Shiloh, a place
no less privileged than yours, and wherefore I did it, and be warned by their woes.
Alterius perditio, tua sit cautio; seest thou another shipwrecked, look well to thy
tackling. Reason should persuade, and therefore lodgeth in the brain; but when
reason cannot persuade, example should, and mostly will.
BE SO , "Jeremiah 7:12. But go ye now to Shiloh — Shiloh was the place where,
upon the first coming of the Israelites into Canaan, the tabernacle, in which was the
ark of God’s presence, was set up; and there it continued for a long space of time,
even until the days of Samuel. It was during this period that the Israelites, as a
punishment of the iniquitous and scandalous lives of the priests and people, received
that signal defeat from the Philistines, when the ark of God was taken, as related 1
Samuel 4:10, &c., the pathetic description of which disaster, given by the psalmist,
Psalms 78:60-64, has caused it to be generally believed, that an allusion to it was
likewise designed here by Jeremiah. “But a due consideration of the context,”
Blaney thinks, “will lead us rather to conclude that the prophet refers to a more
recent event, the vestiges of which were still fresh to be seen. Shiloh was in the tribe
of Ephraim, and this place, once so favoured and sanctified by God’s particular
residence, had shared the fate of the rest of the kingdom of Israel, and was become a
scene of misery and ruin. This they might literally go and see at present; and this,
says God, have I done because of the wickedness of my people Israel. In which
words Israel, meaning the ten tribes, is acknowledged to have been God’s people no
less than Judah; and Shiloh, it is observed, had once enjoyed the same privileges,
which now belonged to the temple at Jerusalem. But as God spared not Shiloh, but
made it the victim of his wrath, so he says he would do to Jerusalem and her temple;
and would cast off Judah for their wickedness from being his people, in like manner

66. as he had already cast off their brethren, whom he distinguishes by the name of the
children of Ephraim.”
ELLICOTT, "(12) My place which was in Shiloh.—The history of the past showed
that a Temple dedicated to Jehovah could not be desecrated with impunity. Shiloh
had been chosen for the centre of the worship of Israel after the conquest of Canaan
(Joshua 18:1), and was reverenced as such through the whole period of the Judges.
It had not, however, been a centre of light and purity. It had been defiled by wild
dances of a half-idolatrous character; by deeds of shameless violence (Judges 21:19-
21), and by the sins of the sons of Eli (1 Samuel 2:22). And so the judgment came. It
lost the presence of the ark (1 Samuel 4:17; Psalms 78:58-64); its people were
slaughtered by the Philistines; it fell into decay. It is possible, as the words “temple”
(1 Samuel 1:9; 1 Samuel 3:3) and “house” (1 Samuel 3:15; Judges 18:31) applied to
it suggest, that substantial buildings may have gathered round the original
tabernacle, and that those wasted ruins may have given a special force to Jeremiah’s
allusion. It will be seen from Jeremiah 26:6; Jeremiah 26:9; Jeremiah 26:11, that it
was this reference that more than anything else provoked the wrath of priest and
people. They thought with a half-concealed exultation of the fate of the earlier
sanctuary in Ephraim, which had given way to that of Judah. They forgot that like
sins bring about like punishments, and were startled when they heard that as
terrible a doom was impending over the Temple of which they boasted. It would
appear from Jeremiah 41:5 that the ruin was not total, perhaps that it was still
visited by pilgrims. Jerome describes it as a heap of ruins. It has been identified by
modern travellers with the village of Seilun.
PETT, "Jeremiah 7:12
“But go now to my place which was in Shiloh, where I caused my name to dwell at
the first, and see what I did to it for the wickedness of my people Israel.”
Let them just consider what had happened to His former house at Shiloh where he
had caused His ame to dwell. Shiloh was the first major centre at which the
Tabernacle had been established for a long time. It had been established there by
Joshua once the initial conquest was over and had continued there throughout the
period of the Judges up to Samuel (Joshua 18:1; Joshua 18:8-10; Joshua 19:51;
Judges 18:31; 1 Samuel 1:3; etc.). They should recall that the people who had
worshipped at Shiloh had had a similar view of things, and see what had happened
there. He had caused it to be destroyed because of the wickedness of His people, a
precedent which boded ill for the Temple. The destruction of Shiloh is not actually
described elsewhere in Scripture, but it is implied by the fact that when Samuel,
who had been brought up in the Tabernacle at Shiloh, ministered to the people after
the Philistines had been driven back, it was not at Shiloh, but elsewhere, while the
Tabernacle furniture itself next turned up at ob (1 Samuel 21:6). Shiloh simply
disappeared from history without mention.
Because They Have Refused To Listen To Him He Will Destroy The Temple And
Send Them Into Exile.

67. PULPIT, "But go ye now unto my place which was in Shiloh. Jeremiah attacks this
false confidence in the temple of Jerusalem, by pointing to the destruction of an
earlier sanctuary, of which very little is known, indeed only so much as to give an
edge to our desire for more. It is certain, from Joshua 18:1 and 1 Samuel 4:3, that
the tabernacle and the ark found a resting-place at Shiloh (an Ephraimitish town to
the north of Bethel), nearly the whole of the period of the judges, or more exactly
between the latter days of Joshua (Joshua 18:1) and the death of Eli (1 Samuel 4:3).
Manifestly, then, there must have been some sort of "house," i.e. temple, at Shiloh; a
mere tent would not have been sufficient for so long a period. This presumption is
confirmed by the language of Jeremiah, and by the expressions of the narrative
books. The fate which the prophet is bidden to announce for the existing temple is
analogous to that which fell upon "Jehovah's place in Shiloh." The latter was,
therefore, not merely a deportation of the ark, such as is referred to in 1 Samuel 5:1-
12. And when the narrator of the times of Samuel speaks of Eli as "sitting by the
door-post of the temple of Jehovah" (1 Samuel 1:9), is it more natural to suppose t
the word "temple" is here applied to the tabernacle, or that there was really a
house, however rude, as sacred in the eyes of the faithful as was afterwards the
splendid temple at Jerusalem? The latter view is strongly confirmed by 18:31, "All
the time that the house of God in Shiloh existed" (Authorized Version is
misleading), and 19:18, where the Levite travelling to Mount Ephraim says, "I am
going to the house of Jehovah." It is no doubt strange at first sight that so little
information is given us as to this central sanctuary of the true religion; but are there
not other omissions (especially in the history of the judges), which are equally
strange as long as we look upon the Old Testament as primarily an historical
document? We do know something, however, and more than is generally suspected;
for when the right translation is restored in 18:31, it follows, from a comparison of
this and the preceding verse, that the temple of Shiloh was destroyed simultaneously
with the captivity of the northern tribes. The impression produced by this emphatic
announcement of Jeremiah is revealed to us by a later passage in his book (see
Jeremiah 26:1-24.).
13 While you were doing all these things, declares
the Lord, I spoke to you again and again, but you
did not listen; I called you, but you did not
answer.

68. BAR ES, "Rising up early and speaking - A proverbial expression for “speaking
zealously and earnestly.” It is used only by Jeremiah.
GILL, "And now, because ye have done all these works, saith the Lord,....
Meaning evil works, such as theft, murder, adultery, perjury, and idolatry, mentioned
Jer_7:8 or the same which were done by the people of Israel, on account of which the
tabernacle at Shiloh was left:
and I spake unto you, rising up early; that is, by his servants the prophets, whom
he sent unto them, and by whom he spoke, as the Targum paraphrases it, and as it is in
Jer_7:25, which shows the Lord's great concern for this people, his early care of them, in
sending his servants betimes to warn, rebuke, and reclaim them:
and speaking, but ye heard not; would not listen to the words of the prophets, and
of the Lord by them; but turned a deaf ear to them, which aggravates their stubbornness,
obstinacy, and wickedness, that so much respect should be shown them, so much pains
should be taken with them, and that so early, and yet to no purpose:
and I called you, but ye answered not; this call was by the external ministry of the
prophets, and was with great vehemence in them, but not with divine energy; however, it
was sufficient to leave the Jews without excuse; and their inattention to it exposes their
hardness and wilful obstinacy; see Pro_1:24.
JAMISO , "rising ... early — implying unwearied earnestness in soliciting them
(Jer_7:25; Jer_11:17; 2Ch_36:15).
BI, "I spake unto you, rising up early.
God’s call to sinners
I. A gracious call. We are utterly undeserving of it. Though we are transgressors, guilty,
corrupt, depraved,—yet God calls upon us—to escape—to live—to be saved—to turn unto
Him, and be forever blest and happy.
II. An affectionate call. The call of a merciful Creator who hath no pleasure in the death
and destruction of His fallen creatures: and would rather they should repent and live;
the call of a tender Father, who looks with compassion upon the prodigal wanderer,
invites and urges him to abandon his wretchedness and want, and come back to his
home of plenty, and his Father’s bosom again, and assures him of a joyous welcome if he
will; the call of a Friend—that Friend that sticketh closer than a brother—even of Jesus
our best friend, our elder brother.
III. A varied call. From every part of the outspread volume of creation, there issues a
voice calling upon us, to know, fear, adore, worship, the great Creator. And as well as by
His works, we are called upon by His ways—by His dealings with the children of men.
The misfortunes and calamities that occur to others; and the bereavements, afflictions,
and trials that happen to ourselves—the constant experience we have of the uncertainty
of our present existence, and of the instability of all earthly good, by these and many

69. similar things we are addressed and admonished to seek a more enduring substance, a
more incorruptible and unfading inheritance. From every page, also, of the book of God
there proceedeth a call, exhorting us to depart from iniquity, and follow after holiness,—
to supplicate for pardoning mercy and for assisting grace.
IV. An oft-repeated—a reiterated call. We are not appealed to once or twice, and then
abandoned to our folly. Forbearance is exercised towards us from year to year; “line is
given upon line, and precept upon precept,”—here a little and there a little; so that we
may have the last possible opportunity of being saved, and may not be left in despair
until the last moment of the day of grace hath expired, and our souls be beyond the
region of impression and awakening.
V. An earnest call. Men may be light and trifling. God is always serious—always in
earnest. He is in earnest in what He does, and in what He speaks. All the appeals and
persuasions by which the Almighty follows you, as children hastening madly on to
destruction, are embodied in the very terms, and wear the very air of the utmost
earnestness; yea, so serious and earnest are they, that, when it is considered from whom
they come, and to what they relate, the wonder is, that men are not at once startled by
them, and arrested in their downward course, and constrained to hasten to the only safe
Refuge from the gathering and impending storm.
VI. An urgent call. Its reference is to the present: it demands immediate attention and
instant compliance. (C. Cook.)
TRAPP, "Jeremiah 7:13 And now, because ye have done all these works, saith the
LORD, and I spake unto you, rising up early and speaking, but ye heard not; and I
called you, but ye answered not;
Ver. 13. And now, because ye have done.] Worthily are they made examples to
others, that will not take example by others; that will not aliena frui insania, make
benefit of other men’s miseries.
Rising early.] As good husbands use to do; and as Plutarch reporteth of the Persian
kings, that they had an officer to call them up betimes, and to mind them of their
business.
BE SO , "Verses 13-15
Jeremiah 7:13-15. And now, because ye have done all these works — Either the
same, or as bad, or worse than Israel did when the tabernacle was at Shiloh; and
particularly those mentioned Jeremiah 7:9. And I spake unto you, rising up early,
&c. — A metaphor taken from persons who, being diligent in their business, are
wont to rise up early; as if he had said, I not only spoke to you by my prophets, but
they, in my name, made all possible haste, and used all possible diligence to reclaim
you, continually and carefully preventing you with remonstrances; employing with
all possible attention severity and softness, promises and threats; but all to no
purpose. Therefore, &c. — Because you have added this, your obstinate rejecting of
all admonitions and warnings, to the rest of your provocations, will I do unto this

70. house, which is called by my name — This sumptuous temple, of which you boast,
and in which you trust for protection and preservation; the place which I gave to
you and to your fathers — Upon condition of your obedience, Psalms 105:44-45, and
therefore may justly, upon the breach of the condition, take from you again; as I
have done to Shiloh — See Jeremiah 7:12. And I will cast you out of my sight —
You shall have my presence with you and watchful eye over you no more; but I will
send you into captivity to Babylon, as I did your brethren into Assyria. See on 2
Kings 17:6-18. He terms the Israelites their brethren here, to remind them that they
both proceeded from the same stock, and therefore had no reason to expect but they
should both fare alike, seeing their sins were alike: even the whole seed of Ephraim
— The ten tribes, called often by this name, because the tribe of Ephraim was the
most numerous and potent of them all, and Jeroboam, their first king, was of that
tribe.
ELLICOTT, "(13) Rising up early and speaking.—A characteristic phrase of
Jeremiah’s, and used by him only (Jeremiah 13:25, Jeremiah 25:4; Jeremiah 26:5;
Jeremiah 29:19). In its bold anthropomorphism it takes the highest form of human
activity, waking from sleep and beginning at the dawn of day, to represent the like
activity in God.
I called you, but ye answered not.—An echo of earlier complaints from prophets
and wise men (Proverbs 1:24; Isaiah 65:12; Isaiah 66:4), destined itself to be used
again by One greater than the prophets (Matthew 23:37).
PETT, "Jeremiah 7:13
“And now, because you have done all these works, says YHWH, and I spoke to you,
rising up early and speaking, but you did not hear, and I called you, but you did not
answer.”
And now, because they had ‘done all these works’ and demonstrated that they were
even worse than those who had worshipped at Shiloh, in that they had stolen,
murdered, committed adultery, sworn falsely, and burned incense to Baal, walking
after other gods that they had not known (Jeremiah 7:9), and refusing to listen to
His continual pleading through the prophets, He would now act against them.
‘Rising up early’ indicates the great effort that He had made to speak to them
(compare Jeremiah 7:25). And He then emphasises how He had repeatedly spoken
to them and called them and had had no reply, indicating quite clearly that their
unresponsiveness was not because they had had no opportunity.
“Rising up early and ---,” indicating urgency, is a favourite phrase of Jeremiah’s
and is unique to him (compare Jeremiah 7:25; Jeremiah 11:7; Jeremiah 25:3-4;
Jeremiah 26:5; Jeremiah 29:19; Jeremiah 32:33; Jeremiah 35:14-15; Jeremiah 44:4)

71. 14 Therefore, what I did to Shiloh I will now do to
the house that bears my ame, the temple you
trust in, the place I gave to you and your
ancestors.
GILL, "Therefore will I do unto this house, which is called by my name,....
The temple, as in Jer_7:11, for though it was called by his name, and his name was called
upon in it, yet this could not secure it from desolation; for so the name of the Lord was
set in the tabernacle at Shiloh, and yet he forsook it through the wickedness of the
people:
wherein ye trust; they trusted in the sacrifices there offered up, and the service there
performed; in the holiness of the place, and because it was the residence of the divine
Majesty; wherefore they thought this would be a protection and defence of them; and
this was trusting in lying words, as in Jer_7:4,
and unto the place which I gave unto you and your fathers; meaning either
Jerusalem; and so the Syriac version renders it, "and to the city"; or the whole land of
Judea, as in Jer_7:7,
as I have done to Shiloh; See Gill on Jer_7:12.
JAMISO , "I gave — and I therefore can revoke the gift for it is still Mine (Lev_
25:23), now that ye fail in the only object for which it was given, the promotion of My
glory.
Shiloh — as I ceased to dwell there, transferring My temple to Jerusalem; so I will
cease to dwell at Jerusalem.
CALVI , "Therefore, he says, I will do to this house, which is called by my name,
etc. He anticipates, no doubt, all objections, as though he had said, “I know what
you will say, — that this place is sacred to God, that his name is invoked here, and
that sacrifices are here offered: all these things, he says, are alleged to no purpose,
for in Shiloh also was his name invoked, and he dwelt there. Though then ye
foolishly trust in this place, it shall not yet escape that judgment which happened to
the former place.” He adds, which I gave to you and to your fathers Be it so; for this
is to be considered as a concession; and at the same time objections are anticipated,
in order that the Jews might understand that it availed them nothing, that God had
chosen to build his sanctuary on Mount Sion; for the object was to promote religion.
But as the place was converted to a wholly different purpose, and as God’s name

72. was there shamefully profaned, he says, “Though I gave this place to you and your
fathers, yet nothing better shall be its fate than the fate of Shiloh.” (198) It follows
—
13.And now, as ye have done all these doings, saith Jehovah, And as I have spoken
to you, rising early and speaking, And ye have not hearkened, And I have called
you, and ye have not answered;
14.I will also do to the house, On which my name is called, In which ye trust, and to
the place, Which I gave to you and to your fathers, According to what I did to
Shiloh:
“The house” was the Temple, “the place” was the city: both are threatened with
destruction. Then he says in the next verse, “And I will cast you from my presence.”
The Temple and the city were to be destroyed like Shiloh; and they (“you”) were to
be dealt with as their brethren, the ten tribes, who had been driven into exile. — Ed.
TRAPP, "Jeremiah 7:14 Therefore will I do unto [this] house, which is called by my
name, wherein ye trust, and unto the place which I gave to you and to your fathers,
as I have done to Shiloh.
Ver. 14. Therefore will I do unto this house.] Which ye fondly think that I am bound
to hold and uphold. The disciples also seem to have had a conceit that the temple
and the world must needs end together; hence that mixed discourse of our Saviour -
now of one, and now of another. [Matthew 24:2 Jeremiah 7:3] {See Trapp on
"Jeremiah 7:3"}
PETT, "Jeremiah 7:14
“Therefore will I do to the house which is called by my name, in which you trust,
and to the place which I gave to you and to your fathers, as I did to Shiloh.”
And one way in which He would act against them would be by destroying the
Temple and the land which He had given them, in the same way as He had
destroyed Shiloh. They had made it a den of robbers and He would treat it as such.
It is difficult for us to appreciate the enormity in the eyes of the people of Jerusalem
of what Jeremiah was saying. ot only was belief in the inviolability of the Temple
firmly rooted deep in their hearts, but they also considered that they were special to
YHWH (in spite of their continuing disobedience, which they dismissed as
unimportant as long as they maintained the Temple ritual) and that He had a
special place for them in His purposes. How then could He destroy them as He had
destroyed Shiloh? It was unthinkable.

73. 15 I will thrust you from my presence, just as I
did all your fellow Israelites, the people of
Ephraim.’
BAR ES, "The whole seed of Ephraim - i. e., the whole of the nine northern
tribes. Their casting out was a plain proof that the possession of the symbols of God’s
presence does not secure a Church or nation from rejection, if unworthy of its privileges.
CLARKE, "The whole seed of Ephraim - Taken here for all the ten tribes, that of
Ephraim being the principal.
GILL, "And I will cast you out of my sight,.... Or, "from before my face", or "faces"
(n); out of the land of Judea, and cause them to go into captivity; and so the Targum
paraphrases it,
"I will cause you to remove out of the land of the house of my majesty:''
as I have cast out all your brethren, even the whole seed of Ephraim; or
Israel, as the Targum; that is, the ten tribes so called, because Ephraim, a principal tribe,
and the metropolis of the kingdom, was in it, and Jeroboam, the first king of the ten
tribes, was of it: now, as they were carried captive into Babylon, so should the Jews; or
they of the two tribes of Judah and Benjamin; who could not expect to fare better than
their brethren, who were more in number than they; and especially since they were
guilty of the same sins.
JAMISO , "your brethren — children of Abraham, as much as you.
whole seed of Ephraim — They were superior to you in numbers and power: they
were ten tribes: ye but two. “Ephraim,” as the leading tribe, stands for the whole ten
tribes (2Ki_17:23; Psa_78:67, Psa_78:68).
K&D, "Jer_7:15
I cast you out from my sight, i.e., drive you forth amongst the heathen; cf. Deu_29:27;
and with the second clause cf. 2Ki_17:20. The whole seed of Ephraim is the ten tribes.

74. CALVI , "He concludes the former verse. The Prophet had indeed sufficiently
explained himself; but this confirmation was necessary for a people so refractory.
He then alleges nothing new, but only shews that there would be no defense to his
own people against God’s vengeance any more than to the Israelites: and hence he
now calls them their brethren, as he had previously said that they were his people;
for the state of the ten tribes was the same, until it had pleased God to remove the
Ark of the Covenant to Mount Sion, that he might have his throne in the tribe of
Judah. All the children of Abraham were indeed equal; but the Israelites were
superior in number and in power. And he says, the whole seed. This is significantly
added; for the Jews had with them only the half of the tribe of Manasse. The ten
tribes had perished; in nothing could they exalt themselves; and they were in this
respect inferior, because they were only one tribe and half, and the ten tribes were
larger in number. (199)
He calls them the seed of Ephraim, because of their first king, and also because that
tribe was more illustrious than the other nine tribes. And in the Prophets Ephraim
is in many places named for Israel, that is, for that second kingdom, which yet
flourished more in wealth and power. We now perceive the meaning of the Prophet.
But we may hence learn this important truth, — that God had never so bound
himself to any people or place, that he was not at liberty to inflict punishment on the
impiety of those who had despised his favors, or profaned them by their ingratitude
and their sins. And this ought to be carefully noticed; for we see that it is an evil as it
were innate in us, that we become elated and proud whenever God deals bountifully
with us; for we so abuse his favors as to think that more liberty is given us, because
God has bestowed on us more than on others. But there is nothing more groundless
than this presumption; and yet we become thus insolent whenever God honors us
with peculiar favors. Let us therefore bear in mind what is taught here by the
Prophet, — that God is ever at liberty to take vengeance on the ungodly and the
ungrateful.
Hence also it appears how foolish is the boasting of the Papists; for whenever they
bring against us the name of the apostolic throne, they think that God’s mouth is
closed; they think that all authority is to be taken away from his word. In short,
they harden themselves against God, as though they had a legitimate possession,
because the gospel had been once preached at Rome, and because that place was the
first seat of the Church in Italy as well as in Europe. But God never favored Rome
with such a privilege, nor has he said that his habitation was to be there. If the Pope
and his adherents had what the Jews then possessed, (which really belonged to
Mount Sion,) who could bear their fury, I say not, their pride? But we see what
Jeremiah says of Mount Sion, of which yet it had been said,
“This is my rest for ever; here will I dwell,
because I have chosen it.” (Psalms 132:14)
Go now, he says, to Shiloh ow, since Shiloh and Jerusalem, and so many
celebrated cities, where the gospel formerly flourished, have been taken away from

75. us, it is not to be doubted, but that a dreadful vengeance and destruction await all
those who reject the doctrine of salvation, and despise the treasure of the gospel.
Since then God has shewn by so many proofs and examples that he is not bound to
any places, how stupid is their madness who seek, through the mere name of an
apostolic seat, to subvert all truth and all fear of God, and whatever belongs to true
religion. Let us now proceed —
TRAPP, "Jeremiah 7:15 And I will cast you out of my sight, as I have cast out all
your brethren, [even] the whole seed of Ephraim.
Ver. 15. And I will cast you out of my sight.] Heb., From against, or over against my
face.
As I have cast out your brethren.] For your instance and admonition I hanged them
up in gibbets, as it were at your very doors but nothing would warn you.
ELLICOTT, "(15) The whole seed of Ephraim.—The fate of the tribes of the
orthern kingdom, among which Ephraim had always held the leading position,
was already familiar to the people. They were dwelling far off by Habor or Gozan,
and the cities of the Medes (2 Kings 15:29; 2 Kings 17:6; 2 Kings 18:11). A like exile
was, they were now told, to be their own portion.
PETT, "Jeremiah 7:15
“And I will cast you out of my sight, as I have cast out all your brothers, even the
whole seed of Ephraim.”
And YHWH then informed them that not only would He destroy both their Temple
and their land as He had Shiloh, but He would also cast the people themselves out of
His sight as He had cast ‘the whole seed of Ephraim’ (all the people of northern
Israel which, especially in its reduced form, had been known as ‘Ephraim, centring
on Mount Ephraim and being named after the most influential of the northern
tribes) out of His sight. And all knew what that meant. It meant captivity and exile.
16 “So do not pray for this people nor offer any
plea or petition for them; do not plead with me,
for I will not listen to you.

76. BAR ES, "They had reached that stage in which men sin without any sense of guilt
(see 1Jo_5:16).
Neither make intercession to me - In Jer_14:7-9 we have an intercessory prayer
offered by Jeremiah, but not heard. The intercession of Moses prevailed with God Num_
11:2; Num_14:13-20; Num_16:22, because the progress of the people then wins upward;
the progress now was from bad to worse, and therefore in Jer_15:1 we read that the
intercession even of Moses and Samuel (see 1Sa_12:23) would profit nothing.
CLARKE, "Therefore pray not thou for this people - They have filled up the
measure of their iniquity, and they must become examples of my justice. How terrible
must the state of that place be, where God refuses to pour out the spirit of supplication
on his ministers and people in its behalf!
GILL, "Therefore pray not thou for this people,.... These are the words of the
Lord to the Prophet Jeremiah, forbidding him to pray for the people of the Jews; which
he either was doing, or about to do, and which, from the great affection he had for them,
he was inclined unto; wherefore, to show how much the Lord was displeased with them,
and how determined he was to punish them with captivity, he orders the prophet not to
make any supplication for them:
neither lift up cry nor prayer for them; referring to the gestures of lifting up the
eyes and hands in prayer, and also to the frame of the heart, in the exercise of faith and
holy confidence: "cry" and "prayer" are put together, because prayer is sometimes made,
especially when persons are in great distress, with strong cryings and tears; see Heb_5:7,
neither make intercession to me; or, "meet me" (o); or come between him and this
people, and so act the part of a mediator, of which office intercession is a branch; it
properly belongs to Christ. The Jews say (p) there is no ‫,פגיעה‬ "meeting", but prayer, or
that is always intended by it; for proof of which they cite this passage:
for I will not hear thee; on the behalf of them, being so highly provoked by them, and
determined they should go into captivity; see Jer_15:1.
HE RY, "God had shown them, in the foregoing verses, that the temple and the
service of it, of which they boasted and in which they trusted, should not avail to prevent
the judgment threatened. But there was another thing which might stand them in some
stead, and which yet they had no value for, and that was the prophet's intercession for
them; his prayers would do them more good than their own pleas: now here that support

77. is taken from them; and their case is said indeed who have lost their interest in the
prayers of God's ministers and people.
I. God here forbids the prophet to pray for them (Jer_7:16): “The decree has gone
forth, their ruin is resolved on, therefore pray not thou for this people, that is, pray not
for the preventing of this judgment threatened; they have sinned unto death, and
therefore pray not for their life, but for the life of their souls,” 1Jo_5:16. See here, 1. That
God's prophets are praying men; Jeremiah foretold the destruction of Judah and
Jerusalem, and yet prayed for their preservation, not knowing that the decree was
absolute; and it is the will of God that we pray for the peace of Jerusalem. Even when we
threaten sinners with damnation we must pray for their salvation, that they may turn
and live. Jeremiah was hated, and persecuted, and reproached, by the children of his
people, and yet he prayed for them; for it becomes us to render good for evil. 2. That
God's praying prophets have a great interest in heaven, how little soever they have on
earth. When God has determined to destroy this people, he bespeaks the prophet not to
pray for them, because he would not have his prayers to lie (as prophets' prayers seldom
did) unanswered. God said to Moses, Let me alone, Exo_22:10. 3. It is an ill omen to a
people when God restrains the spirits of his ministers and people from praying for them,
and gives them to see their case so desperate that they have no heart to speak a good
word for them. 4. Those that will not regard good ministers' preaching cannot expect any
benefit by their praying. If you will not hear us when we speak from God to you, God will
not hear us when we speak to him for you.
JAMISON, "When people are given up to judicial hardness of heart, intercessory
prayer for them is unavailing (Jer_11:14; Jer_14:11; Jer_15:1; Exo_32:10; 1Jo_5:16).
K&D 16-28. "This punishment will be turned aside, neither by intercession, because
the people re2fuses to give up its idolatry, nor by sacrifice, which God desires not,
because for long they have turned to Him the back and not the face, and have not
hearkened to His words. - Jer_7:16. "But thou, pray not for this people, and lift not up
for them cry and prayer; and urge me not, for I do not hear thee. Jer_7:17. Seest thou
not what they do in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem? Jer_7:18. The
sons gather sticks, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead dough, to
make cakes for the Queen of heaven, and to pour out drink-offerings unto other gods, to
provoke me. Jer_7:19. Provoke they me, saith Jahveh, not themselves, to the shaming of
their face? Jer_7:20. Therefore thus saith the Lord Jahveh, Behold, mine anger and my
fury shall be poured out on this place, upon man, upon beast, upon the trees of the field,
and upon the fruit of the ground; and shall burn, and not be quenched. Jer_7:21. Thus
saith Jahveh of hosts, the God of Israel: Your burnt-offerings add to your slain-
offerings, and eat flesh. Jer_7:22. For I spake not with your fathers, nor commanded
them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning the matters of
burnt-offering or slain-offering. Jer_7:23. But this word commanded I them, saying,
Hearken to my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people; and walk in
the way which I command you, that it may be well with you. Jer_7:24. But they
hearkened not, nor inclined their ear, and walked in the counsels, in the stubbornness
of their evil heart, and turned to me the back, and not the face. Jer_7:25. Since the day
that your fathers went forth of the land of Egypt until this day, I sent to you all my
servants the prophets, daily from early morn sending them; Jer_7:26. But they
hearkened not to me, nor inclined their ear, and were stiffnecked, and did worse than
their fathers. Jer_7:27. And though thou speakest all these words unto them, yet will
they not hearken unto thee; and though thou callest unto them, yet will they not answer

78. thee. Jer_7:28. Thus speak to them: This is the people that hearken not unto the voice of
Jahveh its God, and that receive not correction. Perished is faithfulness, cut off from
their mouth."
The purport of Jer_7:16, that God will not suffer Himself to be moved by any
entreaties to revoke the doom pronounced on the wicked people, is expressed by way of
a command from God to the prophet not to pray for the people. That Jeremiah did
sometimes pray thus, however, we see from Jer_14:19. (cf. Jer_18:20), when to his
prayer the same answer is given as we have here, and all intercession for the corrupt race
is characterized as in vain. The second clause: lift not up for them crying, i.e.,
supplicatory prayer, expresses the same, only more strongly; while the third clause: urge
me not, cuts off all hope of success from even the most importunate intercession. The
reason for this command to desist is shown in Jer_7:17, by a reference to the idolatry
which was openly practised throughout the land by young and old, men and women.
Each takes part according to strength and capacity: the sons gather wood together, the
fathers set the fire in order, etc. The deity so zealously worshipped by the people is called
the Queen of heaven, and is mentioned only by Jeremiah. Besides here, there is
reference to her in Jer_44:17, where we see that her worship was very diligently
cultivated, and that she was adored as the bestower of earthly possessions. (‫ת‬ ֶ‫כ‬ ֶ‫ל‬ ְ‫מ‬ is stat.
constr., either from the Chald. form ְ‫ך‬ ֵ‫ל‬ ְ‫,מ‬ or from ‫ה‬ ָ‫יכ‬ ִ‫ל‬ ְ‫,מ‬ after the analogy of ‫ת‬ ֶ‫ר‬ ֶ‫ב‬ְ, st.
constr. of ‫ה‬ ָ‫יר‬ ִ‫ב‬ְ; but perhaps it has ‫ת‬ ֶ‫כ‬ ֶ‫ל‬ ְ‫מ‬ in stat. abs.) This worship was combined with
that of the stars, the host of heaven, which especially prevailed under Manasseh (2Ki_
21:5). Thence it may be presumed that the Queen of heaven was one of the deities who
came to Western Asia with the Assyrians, and that she corresponds to the Assyrian-
Persian Tanais and Artemis, who in the course of time took the place once occupied by
the closely related Phoenician Astarte. She is originally a deification of the moon, the
Assyrian Selene and Virgo caelestis, who, as supreme female deity, was companion to
Baal-Moloch as sun-god; cf. Movers, Phönizier, i. S. 623ff. With this accords the
statement of Steph. Byz., that σελήνη is also πήπανον τι τሬ ᅎστρω παραπλήσιον. The
offerings which, acc. to this verse and Jer_44:19, were brought to her, are called ‫ים‬ִ‫נ‬ָ‫וּ‬ ַⅴ, a
word which would appear to have come to the Hebrews along with the foreign cultus. By
the lxx it was Grecized into χαυራνας, for which we find in glossators and codd. καυራνας
and χαβራνας. They were, acc. to the Etymol. magn. and Suidas, ᅎρτοι ᅚλαίሩ
ᅊναφυραθέντες or λάχανα ᆊπτα (? cooked vegetables); acc. to Jerome, χαυራνας, quas nos
placentas interpretati sumus. In any case, they were some kind of sacrificial cakes,
which Vitr. put alongside of the πόπανα of Aristophanes and Lucian; cf. the various
interpretations in Schleussner, Lexic. in lxx s.v. χαυών. These cakes were kindled on the
altar (cf. ‫ים‬ ִ‫ר‬ ְ ַ‫ק‬ ְ‫,מ‬ Jer_44:19) as a kind of Minchah (meat-offering), and with this
Minchah a libation or drink-offering (‫ים‬ ִ‫כ‬ ָ‫ס‬ְ‫)נ‬ was combined. ְ‫ך‬ ֵ ַ‫ה‬ corresponds to ‫ּות‬‫שׂ‬ ֲ‫ע‬ ַ‫,ל‬ so
that ְ‫ל‬ has to be repeated; cf. Jer_44:19, Jer_44:25, where we find libations poured out
to the Queen of heaven. In the 18th verse the expression is generalized into "other gods,"
with reference to the fact that the service of the Queen of heaven was but one kind of
idolatry along with others, since other strange gods were worshipped by sacrifices and
libations. To provoke me; cf. Deu_31:29; Deu_32:16, etc.

79. BI, "Pray not thou for this people.
Intercessory prayer forbidden
1. God’s prophets are praying men.
2. God’s praying prophets have a great interest in heaven, how little soever they have
on earth.
3. It is an ill omen to a people when God restrains the spirits of His ministers and
people from praying for those condemned.
4. Those that will not regard good ministers’ preaching cannot expect any benefit by
their praying. If you will not hear us when we speak from God to you, God will not
hear us when we speak to Him for you. (M. Henry, D. D.)
CALVI , "God, in order to exonerate his servant from every ill-will, forbids him to
pray for the people. This might have been done for the sake of the Prophet, as well
as of the whole people; for no doubt Jeremiah regarded the ruin of his own nation
with great grief and sorrow: as we shall see elsewhere, he had not divested himself
of all human feelings. He was doubtless anxious for the safety of his brethren, and
he condoled with the miserable, when he saw that they were already given up to
destruction. But God strengthens him, that he might courageously discharge his
office; for pity has often melted the hearts of men so as not to be able, as they ought,
to perform their office. Jeremiah might have been more tardy or more temperate in
denouncing God’s vengeance, had not all impediments, which checked his alacrity,
been removed. Hence then he is bidden to divest himself of sympathy, so that he
might rise above all human feelings, and remember that he was set a judge over the
people, or a herald to denounce their final doom. There is yet no doubt but that God
had respect to the people also, — to make it known to them that Jeremiah was
constrained to perform his part, however unpleasant it might be to him. Hence, as I
have said, he was thus relieved from the charge of ill-will, lest he should exasperate
his own nation while treating them with so much severity.
Pray not, he says, for this people; and then, Raise not up a prayer Some read, “Take
not up a prayer.” The verb ‫,נשא‬ nesha, properly means to raise up. We have spoken
of this phrase elsewhere; for there are two different ways of speaking when prayer
is the subject. The Scripture sometimes says of the faithful, that they cast a prayer
before God; and thus is set forth their humility, when they come as suppliants, and
dare not lift upwards their eyes, like the publican, of whom Christ speaks. (Luke
18:13.) We are then said to cast a prayer before God, when we humbly seek pardon,
and stand before him with shame and self — reproach. We are also said, for another
reason, to raise up a prayer; for when our hearts sink and ascend not to God in
faith, it is certain that our prayers are not real: hence the faithful, on account of the
fervor of their desire, are said to raise up their prayers. Even so the meaning is here,
Raise not up for them a cry and a prayer
Then he says, Intercede not, for I will not hear thee (200) There is yet no doubt but

80. that the Prophet, as we shall see, continued in his prayers; but still as one knowing
that the safety of the city and kingdom would no longer be granted by God: for he
might have prayed for two things, — that God would reverse his decree; and this he
was forbidden to do; — and, that God would be mindful of his covenant in
preserving a remnant; and this was done; for the name of the people, though the city
and the Temple were destroyed, has never been obliterated. Some people then
survived, though without any distinction or renown. And hence at the restoration of
the Church God calls its subjects a new people, as in Psalms 102:19,
“A people who shall be created,” that is, a new people,
“shall praise the Lord,”
as though he intimated that the Babylonian exile would be the ruin of his ancient
people. God has, however, preserved a remnant, as Paul says in Romans 10:0 and
Romans 11:0. So for the whole body of the people, and for the kingdom, the Prophet
was not to pray, because he knew that it was all over with the people. But on this
subject we shall speak more at large in another place. It follows —
And thou, be not an intercessor for this people, or raise for them a cry and a
supplication, or make an entreaty to me, For I will not hear thee.
That is, “Undertake not their cause as one who intercedes or mediates between a
judge and a criminal, nor cry suppliantly for mercy, nor entreat me to be favorable
to them.” He was not to be for them an intercessor, nor a deprecator of evils, nor a
solicitor of favors. All the versions render the passage loosely. — Ed.
COFFMA , ""Therefore pray thou not for this people, neither lift up cry nor
prayer for them, neither make intercession to me; for I will not hear thee. Seest thou
not what they do in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem? The children
gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead the dough, to
make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink-offerings unto other gods,
that they may provoke me to anger. Do they provoke me to anger? saith Jehovah; do
they not provoke themselves, to the confusion of their own faces? Therefore thus
saith the Lord Jehovah: Behold, mine anger and my wrath shall be poured out upon
this place, upon man, and upon beast, and upon the trees of the field, and upon the
fruit of the ground; and it shall burn, and shall not be quenched."
The repeated prohibition of Jeremiah's praying any more for Judah is also repeated
again in Jeremiah 11:14,14:11ff; and from these repetitions, Ash concluded that. "In
spite of their iniquity, Jeremiah had been praying for the people."[18] As many a
heartbroken parent has discovered, it is nearly impossible to stop praying for a
wayward son or daughter, no matter how wicked they might have become.
The meaning of this is simply that, "Persistent idolatry of Judah could only bring
upon her as a consequence the curses of the covenant; and that time had now
arrived."[19]

81. "To make cakes to the queen of heaven ..." (Jeremiah 7:17-18). This pagan goddess
originally was worshipped in Canaan.
"The Phoenicians, called the moon Ashtoreth or Astarte, the wife of Baal or Moloch,
the king of heaven. This male and female pair of deities symbolized the generative
powers of nature; and, from this, came the introduction of so-called sacred
prostitution into their worship."
It is impossible, nor is it necessary, to describe the shameful, licentious worship
which characterized the idolatry associated with the queen of heaven. Stephen's
mention of Israel's worshipping "the host of heaven" (Acts 7:42) is a reference to
this very goddess, who was also said to be represented by the planet Venus. She was
also identified as Ishtar (in Babylon) and the moon-goddess. The attractiveness of
this idolatry to Israel was due primarily to the gratification of the lust of the flesh
which it abundantly supplied.
"Do they provoke me to anger ..." (Jeremiah 7:19)? God's answer is, " o, they were
only provoking themselves." So it still is. Men fancy that they are "breaking God's
commandments"; but in reality, they are only "breaking themselves!" As
Dummelow stated it, "Their sin did not provoke God to a mere helpless anger, but
to a wrath that was quick to punish and destroy them."[20]
COKE, "Jeremiah 7:16. Therefore, pray not thou, &c.— This is not said to
Jeremiah, because God would not have him affected with love for his country; but
to assure him, that if he prayed it would be in vain, as he had determined to punish
the incorrigible sins of the Jews. These expressions, however, admirably mark out
the efficacy of the prayers of believers for sinners. See Ezekiel 32:30 and Houbigant.
TRAPP, "Jeremiah 7:16 Therefore pray not thou for this people, neither lift up cry
nor prayer for them, neither make intercession to me: for I will not hear thee.
Ver. 16. Therefore pray not thou for this people.] For I am unchangeably resolved
upon their ruin, and I would not have thy prayers, those honeydrops, spilt upon
them. Their day of grace is past, their sins are full, the decree is now gone forth, and
it is irreversible, therefore pray not for this deplored people; there is a sin unto
death, and who knows but their sin was such? Sure it is the prophet was silenced
here, and that was a sad symptom.
either lift up cry.] Verbum aptum precibus est; lift up is a very fit expression, and
the word rendered cry comes from a root (a) that signifieth clamare voce contenta et
efficaci, to set up the note to some tune, as we say.
either make intercession to me.] Interdicit ei ne intercedat. Here and elsewhere
God flatly forbids the prophet to pray. See Jeremiah 14:7; Jeremiah 14:11; and yet
he is at it again. [Jeremiah 7:19-22] So Exodus 32:11-13, Let me alone, saith God.
The Chaldee there hath it, Cease thy prayer; but Moses would not. These were men

82. of prayer, and could truly say of themselves, as David once did, [Psalms 109:4] But I
gave myself to prayer. Where the Hebrew hath it, But I, prayer; as if he had been
made up of it, and had minded little else. The Lord also, they knew, was a prayer
hearing God. "Oh thou that art hearing prayers" - so the Hebrew hath it [Psalms
65:2] - always hearing some, and ready to hear the rest. Our God is not like Jupiter
of Crete, that had no ears; nor as those other heathen deities of whom Cicero sadly
complaineth to his brother Quintus in these words: I would pray to the gods for
those things, but that they have given over to hear my prayers. Jeremiah could upon
better ground pray, than ever he in Plato did,
“ Zευ βασιλευ τα µεν εσθλα, ”{ b} &c.
In English thus:
"Great God, the good thou hast to give,
Whether we ask’t or no,
Let’s still receive: no mischief thrive
To work our overthrow."
BE SO , "Jeremiah 7:16. Therefore pray not thou for this people — God had been
wont to suffer himself to be prevailed with to spare his people by the mediation of
his servants, as of Moses, Exodus 32:11; Exodus 32:14; umbers 14:19-20; but now
he will admit of no intercession. See also chap. Jeremiah 15:1; Ezekiel 14:20.
othing but a universal reformation, which God foresaw would not take place,
could preserve the Jews from that captivity and desolation which he had threatened
to bring upon them. This decree of God to destroy them, unless they repented and
were reformed, being irrevocable, the prophet is forbid to interpose by his prayers
for the reversing of it. But still he might beseech God not to proceed to an utter
destruction of his people, but, in remembrance of his covenant with Abraham and
his seed, might spare a remnant, and accordingly we find he did pray to that effect,
Jeremiah 14:7-9.
ELLICOTT, "(16) Pray not thou.—The words imply that a prayer of intercession,
like that which Moses had offered of old (Exodus 32:10), was rising up in the heart
of the prophet. He is told that he must check it. Judgment must have its way. The
discipline must be left to do its work. A like impulse met by a like repression is
found in Jeremiah 11:14; Jeremiah 14:11. It is obvious that the utterance of the
conflict between his human affections and the Divine will made the sentence which
he pronounced more terrible than ever.
PETT, "Verses 16-28
YHWH Explains To Jeremiah Why He Sees His People As Having Gone Beyond
What Was Acceptable, And What The Consequences Must Inevitably Be, Because
They Have Constantly Refused To Hear His Voice (Jeremiah 7:16-28).

83. Jeremiah was called on no longer to pray for the people of Judah because there was
no longer any possibility that such a prayer would be heard (compare Jeremiah
14:11; and note Jeremiah 18:19-23). And the reason for that was because of their
total addiction to idolatrous worship, including that of ‘the Queen of Heaven’
(compare Jeremiah 44:17). This has been identified by some in terms of
Ashtoreth/Ishtar/Astarte although it is nowhere said so. However, numerous clay
plaques depicting naked female images have been discovered in Palestine from the
bronze and iron ages, and an Egyptian stele at Bethshean speaks of Anath, Baal’s
sister, as the Queen of Heaven. The consequence of all this was that they had
brought on themselves total ‘confusion’. That indeed was why YHWH’s anger was
about to be poured out on the whole land, including man, animals, trees and crops
in a way which could not be prevented (‘it will not be quenched’).
For at the very root of the problem was the fact that they had refused to hear Him to
obey Him or to walk in His ways. It was such activity that had always been His first
priority. Thus their offerings and sacrifices, which had always been of secondary
importance, were in vain. And this situation had been exacerbated even more by the
fact that He had sent to them His servants the prophets, to whom also they had
refused to listen, just as they would now not listen to Jeremiah. That is why they are
to be branded as the people who would not listen to the voice of YHWH their God,
truth having been cut off from their mouths.
Jeremiah Is ot Even To Pray For ‘This People’ Because Of The Terrible Things
That They Are Doing.
Jeremiah 7:16
“Therefore do not pray for this people, nor lift up cry nor prayer for them, nor
make intercession to me, for I will not hear you.”
In a threefold manner YHWH now called on Jeremiah no longer to pray for the
people of Judah because He simply would not listen to him. The end had been
reached and mercy was no longer available. ‘Do not pray -- nor lift up cry or prayer
-- nor make intercession’. ote the advancement in intensity, with intercession
involving personal involvement. It was an emphatic statement for which there was
to be no exception. It is a reminder to us that although God is continually
longsuffering, there regularly comes a time when, because of people’s intransigence,
He finally brings things to a conclusion, in order to begin again. It happened for the
people in the time of oah, with the Flood (Genesis 6:7). It happened for the
Canaanites when, after waiting for four hundred years for them to repent (Genesis
15:16), He finally sent in the Israelites to destroy them. It had happened for Israel
when it had continually refused to listen to His prophets, so that Samaria had been
destroyed and they had at last been exiled. ow it had happened to Judah, who
could thus only await their certain end.
PULPIT, "Pray not thou for this people. Abraham prayed for Sodom (Genesis
18:23-32); Moses and Samuel for Israel (Exodus 32:11-14; Exodus 17:11; umbers

84. 14:13-20; Psalms 106:23; 1 Samuel 7:9, 1 Samuel 7:10; 1 Samuel 12:17, 1 Samuel
12:18, 1 Samuel 12:23); and Jeremiah would fain perform the same pious duty to his
people. We have a specimen of his intercession in Jeremiah 14:19-22 (comp.
Jeremiah 18:20), followed immediately by a rejection of his prayer, parallel in
thought to the present passage. Verbal parallels are Jeremiah 11:14; Jeremiah
14:11. Cry; i.e. cry for help (see on Jeremiah 14:12); parallel with "prayer," as
Jeremiah 11:14; Psalms 17:1, Psalms 61:1.
17 Do you not see what they are doing in the
towns of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem?
BAR ES, "The proof of the hopeless immorality of the people is this, that they
worship pagan deities
(1) generally in the cities of Judah, and not in the capital only; and
(2) publicly in the streets of Jerusalem. Such public idolatry could have been practiced
only in the reign of a king like Jehoiakim.
GILL, "Seest thou not what they do in the cities Judah,.... Not in one city only,
but in all of and particularly the chief of them; as follows:
and in the streets of Jerusalem? these words, with what is said next, show the
reason why the prophet was forbid to pray for this people, and the Lord was so provoked
with them as to cast them out of his sight; and he appeals to the prophet, and to what he
saw, or which he might see; for what was done was done not in secret, but openly, in the
very streets of the city; by which he might be sufficiently convinced it was but just with
God to do what he determined to do with them.
HE RY, "He gives him a reason for this prohibition. Praying breath is too precious a
thing to be lost and thrown away upon a people hardened in sin and marked for ruin.
1. They are resolved to persist in their rebellion against God, and will not be turned
back by the prophet's preaching. For this he appeals to the prophet himself, and his own
inspection and observation (Jer_7:17): Seest thou not what they do openly and publicly,
without either shame or fear, in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem? This
intimates both that the sin was evident and could not be denied and that the sinners
were impudent and would not be reclaimed; they committed their wickedness even in

85. the prophet's presence and under his eye; he saw what they did, and yet they did it,
which was an affront to his office, and to him whose officer he was, and bade defiance to
both. Now observe,
JAMISO , "Jehovah leaves it to Jeremiah himself to decide, is there not good reason
that prayers should not be heard in behalf of such rebels?
CALVI , "Here God shews first why he ought to be implacable towards the people:
for the command to the Prophet not to pray for them seems at the first hearing to be
very severe; and it might have been objected and said, “What if they repent? Is
there no hope of pardon?” God shews that they were past remedy — How so? He
says, Dost thou not see? Here he refers the examination of the cause to his servant
Jeremiah; as though he had said, “There is no reason for thee to contend with me;
open thine own eyes, and consider how they have fallen; for children gather wood,
and fathers kindle the fire, and women knead dough.” Some render the last words,
“Women are busy with the paste;” but literally, “they set the dough, “la paste God
intimates here shortly, that the whole people were become corrupt, as though they
had wickedly conspired together, so that men, women, and children, were all led
away into idolatry as by a mad impulse; for he speaks here only of their
superstitions. He had before charged them with adulteries, murders, and plunders;
but he now condemns them for having wholly profaned God’s worship, and at the
same time shews the fruit of their impiety — that they all strove to outdo one
another by an insane rivalship.
TRAPP, "Jeremiah 7:17 Seest thou not what they do in the cities of Judah and in
the streets of Jerusalem?
Ver. 17. Seest thou not what they do?] (a) And hast thou yet a heart to pray for
them? and should I yet have a heart to pity them? There is only this hope left
sometimes, that something God will yield to the prayers of his people, even when he
is most bitterly bent against them.
“ Flectitur iratus, voce rogante, Deus. ”
BE SO ,"Jeremiah 7:17-19. Seest thou not what they do in the cities of Judah —
Thou canst not pass along the streets, but thou must needs be an eye witness of their
abominations, committed openly and publicly in the face of the sun, without either
shame or fear; and in the streets of Jerusalem — In both city and country. This
intimates both that their sins were evident and could not be denied, and that the
sinners were impudent and would not be reclaimed: they committed their
wickedness even in the prophet’s presence and under his eye; he saw what they did,
and yet they did it; which was an affront to his office, and to God, whose minister he
was, and bid defiance to both. The children gather wood — Here God shows how
busily they were employed, from the youngest to the oldest, for their idolatry. Every
one in the family did something toward it. To make cakes to the queen of heaven —
That is, the moon, either in an image, or in the original, or both. They worshipped
her probably under the name of Astarte, or Ashtaroth, being in love, it seems, with

86. the brightness with which they saw the moon walk, and thinking themselves
indebted to her for her benign influences, or fearing her malignant ones, Job 32:26.
The worship of the moon was much in use among the heathen nations, and, as
appears from Jeremiah 44:17-19, many of the Jews were so attached to it, that they
could not be reclaimed from it: no, not when destruction had come upon their
country for that and other species of idolatry. We may observe, that the word ‫,מלכת‬
here rendered queen, may signify regency, as Blaney translates it, and therefore
may include the whole host of heaven: but queen is the more common and proper
signification of the word, and most probably here means the moon only: they,
however, worshipped the sun and stars also. That they may provoke me to anger —
Which is the direct tendency of their sin, though they may not propose to themselves
such an end in the committing it. Do they provoke me to anger? — Do they think to
grieve me, and trouble my infinite and eternal mind, as if they could hurt me by
their wickedness? They are deceived: I am without passion, and can be without
their offerings. Do they not provoke themselves, &c. — Will they not themselves feel
the hurt, and reap the fruits of their conduct? Will not the arrow which they shoot
against heaven recoil upon their own guilty heads? Will not their sins turn at last to
their own utter confusion?
BI 17-18, "Seest thou not what they do in the streets of Jerusalem?
The streets of the city
I. As an index to character.
1. The streets are the pulse of commercial prosperity. The man who goes from a dull,
sluggish place to a city of great business activity must quicken his pace, or get run
over.
2. The street on which a man lives is no index to his character. It does not even
indicate the amount of money he has. Not a few proud families stint their table to
pay their rent on a costly street, in order to make or keep up appearances. Their fine
street, to those who know the facts, is an index of their pretensions. Another man
who has plenty of money lives on a cheap street, because he is too niggardly to pay
rent for more comfortable quarters. To those who know him the street is an index of
his meanness. A Christian man may choose to live on a cheap street, because he
prefers to save money with which to do good. His street indicates self-denying
liberality.
3. What can be seen on the streets of a city, however, is to a great extent an index of
the character of its people. Dirty streets suggest dirty morals. If indecent handbills
pollute the streets of a city, it indicates either sinful apathy, or a very low moral tone.
II. As a test of character. To walk down one of our streets is to some men like going into
a furnace. Their moral courage is tested at nearly every step. There is within them a
demon of drink that can be waked from his sleep by the smell of a beer barrel. A deep-
sea diver laid his hand on something soft, and curious to know what it was, he took hold
of it to examine it. Fatal curiosity! The long tentacles of an octopus reached out and
grasped him in its deadly embrace. The friends above, feeling the struggle, drew him to
the surface, to find only a corpse still in the clutches of the monster. Many a young man
has come from his pure country home to the great city, and, prompted by a curiosity
excited by the signs on the streets, has entered one of these homes of the devil fish. Soon

87. its slimy tentacles are wrapped around him, soul and body. (A. C. Dixon, D. D.)
The streets and their story
The prophet evidently knew what was going on in the city. He had gone up and down the
streets by night and by day, and had seen the sins and iniquities of the people. The great
city of Jerusalem lay like a putrid sore, filled with all manner of pollution and
corruption. The time had come for a warning. Hiding no detail of its iniquity, he
catalogued before the sin-laden people the awful record of their sin, and launched
against their filthiness and impenitence the sentence of the condemnation of God. It was
no pleasant task. To sing in sweeter strains the adoration of God and the beauties of
holiness had been a far more gladsome work—but to sing of holiness in such a city had
been like singing of springs amid the sands of the arid desert. Moreover, the Word of
God had commanded, again and again, “Cry aloud, spare not lift up thy voice like a
trumpet,” etc. I suppose an over-cautious but easy-going city cried out against the
prophet who left his harp to throttle sin. I suppose its wicked inhabitants had a great
many sneers and scoffs for the preacher who ventured to look in upon their wickedness;
but he heard God’s Word and he did it; he called things by their right names, and shook
above them the thunderstorm of Divine wrath and the penalties of the broken law. Sin
must be assailed in the name of God. Its colours must he shown, clear of the prism tints
by which it dazzles and deceives. Its wages, hidden too often behind the screens of
shame and misery, must be brought to light, and men warned in the name of facts, in the
name of experience, in the name of God, against the man traps of hell. I want to show
you sin as it is and it always must be, and from its actual facts of awful misery I want to
read a warning. The old legends ten of a dual life that walks the earth; how in the shades
of night, when all else is slumber bound and still, another life comes out and fills the
night with weird events. The elf folk, hidden all day in earth caves and crannies, now
come out and fill the sleeping earth with a weird, unnatural life. The old legend has a
sort of awful reality here in our darkened streets, for when the day is spent, and the life
of business sinks to rest, and the great buildings darken into shadow, another life comes
out and passes to and fro in the darkened streets and plies its concerns in the silent
shadows. It is a life of sin and of shame. We pause a moment, and watch and listen. Now
and then a belated passer-by hastens with hurried step, but it is almost noiseless—this
night life on these silent streets. Here and there, there are figures standing within the
shadows. A young man emerges from the building, where late accounts have kept him
long after the hours of accustomed toil. A dozen steps, and he is accosted; there is a
rustle and a voice, and then maybe a woman’s laugh ringing out with strange echo in the
darkness. They loiter along with slow step, and together are lost to our view, and the
night covers up this silent trap of hell, whose snares are spread for unwary feet. A little
further and we drive hurriedly across the glare, where the crowds flow along the great
night arteries of the city—a motley crowd, vastly differing from the daylight throng.
There are hundreds of young men, scores of young women, whose days are spent in
shops and behind counters, and whose nights court ruin in the streets. The air is noisy
and the lights are dazzling; here and yonder are those brilliantly lighted stairs that lead
up into apparent gloom, for all the curtained windows show by their darkness. It is the
old story: “The idle brain is the devil’s workshop.” The life that simply works to live, and
that only six hours, if six hours will keep the body, courts the devil for his master. And
yet, go out among the thousands of young men in this city tonight, and let us question
them as to the object of life, and you may well wonder at the multitudes who only live to
live. No thought of anything above the body, no glimpse of anything beyond the sky—an

88. animal life, serving only appetite and seeking only pleasure. Oh, is that all of life? To
spend the day in toil, the night in empty pleasure; our days for nothing, and our future in
eternal poverty of soul. Oh, hear me preach the gospel of yourself, your better self; its
possibilities, its powers, its future. Think what you may be, and then be it, by God’s
grace, and cheat the devil as you save your soul. I marked most of all in these streets the
presence of death. They were full of dead men, of dead women, of corpses, walking,
talking, jesting in loathsome death. Do you remember Valjean’s dream in “Les
Miserables”? How, conscious of his crime, he slept, and sleep revealed to him the death
of sin. He dreamed he was at Romainville, a little garden park near Paris, full of flowers
and music and pleasure. But as he in his dream comes to this domain of revelry, the
flowers, and the trees, and the very sky, all are of the colour of ashes. Leaning against a
wall he finds a man at the corner where two streets meet. “Why is all so still?” The man
seems to hear not and makes no reply. In amazement Valjean wanders on through
vacant rooms and courts and through the gardens, all the colour of ashes, and finds
everywhere silence by the fountains, in the pavilions, everywhere these silent men and
women, who have no answer to his questions. In horror he endeavours to fly from the
ashen abode of terror, when, looking back, he finds all the inhabitants of the lifeless
town suddenly clustering about him, and their ashen lips open, they cry to him, “Do you
not know that you have been dead for a long time?” And with a cry Valjean wakens and
feels his sin. So I saw in these ways of sin dead men all about me. Beneath that silken
robe and sparkling necklace, loathsome death; behind that laugh and empty jest, a dead
man; walking, talking, drinking, feasting, and yet dead. Dead in sin, helpless in habit’s
chains, snared in the man traps of hell. (T. E. Green, D. D.)
Home missions
First, glance at the circumstances and conduct of the Jewish people, which gave rise to
the language of the text. During the days of Jeremiah, and of all the later prophets, they
appear to have sunk into the very depths of national degeneracy. The sanctions of the
Divine authority, and the terrors of Divine indignation, were equally disregarded with
the promises and protection of the Most High. The prophet would have awakened them
to a sense of their criminality and danger; but in vain. He interceded in secret for the
reversal of that righteous sentence by which they were doomed to prove the folly and
misery of their own ways; but this also was without effect. While his voice was still
tremulously pleading for their forgiveness, and the saint and patriot blended in every
gushing tear, and every irrepressible emotion,—the mandate of almighty justice,
tempted too far and wearied of forbearance, imposed an awful interdict—“Pray not thou
for this people,” etc. How happy that no such solemn prohibition rests upon ourselves;
but that we may pour forth our utmost fervour in supplicating for mercy upon those who
are ready to perish! How unspeakable the happiness of reflecting, too, that we have an
Advocate on high, whose plea can never be thus silenced. What was the particular nature
of their idolatry at this season we know not,—or by what offerings they sought to
propitiate and honour that mysterious divinity which they worshipped as “the queen of
heaven”; but that it was a service accompanied with whatever was fitted to inflame the
jealousy and provoke the retribution of the God of Israel, the tenor of this book and of
their subsequent calamities suffers us not to question. But there is one reflection forced
upon our minds by the mention of this subject, which is perpetually arising in the
perusal of these sacred documents,—how inveterate and how wonderful is the depravity
of the human intellect, as well as the corruption of the human heart! How great, too, is
the compassion, of God!—how impressive and encouraging the illustration of His long-

89. suffering! “He remembered that they were but dust,” etc. This is the compassion and
long-suffering which we are called every day to recognise, amidst provocations and
unfaithfulness which would have wearied out all other grace but the grace of
Omnipotence, and which no might could restrain itself from punishing but that which
upholds the mountains and which grasps the thunderbolt. Its very power alone is our
security. We cannot meditate upon these facts without one other suggestion,—how great
is the necessity for continued zeal and diligence, on the part of good men, to counteract
to the uttermost the evils, not only of their own hearts and conduct, but of those among
whom they dwell The condition of men at large forces itself on our notice, as one of
universal calamity and peril,—“Seest thou not what they do?” Let us suppose the
spectator one from a distant region, an inhabitant of one of the remoter provinces of
intellectual being,—acquainted with the character, and reposing with joyful confidence
in the presiding power, of the Creator,—but unread in the history of man. He has heard
of redemption, and is desirous to explore it; but he knows not yet the state of those for
whom it was designed. And he is permitted this momentary inspection of the human
system, that he may gather from it the elements of heavenly truth, and “the manifold
wisdom of God.” Alas! how perplexed and intricate would all appear! What numberless
anomalies, difficulties, and causes of shame and wonder, would everywhere astonish and
overwhelm him! For what end would such a system seem to have been constructed, or
wherefore still upheld, or tending to what result, or interpretative of what purposes, or
susceptible of resolution into its contradictory phenomena by what reconciling and all-
commanding principles, or calculated to excite what other sentiment except the
melancholy apostrophe, “Wherefore hast Thou made all men in vain!” Descending from
the contemplation of the whole, he would consider each several particular with the
intensity of interest which that stupendous but appalling spectacle had summoned into
being. And first, he would probably be arrested with the secular condition of mankind,
and their extreme differences in the nature and degrees of social happiness. The effect
would be as painful as the scene was intricate. He would shrink and tremble, as if within
the boundaries of chaos, or the empire of darkness and of blind misrule. He would next
consider their religious state. And now, what would be the agitation of his feelings, or in
what explanation of such strange appearances could he find or seek relief? Here, he
would sicken at the sight of gross and grovelling idolatries; there, at the bewildering
glare of cruel yet invincible delusions; and elsewhere, at the reveries and dreamy visions
of a spurious philosophy, neutralising at once every claim of human duty, and every
attribute of God. Nothing would seem to him so terrible as our exposure to the jealousy
and wrath of our Creator; nor anything so unfathomable as the mystery of His
compassion. Outraged, defied, forgotten; His being denied by some, His noblest
characters mocked, falsified, contemned by others; His best gifts perverted to the vilest
purposes, His gentle inflictions misinterpreted or impiously repelled, His forbearance
converted into an argument to set aside His veracity, His glorious mad terrible name,
eve where it is not unknown, employed only to add force to blasphemy, or emphasis to
imprecation and falsehood:—what could the stranger anticipate but the kindling up of
His fury, while its flame should burn unto the lowest hell! Thus prepared—how would he
dart his eager eye toward the scenes of men’s future and everlasting habitation! To what,
he would ask himself, can all be hastening onwards? Where must this pilgrimage of sin
and folly end? Conceive now of the surprise and the delight with which he would hear of
the means provided for the restoration of men. That astonished spectator is no creation
merely of the fancy. Many “a watcher,” and many “a holy one,” looks down upon the
scene, and wonders. All that environs us is revealed, in a light of which we are strangely
unconscious, to innumerable witnesses. We walk ourselves, at every step, beneath their
gaze. And it is their judgment, not ours, respecting the dependencies and results of

90. moral action, which shall be confirmed in the decisions of the last day. (R. S. M’All, LL.
D.)
18 The children gather wood, the fathers light the
fire, and the women knead the dough and make
cakes to offer to the Queen of Heaven. They pour
out drink offerings to other gods to arouse my
anger.
BAR ES, "Children ... fathers ... women - All members of the family take part in
this idolatry.
Cakes - Probably very similar to those offered at Athens to Artemis.
To the queen of heaven - A Persian and Assyrian deity, who was supposed to
symbolize a quality possessed by moonlight of giving to nature its receptive power, as
the sun represented its quickening power. The moon thus became generally the symbol
of female productiveness, and was worshipped as such at Babylon. Disgraceful usages to
which every woman was obliged once to submit formed part of her worship.
CLARKE, "The children gather wood - Here is a description of a whole family
gathered together, and acting unitedly in idolatrous worship.
1. The children go and collect wood, and bring it to the place of sacrifice.
2. The fathers lay it in order, and kindle a fire.
3. The mother and her maids knead dough, make their batch, and out of it form
cakes, and bake them for the honor of the queen of heaven; most probably the
moon, though perhaps not exclusive of the sun and planets, generally called the
host of heaven.
Family worship is a most amiable and becoming thing when performed according to
truth. What a pity that so few families show such zeal for the worship of God as those
apostate Israelites did for that of their idols!

91. GILL, "The children gather wood,.... In the fields, or out of the neighbouring
forest; not little children, but young men, who were able to cut down trees, and bear and
carry burdens of wood:
and the fathers kindle the fire; take the wood of their children, lay it in order, and
put fire to it; which shows that they approved of what their children did, and that what
they did was by their direction and order:
and the women knead their dough; so that every age and sex were employed in
idolatrous service, which is here intended; the corruption was universal; and therefore
the whole body was ripe for ruin; nor would the Lord be entreated for them: and all this
preparation was,
to make cakes for the queen of heaven; the moon, as Abarbinel; which rules by
night, as the sun is the king that rules by day; and which was much worshipped by the
Heathens, whom the Jews imitated. Some render it,
to the work, or workmanship, of heavens; (q) that is, to the whole host of heaven,
sun, moon, and stars, which were worshipped in the cities of Judah, and in the places
round about Jerusalem, 2Ki_23:5. The Targum renders it,
"to the star of heaven;''
and Jarchi interprets it of some great star in the heaven, called the queen of heaven; and
thinks that these cakes had the impress of a star upon them; see Amo_5:26 where
mention is made of "Chiun, your image, the star of your god". The word "chiun" is akin
to the word here translated cakes, and thought to be explained by a star; see also Act_
7:43 but it seems rather to be the moon, which is expressly called by Apuleius (r) the
queen of heaven; and often by others Coelestis; and Urania by the Africans, as Tertullian
(s) and Herodian (t) affirm; as also Beltis, by Abydenus (u); and Baaltis, by Philo-
Byblius, or Sanchoniatho (w); which have the signification of "queen"; and these cakes
might have the form of the moon upon them, and be made and offered in imitation of
the shewbread:
and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods; not different from the queen of
heaven, and the hosts thereof; for to her and them drink offerings were poured out, Jer_
44:18 but other gods besides the one, only, living, and true God:
that they may provoke me to anger; not that this was their intention, but so it was
eventually.
HE RY, " What the sin is with which they are here charged - it is idolatry, Jer_7:18.
Their idolatrous respects are paid to the queen of heaven, the moon, either in an image
or in the original, or both. They worshipped it probably under the name of Ashtaroth, or
some other of their goddesses, being in love with the brightness in which they saw the
moon walk, and thinking themselves indebted to her for her benign influences or fearing
her malignant ones, Job_31:26. The worshipping of the moon was much in use among
the heathen nations, Jer_44:17, Jer_44:19. Some read it the frame or workmanship of
heaven. The whole celestial globe with all its ornaments and powers was the object of
their adoration. They worshipped the host of heaven, Act_7:42. The homage they should
have paid to their Prince they paid to the statues that beautified the frontispiece of his

92. palace; they worshipped the creatures instead of him that made them, the servants
instead of him that commands them, and the gifts instead of him that gave them. With
the queen of heaven they worshipped other gods, images of things not only in heaven
above, but in earth beneath, and in the waters under the earth; for those that forsake
the true God wander endlessly after false ones. To these deities of their own making they
offer cakes for meat-offerings, and pour out drink-offerings, as if they had their meat
and drink from them and were obliged to make to them their acknowledgments: and see
how busy they are, and how every hand is employed in the service of these idols,
according as they used to be employed in their domestic services. The children were sent
to gather wood; the fathers kindled the fire to heat the oven, being of the poorer sort
that could not afford to keep servants to do it, yet they would rather do it themselves
than it should be undone; the women kneaded the dough with their own hands, for
perhaps, though they had servants to do it, they took a pride in showing their zeal for
their idols by doing it themselves. Let us be instructed, even by this bad example, in the
service of our God. [1.] Let us honour him with our substance, as those that have our
subsistence from him, and eat and drink to the glory of him from whom we have our
meat and drink. [2.] Let us not decline the hardest services, nor disdain to stoop to the
meanest, by which God may be honoured; for none shall kindle a fire on God's altar for
nought. Let us think it an honour to be employed in any work for God. [3.] Let us bring
up our children in the acts of devotion; let them, as they are capable, be employed in
doing something towards the keeping up of religious exercises.
JAMISO , "children ... fathers ... women — Not merely isolated individuals
practiced idolatry; young and old, men and women, and whole families, contributed
their joint efforts to promote it. Oh, that there were the same zeal for the worship of God
as there is for error (Jer_44:17, Jer_44:19; Jer_19:13)!
cakes ... queen of heaven — Cakes were made of honey, fine flour, etc., in a round
flat shape to resemble the disc of the moon, to which they were offered. Others read as
Margin, “the frame of heaven,” that is, the planets generally; so the Septuagint here; but
elsewhere the Septuagint translates, “queen of heaven.” The Phoenicians called the
moon Ashtoreth or Astarte: the wife of Baal or Moloch, the king of heaven. The male
and female pair of deities symbolized the generative powers of nature; hence arose the
introduction of prostitution in the worship. The Babylonians worshipped Ashtoreth as
Mylitta, that is, generative. Our Monday, or Moon-day, indicates the former prevalence
of moon worship (see on Isa_65:11).
that they may provoke me — implying design: in worshipping strange gods they
seemed as if purposely to provoke Jehovah
CALVI , "The children, he says, gather wood He ascribes the collecting of wood to
the young; for it was a more laborious work. As then that age excels in strength,
they collected wood; and the fathers kindled the fire: the women, what did they do?
They were busy with the meal. Thus no part was neglected. “What then is to be
done? and what else can I do, but wholly to cut off a people so wicked?” Then he
says, that they may make ‫,כונים‬ cunim, which is translated “cakes, “and this is the
most common rendering. Some think that kindling is meant, deriving the word from
‫,כוה‬ cue, which means to kindle. But I prefer the opinion of those who derive the
word from ‫,כון‬ cun, which is to prepare, as cakes are things prepared. I do not then
doubt, but that cakes are meant here, as it appears also from other places. The
second interpretation I regard as too refined. (201)

93. With regard to the word ‫,למלכת‬ lamelcath, many consider the letter ‫א‬ left out, and
think that “works” are intended. In this case ‫מ‬ would be a servile: but others
consider it a radical, and render the word, “Queen;” which appears to me probable;
though I do not wholly reject what some hold that the workmanship of the heavens
is here meant. Some understand the stars, others the sun, and others the moon: let
every one enjoy his own opinion. However, I think, that if the workmanship of the
heavens be meant, the whole celestial host is to be included, as the Scripture thus
calls all the stars. But if “the Queen of the heavens” be adopted, then I am inclined
to think that the moon is intended: and we know how much superstition has ever
prevailed among most people as to the worship of the moon. Hence I approve of this
meaning. Yet I readily admit that all the stars, not one only, may be here designated,
and called the work or the workmanship of the heavens. And the Jews, we know,
were very much given to this madness: for as the sun was considered by the
Orientals as the supreme God, when the Jews became enamoured with this error,
they also thought that some high and adorable divinity belonged to the sun: they
turned also afterwards to the stars; and this absurdity is often referred to in the
Law and also in the Prophets. (202)
It is then added, That they may pour forth libations to foreign gods, to provoke me
to wrath When God complains of being provoked, it is the same as though he had
said, that the Jews now openly carried on war with him, — “They sin not through
ignorance, nor is it unknown to them how much they offend me by these
profanations; but it is as it were their object and design to provoke me and to carry
on war with me by these acts of impiety.”
In Deuteronomy 4:19, the sun, the moon, and the stars, as constituting the host of
heaven, are mentioned together: these the first, as including all the rest, seems to be
intended. Instead of “queen,“ we should say in our language, “the king of the
heavens.” We do not read that the Jews worshipped the moon; but the worship of
the sun among them is specifically referred to and mentioned. See 2 Kings 23:11;
Ezekiel 8:16. The Israelites adored the sun under the name of Baal, which was the
Chemosh of the Moabites, and the Moloch of the Ammonites. — Ed.
COKE, "Jeremiah 7:18. To the queen of heaven— The queen of heaven was the
moon; the same as Astarte or Ashtaroth. The prophet here describes the whole
family as busied in preparing their sacrifices and superstitious rites to this idol.
Houbigant renders the words other gods, very properly, by strange gods; and
Jeremiah 7:19. Do they aggrieve me, saith the Lord, and not themselves [rather], to
the confusion of their own faces?
TRAPP, "Jeremiah 7:18 The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire,
and the women knead [their] dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to
pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger.
Ver 18. The children gather wood.] (a) All sorts, sizes, and sexes are as busy as bees:

94. “ Sed turpis labor est ineptiarum. ”
Oh that we were so intent, with united forces, to the worship of the true God of
heaven! Vae torpori nostro. Oh take heed of industrious folly! dispirit not
yourselves in the pursuit of trifles, &c.
To make cakes.] Popana, (b) cakes stamped with stars.
To the queen of heaven,] i.e., To the heavenly bodies, and, as some will have it, to the
moon in special. The Hebrews have a saying, that God is to be praised in the least
gnat, to be magnified in the elephant, but to be admired in the sun, moon, and stars.
And if the Jews in the text had stayed here, who could have blamed them? but to
deify these creatures was gross idolatry, and an inexpiable sin. Epiphanius (c) telleth
us of certain heretics called Collyridians, that they baked cakes and offered them to
the Virgin Mary, whom they called the queen of heaven. And do not the Papists to
this day the very same, saying that hyperdulia (d) is due unto her? not to speak of
Bonaventure’s blasphemous Lady psalter; Bernard Baubusius, the Jesuit, hath set
forth a book in praise of the Virgin Mary, by changing this one verse -
“ Tot tibi sunt dotes, Virgo, quot sidera caelo, ”
a thousand twenty and two ways, according to the number of the known stars. The
Jesuits commonly write at the end of their books, Laus Deo et beatae Virgini, Praise
be given to God and to the blessed Virgin; but this is the badge of the beast. Let us
say, Soli Deo gloria; Glory only to God, and yet not in the sense of that Persian
ambassador, who, whensoever his business lay with Christians, was wont to have
Soli Deo gloria very much in his mouth; but by soli he meant the sun, whom he
honoured for his god. Why the women here, and Jeremiah 44:19, should be so busy
in kneading cakes to the moon, these reasons are given: - (1.) Because the moon was
a queen; (2.) Because the women at their labour were most beholden to the moon,
who by her great moisture mollifies the pregnant, and makes the passage easy for
their delivery. This custom of offering cakes to the moon, saith one, (e) our ancestors
may seem not to have been ignorant of; to this day our women make cakes at such
times, yea, the child is no sooner born but called cake bread. Add, that the Saxons
did adore the moon, to whom they set a day apart, which to this day we call
Monday. The same author (f) telleth us, that he who not long since conquered the
Indies, persuaded the natives that he had complained of them to their moon, and
that such a day the goddess should frown upon them; which was nothing else but an
eclipse, which he had found out in the almanac.
ELLICOTT, "(18) The queen of heaven.—The goddess thus described was a kind of
Assyrian Artemis, identified with the moon, and connected with the symbolic
worship of the reproductive powers of ature. Its ritual probably resembled that of
the Babylonian Aphrodite, Mylitta, the mother-goddess, in its impurities (Herod. i.

95. 199; Baruch 6:43), and thus provoked the burning indignation of the prophet here
and in Jeremiah 44:19; Jeremiah 44:25. The word rendered “cakes,” and found only
in connection with this worship, was clearly a technical term, and probably of
foreign origin. Cakes of a like kind, made of flour and honey, round like the full
moon, and known, therefore, as selence or “moons,” were offered, like the Minchah
or meat-offerings in the Mosaic ritual, the eideh in the Egyptian worship of the
goddess eith, at Athens to Artemis, and in Sicily to Hecate (Theocr., Idylls, ii. 33).
The worship of Ashtoreth (Milton speaks of her as “Astarte, Queen of Heaven, with
crescent horn “), though of kindred nature, was not identical with that of the Queen
of Heaven, that name signifying a star, and being identified with the planet Venus.
A various reading gives, as in the margin, “the frame of heaven.”
PETT, "Jeremiah 7:18
“The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead
the dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink-offerings to
other gods, so that they may provoke me to anger.”
All were involved. The children gather the wood, the fathers kindle the fire, the
women knead the dough. All are concerned in making cakes for the Queen of
Heaven, as well as pouring out drink-offerings to other gods, thus provoking Him to
anger. While the formal worship of YHWH continued in the Temple, and they paid
lip service to it, it was these other gods and goddesses, accompanied by their
depraved practises, who took all of the people’s attention and affection, and because
the celebrations were carried out indoors they had no doubt escaped Josiah’s
attempts at reformation. They could no longer blatantly offer blood sacrifices to
such gods, but cake-offerings and drink-offerings were a different matter
While this is the first mention of the Queen of Heaven individually (compare also
Jeremiah 44:17-25), worship of the queen of heaven may well have been prominent
in Israel in the days of Amos (consider Amos 5:26 where mention is made of ‘the
star god’ - there was no Hebrew word for goddess), and it may have been
encouraged in Judah by Manasseh, through the worship of ‘the host of Heaven’ (2
Kings 21:3).
Some, however, would repoint malkat (queen) as meleket, signifying ‘heavenly
handiwork’, thus having more in mind ‘the host of Heaven’ (2 Kings 21:3), the very
worship of the stars which Josiah had sought to quell (2 Kings 23:5).
PULPIT, "The children … the fathers … the women. All ages were represented in
this idolatrous act, thus justifying the sweeping character of the judgment as
described in Jeremiah 6:11. Cakes (comp. Jeremiah 44:19). The word is peculiar
(kavvanim), and perhaps entered Palestine together with the foreign rite to which
the cakes belonged. Various conjectures have been offered as to their nature, but
without any demonstrable ground. Sacrificial cakes were not uncommon. Hosea
refers to the luscious raisin-cakes used by idolaters (Hosea 3:1). To the queen of
heaven. This title of a divinity only occurs in Jeremiah (here and in Jeremiah 44:17-
19, Jeremiah 44:25). It reminds us, first, of titles (such as "queen of the gods") of the

96. Babylonic-Assyrian goddesses, Bilat (Beltis) and Istar, who, though divided in later
times, were "originally but two forms of the same goddess" (Sayce, Transactions of
Society of Biblical Archaeology, 3.169). It is, however, perhaps an objection to the
view that Bilat or Istar is intended, that neither here nor in Jeremiah 44:1-30. is
there any allusion to that characteristic lascivious custom which was connected in
Babylonia with the worship of Istar (Herod; 1.199). The phrase has, however,
another association. It reminds us, in the second place, of the Egyptian goddess
eith, "the mother of the gods." The first mention of "the queen of heaven" in
Jeremiah occurs in the reign of Jehoiakim, who was placed on the throne by
Pharaoh- echo, one of the Saite dynasty (Says was the seat of the worship of eith).
If the "queen of heaven" were a Babylonic-Assyrian goddess, we should have looked
for the introduction of her cultus at an earlier period (e.g. under Ahaz). But it was
in accordance with the principles of polytheism (and the mass of the Jews had an
irresistible tendency to polytheism), to adopt the patron-deity of the suzerain.
Subsequently Judah became the subject of ebuchadnezzar; thus it was equally
natural to give up the worship of an Egyptian deity. Jewish colonists in Migdol
would as naturally revert to the cultus of the Egyptian "mother of the gods". The
form of the word rendered "queen" being very uncommon, another reading,
pronounced in the same way, obtained currency. This should be rendered, not
"frame," or "workmanship", but "service." The context, however, evidently
requires a person.
19 But am I the one they are provoking? declares
the Lord. Are they not rather harming
themselves, to their own shame?
BAR ES, "Do they not provoke ... - literally, Is it not themselves (“that they
provoke”) to the shame of their faces?
GILL, "Do they provoke me to anger? saith the Lord,.... No: he cannot be
provoked to anger as men are; anger does not fall upon him as it does on men; there is
no such affection in God as there is in men; his Spirit cannot be irritated and provoked
in the manner that the spirits of men may be; and though sin, and particularly idolatry,
is disagreeable to him, contrary to his nature, and repugnant to his will; yet the damage
arising from it is more to men themselves than to him; and though he sometimes does

97. things which are like to what are done by men when they are angry, yet in reality there is
no such perturbation in God as there is in men:
do they not provoke themselves to the confusion of their own faces? the
greatest hurt that is done is done to themselves; they are the sufferers in the end; they
bring ruin and destruction upon themselves; and therefore have great reason to be angry
with themselves, since what they do issues in their own shame and confusion. The
Targum is,
"do they think that they provoke me? saith the Lord; is it not for evil to themselves, that
they may be confounded in their works?''
HE RY, "What is the direct tendency of this sin: “It is that they may provoke me to
anger; they cannot design any thing else in it. But (Jer_7:19) do they provoke me to
anger? Is it because I am hard to be pleased, or easily provoked? Or am I to bear the
blame of the resentment? No; it is their own doing; they may thank themselves, and they
alone shall bear it.” Is it against God that they provoke him to wrath? Is he the worse
for it? Does it do him any real damage? No; is it not against themselves, to the confusion
of their own faces? It is malice against God, but it is impotent malice; it cannot hurt
him: nay, it is foolish malice; it will hurt themselves. They show their spite against God,
but they do the spite to themselves. Canst thou think any other than that a people, thus
desperately set upon their own ruin, should be abandoned?
JAMISO , "Is it I that they provoke to anger? Is it not themselves? (Deu_32:16,
Deu_32:21; Job_35:6, Job_35:8; Pro_8:36).
CALVI , "He then subjoins, Do they provoke me, and not rather to the shame of
their own faces? God here intimates, that however reproachfully the Jews acted
towards him, they yet brought no loss to him, for he stood in no need of their
worship. Why then does he so severely threaten them? Because he had their sins in
view: but yet he shews that he cared not for them nor their sacrifices, for he could
without any loss be without them. Hence he says, that they sought their own ruin,
and whatever they devised would fall on their own heads. They seek to provoke me;
they shall know with whom they have to do.” It is like what is said by the Prophet
Zechariah, “They shall know whom they have pierced: I indeed continue uninjured;
and though they provoke me as much as they can, I yet despise all their wickedness,
for they cannot reach me; they can neither hurt me nor take anything from me.”
But he says, they provoke themselves, that is, their fury shall return on their own
heads; and hence it shall be, that their faces shall be ashamed. (203)
Is it I they are annoying, saith Jehovah? Is it not themselves, to the confusion of
their own faces?
They were not disturbing, as it were, the repose of God, but their own. They could
do no hurt or annoyance to God, but they were annoying and injuring themselves;
and this would turn out to their own shame and confusion. — Ed.

98. TRAPP, "Jeremiah 7:19 Do they provoke me to anger? saith the LORD: [do they]
not [provoke] themselves to the confusion of their own faces?
Ver. 19. Do they provoke me to anger?] i.e., Hurt they me by their provocations? or
hope they to get the better of me, and to cause me to lay down the bucklers first?
Surely, as Ulysses’s companions said to him, when he would needs provoke
Polydamas, may we better say to such as provoke the Almighty,
“ Sχετλιε, τιπτ δθελεις εριθεζεµεν αγριον ανδρα.”
Or as the wise man, "Contend not with him that is mightier than thou"; meddle
with thy matchman.
PETT, "Jeremiah 7:19
“Do they provoke me to anger?” says YHWH, “is it not themselves (who were being
provoked), to the confusion of their own faces?”
The words in brackets are not in the Hebrew text but are required for the sense.
That was the way in which men wrote. YHWH’s question was rhetorical. They had
certainly succeeded in provoking Him to anger. But what they also needed to
recognise was that what they were doing was provoking confusion (shame) to their
own faces, bringing shame and ignominy on themselves (compare Jeremiah 3:25,
where they had recognised that fact, but had failed to make it good, so that they
were without excuse because they were continuing to do it). By their folly they were
putting themselves beyond the pale.
20 “‘Therefore this is what the Sovereign Lord
says: My anger and my wrath will be poured out
on this place—on man and beast, on the trees of
the field and on the crops of your land—and it
will burn and not be quenched.
BAR ES, "Upon man, and upon beast - All creation in some mysterious way
shares in man’s fall and restoration Rom_8:19-22.

99. GILL, "Therefore thus saith the Lord God,.... Since these are their thoughts, and
this the fruit of their doings:
behold, my anger and my fury shall be poured out upon this place; like fire, to
consume and destroy it; meaning Jerusalem, which was burned with fire; as an emblem
of God's wrath, and an instance of his vengeance upon it, for sins; which came down in
great abundance, like a storm or tempest:
upon man and upon beast; upon beasts for the sake of man, they being his property,
and for his use; otherwise they are innocent, and do not deserve the wrath of God, nor
are they sensible of it:
and upon the trees of the field, and upon the fruit of your ground; which
should be blighted by nipping winds, or cut down and trampled upon by the Chaldean
army:
and it shall burn, and shall not be quenched; that is, the wrath of God shall burn
like fire, and shall not cease until it has executed the whole will of God in the
punishment of his people.
HE RY, " God is resolved to proceed in his judgments against them, and will not be
turned back by the prophet's prayers (Jer_7:20): Thus saith the Lord God, and what he
saith he will not unsay, nor can all the world gainsay it; hear it therefore, and tremble.
“Behold, my anger and my fury shall be poured out upon this place, as the flood of
waters was upon the old world or the shower of fire and brimstone upon Sodom; since
they will anger me, let them see what will come of it.” They shall soon find, (1.) That
there is no escaping this deluge of fire, either by flying from it or fencing against it; it
shall be poured out on this place, though it be a holy place, the Lord's house. It shall
reach both man and beast, like the plagues of Egypt, and, like some of them, shall
destroy the trees of the field and the fruit of the ground, which they had designed and
prepared for Baal, and of which they had made cakes to the queen of heaven. (2.) There
is no extinguishing it: It shall burn and shall not be quenched; prayers and tears shall
then avail nothing. When his wrath is kindled but a little, much more when it is kindled
to such a degree, there shall be no quenching it. God's wrath is that fire unquenchable
which eternity itself will not see the period of. Depart, you cursed, into everlasting fire.
JAMISO , "beast ... trees ... ground — Why doth God vent His fury on these? On
account of man, for whom these were created, that the sad spectacle may strike terror
into him (Rom_8:20-22).
K&D, "Jeremiah 7:19-20
But instead of vexing Him (Jahveh) they rather vex themselves, inasmuch as God
causes the consequences of their idolatry to fall on their own head. ‫ם‬ ָ‫ּת‬‫א‬ is used
reflexively: se ipsos; cf. Ew. §314, c; Gesen. §124, 1, b. For the cause of the shame of their
face, i.e., to prepare for themselves the shame of their face, to cover their face with
shame; cf. Jer_3:25. - For (Jer_7:20) because of this idolatrous work, the wrath of the

100. Lord will pour itself over the land in the consuming fire of war (cf. Jer_4:4 with Jer_
5:17, Nah_1:6, etc.), so as to cut off men and beasts, trees and fruit.
CALVI , "Jeremiah proceeds still with the same subject, and explains more at
large what we have noticed in the preceding lecture, that the ruin of Mount Sion
and of the Temple was nigh at hand, according to what God had before done to
Shiloh, where the Ark had long been kept. But that his threatening might have more
weight, he introduced God as the speaker, —
Behold, he says, my wrath, even mine indignation, has been poured down on this
place He refers to the metaphor he had before used; and hence is confirmed what I
then said, — that God spoke not of prophetic teaching, but of the punishments
which he had already inflicted and was prepared to inflict. On this account he says,
that his wrath, or vengeance (the cause is put for the effect) had been poured down
on the city Jerusalem, so as to bring destruction on the cattle as well as men, and
also on the fruit of the land. It is indeed certain that brute animals, as well as trees
and the productions of the earth, were innocent; but as the whole world was created
for man and for his benefit, it is nothing strange that God’s vengeance should
extend to innocent animals and to things not endued with reason: for God does not
inflict punishment on brute animals and on the fruits of the earth, except for the
purpose of shewing, by extending the symptoms of his wrath to all the elements, how
much displeased he is with men. The whole world, we know, bears at this day in
some measure the punishment which Adam deserved: and hence Paul says, that all
the elements labor in pain, aspiring after a deliverance; and he says also, that all
creatures have been subjected to corruption, though not willingly, that is, not
through their own fault, but through the sin and transgression of man. (Romans
8:20.) It is no wonder, then, that God, wishing to terrify men, should daily set before
their eyes the various forms of his vengeance as manifested towards animals, as well
as trees and the fruits of the earth.
The meaning then is, — that God was so angry, that he purposed to destroy, not
only the Jews, but the land itself, in order that posterity might know how grievously
they had sinned, against whom God’s just vengeance had thus kindled. There is
therefore no need for us curiously to inquire why God shewed his displeasure
towards trees and brute animals: for it is enough for us to know that God does not
in a strict sense punish brute animals and trees, but that this is done on account of
man, that such a sad spectacle may fill them with fear. He afterwards adds —
TRAPP, "Jeremiah 7:20 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD Behold, mine anger
and my fury shall be poured out upon this place, upon man, and upon beast, and
upon the trees of the field, and upon the fruit of the ground; and it shall burn, and
shall not be quenched.
Ver. 20. Mine anger and mine fury.] A very dreadful doom, denounced against these
daring monsters. Those that provoke God to anger shall soon have enough of it. It is

101. a fearful thing to fall into the punishing hands of the living God [Hebrews 10:31] Oh
keep out of them!
BE SO , "Jeremiah 7:20. Therefore thus saith the Lord — And what he saith he
will not unsay, nor can all the world withstand its execution. Hear it therefore and
tremble. Behold, mine anger and my fury shall be poured out upon this place — As
the flood of waters was poured upon the old world, or the shower of fire and
brimstone upon Sodom; since they will provoke me, let them feel the effects of their
conduct. They shall soon find, 1st, That there is no escaping this deluge of wrath,
either by fleeing from it, or fencing against it. It shall be poured out on this place —
Though it be a holy place, the Lord’s house. It shall reach both man and beast —
Like the plagues of Egypt; and, like some of them, shall destroy the trees of the field
and the fruit of the ground — Which they had designed and prepared for Baal, and
of which they had made cakes to the queen of heaven. They shall find, 2d, That
there is no extinguishing it: it shall burn and shall not be quenched — Prayers and
tears, forms and ceremonies of worship, and ritual observances of whatever kind,
shall then avail nothing, to prevent that total destruction which it shall produce.
PETT, "Jeremiah 7:20
“Therefore thus says the Lord YHWH, Behold, my anger and my wrath will be
poured out on this place, on man, and on beast, and on the trees of the field, and on
the fruit of the ground, and it will burn, and will not be quenched.”
As a result (‘therefore’) their Sovereign Lord YHWH had now determined to pour
out His wrath on the whole land, involving all of nature, man, beast, trees and crops.
The land itself would burn with unquenched fire, a regular picture of final
judgment (compare Isaiah 34:10; Isaiah 66:24), although here not said to be ‘for
ever’.
PULPIT, "Upon man, and upon beast. That all creation shares in the curse of man
is repeatedly affirmed in the Old Testament as well as the ew. Inferentially, this
doctrine appears from the narrative of the Fall, and still more clearly from Isaiah's
description of Paradise regained (Isaiah 11:1-16). Hosea speaks of sufferings of the
animals arising out of the guilt of Israel (Hosea 4:3), and a consciousness of the
"solidarity" of all living creatures is ascribed to a inevite king in the Book of
Jonah (Jonah 3:7, Jonah 3:8). In general, the origin of this community of suffering is
left mysterious, but in Genesis 6:12 it is expressly stated as the cause of the Deluge,
that "all flesh [i.e. both man and beast.] had corrupted its way upon the earth;" i.e.
apparently, that contact with man had led to a corruption of the original innocence
of the lower animals. It is a common experience that intercourse between
Christianized (not to say civilized) man and the domestic animals produces a
sometimes pathetic change in the psychic phenomena of the latter. Is the reverse
process utterly inconceivable?

102. 21 “‘This is what the Lord Almighty, the God of
Israel, says: Go ahead, add your burnt offerings
to your other sacrifices and eat the meat
yourselves!
BAR ES, "The meaning is, Increase your sacrifices as you will. Acid burnt-offering
to peace-offerings. All is in vain as long as you neglect the indispensable requirements of
obedience and moral purity. Eat flesh is equivalent to sacrifice. The flesh of animals
offered in sacrifice was usually eaten by the offerers, and this meal was regarded as a
symbol of reconciliation. God and man partook of the same victim, and so were made
friends. This passage Jer_7:21-28 is the Haphtarah (lesson) from the prophets, after the
Parashah, Lev. 6–8, or Lesson from the Law. The selection of such a Haphtarah shows
that the Jews thoroughly understood that their sacrifices were not the end of the Law,
but a means for spiritual instruction.
CLARKE, "Put your burnt-offerings unto your sacrifices, and eat flesh - I
will receive neither sacrifice nor oblation from you; therefore you may take the beasts
intended for sacrifice, and slay and eat them for your common nourishment. See on Jer_
7:29 (note).
GILL, "Thus saith the Lord God of hosts, the God of Israel,.... The Lord of
armies above and below, and the covenant God of the people of Israel; who were bound
to serve him, not only by the laws of creation, and the bounties of Providence, but were
under obligation so to do by the distinguishing blessings of his goodness bestowed upon
them; wherefore their idolatry, and other sins committed against him, were the more
heinous and aggravated:
put your burnt offerings unto your sacrifices, and eat flesh; that is, add one
offering to another; offer every kind of sacrifice, and, when you have done, eat the flesh
of them yourselves; for that is all the advantage that comes by them; they are not
acceptable to me, as Jarchi observes, therefore why should you lose them? burnt
offerings were wholly consumed, and nothing was left of them to eat; but of other
sacrifices there were, particularly the peace offerings; which the Jewish commentators
think are here meant by sacrifices; and therefore the people are bid to join them
together, that they might have flesh to eat; which was all the profit arising to them by
legal sacrifices. The words seem to be sarcastically spoken; showing the
unacceptableness of legal sacrifices to God, when sin was indulged, and the
unprofitableness of them to men.

103. HE RY, "God, having shown the people that the temple would not protect them
while they polluted it with their wickedness, here shows them that their sacrifices would
not atone for them, nor be accepted, while they went on in disobedience. See with what
contempt he here speaks of their ceremonial service (Jer_7:21). “Put your burnt-
offerings to your sacrifices; go on in them as long as you please; add one sort of sacrifice
to another; turn your burnt-offerings (which were to be wholly burnt to the honour of
God) into peace-offerings” (which the offerer himself had a considerable share of), “that
you may eat flesh, for that is all the good you are likely to have from your sacrifices, a
good meal's meat or two; but expect not any other benefit by them while you live at this
loose rate. Keep your sacrifices to yourselves” (so some understand it); “let them be
served up at your own table, for they are no way acceptable at God's altars.” For the
opening of this,
JAMISO , "Put ... burnt offerings unto ... sacrifices ... eat flesh — Add the
former (which the law required to be wholly burnt) to the latter (which were burnt only
in part), and “eat flesh” even off the holocausts or burnt offerings. As far as I am
concerned, saith Jehovah, you may do with one and the other alike. I will have neither
(Isa_1:11; Hos_8:13; Amo_5:21, Amo_5:22).
K&D 21-23, "The multiplication of burnt and slain offerings will not avert judgment.
Your burnt-offerings add to your slain-offerings. In the case of the ‫ים‬ ִ‫ח‬ ָ‫ב‬ְ‫,ז‬ the greater part
of the flesh was eaten at the sacrificial meals by those who brought them. Along with
these they might put the burnt-offerings, which were wont to be burnt entire upon the
altar, and eat them also. The words express indignation at the sacrifices of those who
were so wholly alienated from God. God had so little pleasure in their sacrifices, that
they might eat of the very burnt-offerings.
To show the reason of what is here said, Jeremiah adds, in Jer_7:22, that God had not
commanded their fathers, when He led them out of Egypt, in the matter of burnt and
slain offerings, but this word: "Hearken to my voice, and I will be your God," etc. The
Keri ‫י‬ ִ‫יא‬ ִ‫ּוצ‬‫ה‬ is a true exegesis, acc. to Jer_11:4; Jer_34:13, but is unnecessary; cf. Gen_
24:30; Gen_25:26, etc. This utterance has been erroneously interpreted by the majority
of commentators, and has been misused by modern criticism to make good positions as
to the late origin of the Pentateuch. To understand it aright, we must carefully take into
consideration not merely the particular terms of the present passage, but the context as
well. In the two verses as they stand there is the antithesis: Not ‫ל‬ ַ‫ע‬ ‫י‬ ֵ‫ר‬ ְ‫ב‬ ִ did God speak
and give command to the fathers, when He led them out of Egypt, but commanded the
word: Hearken to my voice, etc. The last word immediately suggests Exo_19:5 : If ye will
hearken to my voice, then shall ye be my peculiar treasure out of all peoples; and it
points to the beginning of the law-giving, the decalogue, and the fundamental principles
of the law of Israel, in Ex 20-23, made known in order to the conclusion of the covenant
in 24, after the arrival at Sinai of the people marching from Egypt. The promise: Then
will I be your God, etc., is not given in these precise terms in Exo_19:5.; but it is found in
the account of Moses' call to be the leader of the people in their exodus, Exo_6:7; and
then repeatedly in the promises of covenant blessings, if Israel keep all the
commandments of God, Lev_26:12; Deu_26:18. Hence it is clear that Jeremiah had
before his mind the taking of the covenant, but did not bind himself closely to the words

104. of Exo_19:5, adopting his expression from the passages of Leviticus and Deuteronomy
which refer to and reaffirm that transaction. If there be still any doubt on this head, it
will be removed by the clause: and walk in all the way which I command you this day
(‫והלכתם‬ is a continuation of the imper. ‫עוּ‬ ְ‫מ‬ ִ‫.)שׁ‬ The expression: to walk in all the way God
has commanded, is so unusual, that it occurs only once besides in the whole Old
Testament, viz., Deu_5:30, after the renewed inculcation of the ten commandments.
And they then occur with the addition (‫ן‬ ַ‫ע‬ ַ‫מ‬ ְ‫ל‬ ‫יוּן‬ ְ‫ח‬ ִ ‫ּוב‬‫ט‬ְ‫,ו‬ in which we cannot fail to recognise
the ‫ן‬ ַ‫ע‬ ַ‫מ‬ ְ‫ל‬ ‫ב‬ ַ‫יט‬ִ‫י‬ ‫ם‬ ֶ‫כ‬ ָ‫ל‬ of our verse. Hence we assume, without fear of contradiction, that
Jeremiah was keeping the giving of the law in view, and specially the promulgation of
the fundamental law of the book, namely of the decalogue, which was spoken by God
from out of the fire on Sinai, as Moses in Deu_5:23 repeats with marked emphasis. In
this fundamental law we find no prescriptions as to burnt or slain offerings. On this fact
many commentators, following Jerome, have laid stress, and suppose the prophet to be
speaking of the first act of the law-giving, arguing that the Torah of offering in the
Pentateuch was called for first by the worship of the golden calf, after which time God
held it to be necessary to give express precepts as to the presenting of offerings, so as to
prevent idolatry. But this view does not at all agree with the historical fact. For the
worship of the calf was subsequent to the law on the building of the altar on which Israel
was to offer burnt and slain offerings, Exo_20:24; to the institution of the daily morning
and evening sacrifice, Exo_29:38.; and to the regulation as to the place of worship and
the consecration of the priests, Ex 25-31. But besides, any difficulty in our verses is not
solved by distinguishing between a first and a second law-giving, since no hint of any
such contrast is found in our verse, but is even entirely foreign to the precise terms of it.
The antithesis is a different one. The stress in Jer_7:23 lies on: hearken to the voice of
the Lord, and on walking in all the way which God commanded to the people at Sinai.
"To walk in all the way God commanded" is in substance the same as "not to depart from
all the words which I command you this day," as Moses expands his former exhortation
in Deu_28:14, when he is showing the blessings of keeping the covenant. Hearkening to
God's voice, and walking in all His commandments, are the conditions under which
Jahveh will be a God to the Israelites, and Israel a people to Him, i.e., His peculiar
people from out of all the peoples of the earth. This word of God is not only the centre of
the act of taking the covenant, but of the whole Sinaitic law-giving; and it is so both with
regard to the moral law and to the ceremonial precepts, of which the law of sacrifice
constituted the chief part. If yet the words demanding the observance of the whole law
be set in opposition to the commandments as to sacrifices, and if it be said that on this
latter head God commanded nothing when He led Israel out of Egypt, then it may be
replied that the meaning of the words cannot be: God has given no law of sacrifice, and
desires no offerings. The sense can only be: When the covenant was entered into, God
did not speak ‫ל‬ ַ‫ע‬ ‫י‬ ֵ‫ר‬ ְ‫ב‬ ִ , i.e., as to the matters of burnt and slain offerings. ‫ל‬ ַ‫ע‬ ‫י‬ ֵ‫ר‬ ְ‫ב‬ ִ is not
identical with ‫י‬ ֵ‫ר‬ ְ‫ב‬ ִ ‫ה‬ ָ‫ּול‬‫ע‬ .‫ר‬ ַ‫ב‬ ְ ‫ל־‬ ַ‫ע‬ are words or things that concern burnt and slain offerings;
that is, practically, detailed prescriptions regarding sacrifice.
The purport of the two verses is accordingly as follows: When the Lord entered into
covenant with Israel at Sinai, He insisted on their hearkening to His voice and walking in
all His commandments, as the condition necessary for bringing about the covenant
relationship, in which He was to be God to Israel, and Israel a people to Him; but He did
not at that time give all the various commandments as to the presenting of sacrifices.
Such an intimation neither denies the divine origin of the Torah of sacrifice in Leviticus,
nor discredits its character as a part of the Sinaitic legislation.

105. (Note: After Vatke's example, Hitz. and Graf find in our verses a testimony against
the Mosaic origin of the legislation of the Pentateuch as a whole, and they conclude
"that at the time of Jeremiah nothing was known of a legislation on sacrifice given by
God on Sinai." Here, besides interpreting our verses erroneously, they cannot have
taken into account the fact that Jeremiah himself insists on the law of the Sabbath,
Jer_17:20.; that amongst the blessings in which Israel will delight in Messianic times
yet to come, he accounts the presenting of burnt, slain, and meat offerings, Jer_
17:26; Jer_31:14; Jer_33:11, Jer_33:18. It is consequently impossible that, without
contradicting himself, Jeremiah could have disallowed the sacrificial worship. The
assertion that he did so is wholly incompatible with the fact recorded in 2 Kings 22,
the discovery of the book of the law of Moses in the temple, in the eighteenth year of
Josiah's reign; and that, too, whether, justly interpreting the passage, we hold the
book of the law to be the Pentateuch, or whether, following the view maintained by
the majority of modern critics, we take it to be the book of Deuteronomy, which was
then for the first time composed and given to the king as Moses' work. For in
Deuteronomy also the laws on sacrifice are set forth as a divine institution. Is it
credible or conceivable, that in a discourse delivered, as most recent commentators
believe, in the beginning of Jehoiakim's reign, Jeremiah should have spoken of the
laws on sacrifice as not commanded by God? For in so doing he would have
undermined the authority of the book of the law, on which his entire prophetic
labours were based.)
All it implies is, that the giving of sacrifices is not the thing of primary importance in the
law, is not the central point of the covenant laws, and that so long as the cardinal
precepts of the decalogue are freely transgressed, sacrifices neither are desired by God,
nor secure covenant blessings for those who present them. That this is what is meant is
shown by the connection in which our verse stands. The words: that God did not give
command as to sacrifice, refer to the sacrifices brought by a people that recklessly broke
all the commandments of the decalogue (Jer_7:9.), in the thought that by means of these
sacrifices they were proving themselves to be the covenant people, and that to them as
such God was bound to bestow the blessings of His covenant. It is therefore with justice
that Oehler, in Herzog's Realencykl. xii. S. 228, says: "In the sense that the
righteousness of the people and the continuance of its covenant relationship were
maintained by sacrifice as such - in this sense Jahveh did not ordain sacrifices in the
Torah." Such a soulless service of sacrifice is repudiated by Samuel in 1Sa_15:22, when
he says to Saul: Hath Jahveh delight in burnt and slain offerings, as in hearkening to the
voice of Jahveh? Behold, to hearken is better than sacrifice, etc. So in Psa_40:7; Psa_
50:8., Jer_51:18, and Isa_1:11., Jer_6:20; Amo_5:22. What is here said differs from
these passages only in this: Jeremiah does not simply say that God has no pleasure in
such sacrifices, but adds the inference that the Lord does not desire the sacrifices of a
people that have fallen away from Him. This Jeremiah gathers from the history of the
giving of the law, and from the fact that, when God adopted Israel as His people, He
demanded not sacrifices, but their obedience to His word and their walking in His ways.
The design of Jeremiah's addition was the more thoroughly to crush all such vain
confidence in sacrifices.
CALVI , "The Prophet here taunts the Jews for being so sedulous in their attention
to sacrifices, while they had no care for piety. Hence he says by way of ridicule,
“Offer your sacrifices, and accumulate burnt-offerings and victims, and eat flesh.”
The last clause proves that God regarded as nothing their sacrifices, and that

106. nothing was acceptable to him, though the Jews spent much money and spared no
labors. God then shews that all these things were nothing to him; eat flesh, he says,
which means, “Ye sacrifice to yourselves, not to me.” There is here a contrast
implied; for when they did eat flesh, there was the legitimate service of God,
provided sacrifices were duly offered; but God here excludes himself, as though he
had said, “These things belong not at all to me; for when ye bring sacrifices, your
object is to feast: eat, then, and stuff your stomachs; nothing of this belongs to me.”
(204)
The import of the whole is, — that the feasts which the Jews celebrated were
profane, though they pretended the name of God, and wished them to be deemed
sacred. Eat then flesh; that is, “I repudiate your sacrifices; it is to no purpose that ye
cover your iniquities by the shadow of the Temple; for your pollutions restrain me
from accepting what ye pretend to offer to me.” By saying, Add sacrifices to victims,
he means, that though they sacrificed every animal in the land, it would be all to no
purpose; for, as I have said, in offering sacrifices to God their object was to get a
feast, inasmuch as they did not regard the right end.
Your burnt-offerings sweep together To your sacrifices, and eat flesh.
— Ed.
COFFMA , ""Thus saith Jehovah of hosts, the God of Israel: add your burnt-
offerings unto your sacrifices, and eat ye flesh. For I spake not unto your fathers nor
commanded them, in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt,
concerning burnt-offerings or sacrifices: but this thing I commanded them, saying,
Hearken unto my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people; and walk
ye in all the way that I command you, that it may be well with you. But they
hearkened not, nor inclined their ear, but walked in their own counsels and in the
stubbornness of their evil heart, and went backward, and not forward. Since the day
that your fathers came forth out of the land of Egypt unto this day, I have sent unto
you all my servants the prophets, daily rising up early and sending them: yet they
hearkened not unto me, nor inclined their ear, but made their neck stiff: they did
worse than their fathers."
"Add your burnt-offerings to your sacrifices, and eat flesh ..." (Jeremiah 7:21).
"These words express God's indignation at the sacrifices of those who were so
wicked and alienated from God. God had so little pleasure in their sacrifices, that
they might as well eat of the very burnt-offerings themselves."[21]
Of course, the Law of Moses had forbidden the worshipper to eat of the burnt-
offerings which were to be burned upon the altar; but God placed so little value
upon their insincere and hypocritical sacrifices, that he here said, "Why don't you
just go ahead and eat the burnt-offerings also; they are doing you no good anyway!"
We reject all of the critical assertions that God here was declaring that the
commanded sacrifices were not necessary, or that it was God's will to be worshipped

107. with genuine purity of life instead of through offering any kind of sacrifices. What
God truly desires is both (1) purity of life and (2) the offering of the sacrifices which
he commanded. The effort to eliminate either originates with Satan. "The idea here
is that there is no sanctity in offerings brought by unrepentant men."[22]
"This thing I commanded them ..." (Jeremiah 7:23). The thing stressed here is that
"hearkening unto God," and obeying his commands, were the very first things God
commanded to Israel when he undertook to adopt them as his people. This was
required even before the institution of the forms and sacrifices of the Mosaic
covenant, and were therefore more important even than the sacrifices; but both
were required. Israel's great failure was that of substituting the lesser of two
commandments instead of the greater.
"They hearkened not ... but walked in their own counsels ... and went backward and
not forward ..." (Jeremiah 7:24). This rebellion had begun almost simultaneously
with the crossing of the Red Sea, and also after Sinai. "Such behavior after Sinai
was incredible! It stresses the prolonged rebellion of Israel, the infinite patience and
longsuffering of God, and showing that disobedience was as old as the Exodus
itself."[23]
COKE, "Verses 21-23
Jeremiah 7:21-23. Put your burnt-offerings, &c.— Houbigant renders this, Put
together your burnt-offerings with your peace-offerings; and eat their flesh. The
meaning is, "Eat your sacrifices yourselves, your burnt-offerings and your peace-
offerings. I am equally regardless of one and the other. I have nothing to do with
them; nor can ever accept offerings from people of so superstitious and so rebellious
a disposition. To be acceptable to me, they must be presented with an humble and
obedient heart." This leads plainly to the interpretation of the next verses, which are
by no means to be taken separately, as if God had not required burnt-offerings at
all; but, that he did not insist so much upon sacrifice, as upon obedience to the
commands of the moral law; or at least that the former derived all their efficacy
from the latter. Others however, and among these Grotius, lay the emphasis upon
the words, in the day; that is to say, "At the time when I first brought you out of
Egypt; when the laws respecting sacrifices were not delivered, though such as
respected obedience were then and ever in full force." Sacrifices, which were but
parts of duty, are here opposed to intire and universal obedience. ow, the thing
which God required, and chiefly insisted upon, was, universal righteousness, and
not partial obedience, which is next to no obedience, because not performed upon a
true principle of obedience. God does not deny that he had required sacrifices: but
he had primarily and principally required obedience, which included sacrifices, and
all other instances of duty as well as that: and he would not accept of such lame
service as those sacrifices amounted to; for that was paying him part only, in lieu of
the whole. Or we may say, that sacrifices, the out-work, are here opposed to obeying
God's voice: that is to say, the shadow is opposed to the substance, apparent duty to
real, hypocrisy and empty shew to sincerity and truth. ow the thing which God
required and insisted upon, was obedience to his voice in every thing; and he laid no
stress upon sacrifices, any further than as considered as parts of true obedience.

108. Sacrifices, separate from true holiness; or from a sincere love of God, were not the
service which God required; for hypocritical services are no services, but
abominations in his sight: he expected, he demanded religious devout sacrifices;
while his people brought him only outside compliments to flatter him, empty
formalities to affront and dishonour him. These were not the things which God
spake of, or commanded: the sacrifices that he spake of, were pure sacrifices, to be
offered up with a clean and upright heart. Those he required, and those only he
would accept of, as real duty and service. The mere opus operatum, or outward
work of offering up sacrifices, from a corrupt heart, was no sacrificing to God, any
more than the fasting for strife and debate, Zechariah 7:5. Isaiah 58:4-7 was a
fasting to God. Such sacrifices God detested, as being a semblance only of duty, and
not the duty required; a corruption and profanation of a holy rite, rather than a just
and proper conformity to it. Sacrifices so profaned, carried more of human
corruption than of divine institution in them, being a kind of mock worship which
man had contrived, and not the true worship which God had enjoined. See
Waterland's Script. Vind. part 3: p. 68 and Amos 5:25.
TRAPP, "Jeremiah 7:21 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Put your
burnt offerings unto your sacrifices, and eat flesh.
Ver. 21. Put your burnt offerings to your sacrifices, and eat flesh.] Congerite,
ingerite, digerite, egerite. Take away all your sacrifices, wherewith ye fondly think
to expiate your sins, and feast your carcases with them; for I wot well that you offer
them to me, ventris potius gratia quam internae pietatis, rather of gourmandise than
good devotion. You have therefore my good leave to make your best of them; for I
account them no other than ordinary and profane food, such flesh as is bought and
sold in the shambles. So their meat offering [Leviticus 2:5] is in scorn called "their
bread for their soul," or life; [Hosea 9:4] that is, for their natural sustenance. And
no better are the elements in the Lord’s Supper to the unworthy receiver, whatever
he may promise himself by them.
BE SO , "Verses 21-28
Jeremiah 7:21-28. Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel — And let Israel
hear when their God speaks — Put your burnt-offerings unto your sacrifices, and
eat flesh — The burnt-offerings, after they were flayed, were to be consumed wholly
upon the altar, Leviticus 1:9; whereas, in the sacrifices of the peace-offerings, only
the fat was to be burned upon the altar; part of the remainder belonging to the
priests, and the rest being the portion of the offerer, to be eaten with his friends in a
kind of religious feast. But here the prophet tells the Jews that they may eat the flesh
of their burnt-offerings as well as that of their peace-offerings; that he was equally
regardless of the one and the other, and would have nothing to do with them; and
that he would never accept offerings from people of so disobedient and refractory a
disposition; that to be acceptable to him they must be presented with an humble and
obedient mind. “This leads plainly to the interpretation of the next verses, which are
by no means to be taken separately, as if God had not required burnt-offerings and
sacrifices at all; but that he did not insist so much upon them as on obedience to the
commands of the moral law; or, at least, that the former derived all their efficacy

109. from the latter.” See note on 1 Samuel 15:22. “Sacrifices,” says Dr. Waterland, on
this passage, “which were but part of duty, are here opposed to entire and universal
obedience. ow the thing which God required, and chiefly insisted upon, was
universal righteousness, and not partial obedience, which is next to no obedience,
because not performed upon a true principle of obedience. God does not deny that
he had required sacrifices: but he had primarily and principally required
obedience, which included sacrifices and all other instances of duty as well as that:
and he would not accept of such lame service as those sacrifices amounted to; for
that was paying him part only in lieu of the whole. Or we may say, that sacrifices,
the out-work, are here opposed to obeying God’s voice; that is, the shadow is
opposed to the substance, apparent duty to real hypocrisy, and empty show to
sincerity and truth. Sacrifices separate from true holiness, or from a sincere love of
God, were not the service which God required; for hypocritical services are no
services, but abominations in his sight: he expected, he demanded, religious devout
sacrifices; while his people brought him only outside compliments, to flatter him;
empty formalities, to affront and dishonour him. These were not the things which
God spake of, or commanded: the sacrifices he spake of were pure sacrifices, to be
offered up with a clean and upright heart. Those he required, and those only he
would accept of as real duty and service.”
PETT, "Jeremiah 7:21
‘Thus says YHWH of hosts, the God of Israel, “Add your burnt-offerings to your
sacrifices, and eat you flesh.”
The people would no doubt have argued that they were still fulfilling their
obligations with regard to offerings and sacrifices, and so ‘YHWH of hosts, God of
Israel’ calls on them sarcastically to add to them as much as they liked, and to
partake of them all, even the burnt offerings which were strictly for YHWH only
and had to be wholly burned up. The implication is that such restrictions had
become irrelevant because He no longer saw them as being offered to Him. And the
implication was that it would do them no good, because this was not YHWH’s prime
requirement.
ote that it is YHWHof hostsWho says this, the One Who not only controls the
hosts that will come against them, but is also over all the hosts of Heaven. Before
Him the Queen of Heaven was a nonentity, simply another star. (compare ‘He made
the stars also’ - Genesis 1:16).
22 For when I brought your ancestors out of
Egypt and spoke to them, I did not just give them
commands about burnt offerings and sacrifices,

110. GILL, "For I spake not unto your fathers,.... Meaning not Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob, but Moses, Aaron, and others, who were living at the time of the bringing of the
children of Israel out of Egypt, as appears by what follows:
nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of
Egypt, concerning burnt offerings, or sacrifices; these are not in the decalogue or
ten commands; these are no part of that law or covenant, but are an appendage or
addition to it; and though they are of early institution and use, yet they never were
appointed for the sake of themselves, but for another end; they were types of Christ, and
were designed to lead the faith of the people of God to him; they never were intended as
proper expiations of sin, and much less to cover and encourage immorality; whenever
therefore they were offered up in a hypocritical manner, and without faith in Christ, and
in order to atone for sinful actions, without any regard to the sacrifice of Christ, they
were an abomination to the Lord. These were not the only things the Lord commanded
the children of Israel; nor the chief and principal ones; and in comparison of others, of
more consequence and moment, were as none at all; and which are next mentioned.
HE RY 22-23, ". He shows them that obedience was the only thing he required of
them, Jer_7:22, Jer_7:23. He appeals to the original contract, by which they were first
formed into a people, when they were brought out of Egypt. God made them a kingdom
of priests to himself, not that he might be regaled with their sacrifices, as the devils,
whom the heathen worshipped, which are represented as eating with pleasure the fat of
their sacrifices and drinking the wine of their drink-offerings, Deu_32:38. No: Will God
eat the flesh of bulls? Psa_50:13. I spoke not to your fathers concerning burnt-offerings
or sacrifices, not of them at first. The precepts of the moral law were given before the
ceremonial institutions; and those came afterwards, as trials of their obedience and
assistances to their repentance and faith. The Levitical law begins thus: If any man of
you will bring an offering, he must do so and so (Lev_1:2, Lev_2:1), as if it were
intended rather to regulate sacrifice than to require it. But that which God commanded,
which he bound them to by his supreme authority and which he insisted upon as the
condition of the covenant, was, Obey my voice; see Exo_15:26, where this was the
statute and the ordinance by which God proved them: Hearken diligently to the voice of
the Lord thy God. The condition of their being God's peculiar people was this (Exo_
19:5), If you will obey my voice indeed. “Make conscience of the duties of natural
religion, observe positive institutions from a principle of obedience, and then I will be
your God and you shall be my people,” which is the greatest honour, happiness, and
satisfaction, that any of the children of men are capable of. “Let your conversation be
regular, and in every thing study to comply with the will and word of God; walk within
the bounds that I have set you, and in all the ways that I have commanded you, and
then you may assure yourselves that it shall be well with you.” The demand here is very
reasonable, that we should be directed by Infinite Wisdom to that which is fit, that he
that made us should command us, and that he should give us law who gives us our being
and all the supports of it; and the promise is very encouraging: Let God's will be your
rule and his favour shall be your felicity.

111. JAMISO , "Not contradicting the divine obligation of the legal sacrifices. But, “I did
not require sacrifices, unless combined with moral obedience” (Psa_50:8; Psa_51:16,
Psa_51:17). The superior claim of the moral above the positive precepts of the law was
marked by the ten commandments having been delivered first, and by the two tables of
stone being deposited alone in the ark (Deu_5:6). The negative in Hebrew often supplies
the want of the comparative: not excluding the thing denied, but only implying the prior
claim of the thing set in opposition to it (Hos_6:6). “I will have mercy, and not sacrifice”
(1Sa_15:22). Love to God is the supreme end, external observances only means towards
that end. “The mere sacrifice was not so much what I commanded, as the sincere
submission to My will gives to the sacrifice all its virtue” [Magee, Atonement, Note 57].
CALVI , "The Prophet therefore adds, I spoke not to your fathers, nor
commanded them, in the day I brought them forth from the land of Egypt,
concerning sacrifices or burnt —offerings: but this only I commanded them, to hear
my voice, and to walk in all the way which I commanded them. Jeremiah seems to
have condemned sacrifices too much; for we know they were designed for certain
purposes: they were intended to promote penitence; for when an animal was killed
at the altar, all were reminded that they were guilty of death, which the animals
underwent instead of men. Hence God did thereby represent to the Jews, as in a
mirror, the dreadful judgment they deserved; and the sacrifices were also living
images of Christ; they were sure pledges of that expiation through which men are
reconciled to God. Jeremiah then seems here to speak too contemptibly of sacrifices;
for they were seals of God’s grace, and had been instituted to lead men to
repentance. But he speaks according to the ideas of those who had strangely vitiated
the worship of God; for the Jews were sedulously attentive to sacrifices, and yet
neglected the main things — faith and repentance. Hence the Prophet here
repudiates sacrifices, because these false worshippers of God had adulterated them;
for they were only intent on external rites, and overlooked their design, and even
despised it.
We know that it was God’s will from the beginning to be worshipped in a spiritual
manner; and he has not changed his nature in our day. As then at this day he
approves of no other than a spiritual worship, as He is a Spirit, (John 4:24) so also
under the Law he was to be worshipped with a sincere heart. Absurdly then did the
Jews offer their sacrifices, as though they could thereby appease God: and this is the
reason why the prophets inveighed so pointedly against sacrifices. God says that he
nauseated them, that he was wearied with them, that his name was thereby polluted,
(Isaiah 1:14) he says also, that to sacrifice was the same as though one killed a dog,
an unclean animal, and as though one killed a man. (Isaiah 66:3.)
“What are your offerings and sacrifices to me.”
he says by Amos. Such declarations occur everywhere in the Prophets; we are told
that sacrifices were not only of no account before God, but that they were filthy
things which he abominated; that is, when the things signified were separated from
the signs. This then is the reason why Jeremiah here wholly rejects sacrifices: he

112. complains that God’s worship was violated and profaned; and it was so, because the
Jews presented to God mere shadows instead of realities.
But still he seems to have exceeded due limits; as he says of God, that he gave no
command respecting sacrifices: for before the law was published, God had ordered
sacrifices to be offered to him; as, for instance, the passover; for the pascal lamb, as
it is well known, was a sacrifice; and he had also spoken of sacrifices before the
people were liberated. Moreover, after the law was given, a priesthood was
established among the people, as Moses clearly shews. Further still, we see with
what care regulations have been given as to sacrifices. Why then is it here said, that
he spoke nothing respecting sacrifices? Even because God regards not sacrifices in
themselves. He therefore makes a distinction between external signs and spiritual
worship; for the Jews, as it has been already said, had by their corruptions so
subverted what God had instituted, that he would not acknowledge what they did as
having been commanded by him. And if we take the words as they are, they are
wholly true, — that God had commanded nothing respecting mere sacrifices, or
sacrifices for their own sake. This distinction solves every difficulty; that is, that
God never delighted in sacrifices themselves, that it was never his will to be served
with mere external rites, that burnt — offerings, victims, incense, and things of this
kind, were of themselves regarded by him of no value. Since, then, sacrifices did not
please God, except on account of the end designed, it remains a clear truth, that God
commanded nothing respecting sacrifices: for his design only was to remind the
Jews of their sin, and also to shew to them the way of reconciliation. We hence see
that God had not from the beginning required mere sacrifices, for he required them
for a certain end. It is the same as though we should say at this day, that God
regards not fasting. We yet know that fasting is commended to us, but not on
account of itself. We now understand the meaning of the Prophet. (205)
ow, this passage contains a very useful doctrine, and which ought the more to be
observed by us, as the neglect of it introduces dreadful darkness. They under the
Papacy think that God is duly and in the best manner worshipped, when they
accumulate many pompous exhibitions of ceremonies; nor can they be persuaded
that all this is altogether frivolous. How so? Because they think of God according to
their own fancies and disposition. And yet all the Papal ceremonies are the
inventions of men: for they derive no authority either from the Law or from the
Gospel. And since God has so severely reprobated ceremonies, which yet he had
appointed for a purpose which was overlooked, what can be thought at this day of
the foolish inventions of men, when there is the some impiety in the people as was
formerly in the Jews? For when the Papists perform their trumperies, when the
monks and the sacrificing priests fill the churches with their noises, when they
practice their childish mummeries, and when they delight themselves with music
and incense, they think that God is satisfied, however full of obscenities and
filthiness their whole life may be: they are hardened in that false confidence, by
which the Jews were inebriated. We ought, therefore, with special care, to notice
this doctrine, — that God so approves of spiritual worship, that he esteems all other
things as nothing; that is, when unconnected with sincerity of heart.

113. “Labor not, “says our Savior, “for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat
which endureth unto everlasting life.” John 6:27.
But it may be, that the reference here is specifically to the day in which the Israelites
were delivered; for on that day, or at that particular time, (for the word day is not to
be taken in its strict meaning,) obedience to his voice was the only thing which God
required. See Exodus 15:26.
Venema thinks that reference is here made, not to the institution of sacrifices, but to
the ground of the covenant. Sacrifices were not the condition of the covenant, but
obedience. God did not say, “If you sacrifice to me, I will be your God;” but, “If you
obey my voice, I will be your God, and you shall be my people.” When the law was
delivered on Mount Sinai, there was no mention of sacrifices. — Ed.
TRAPP, "Jeremiah 7:22 For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in
the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or
sacrifices:
Ver. 22. For I spake not unto your fathers.] Videlicet solum aut simpliciter. Only
clearly and candidly I gave them not those holy rites as the substance of my service,
or that ye should thus hold them up against my threats for your rebellions, as a
buckler of defence. Sacrifices without obedience nec placent nec placant Deum.
neither may they please nor placate God.
ELLICOTT, "(22) I spake not . . . concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices.—
“Concerning” is, literally, for, or with a view to, the matter of sacrifices. The words
seem at first hard to reconcile with the multiplied rules as to sacrifices both in
Exodus and Leviticus. They are, however, rightly understood, strictly in harmony
with the facts. They were not the end contemplated. The first promulgation of the
Law, the basis of the covenant with Israel, contemplated a spiritual, ethical religion,
of which the basis was found in the ten great Words, or commandments, of Exodus
20. The ritual in connection with sacrifice was prescribed partly as a concession to
the feeling which showed itself, in its evil form, in the worship of the golden calf,
partly as an education. The book of Deuteronomy, representing the higher truth
from which Moses started (Exodus 19:5), and upon which he at last fell back, bore
its witness to the original purport of the Law (Deuteronomy 6:3; Deuteronomy
10:12). Its re-discovery under Josiah left, here as elsewhere, its impress on the mind
of Jeremiah; but prophets, as in 1 Samuel 15:22; Hosea 6:6; Hosea 8:11-13; Amos
5:21-27; Micah 6:6-8; Psalms 50, 51, had all along borne a like witness, even while
recognising to the full the fact and the importance of a sacrificial ritual.
PETT, "Jeremiah 7:22-23
“For I did not speak to your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought
them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt-offerings or sacrifices, but this
thing I commanded them, saying, ‘Listen to my voice, and I will be your God, and
you will be my people, and walk you in all the way that I command you, that it may

114. be well with you.’ ”
This is not saying that they were unaware of the idea of sacrifices, for not only
would that have been unlikely for people who had been living in Egypt, but in fact
the offering of sacrifices to YHWH had been one of the reasons for their wanting to
leave Egypt, and such sacrifices were their first thought when they rebelled against
YHWH and set up the golden calf. Rather it is pointing out that what had been
YHWH’s stress immediately after they left Egypt was not that they should offer to
Him burnt offerings and sacrifices, but that they should listen to His voice, recognise
Him as their God and obey His commandments. In other words He was emphasising
that obedience was more important than sacrifices.
What they should now recognise was what had been His prime concern on
delivering them from Egypt. It had not been to command them to offer offerings
and sacrifices (even though that had been the originally idea cited for leaving Egypt,
and would have been a priority in other religions), but to command them to hear
His voice and obey His commandments. It was this latter that had come immediately
on leaving Egypt, whilst the regulations concerning offerings and sacrifices had
come some long time after. Thus His original command immediately after the
deliverance of the Red Sea had been (as found in Exodus 15:25-26), ‘If you will
diligently listen to the voice of YHWH and will give ear to His commandments
(compare ‘listen to My voice --- and walk in all the way that I command you’), and
will keep all His statutes, (the statute and ordinance given in Jeremiah 7:25 b) I will
put on you none of these diseases which I have put on the Egyptians (compare ‘that
it may be well with you’), for I am YHWH Who heals you.’ Thus He had revealed
from the beginning that what He was primarily concerned to receive from them was
obedience to His commandments, and that it was that on which their well being
would depend. ote also in Jeremiah 7:24-26 the twice repeated ‘inclined their ear’,
which parallels with ‘give ear to His commandments’ in Exodus 15:26. It is thus
clear that YHWH’s words here in Jeremiah contain clear echoes of Exodus 15:26,
whilst it was Exodus 15:26 that was spoken while they were still in the throes of
their first love (Jeremiah 2:2).
And these words had then been further confirmed in Exodus 19:5 where He had
stated that ‘if they obeyed His voice’ and kept His covenant they would be ‘a unique
treasure to Him from among all peoples’ --- and ‘a holy nation’, and that covenant
had then been seen as prominently including the ten words (Exodus 20:1-18). ote
also that in Deuteronomy 5:33 alone do we find the phrase ‘you shall walk in all the
way which YHWH your God has commanded you’ (compare ‘walk you in all the
way that I command you’), and that that was also spoken in the context of the giving
of the ten words.
Thus what YHWH is saying here is that once they had left Egypt, purportedly to
offer offerings and sacrifices, it was not that which had been His first concern, but
their willingness to listen to Him, obey His commandments and walk in His ways.
PULPIT, "I spake not unto your fathers, etc. An important and much-disputed
passage, from which Graf, Colenso, and Kuenen derive one of their chief subsidiary

115. arguments for the post-Exile date of the Levitical legislation. The prophet here
appears to deny in tote that Jehovah at Mount Sinai had given any injunctions on
the subject of sacrifice. But the prophet must at any rate be consistent with himself;
he cannot utter anything by Divine command which is fundamentally at variance
with other equally authoritative declarations. Do the statements of Jeremiah
elsewhere justify us in accepting the words in their literal, superficial meaning?
There are three other passages which have a claim to be considered. In Jeremiah
17:26 the prophet draws a picture of the happy condition in which the Jews might
be, were they only obedient. One of the features of this picture is that the Jews
would still bring all the various kinds of sacrifices to the house of Jehovah. In
Jeremiah 31:14 a similar description is closed with the promise to "satiate the soul
of the priests with fatness," implying that there would be a great abundance of
thank offerings in regenerate Israel. In Jeremiah 33:11, among other blessings of the
future, the prophet mentions the praiseful exclamations of those who would bring
the sacrifice of thanksgiving. These passages do not contain any statement
respecting the origin of the sacrificial system; but they do expressly assert that
Jehovah contemplates that system with pleasure, and apparently that he designs it
to be permanent among his people Israel. Let us now turn to Jeremiah 33:17-24.
Here the prophet, in the ame of Jehovah, declares that there is a Divine covenant
"with the Levites, the priests," who shall never "want a man before me … to do
sacrifice continually." A covenant with the priests implies a covenant with the
people, the priests being the representatives of the people. This passage, therefore, is
more distinct than those previously quoted; it does appear to maintain that the
range of the Sinaitic covenant included the duties of the priesthood, i.e. sacrifices.
On the other hand, it should be observed that the genuineness of this latter passage
is not beyond dispute, the whole section in which it occurs (Jeremiah 33:14-26)
being omitted in the Septuagint. We have now to inquire, Is there a real discrepancy
between the words of Jeremiah (strictly speaking, of Jehovah) in the verse now
before us, interpreted literally, and the passages adduced above? Are they more
inconsistent than such an utterance as Jeremiah 6:20 (first half of verse), which
appears to deny the utility of sacrifices altogether? If the latter may be explained as
a forcible oratorical exaggeration, why not also the present passage? Jeremiah sees
the people attaching a pernicious importance to the opus operatum of sacrifice. On
one occasion he tells them that Jehovah cares not for sacrifices; he means, as the
context shows, the sacrifices of men without spiritual sensibilities. On another, that
Jehovah never commanded their fathers to sacrifice; he means the mere outward
forms of the ritual, divorced from the sentiment and practice of piety, which, as
Hosea tells us (Hosea 6:6), Jehovah "delights in and not [equivalent to 'more than']
sacrifice." There is, therefore, no fundamental inconsistency between the passage
before us and the three passages first quoted, and if so there can be no real
discrepancy with the last-mentioned passage, for the priests (as was remarked)
perform their functions on behalf of the people, and the permanence of Jehovah's
covenant with the priests depended on the spiritual life of the people they
represented (read Jeremiah 33:1-26, as a whole). This view seems less arbitrary than
that of Ewald, who thinks that the sacrifices spoken of in our passage are merely the
free-will offerings of the rich; and than that of Dahler, who interprets, "My chief
care was not to prescribe rules for holocausts and sacrifices, but this is what I

116. commanded thee above all," viz. moral obedience. According to it, the prophet's
denial is not absolute, but relative—relative, that is, to the notion of sacrifices
entertained by the Jews whom he addresses. Of course, Graf's view, that the denial
is absolute, will equally well suit the context. The people were surprised at
Jeremiah's objurgations, because they thought they had fulfilled the claims of the
covenant. Jeremiah's purpose is equally well fulfilled whether his denial is qualified
or unqualified, absolute or relative. Our object has been to separate the exegesis of
our passage from a still doubtful controversy, and to offer a tenable view of it, based
upon grounds purely internal to Jeremiah. It may be suggested, however, to the
student of Leviticus, that even if the Levitical legislation in its present form were
proved to be of a pest-Exile date, it would still be doubtful whether any believing
temple-worshipper could help assuming that Jehovah had, from the first existence
of the nation, given his direct sanction to the offering of sacrifices. If so, it is
comparatively unimportant (except with regard to the progressive revelation of the
strictness of the law of truth) whether the Levitical code was given to Moses at
Mount Sinai in its present form or not.
23 but I gave them this command: Obey me, and I
will be your God and you will be my people. Walk
in obedience to all I command you, that it may go
well with you.
BAR ES, "Obey ... - These words are not found verbatim in the Pentateuch, but are
a sum mary of its principles. Sacrifice is never the final cause of the covenant, but always
obedience (Exo_19:5-6; Lev_11:45. Compare Exo. 20; Deut. 11, in which the moral
object of the Mosaic dispensation is most clearly taught). In connection with Jeremiah’s
argument, notice that Amo_5:25 (taken in conjunction with Jos_5:2-7) proves that the
ceremonial law was not observed during the 40 years’ wandering in the wilderness. A
thing so long in abeyance in the very time of its founder, could not be of primary
importance.
CLARKE, "This thing commanded I them - Obey my voice - It was not
sacrifices and oblations which I required of your fathers in the wilderness, but

117. obedience; it was to walk in that way of righteousness which I have commanded; then I
should have acknowledged them for my people, and I should have been their God, and
then it would have been well with them. But to my commands,
1. They hearkened not - paid no regard to my word.
2. They inclined not the ear - showed no disposition to attend to my counsels.
3. They walked in the imaginations of their evil heart - followed its irregular and
impure motions, rather than the holy dictates of my Spirit.
4. They went backward and not forward. Instead of becoming more wise, obedient,
and holy, they grew more corrupt; so that they became more profligate than their
fathers.
GILL, "But this thing commanded I them, saying,.... This was the sum and
substance of what was then commanded, even obedience to the moral law; this was the
main and principal thing enjoined, and to which the promise was annexed:
obey my voice: the word of the Lord, his commands, the precepts of the decalogue;
obedience to which was preferable to the sacrifices of the ceremonial law; see 1Sa_15:22,
wherefore it follows:
and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people; the meaning is, that while they
were obedient to him, he would protect them from their enemies, and continue them in
their privileges and blessings, which he had bestowed upon them as his peculiar people:
and walk ye in all the ways that I have commanded you; not only in some of
them, but in all of them; not merely in the observance of legal sacrifices, but chiefly in
the performance of moral actions; even in all the duties of religion, in whatsoever is
required in the law, respecting God or man:
that it may be well unto you; that they might continue in the land which was given
them for an inheritance, and enjoy all the blessings promised to their obedience.
CALVI , "I spoke not then to your fathers, nor commanded them in the day I
brought them forth from the land of Egypt, etc. The Prophet calls the attention of
the Jews to the first condition of the Church; for though God had made his covenant
with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, yet he then only formed or framed for himself a
Church when the Law was promulgated. Hence God at that time showed what
pleased him, and prescribed certain things, which were in future to be inviolably
observed: and as the Jews violated the rule given them, the Prophet concludes that
God was corruptly and absurdly worshipped by them. This is the reason why he
expressly speaks here of the deliverance granted to the fathers. There follows
afterwards a clearer explanation, which removes all ambiguity: for God
subordinates sacrifices to obedience. Yet sacrifices are a part of obedience: very
true; but as the people were to be subject to the whole law, it hence follows, that the
worship of God was mutilated by them, when there was no care for true piety. We
now then, no doubt, understand the meaning of the Prophet, and see at the same

118. time the reason why God so expressly rejected sacrifices: for what God has
connected, it is not in the power of man to separate. (Matthew 19:6; Mark 10:9.)
This rending of things is impious. As the Jews had separated sacrifices from their
right and legitimate end, whatever they did was a sacrilege and a profanation.
That we may now more fully comprehend this doctrine, we must remember this
principle — that the basis of true religion is obedience. For unless God shines on us
with his word, there is no religion, but only hypocrisy and superstition; as the case is
with heathens, who, though they busy themselves much and with great diligence, yet
loose all their labor, and uselessly weary themselves, for God has not shewn to them
the right way. In short, true religion may always be distinguished from superstition
by this mark — If the truth of God guides us, then our religion is true; but if any
one follows his own reason, or is led by the opinion and consent of men, he forms for
himself superstition; and nothing that he does will please God. This is one thing.
ow, in the second place, let us see what God chiefly requires from those who are
his servants. Being fully convinced of this truth — that God cannot be truly served,
except we obey his voice, we must consider, as I have said, what God commands us
to do. ow, as he is a Spirit, so he demands sincerity of heart. (John 4:24.) We also
know that God so comes to us, that he would have us to trust wholly in his
gratuitous goodness, that he would have us to depend altogether on his paternal
kindness, that he would have us to call on him, and to offer him the sacrifice of
praise. Since, then, God has expressly required these things in his word, it is certain,
that all other modes of worship are rejected by him as vitious; that is, when there is
no faith, when there is no prayer and praise: for these hold the first place in true
and legitimate worship.
This one passage is sufficient to put an end to all the contentions which are now in
the world. For if the Papists admitted that obedience is of more account with God
than all sacrifices, (1 Samuel 15:22,) we might easily agree. They might afterwards
debate every article of faith; but there would be in the main an agreement between
us, were they to submit simply and unreservedly to the word of God. But we see how
pertinaciously they insist on this point — that we are not to stand on God’s word,
nor acquiesce in it, because there is in it nothing certain. Hence they regard the
doctrine of the Fathers, and what they call the perpetual consent of the Catholic
Church, as of more value than the Law and the Prophets and the Gospel. They dare
not indeed to contend on this ground; and so far they act wisely: for if the disputes
between us are capable of being removed, as I have said, by God’s word, we could
easily overcome them. But while they, fostering their own blindness, strive to
extinguish the light, and willfully envelop themselves in darkness, let us follow what
God’s Spirit shews to us here, — that the main part of true and right worship and
service is to hear God speaking, and to regard obedience of more account than all
offerings and sacrifices, according to the passage we have quoted from 1 Samuel
15:22.
He afterwards adds, I will be to you a God, and ye shall be to me a people; and ye
shall walk in all the way which I shall shew to you, that it may be well with you. The

119. Prophet confirms what I have already said, that if we would obey God, we must
consider what he commands. ow God omits no part of true worship: we shall then
never go astray from true religion, if only we render ourselves teachable. Whence
then is it, that men diligently labor and profit nothing, except that they are deaf to
God’s voice? for as it has been already often said, God has not only spoken
generally, and in various ways, of obedience, but has clearly and distinctly taught
what he approves. Our obedience then will please him, if only we learn what he
would have us to do.
And at the same time he adds, that this condition was mentioned to the Jews, that it
would be well with them, if they only obeyed God. Hence their perverseness is more
fully detected; for they willfully sought to be miserable, and procured for themselves
their own destruction: for a happy life was offered to them, provided only they
submitted to God. Since they refused this, who does not see that they willfully gave
themselves up to misery, as though they wished to provoke God’s anger, and did so
designedly? for it immediately follows —
TRAPP, "Jeremiah 7:23 But this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice,
and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people: and walk ye in all the ways that I
have commanded you, that it may be well unto you.
Ver. 23. But this thing I commanded them,] i.e., I principally commanded them,
giving them therefore first the decalogue, and then afterwards the ceremonial law,
which was, or should have been, their gospel.
ELLICOTT, "(23) But this thing commanded I them.—The words that follow are a
composite quotation, partly from the lately re-found Deuteronomy (Deuteronomy
5:33), partly from the words that were strictly true of the “day” when Israel came
out of Egypt (Exodus 19:5), partly from the very book which seemed to be most
characterised by sacrificial ritual, Leviticus (Leviticus 26:12). The influence of
Jeremiah’s teaching on later Jewish thought is shown by the fact that this very
section of Jeremiah (Jeremiah 7:21-28) appears in the Synagogue ritual as the
Haphtara, or second lesson from the prophets, after Leviticus 6-8, as the Parashah,
or first lesson from the Law. The Synagogue worship, indeed, was, in the nature of
the case, the result of the teaching of scribes and prophets rather than of priests,
and therefore a witness for the spiritual truth symbolised in sacrifice, and not for
the perpetuation of the symbol.
PULPIT, "But this thing … Obey my voice, etc. Comp. Deuteronomy 6:3, "Hear
[the verb rendered here 'obey'] therefore, O Israel, and observe to do it; that it may
be well with thee," etc. The words, I will be your God; rather, to you a God, etc;
occur in Le Deuteronomy 26:12 (comp. Exodus 6:7; Deuteronomy 29:13). Walk ye
in all the ways, etc; is not a citation, but reminds us of passages like Deuteronomy
9:12, Deuteronomy 9:16; Deuteronomy 11:28; Deuteronomy 31:29. That it may be
well unto you is a characteristic phrase of Jeremiah (Jeremiah 43:6; Jeremiah
38:20; Jeremiah 40:9); but is also frequent in Deuteronomy (comp; besides the

120. passage quoted above, Deuteronomy 4:40; Deuteronomy 5:16; Deuteronomy 6:18;
Deuteronomy 12:25).
24 But they did not listen or pay attention;
instead, they followed the stubborn inclinations of
their evil hearts. They went backward and not
forward.
BAR ES, "Imagination - Better, as in the margin.
And went backward - literally, as in the margin; i. e., they turned their back upon
Me to follow their own devices.
GILL, "But they hearkened not, nor inclined their ear,.... Neither to the law that
was given them, nor to the promises that were made unto them, this was the case of the
Jewish fathers, and also of their posterity, to whom belonged the law, and the promises,
and the service of God:
but walked in the counsels and in the imagination of their evil heart; what
their evil heart imagined, advised and directed to, that they attended to, walked in, and
pursued after. The heart of man is evil; it is desperately wicked, even wickedness itself;
and so is every thought and every imagination of the thoughts of it and all its counsels,
machinations and contrivances; and therefore the consequence of walking in these, or
steering the course of life according to them, must be bad:
and went backward, and not forward; they went backwards from the ways of God,
and walked not in them. The Targum is,
"they turned the back in my worship, and did not put my fear before their face;''
or else this may design, not their sin, but their punishment, as Kimchi interprets it; they
did not prosper, but suffered adversity; a curse, and not a blessing, attended the works of
their hands.
HE RY 24-28, "He shows them that disobedience was the only thing for which he

121. had a quarrel with them. He would not reprove them for their sacrifices, for the
omission of them; they had been continually before him (Psa_50:8); with them they
hoped to bribe God, and purchase a license to go on in sin. That therefore which God
had all along laid to their charge was breaking his commandments in the course of their
conversation, while they observed them, in some instances, in the course of their
devotion, Jer_7:24, Jer_7:25, etc. 1. They set up their own will in competition with the
will of God: They hearkened not to God and to his law; they never heeded that; it was to
them as if it had never been given or were of no force; they inclined not their ear to
attend to it, much less their hearts to comply with it. But they would have their own way,
would do as they chose, and not as they were bidden. Their own counsels were their
guide, and not the dictates of divine wisdom; that shall be lawful and good with them
which they think so, though the word of God says quite contrary. The imagination of
their evil heart, the appetites and passions of it, shall be a law to them, and they will
walk in the way of it, and in the sight of their eyes. 2. If they began well, yet they did not
proceed, but soon flew off. They went backward, when they talked of making a captain,
and returning to Egypt again, and would not go forward under God's conduct. They
promised fair: All that the Lord shall say unto us we well do; and, if they would but have
kept in that good mind, all would have been well; but, instead of going on in the way of
duty, they drew back into the way of sin, and were worse than ever. 3. When God sent to
them by word of mouth to put them in mind of the written word, which was the business
of the prophets, it was all one; still they were disobedient. God had servants of his
among them in every age, since they came out of Egypt unto this day, some or other to
tell them of their faults and put them in mind of their duty, whom he rose up early to
send (as before, Jer_7:13), as men rise up early to call servants to their work; but they
were as deaf to the prophets as they were to the law (Jer_7:26): Yet they hearkened not,
nor inclined their ear. This had been their way and manner all along; they were of the
same stubborn refractory disposition with those that went before them; it had all along
been the genius of the nation, and an evil genius it was, that continually haunted them
till it ruined them at last. 4. Their practice and character were still the same. They are
worse, and not better, than their fathers. (1.) Jeremiah can himself witness against them
that they were disobedient, or he shall soon find it so (Jer_7:27): “Thou shalt speak all
these words to them, shalt particularly charge them with disobedience and obstinacy.
But even that will not work upon them: They will not hearken to thee, nor heed thee.
Thou shalt go, and call to them with all the plainness and earnestness imaginable, but
they will not answer thee; they will either give thee no answer at all or not an obedient
answer; they will not come at thy call.” (2.) He must therefore own that they deserved
the character of a disobedient people, that were ripe for destruction, and must go to
them and tell them so to their faces (Jer_7:28): “Say unto them, This is a nation that
obeys not the voice of the Lord their God. They are notorious for their obstinacy; they
sacrifice to the Lord as their God, but they will not be ruled by him as their God; they
will not receive either the instruction of his word or the correction of his rod; they will
not be reclaimed or reformed by either. Truth has perished among them; they cannot
receive it; they will not submit to it nor be governed by it. They will not speak truth;
there is no believing a word they say, for it is cut off from their mouth, and lying comes
in the room of it. They are false both to God and man.”
JAMISO , "hearkened not — They did not give even a partial hearing to Me (Psa_
81:11, Psa_81:12).
imagination — rather, as Margin, “the stubbornness.”
backward, etc. — (Jer_2:27; Jer_32:33; Hos_4:16).

122. K&D 24-26, "But they have not regarded that which was foremost and most cardinal
in the law. They hearkened not, sc. to my voice; and instead of walking in the ways
commanded, they walked in the counsels of the stubbornness of their evil heart. ‫ּות‬‫צ‬ ֵ‫ּע‬‫מ‬ ְ is
stat. absol., and ‫רוּת‬ ִ‫ר‬ ְ‫שׁ‬ ִ is co-ordinated with it in apposition, instead of being
subordinated; cf. Ew. §289, c. The lxx have not seen their way to admit such a co-
ordination, and so have omitted the second term; and in this, Movers, Hitz., and Graf
have followed them, deleting the word as a mere gloss. As to "the stubbornness of their
evil heart," see on Jer_3:17. ‫יוּ‬ ְ‫ה‬ִ‫י‬ ‫ּור‬‫ח‬ፎ ְ‫,ל‬ they were backwards, not forwards, i.e., they so
walked as to turn to me the back and not the face. ‫ה‬ָ‫י‬ ָ‫ה‬ with ְ‫ל‬ expresses the direction or
aim of a thing. The subject to these clauses is the Israelites from the time of Moses down
to that of Jeremiah. This is shown by the continuation of the same idea in Jer_7:25 and
Jer_7:26. From the time the fathers were led out of Egypt till the present time, God has
with anxious care been sending prophets to exhort and warn them; but they have not
hearkened, they have made their neck hard, i.e., were stiffnecked, and did worse than
their fathers, i.e., each succeeding generation did more wickedly than that which
preceded it. On ‫ן‬ ִ‫מ‬ ְ‫ל‬ ‫ּום‬ ַ‫,ה‬ (the period) from the day...until...cf. the remarks on Hag_2:18.
The ְ‫ל‬ gives to the mention of the time the value of an independent clause, to which that
which is said regarding that time is joined by ‫ו‬ consec. ‫ּום‬‫י‬ is adverbial accusative: by the
day, i.e., daily, in early morn, i.e., with watchful care sending (on this expression, see at
Jer_7:13). ‫ּום‬‫י‬ acquires this sense, not in virtue of its standing for ‫ּום‬‫י‬ ‫ּום‬‫י‬, but by reason of
its connection with the two infinitives absoll.
CALVI , "They hearkened not nor inclined their ear Here the Prophet shews, that
the Jews did not then begin to be rebellious against God and his word; for they
imitated the impious contumacy of their fathers: and he dwells on this more at large.
He now says, “I gave no command about sacrifices, but only this one thing I
required of your fathers, to obey me.” They hearkened not, he says. What could
have been a juster demand than that they should obey God? How great, then, and
how base an indignity it was, to reject his authority? ay, still more, they inclined
not the ear: for by this phrase the Prophet means not only a contempt of his word
and indifference, but their obstinacy and willfulness, inasmuch as they had
hardened themselves against God. Hypocrites do, indeed, sometimes incline the ear,
and wish to know what is said, and in some measure consider it: but the Prophet
here sets forth as it were the insane contumacy of the Jews, for they inclined not, no,
not even the ear to God speaking to them.
He afterwards adds, that they walked in their tortuous counsels, and also, in the
wickedness of their evil heart (206) This comparison aggravates their sin, — the
Jews preferred to follow their own humor rather than to obey God and his
commands. Had anything been set before them, which might have deceived them
and obscured the authority of the law, there would have been some excuse: but

123. when there was nothing to prevent them from obeying the command of God, except
that they followed their own foolish imaginations, they were wholly inexcusable. For
what excuse could they have made? That they wished to be wiser than God! How
great a madness was this, and how diabolical? But the Prophet leaves them nothing
but this vain excuse, which doubled their guilt. They thought, no doubt, that their
heart was well fitted for the purpose: but he does not here allow them to judge, but
distinctly condemns them as they deserved.
We ought to take particular notice of this passage; for the majority of men at this
day set up their own fictions against God’s word. The Papists indeed pretend
antiquity; they say that they have been taught by their ancestors; and at the same
time they plead councils and the ordinances of the fathers: but yet there is not one of
them, who is not addicted to his own figments, and who does not take the liberty,
nay, an unbridled license, to reject whatever he pleases. Moreover, if the origin of
the whole Papal worship be considered, it will appear, that those who first devised
so many strange superstitions, were only impelled by audacity and presumption, in
order that they might trample under foot the word of God. Hence it is, that all
things are become corrupt; for they brought in all the strange figments of their own
brains. And we see that the Papists at this day are so perversely fixed in their own
errors, that they prefer themselves and their own trumperies to God. And the same
is the case also with all heretics. What then is to be done? Obedience, as I have said,
is to be held as the basis of all true religion. If, then, on the other hand, we wish to
render our worship approved by God, let us learn to cast aside whatever is our own,
so that his authority may prevail over all our reasons.
Let us further notice how detestable a sacrilege it is, to follow the wickedness of our
heart rather than to obey God, when he shews to us, as by the finger, the way of
salvation. Let us also observe, that nothing will then do us good, though we may
seem to ourselves to be very wise, and praise ourselves in our folly; for God declares
here that our heart is evil whenever we turn aside from his pure word.
He says, that they were behind and not before By this phrase he intimates that the
Jews turned the back, that they might not look at him or go forward. For when one
promises to be our leader to conduct us in the way, we immediately turn our eyes to
him; but when we turn our back, it is a proof of our contempt. And thus God
complains of his people, that he was despised by them; for they had not only been
deaf to the prophetic teaching and admonitions, but had also turned their faces
another way, as a proof of a contumacy still worse, so that they forsook him, and as
it were bade him to be gone. (207) This is the import of the last sentence. We shall
proceed to-morrow.
And they walked in the counsels, —
In the resolutions of their evil heart.
They not only devised their own ways, but resolved to walk in them. They formed
their own counsels, and made resolutions to follow them, and they were the counsels
and resolutions of a disordered and perverted heart. In rendering the last word

124. “wickedness,“ Calvin has followed the Vulgate; and our version, “imagination,“ is
the Targum. It is omitted in the Septuagint, and “desires” in Syriac. See note on
Jeremiah 3:17. — Ed.
And they were for behind, and not for before them;
which seem to mean, that they were bent on turning back to their own ways rather
than to go on in the ways of God. The version of theSeptuagint is, “They were for
things behind, and not for things before;” the Syriac and Arabic, “ They
retrograded and did not advance, “or go forward. The allusion seems not to be, as
Blayney thinks, to refractory oxen under the yoke; but to those travelers who, when
shewn the right way, go back instead of going forward. And this was especially true
of the Israelites, who, after having left Egypt, wished often to return, instead of
going forward to Canaan. Hence it is said, that they were going back to their old
ways, and not going forward in the way which God bad pointed out to them. The
phrase in Jeremiah 2:27, is of another kind, and ought not to be confounded with
this. — Ed.
COKE, "Jeremiah 7:24. And went backward, &c.— And they turned from me, and
not towards me, (Jeremiah 7:25.). Since the day that your fathers came forth out of
the land of Egypt, unto this day. And I sent unto them, &c.
Jeremiah 7:27. Therefore, &c.— And when thou shalt speak all these things unto
them, they will not hearken unto thee.
TRAPP, "Jeremiah 7:24 But they hearkened not, nor inclined their ear, but walked
in the counsels [and] in the imagination of their evil heart, and went backward, and
not forward.
Ver. 24. But they hearkened not, nor inclined.] So cross grained they were, and
thwart from the very first.
In the imagination of their evil hearts.] In sententia animi sui pessimi. (a) Heb.,
Aspectu cordis - so Deuteronomy 19:9.
They went backward, and not forward.] As crab fish do; as vile apostates, in peius
proficiunt, grow every day worse than other, being not only averse but adverse to
any good, they daily "grow worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived," seipsis
indies facti deteriores. Islebius first became an Antinomian, and the father of that
sect, and then a Papist, and lastly an atheist and epicure, as Osiander testifieth.
While he was an Antinomian only, he many times promised amendment, being
convinced of his error, but performed it not. After that he condemned his error, and
recanted it in a public auditory, and printed his recantation; yet when Luther was
dead, he not only licked up his former vomit, but fell to worse, as aforesaid. (b)

125. ELLICOTT, "(24) Imagination.—Better, stubbornness, as in Jeremiah 3:17.
Went backward and not forward.—The whole sacrificial system, even at its best, to
say nothing of its idolatrous corruptions, was accordingly, from Jeremiah’s point of
view, a retrograde movement. The apostasy of the people in the worship of the
golden calf involved a like deflection, necessary and inevitable though it might be as
a process of education, from the first ideal polity, based upon the covenant made
with Abraham, i.e., upon a pure and spiritual theism, the emblems and ordinances
of which, though “shadows of good things to come,” were in themselves “weak and
beggarly elements” (Hebrews 10:1; Galatians 4:9).
PETT, "Jeremiah 7:24
“But they did not listen, nor inclined their ear, but walked in their own counsels and
in the stubbornness of their evil heart, and went backwards, and not forwards.”
And what had followed had been that they had not listened, or inclined their ear,
nor had they walked in all the way that He had commanded them. Rather they had
walked in their own counsels and in the stubbornness of their own evil hearts and
had gone backwards and not forwards. In other words their hearts had gone
backwards to Egypt (as witness the moulten calf) and all its connections with idol
worship, rather than forwards in obedience to their covenant with YHWH.
BI, "Went backward, and not forward.
Backward
I. Illustrations of going backward in regard to religion.
1. From Jewish history. Compare best days of Solomon, when temple was dedicated,
with these when jeremiah preached at gate. National mind darkened, conscience
enfeebled, heart hardened.
2. Churches. Galatia (Gal_3:1-3; Gal_5:7-8), Ephesus (Rev_2:4), Sardis (Rev_3:1).
3. Individual life.
(1) Brought up in Christian home; back into thoughtlessness, dissipation,
infidelity.
(2) Awakened by power of truth, and gained a place in household of faith; go
backward and “make shipwreck of faith and a good conscience.”
(3) Trod noblest heights of Christian service; back to stagnation and ease.
II. Causes of this going backward.
1. Negatively.
(1) God never causes a human being to go backward from what is pure and good
and true.
(2) Nor must the charge be laid at the door of men or of Satan.

126. 2. Positively.
(1) The primary cause must be sought in man himself, his inclination to the
things which are behind. Spiritual feebleness.
(2) The secondary causes are temptations; the lusts, pleasures, and gains he
desires to enjoy.
(3) His weakness in yielding results from neglect of the means of strength, the
Word of God, prayer, means of instruction and grace.
III. Consequences of going backward.
1. Displeasure of God.
2. Such as turn back are liable to sink into lowest depths of irreligion.
3. Experience of deepest remorse and reproach of conscience.
Conclusion—
1. Stand fast in the Lord.
2. Despair not, but return. (R. Ann.)
The backslider defenceless
When Christian, in the Pilgrim’s Progress, thought about going back, he recollected that
he had no armour for his back. He had a breastplate, he was covered from head to foot
by his shield, but there was nothing to protect his back, and therefore, if he retreated,
the adversary could spit him with his javelin in a moment. So he thought that bad as it
was to go forward, it would be worse to go backward, and therefore he bravely cut a path
for himself straight onward for glory. Look at that fact whenever you are tempted: do not
endure the idea of turning tail in the day of battle. May retreat be impossible to you! God
makes it Impossible by His grace. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
25 From the time your ancestors left Egypt until
now, day after day, again and again I sent you my
servants the prophets.

127. GILL, "Since the day that your fathers came forth out of the land of Egypt
unto this day,.... That is, in all generations; ever since their first coming out of Egypt,
they had been disobedient to the commands of God, and had walked after their own
hearts' lusts, and had gone backward, and not forward; for this is not to be connected
with what follows:
I have even sent unto you all my servants the prophets, daily rising up early,
and sending them; which should be rendered, "although I have sent" (x); which is an
aggravation of their sin, that they should continue in their disobedience, though the
Lord sent to them to exhort and warn them, not one, or two, of his servants the
prophets, but all of them, and that daily; who rose early in the morning, which denotes
their care and diligence to do their message; and which, because they were sent of the
Lord, and did his work as he directed them, it is attributed to himself; and of these there
was a constant succession, from the time of their coming out of Egypt unto that day;
which shows the goodness of God to that people, and their slothfulness, hardness, and
obstinacy.
CALVI , "God complains of the perverse wickedness of the people, — that he had
lost all his labor in endeavoring to lead them to repentance, not only in one age, but
that the children succeeded their fathers in their corruptions, and that thus the
imitation had become perpetual. This might indeed appear as an extenuation of
their fault; they might have pleaded as the Papists at this day do; who have no
pretext more specious, than when they bring against us the Fathers and antiquity.
But God shews in this place and elsewhere that the children are not excused by the
examples of their fathers; but on the contrary, that it is an aggravation of the crime,
when men thus harden themselves, and think that a continued indulgence in vices
avails them for a precedent; for God does not thus permit himself to be deprived of
his own right. This passage then deserves particular notice; for God not only
condemned those who were then living and whom Jeremiah addressed, but also
connected with them the dead, in order to prove their greater obstinacy, as impiety
had been as it were handed down from one age to another.
From the day, he says, in which your fathers came forth from the land of Egypt unto
this day, have I sent to you, etc. We know how intractable the people had been from
the beginning; for they did all they could to reject Moses, the minister of a favor so
remarkable and invaluable. And after their deliverance, they were continually
either clamoring against God, or openly contending with Moses and Aaron, or
running into gross idolatry, or giving loose reins to their lusts; in short, there was no
end to their course of sinning: and yet Moses daily endeavored to restore them to
obedience. It was this great contumacy that God now refers to; and he says, that the
Israelites did not then begin to be disobedient, but that they had ever been of such a
disposition as not to bear to be corrected, as he will tell us hereafter. It was not
necessary here to adduce examples to shew that the people had been indomitable;
for this was evident from sacred history. It was enough to remind them, that the
hardness and obstinacy of the fathers had descended to their children, so that they
might know that they were twofold and treblefold guilty before God, for they had
imitated the perverseness which God had before severely punished; nor was it
unknown to them how God had brought judgments on their fathers. It was

128. therefore to provoke God most wantonly, when they overlooked and disregarded
such dreadful vengeances as he had executed on their progenitors. We shall
hereafter see similar declarations; nay, this way of speaking occurs everywhere in
the prophets, that is, that their race had been from the beginning perverse and
rebellious, and that they had also in all ages despised the favor of God and
obstinately resisted the prophets.
But God reminds them here, that from the day they came forth from the land of
Egypt he had never ceased to speak to them even to the time of Jeremiah: this his
perseverance greatly aggravated the sin of the people. Had God spoken only once, it
would have been sufficient for their condemnation: but inasmuch as he had borne
with their perverse conduct, and never ceased from day to day kindly to call them to
himself and to promise them pardon and to offer salvation to them — inasmuch
then as God had thus persevered, the more fully discovered was the irreclaimable
impiety of the people. We indeed know how dreadful a punishment must await those
who dare thus to abuse the forbearance of God and openly to scorn his word, when
he invites them a hundred or a thousand times to repentance.
He afterwards adds, that he had sent all his servants, (208) etc In the same sense is
to be taken the universal particle, ‫,כל‬ cal, “ all.” Had God sent only one prophet,
there would have remained no excuse for the Israelites; but as he had continually
sent one after another, to train them up like an army, how great was their madness
to despise so large a number? We indeed know that there were never wanting
prophets among the people, as Moses had promised in the eighteenth chapter of
Deuteronomy. As then God had dealt bountifully with the people, so that prophets
had never ceased but continually succeeded one another, hence surely the baseness
of their impious obstinacy became more evident; for they had not despised God only
for one day, nor disregarded one prophet, or two or three, but resisted all the
prophets, though they had been sent in great number. I sent, he says, all my servants
Then he adds, daily This is mentioned for the same purpose, even to shew that God
had never been wearied, and that they had resisted as it were designedly his
goodness, while he was incessant in kindly exhorting them to repentance. He says,
by rising early and sending As we have said elsewhere, the verb ‫,שכם‬ shecam,
properly means to rise early. God here commends the authority of prophetic
instruction by ascribing to himself what is done by men. With him, indeed, as we all
know, there is no change; hence the expression, to rise up, as applied to him, is not
strictly true; but what he commanded his servants to do, he transfers, as we have
said, to himself, in order that he might more sharply reprove the ingratitude of the
people; as though he had said, that he had been most carefully attentive to secure
their salvation, but that they had been torpid and wholly indifferent.
We may hence learn a useful doctrine, — that God rises to invite us, and also to
receive us, whenever his word is proclaimed among us, by which he testifies to us his
paternal love. God then not only employs men to lead us to himself, but comes forth
in a manner himself to meet us, and rises early as one solicitous for our salvation.
This commendation of divine truth may be of great benefit to the faithful, and

129. induce them to recumb confidently and with tranquil minds on God’s promises; for
they are the same as though God himself had spoken them to us. But here is also
reproved the impiety of those who slumber and sleep, while God thus watches in
order to promote their salvation, and who lend not an ear, when he rises early to
come to them in order to draw them to himself.
And they went backward and not forward,
25.From the day in which your fathers came forth From the land of Egypt, to this
day: And I sent to you all my servants the prophets, Every day rising early and
sending;
26.Yet they hearkened not to me, or inclined their ear, But hardened their neck;
They have been more wicked than their fathers.
Such is the connection in all the ancient versions and in the Targum. The verb,
rendered “they have been more wicked,“ or “done worse,“ is omitted by the
Septuagint and the Syriac; but retained by the Vulgate and the Targum, and is
found wanting in no MS. — Ed.
TRAPP, "Jeremiah 7:25 Since the day that your fathers came forth out of the land
of Egypt unto this day I have even sent unto you all my servants the prophets, daily
rising up early and sending [them]:
Ver. 25. Since the day.] The Church hath never wanted preachers of the truth. See
my True Treasure, pp. 7, 8. Woe to the world because of this!
Daily rising up early.] See on Jeremiah 7:13.
ELLICOTT, "(25) Daily rising up.—Stress is laid on the continual succession of
prophets as witnesses of the Truth from the beginning. The prophet was not tied to
the actual letter of his statement, and the prominence given to Samuel, as the first
who bore the name of prophet (1 Samuel 9:9), seems at first against him. On the
other hand, the gift of prophecy (as seen in umbers 11:25-29) was bestowed freely
even during the wilderness wanderings, and the mention of prophets (Judges 4:4;
Judges 6:8) and men of God (Judges 13:6), perhaps, also, that of the “angel” or
messenger of God, in Judges 5:23, as well as the honour paid to seers before the time
of Samuel (1 Samuel 9:8), show that, great as he was, it was that name and the
organisation, rather than the gift, that were new in his ministry.
PETT, "Jeremiah 7:25
“Since the day that your fathers came forth out of the land of Egypt to this day, I
have sent to you all my servants the prophets, daily rising up early and sending
them,”
And from the day that their fathers had come out of Egypt right up to this point in

130. time, He had sent to them all His servants the prophets, ‘daily rising up early and
sending them’. The idea of ‘rising up early’ (compare Jeremiah 7:13) was not
intended to be taken literally but as being in order to emphasise the urgency that
had been behind His sending them. (He did not literally arise each morning and
send a prophet a day). His supply of prophets had been constant, with Jeremiah
now being the most recent one to be on their case. That there had been prophets
other than Moses before the time of Samuel comes out in umbers 11:25-29; Judges
4:4; Judges 6:8.
26 But they did not listen to me or pay attention.
They were stiff-necked and did more evil than
their ancestors.’
BAR ES, "
CLARKE, "
GILL, "
HE RY, "
JAMISO , "
K&D, "
CALVI , "He afterwards subjoins, And they hearkened not There is here a change
of person; for he said in the last verse, “your fathers,” “I sent to you; ” but now he
says, They hearkened not, nor inclined their ear It is indeed true, that the reference
is to the fathers; but in the next verse God includes the people who were then living.
There is then no doubt but that it was an evidence of indignation, that he changed
the person, and that he was wearied in addressing them, for he saw that he spoke in
vain to a stupid people: and this will appear evident from the next verse. They
hearkened not, he says, nor inclined their ear The words we have already explained:
the Jews are here precluded from having any excuse on the ground of error or
ignorance; for they had refused to be taught, they would not attend, but on the
contrary made deaf their cars. And he says also, that they hardened their neck; by
which their perverseness is still more fully expressed: they designedly as it were
despised God, and carried on war even with his favor and kindness. And he

131. concludes by saying, that they had done worse than their fathers He had said, “your
fathers;” but now, “their fathers.” We hence see that the sentence is changed, for
God knew that he could produce no effect on them, as we find by what follows —
ELLICOTT, "Verse 26
(26) Worse than their fathers.—The rapid survey of the past makes it doubtful
whether the comparison is made between the generations that came out of Egypt
and their immediate followers, or between those followers and their successors.
Probably the general thought was that the whole history of Israel had been one of
progressive deterioration, reaching its climax in the generation in which Jeremiah
lived. His words find a striking parallel in the complaint of the Roman historian
(Livy, Præf), or of the poet :—
“Ætas parentum, pejor avis, tulit
os nequiores.”—Hor., Od. iii. 6.
“Our fathers’ age, more stained with crime
Than were their sires in older time,
Has brought us forth a later race
Yet more iniquitous and base.”
PETT, "Jeremiah 7:26
“Yet they did not listen to me, nor did they incline their ear, but made their neck
stiff. They did worse than their fathers.”
But they had not listened, nor inclined their ear (compare Jeremiah 7:24; Jeremiah
34:14; Jeremiah 44:5; Exodus 15:26). Rather they had stiffened their necks (see
Jeremiah 19:15; and compare 2 Kings 17:14), stubbornly refusing to hear and
holding back on obedience. Thus they had done even worse than their fathers.
27 “When you tell them all this, they will not listen
to you; when you call to them, they will not
answer.

132. GILL, "Yet they hearkened not unto me,.... Speaking by the prophets:
nor inclined their ear; to what was said to them; would not listen to it, and much less
obey what was commanded them:
but hardened their neck; and so became stiffnecked, and would not submit to bear
the yoke of the law:
they did worse than their fathers; every generation grew more and more wicked,
and went on to be so until the measure of their iniquity was filled up; hence it follows:
JAMISO , "hardened ... neck — (Deu_31:27; Isa_48:4; Act_7:51).
worse than their fathers — (Jer_16:12). In Jer_7:22 He had said, “your fathers”;
here He says, “their fathers”; the change to the third person marks growing alienation
from them. He no longer addresses themselves, as it would be a waste of words in the
case of such hardened rebels.
CALVI , "Here is seen more clearly what I have stated, — that the Jews were not
addressed, because they had no ears. Here then God addresses his Prophet and says,
“The children will be like their parents: for thou shalt indeed bear the commands
which I give thee, but it will be without any advantage; for they will not hear, and
when thou callest to them, they will not answer ” It was a most grievous trial to the
Prophet to know that his words would pass away with the air and produce no good.
What was to be expected but that God’s wrath would thus be still more kindled
against the people? The Prophet then must have had his mind greatly depressed; for
he doubtless labored for the good of his own nation; and we shall hereafter see how
sad he was when he understood that their final ruin was at hand. But, as we have
said elsewhere, the prophets were influenced by two feelings: for they did not divest
themselves of all human affections, inasmuch as they loved their own nation and felt
great sorrow, when God declared that he was coming to execute judgment: but this
sympathy and sorrow did not prevent them from executing, in a bold manner, and
with unshaken zeal, what God had committed to them. Thus then the prophets had
feelings to condole with their own kindred, and at the same time were enabled to
surmount whatever might check or hinder them from performing their office.
Jeremiah did thus condole with his own nation, when he knew that shortly ruin
would overtake them; but yet he felt bound to execute what God had bidden him to
do, and to obey his call.
However bitter therefore was the declaration, Thou shalt speak to them, but they
will not hear, yet Jeremiah went forth; for he knew that he must obey God’s
command, whatever might be the issue. The same resolution ought to be formed at
this day by all the faithful ministers of God. They ought to strive as far as they can
to promote the salvation of the people; but still when they see that their doctrine
succeeds not as they wish, and that it is the savor of death to the whole world, they

133. ought nevertheless to follow their course: why? because they are always a sweet and
good savor to God, whatever may be the event. God then declares to his servant
what would be the issue, in order that he might not cease to execute his office with
invincible courage, even if no fruit appeared. It was also his purpose to shew before
the time to the people their perverseness, if there was possibly any hope, or at least,
that he might doubly prove them to be unhealable. It was further his design to
consult the good of those few who cherished true religion in their hearts, though the
multitude were running headlong to their own ruin.
In like manner at this day it is necessary thus to sustain the souls of the faithful; for
while the ungodly rave against God, and while almost the whole world is seized with
this madness, what would become of the godly, had they not this fact to think of, —
that it is nothing new for hypocrites, who boast that they are God’s people and his
Church, to reject his grace and to regard as nothing his servants. This truth then is
serviceable to us at this day, and may be applied in the same way, so that our minds
may not despond nor vacillate, when we see the majority of those, whom God
addresses by his servants, heedless and deaf. Thou shalt speak to them, he says, all
these words
He says not without a reason, All these words; for if the Prophet had only briefly
declared to them what he had heard from God’s mouth, he might have discharged
his office with less weariness; but when he had often repeated what had been
committed to him, it was not done without great trouble and sorrow; for as we have
said at the beginning, he spent his labor on the people, not for one year or for ten
years; for he preached to them for twenty, thirty, forty years, and pursued his
course even beyond that time. When he saw the truth of God thus rejected by the
people, how could he otherwise than feel weariness at times? It is therefore not in
vain intimated, as I have said, that he was chosen, that he might try, not only for one
day, or for a few months or years, whether he could recover the people to the way of
salvation, but that he was to go on through all obstacles, so as not to faint, whatever
might take place. They will not hear thee, he says: and further, —
Thou shalt call to them, and they will not answer thee This also, which God foretells
him, is emphatical, — that if the Prophet called most loudly, (as Isaiah is bidden to
do, (Isaiah 58:1,) and in his person all teachers,) and called even to hoarseness, yet
he is told they would not answer. This shews still more fully their perverseness; for
they were not only deaf to God’s voice and neglected plain teaching, but also
disregarded the most vehement exhortations, he then adds —
COFFMA , ""And thou shalt speak all these words unto them; but they will not
hearken to thee; thou shalt also call them, but they will not answer thee. And thou
shalt say unto them, This is the nation that hath not hearkened unto the voice of
Jehovah their God; nor received instruction: truth is perished, and is cut off from
their mouth."
The Jews believed in salvation "by faith only"; but as Feinberg stated it, "That faith

134. must be joined by works was lost to them; so the time of Jeremiah was a sad
epilogue in Judah's history."[24] God's warning in these verses alerted Jeremiah to
the truth that he would not have any success whatever in turning Israel into the
path of righteousness.
PETT, "Jeremiah 7:27
“And you shall speak all these words to them, but they will not listen to you, you
shall also call to them, but they will not answer you.”
So while Jeremiah was to speak all these words to them He was not to be surprised
when they did not listen and did not respond to his call. For the wording compare
Jeremiah 7:13; Jeremiah 35:17; see also Isaiah 65:12; Isaiah 66:4.
28 Therefore say to them, ‘This is the nation that
has not obeyed the Lord its God or responded to
correction. Truth has perished; it has vanished
from their lips.
BAR ES, "A nation - The “nation.” Israel holds so unique a position among all
nations that for it to disobey God is marvelous.
Truth ... - Fidelity to God. Though they have the name of Yahweh often upon their
lips and swear by Him Jer_5:2, yet it is only profession without practice.
CLARKE, "Nor receiveth correction - They have profited neither by mercies nor
by judgments: blessings and corrections have been equally lost upon them.
GILL, "But thou shalt say unto them,.... Having found by experience, after long
speaking and calling to them, that they are a disobedient and incorrigible people:
this is a nation that obeyeth not the voice of the Lord their God; who, though

135. the Lord is their God, and has chosen and avouched them to be his special people, whom
he has distinguished by special favours; yet what he says by his prophets they pay no
regard unto, and are no better than the Gentiles, which know not God:
nor receiveth correction; or "instruction" (y); so as to be reclaimed, and made the
better; neither by the word, nor by the rod; neither had any effect upon them:
truth is perished, and is cut off from their mouth; neither faith nor faithfulness
is in them; nothing but lying, hypocrisy, and insincerity.
JAMISO , "unto them — that is, in reference to them.
a nation — The word usually applied to the Gentile nations is here applied to the
Jews, as being east off and classed by God among the Gentiles.
nor receiveth correction — (Jer_5:3).
truth ... perished — (Jer_9:3).
CALVI , "God shews now that he must act in a new way. The first duty of teachers
is to set forth the will of God, to shew what is right, and then to exhort, if plain
teaching proves not sufficient. But God intimates here that he was under the
necessity to change his manner, because they were wholly irreclaimable. Thou shalt
then say this as the last thing; as though he had said, “I indeed wished to try,
whether they were capable of being improved, and have employed thee for this
purpose: after having long borne with them, knowing by a long trial that thy labor
is useless, thou shalt say to them, “I bid you adieu at last.” For what is the meaning
of these words, This is a nation which heard not the voice of its God, except that the
Prophet, after long trials, knew that he was neither to teach nor exhort them? It is
not to be doubted but that God referred to the Jews themselves; for it was his object
to expose their impious perverseness. He yet comforted his servant; for he hence
knew, that though he could do no good to his hearers, yet his labor was acceptable
to God and not without its fruit: for the truth of God is not only fruitful in the
salvation of men, but also in their perdition. (2 Corinthians 2:15.) God then shews,
that there would be no loss to his servant, even though the Jews repented not; for he
would be their judge, and denounce by the highest authority their destruction.
We now perceive the design of the Holy Spirit, in saying, Thou shalt at length say,
This is a nation which has not hearkened to the voice of its God: for the Prophet is
not bidden here to address the Jews, but to pronounce on them a sentence, that the
whole world might know how base and detestable had been their contumacy, and
how abominable their impiety; for the whole nation had refused to hear The word
nation seems here to be taken in a bad sense: it is indeed in many places to be taken
for “people;” but in other places Scripture sets ‫,גוים‬ guim, in opposition to God’s
chosen people. And perhaps this word has been used, that the Jews might know that
they in vain gloried in their own dignity. He shews that they did not excel other
nations, for they were themselves of the same class, a nation. This is a nation, he
says, which has not hearkened to the voice of Jehovah their God (209) In saying this
he doubtless amplified their crime; for as God had made himself plainly known to
the Jews, they could not pretend ignorance nor plead any doubt respecting what the

136. prophets taught. As then they had designedly rejected their own God, they hence
became more obviously guilty and abominable.
He afterwards adds, They have not received correction, he points out the very
source of rebellion, — they were unwilling to undertake the yoke. Here then he
excludes all those plausible pretences by which the Jews might cloak their impiety,
as hypocrites are ever wont to do. Hence he declares that they had been
unteachable, for they had refused correction. The word ‫,מוסר‬ musar, often means
chastisement; but generally signifies every kind of training. As the subject here is
teaching, the Prophet means that they were willfully blind, for they would not be
taught; ow this is the extremity of wicked perverseness, that is, when men become
so degenerated, that they willfully assimilate themselves to brute beasts by rejecting
the yoke of God.
He then subjoins, that truth, or faith, had perished The word ‫,אמונה‬ amune, may be
taken in two senses. Some refer it to what belongs to God, as meaning religion, or
faith: or piety. But the Prophet seems to take it in a larger sense, as signifying what
is sincere; for they acted perfidiously towards men as well as towards God. The
word then is to be taken simply as meaning integrity, as though he had said, that
nothing true or sincere remained in them, but that they were so corrupt that they
mocked God and deceived men, and that nothing but dissimulation prevailed among
them. This meaning is confirmed by what follows, that it is cut off from their mouth
(210) We hence learn that their perfidy is condemned because they acted falsely;
and as their heart was full of duplicity, so also was their tongue. He intimates, in
short, that there was no hope as to their repentance; for had they promised a
hundred times to God to be teachable and obedient, and shewed before the world
any appearance of integrity, their promises would have passed off into mere
fallacies and deceptions. He then adds —
Lost is faithfulness, yea, wholly separated from the mouth.
TRAPP, "Jeremiah 7:28 But thou shalt say unto them, This [is] a nation that
obeyeth not the voice of the LORD their God, nor receiveth correction: truth is
perished, and is cut off from their mouth.
Ver. 28. This is a nation.] A heathenish nation, such as they use to reproach with
this name, Goi, and Mamzer Gojim, that is, bastardly heathens.
or receiveth correction.] Or, Instruction.
PETT, "Jeremiah 7:28
“And you shall say to them, “This is the nation which has not listened to the voice of
YHWH their God, nor received instruction. Truth is perished, and is cut off from
their mouth.”
And he was then to declare to them, “This is the nation which has not listened to the

137. voice of YHWH their God, nor received instruction. Truth is perished, and is cut off
from their mouth.” In other words He was to make clear that they had as a whole
adamantly failed to listen to the voice of YHWH, and had not received His
instruction, the consequence being that as far as they were concerned truth was
dead, and all that they spoke was lies.
29 “‘Cut off your hair and throw it away; take up
a lament on the barren heights, for the Lord has
rejected and abandoned this generation that is
under his wrath.
BAR ES, "Jeremiah summons the people to lament over the miserable
consequences of their rejection of God. In the valley of Hinnom, where lately they
offered their innocents, they shall themselves fall before the enemy in such multitudes
that burial shall be impossible, and the beasts of the field unmolested shall prey upon
their remains.
Jer_7:29
The daughter of Zion, defiled by the presence of enemies in her sanctuary, and
rejected of God, must shear off the diadem of her hair, the symbol of her consecration to
God, just as the Nazarite, when defiled by contact with a corpse, was to shave his
crowned head.
Take up a lamentation ... - Or, lift up a “lamentation on the bare hill-sides” Jer_
3:2.
CLARKE, "Cut off thine hair - ‫נזרך‬ ‫גזי‬ gozzi nizrech, shear thy nazarite. The
Nazarite was one who took upon him a particular vow, and separated himself from all
worldly connections for a certain time, that he might devote himself without
interruption to the service of God; and during all this time no razor was to pass on his
head, for none of his hair was to be taken off. After the vow was over, he shaved his head
and beard, and returned to society. See Num_6:2 (note), etc., and the notes there.
Jerusalem is here considered under the notion of a Nazarite, by profession devoted to
the service of God: but that profession was empty; it was not accompanied with any
suitable practice. God tells them here to cut off their hair; to make no vain pretensions to
holiness or religion; to throw off the mask, and attempt no longer to impose upon
themselves and others by their hypocritical pretensions. On the same ground he orders
them, Jer_7:21, to devote to common use the animals destined for sacrifice; and to make

138. no more vain shows of religion while their hearts were not right with him. Dr. Blayney
thinks the address is to the prophet, who was a Nazarite by virtue of his office, and who
was called to cut off his hair as a token of mourning for the desolations which were
coming upon his people. That cutting off the hair was a sign of distress and mourning
may be seen, Ezr_9:3; Isa_15:2; Jer_41:5, etc. But I think the other the more natural
construction.
On high places - That the lamentation may be heard to the greater distance.
The generation of his wrath - Persons exposed to punishment: used here as
children of wrath, Eph_2:3.
GILL, "Cut off thine hair, O Jerusalem, and cast it away,.... This supplement is
made, because the word is feminine; and therefore cannot be directed to the prophet,
but to Jerusalem, and its inhabitants; shaving the head is a sign of mourning, Job_1:20
and this is enjoined, to show that there would soon be a reason for it; wherefore it
follows:
and take up a lamentation on high places: that it might be heard afar off; or
because of the idolatry frequently committed in high places. The Targum is,
"pluck off the hair for thy great ones that are carried captive, and take up a lamentation
for the princes:''
for the Lord hath rejected and forsaken the generation of his wrath; a
generation of men, deserving of the wrath of God, and appointed to it, on whom he
determined to pour it out; of which his rejection and forsaking of them was a token: this
was remarkably true of that generation in which Christ and his apostles lived, who
disbelieved the Messiah, and had no faith in him, and spoke lying and blasphemous
words concerning him; and therefore were rejected and forsaken by the Lord; and wrath
came upon them to the uttermost.
HE RY, "Here is, I. A loud call to weeping and mourning. Jerusalem, that had been
a joyous city, the joy of the whole earth, must now take up a lamentation on high places
(Jer_7:29), the high places where they had served their idols; there must they now
bemoan their misery. In token both of sorrow and slavery, Jerusalem must now cut off
her hair and cast it away; the word is peculiar to the hair of the Nazarites, which was
the badge and token of their dedication to God, and it is called their crown. Jerusalem
had been a city which was a Nazarite to God, but now must cut off her hair, must be
profaned, degraded, and separated from God, as she had been separated to him. It is
time for those that have lost their holiness to lay aside their joy.
JAMISO , "Jeremiah addresses Jerusalem under the figure of a woman, who, in
grief for her lost children, deprives her head of its chief ornament and goes up to the
hills to weep (Jdg_11:37, Jdg_11:38; Isa_15:2).
hair — flowing locks, like those of a Nazarite.
high places — The scene of her idolatries is to be the scene of her mourning (Jer_
3:21).
generation of his wrath — the generation with which He is wroth. So Isa_10:6;

139. “the people of My wrath.”
K&D 29-31, "Therefore the Lord has rejected the backsliding people, so that it shall
perish shamefully. - Jer_7:29. "Cut off thy diadem (daughter of Zion), and cast it away,
and lift up a lamentation on the bald peaked mountains; for the Lord hath rejected and
cast out the generation of His wrath. Jer_7:30. For the sons of Judah have done the evil
in mine eyes, saith Jahveh, have put their abominations in the house on which my
name is named, to pollute it; Jer_7:31. And have built the high places of Tophet, which
is in the valley of Benhinnom, to burn their sons and daughters in the fire; which I have
not commanded, neither came it into my heart. Jer_7:32. Therefore, behold, the days
come, saith Jahveh, that they shall no longer say, Tophet and Valley of Benhinnom,
but, The valley of slaughter; and they shall bury in Tophet for want of room. Jer_7:33.
And the carcases of this people shall be meat for the fowls of heaven and the beasts of
the earth, with no one to fray them away. Jer_7:34. And I make to cease out of the
cities of Judah and from the streets of Jerusalem, the voice of mirth and the voice of
gladness, the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride; for a waste shall the
land become. Jer_8:1. At that time, saith Jahveh, they shall bring out the bones of the
kings of Judah and the bones of his princes, the bones of the priests and the bones of the
prophets, and the bones of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, out of their graves. Jer_8:2.
And they shall spread them before the sun, and the moon, and all the host of heaven,
which they have loved, and which they have served, after which they have walked, and
which they have sought and worshipped: they shall not be gathered nor buried; for
dung upon the face of the earth shall they be. Jer_8:3. And death shall be chosen rather
than life by all the residue which is left of this evil race, in all the places whither I have
driven them that are left, saith Jahveh of hosts."
In these verses the judgment of Jer_7:20 is depicted in all its horror, and the
description is introduced by a call upon Zion to mourn and lament for the evil awaiting
Jerusalem and the whole land. It is not any particular woman that is addressed in Jer_
7:29, but the daughter of Zion (cf. Jer_6:23), i.e., the capital city personified as a
woman, as the mother of the whole people. Cut off ְ‫ך‬ ֵ‫ר‬ְ‫ז‬ִ‫,נ‬ thy diadem. There can be no
doubt that we are by this to understand the hair of the woman; but the current opinion,
that the words simply and directly means the hair, is without foundation. It means
crown, originally the diadem of the high priest, Exo_29:6; and the transference of the
same word to the hair of the head is explained by the practice of the Nazarites, to wear
the hair uncut as a mark of consecration to the Lord, Num_6:5. The hair of the Nazarite
is called in Num_6:7 the consecration (‫ר‬ֶ‫ז‬ֵ‫)נ‬ of his God upon his head, as was the
anointing oil on the head of the high priest, Lev_21:12. In this sense the long hair of the
daughter of Zion is called her diadem, to mark her out as a virgin consecrated to the
Lord. Cutting off this hair is not only in token of mourning, as in Job_1:20; Mic_1:16,
but in token of the loss of the consecrated character. The Nazarite, defiled by the sudden
occurrence of death near to his person, was bound to cut off his long hair, because by
this defilement his consecrated hair had been defiled; and just so must the daughter of
Zion cut off her hair and cast it from her, because by her sins she had defiled herself, and
must be held as unconsecrate. Venema and Ros. object to this reference of the idea to the
consecrated hair of the Nazarite: quod huc non quadrat, nec in faeminis adeo suetum
erat; but this objection is grounded on defective apprehension of the meaning of the
Nazarite's vow, and on misunderstanding of the figurative style here employed. The
allusion to the Nazarite order, for the purpose of representing the daughter of Zion as a
virgin consecrated to the Lord, does not imply that the Nazarite vow was very common

140. amongst women. Deprived of her holy ornament, Zion is to set up a lament upon bare
hill-tops (cf. Jer_3:21), since the Lord has rejected or cast out (Jer_7:30) the generation
that has drawn His wrath down on it, because they have set idols in the temple in which
He has revealed His glory, to profane it. The abominations are the image of Asherah
which Manasseh set up in the temple, and the altars he had built to the host of heaven in
both the courts (2Ki_21:5, 2Ki_21:7). Besides the desecration of the temple of the Lord
by idolatry, Jeremiah mentions in Jer_7:31, as an especially offensive abomination, the
worship of Moloch practised in the valley of Benhinnom. Here children were burnt to
this deity, to whom Manasseh had sacrificed his son, 2Ki_21:6. The expression "high
altars of Tophet" is singular. In the parallel passages, where Jeremiah repeats the same
subject, Jer_19:5 and Jer_32:35, we find mentioned instead high altars of Baal; and on
this ground, Hitz. and Graf hold ‫התפת‬ in our verse to be a contemptuous name for Baal
Moloch. ‫ת‬ ֶ‫ּפ‬ is not derived from the Persian; nor is it true that, as Hitz. asserts, it does
not occur till after the beginning of the Assyrian period, since we have it in Job_17:6. It
is formed from ‫וּף‬ , to spit out, like ‫ת‬ ֶ‫ּפ‬‫נ‬ from ‫;נוּף‬ and means properly a spitting out, then
that before or on which one spits (as in Job_17:6), object of deepest abhorrence. It is
transferred to the worship of Moloch here and Jer_19:6, Jer_19:13., and in 2Ki_23:10.
In the latter passage the word is unquestionably used for the place in the valley of
Benhinnom where children were offered to Moloch. So in Jer_19:6, Jer_19:13 (the place
of Tophet), and Jer_19:14; and so also, without a doubt, in Jer_7:32 of the present
chapter. There is no valid reason for departing from this well-ascertained local
signification; "high altars of the Tophet" may perfectly well be the high altars of the place
of abominable sacrifices. With the article the word means the ill-famed seat of the
Moloch-worship, situated in the valley of Ben or Bne Hinnom, to the south of Jerusalem.
Hinnom is nomen propr. of a man of whom we know nothing else, and ‫ן‬ ֶ ( ‫י‬ֵ‫נ‬ ְ ‫ּום‬ ִ‫)ה‬ is not
an appellative: son of sobbing, as Hitz., Graf, Böttcher explain (after Rashi), rendering
the phrase by "Valley of the weepers," or "of groaning, sobbing," with reference to the
cries of the children slain there for sacrifices. For the name Ben-hinnom is much older
than the Moloch-worship, introduced first by Ahaz and Manasseh. We find it in Jos_
15:8; Jos_18:16, in the topographical account of the boundaries of the tribes of Judah
and Benjamin. As to Moloch-worship, see on Lev_18:21 and Eze_16:20. At the
restoration of the public worship of Jahveh, Josiah had extirpated Moloch-worship, and
had caused the place of the sacrifice of abominations in the valley of Ben-hinnom to be
defiled (2Ki_23:20); so that it is hardly probable that it had been again restored
immediately after Josiah's death, at the beginning of Jehoiakim's reign. Nor does the
present passage imply this; for Jer. is not speaking of the forms of idolatry at that time in
favour with the Jews, but of the abominations they had done. That he had Manasseh's
doings especially in view, we may gather from Jer_15:4, where the coming calamities are
expressly declared to be the punishment for Manasseh's sins. Neither is it come into my
heart, i.e., into my mind, goes to strengthen: which I have not commanded.
CALVI , "Here again Jeremiah exhorts his own people to lament; and he uses the
feminine gender, as though he called the people, the daughter of Sion, or the
daughter of Jerusalem. He then, according to a common mode of speaking, calls the
whole people a woman. (211)
He first bids her to shave off the hair The word ‫,נזר‬ nesar, means the hair, derived
from the azarites, who allowed their hair to grow: and there may be here a

141. striking allusion to the azarites who were sacred to God; as though he had said,
“This people are profane, and therefore ought to have nothing in common with the
azarites.” Hence also is derived ‫,נזר‬ nesar, a crown. Though then the word means
the hair, yet the allusion is not to be overlooked, — that this people, rejected by
God, are bidden to cut off and to throw away the hair. After the throwing away of
the hair there was to be great lamentation; Raise, he says, on high places a
lamentation This may seem to be an exhortation to repentance: but as we have seen
elsewhere, though the prophets often gave the people the hope of pardon and
reconciliation, yet in this place the Prophet no doubt denounces a final judgment,
and is a herald of lamentation, because the prevailing impiety was irreclaimable. He
does not then perform here the duty of a teacher, but in a hostile manner denounces
ruin: for it immediately follows —
For rejected hath Jehovah and forsaken the generation of his wrath The word ‫,דור‬
dur, means an age, not time, but men of the same age: as we call that our generation
which now lives in the world, and that which is dead the generation of our fathers,
and what succeeds us the next generation. It is indeed true, that the Israelites in
every age were worthy of a similar vengeance; but God no doubt shews here, that
his vengeance was at hand, for he had long borne with the perverse conduct of the
people, and suspended his judgment. As then vengeance was now to be executed, the
Prophet calls that age the age of God’s wrath; for we know that the genitive case in
Hebrew has often such a meaning as this. Then the age of his wrath means the age
or generation devoted to extreme vengeance; for their wickedness against God was
extreme, as long as he treated them with forbearance. The longer then he had
deferred his judgment, the heavier punishment was at hand. It afterwards follows
—
COFFMA , ""Cut off thy hair, O Jerusalem, and cast it away, and take up a
lamentation on the bare heights; for Jehovah hath rejected and forsaken the
generation of his wrath."
Jerusalem is commanded here to go into mourning for herself. When a azarite was
defiled by touching a corpse, he was required to cut off his hair and to re-consecrate
himself; and thus the figure here is that Jerusalem is defiled, God finds no excuse
for her; he announces his rejection and forsaking of the Once Chosen race.
God did not execute such a terrible sentence upon Judah without grave and
sufficient reasons; some of which were just cited in the matter of their worship of
the queen of heaven; but there were additional reasons also.
COKE, "Jeremiah 7:29. Cut off thine hair, O Jerusalem— See Job 1:20. Isaiah 15:2
and Ezekiel 27:31. Jerusalem is here addressed as a woman under extreme misery,
and exhorted to take upon her the habit and disposition of a mourner, and to bewail
the calamities which were fallen upon her. Instead of, Take up a lamentation on
high places, some read, for the high places; see Jeremiah 7:31-32. To cut off the hair
was a mark of extreme grief: the custom was usual among the Pagans also. Achilles,
as well as his soldiers, cut off their hair at the funeral of Patroclus. Mr. Pope is of

142. opinion, that this custom of cutting off the hair was not only in token of sorrow, but
perhaps had a concealed meaning,—that as the hair was cut from the head, and was
never more to be joined to it: so was the dead for ever cut off from the living, never
more to return. See his note on Il. 23. ver. 164 and Peters on Job, p. 315. The last
words of the verse may be rendered, A most provoking generation; or a generation
which hath much angered him.
TRAPP, "Jeremiah 7:29 Cut off thine hair, [O Jerusalem], and cast [it] away, and
take up a lamentation on high places; for the LORD hath rejected and forsaken the
generation of his wrath.
Ver. 29. Cut off thine hair, O Jerusalem.] In token of greatest sorrow and servitude.
[Job 1:20 Isaiah 15:2 Ezekiel 27:31] Tu, dum servus es, comam nutris? said he in
Aristophanes. The word here rendered "hair" is nezir, which signifieth a crown,
and there hence the azarites had their name, [ umbers 6:2; umbers 6:5]
intimating thereby haply that their votaries should be as little accepted as were their
sacrifices. [Jeremiah 7:21]
And forsaken the generation of his wrath.] Who are elsewhere called "the people of
his curse," and "vessels of wrath, fitted for destruction."
BE SO , "Jeremiah 7:29. Cut off thy hair, O Jerusalem — This was commonly
practised in the time of great sorrow and mourning. And Jerusalem is here
addressed as a woman in extreme misery, and exhorted to take upon her the habit
and disposition of a mourner, and to bewail the calamities which were fallen upon
her. But some have observed that the Hebrew word ‫,נזר‬ which we translate barely
the hair, signifies something more, namely, votive, or azarite hair; and they think
the prophet alludes to the law concerning azarites, ( umbers 6:9,) whereby it was
ordered that, if any one should die near them, they should immediately shave off
their hair. They suppose, therefore, the sense here is, that so many would be killed
in Jerusalem by the Chaldeans, that if there were any azarites in the city, they
would be all obliged on that account to shave off their hair: by which is signified
that a great number of the inhabitants would be slain. And take up a lamentation on
high places — Or, for the high places, as some read it; namely, where they had
worshipped their idols, and offered their sacrifices, there they must now bemoan
their misery. Or the words may, as some suppose, be intended to signify the cries
and lamentations of the watchmen, who were placed on high towers and on hills, to
observe the country around; and who are represented as seeing, on this occasion,
scenes of calamity and slaughter on every side, and continually fresh subjects of
alarm. For the Lord hath rejected the generation of his wrath — This sinful
generation, who have so highly provoked him. As God is said to reject or cast off his
people when he gives them up into the hands of their enemies, so he is said to choose
them again at their restoration from captivity, Isaiah 14:1 .
ELLICOTT, "(29) Cut off thine hair.—Literally, as in 2 Samuel 1:10; 2 Kings
11:12, thy crown or diadem; but the verb determines the meaning. The word etzer

143. (“consecration” in the Authorised version) is applied to the unshorn locks of the
azarite ( umbers 6:7), and from it he took his name. As the azarite was to shave
his head if he came in contact with a corpse, as cutting the hair close was generally
among Semitic races the sign of extremest sorrow (Job 1:20; Micah 1:16), so
Jerusalem was to sit as a woman rejected by her husband, bereaved of her children.
(Comp. the picture in Lamentations 1:1-3.) The word is applied also to the “crown”
of the high priest in Exodus 29:6, the “crown” of the anointing oil in Leviticus 21:12.
O Jerusalem.—The italics show that the words are not in the Hebrew, but the
insertion of some such words was rendered necessary by the fact that the verb “cut
off” is in the feminine. Those who heard or read the words of the prophet, who so
often spoke of “the daughter of Zion” (Jeremiah 6:2), of “the daughter of his
people” (Jeremiah 6:14; Jeremiah 8:11), of “the betrothed of Jehovah” (Jeremiah 2,
3), would be at no loss to understand his meaning.
PETT, "Having Described His People As Having Deceived Minds And Stiff ecks
YHWH ow Calls On Them To Mourn Over Their Rejection By Him Because Of
Their Doings, And Illustrates In Detail How Far They Have Gone From Him,
Whilst Warning Again Of The Consequences (Jeremiah 7:29 to Jeremiah 8:3).
YHWH now turns from the question of their general disobedience and idolatry, to
their particular disobedience in reference to their especially evil behaviour with
regard to idols in that they have set up their abominations in the House of YHWH,
and have done even worse (if that were possible) in the Valley of Topheth where
they have offered their children as sacrifices to idols, something which He had not
commanded and had not (and would not have) even remotely considered. He calls
on them to lament because, as a result, He was going to make the Valley of Topheth
a place of slaughter and death in that it would become a place for burying huge
numbers of dead and a place where the bones of kings and princes, priests and
prophets, and all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, would be exposed before the sun,
moon and stars that they had worshipped, as though they were criminals, whilst
those evil people who survived the massacre and went into exile would seek death
rather than life.
Jeremiah 7:29
“Cut off your hair (O daughter of Zion) and cast it away,
And take up a lamentation on the bare heights,
For YHWH has rejected and forsaken,
The generation of his wrath.”
The command to ‘cut off’ is in the feminine, suggesting that here the call is to ‘the
daughter of Zion’ (Jeremiah 6:23), that is, the inhabitants of Jerusalem. YHWH
calls on her to mourn and lament by cutting off her hair (her ‘crown’ - nzr -
compare umbers 6 where it indicates consecration) and casting it away. This may
signify that she is to do this because she has already cast away her glory (her crown)
or that, having been rejected by YHWH, she is to cast off the sign of her
consecration to Him, in the same way as a azarite cut off his hair and cast it away

144. when he had broken his vow. Either way it is a way of signifying great loss.
And she is to take up her lamentation on the ‘bare heights’, the very place where
they had offered incense at their high places (Jeremiah 3:2). In other words instead
of indulging in their riotous sex-ridden festivals they were to humiliate themselves
and mourn and weep (compare Job 1:20), because rather than facing blessing their
future was dismal. And this was because YHWH had rejected and forsaken them, as
a result of the fact that they were the generation at which His wrath was directed.
‘The generation of His wrath’ probably signifies the generation on which YHWH
had decided the punishment must fall for all the failures of the past which had
aroused His wrath, because they had now reached the point of no return.
PULPIT, "Cut off thine hair. The "daughter of Zion," i.e. the community of
Jerusalem, is addressed; this appears from the verb being in the feminine. It is a
choice expression which the prophet employs—literally, shear off thy crown (i.e. thy
chief ornament). The act was to be a sign of mourning (see Job 1:20; Micah 1:16).
Some think there is also a reference to the vow of the azarite (the word for
"crown" being here nezer, which is also the word rendered in Authorized Version,
"separation," i.e. "consecration," in the law of the azarite ( umbers 6:1-27.). But
neither in this context nor anywhere else have we any support for the application of
the term " azarite" to the people of Israel. On high places; rather, on (the) bare
hills (see on Jeremiah 3:21). The generation of his wrath; i.e. on which his wrath is
to be poured out (comp. Isaiah 10:6).
The Valley of Slaughter
30 “‘The people of Judah have done evil in my
eyes, declares the Lord. They have set up their
detestable idols in the house that bears my ame
and have defiled it.
BAR ES, "er_7:30
They have set their abominations ... - Probably a reference to the reign of the
fanatic Manasseh, in whose time the worship of Astarte and of the heavenly bodies was

145. the established religion of the land 2Ki_21:3-5, and even the temple was used for
idolatrous services. The people had never heartily accepted Josiah’s reformation.
GILL, "For the children of Judah have done evil in my sight, saith the
Lord,.... Meaning not a single action only, but a series, a course of evil actions; and
those openly, in a daring manner, not only before men, but in the sight of God, and in
contempt of him, like the men of Sodom, Gen_13:13,
they have set their abominations in the house which is called by my name,
to defile it; that is, set their idols in the temple; here Manasseh set up a graven image of
the grove, 2Ki_21:7 which was done, as if it was done on purpose to defile it.
HE RY 30-31, "Just cause given for this great lamentation.
1. The sin of Jerusalem appears here very heinous, nowhere worse, or more exceedingly
sinful (Jer_7:30): “The children of Judah” (God's profession people, that came forth out
of the waters of Judah, Isa_48:1) “have done evil in my sight, under my eye, in my
presence; they have affronted me to my face, which very much aggravates the affront:”
or, “They have done that which they know to be evil in my sight, and in the highest
degree offensive to me.” Idolatry was the sin which was above all other sins evil in God's
sight. Now here are two things charged upon them in their idolatry, which were very
provoking: (1.) That they were very impudent in it towards God and set him at defiance:
They have set their abominations (their abominable idols and the altars erected to
them) in the house that is called by my name, in the very courts of the temple, to pollute
it (Manasseh did so, 2Ki_21:7, 2Ki_23:12), as if they thought God would connive at it, or
cared not though he was ever so much displeased with it, or as if they would reconcile
heaven and hell, God and Baal. The heart is the place which God has chosen to put his
name there; if sin have the innermost and uppermost place there, we pollute the temple
of the Lord, and therefore he resents nothing more than setting up idols in the heart,
Eze_14:4. (2.) That they were very barbarous in it towards their own children, Jer_7:31.
They have particularly built the high places of Tophet, where the image of Moloch was
set up, in the valley of the son of Hinnom, adjoining to Jerusalem; and there they burnt
their sons and their daughters in the fire, burnt them alive, killed them, and killed them
in the most cruel manner imaginable, to honour or appease those idols that were devils
and not gods. This was surely the greatest instance that ever was of the power of Satan in
the children of disobedience, and of the degeneracy and corruption of the human nature.
One would willingly hope that there were not many instances of such a barbarous
idolatry; but it is amazing that there should be any, that men could be so perfectly void
of natural affection as to do a thing so inhuman as to burn little innocent children, and
their own too, that they should be so perfectly void of natural religion as to think it
lawful to do this, nay, to think it acceptable. Surely it was in a way of righteous
judgment, because they had changed the glory of God into the similitude of a beast, that
God gave them up to such vile affections that changed them into worse than beasts. God
says of this that it was what he commanded them not, neither cam it into his heart,
which is not meant of his not commanding them thus to worship Moloch (this he had
expressly forbidden them), but he had never commanded that his worshippers should be
at such an expense, nor put such a force upon their natural affection, in honouring him;
it never came into his heart to have children offered to him, yet they had forsaken his
service for the service of such gods as, by commanding this, showed themselves to be
indeed enemies to mankind.

146. JAMISO , "set their abominations in the house — (Jer_32:34; 2Ki_21:4, 2Ki_
21:7; 2Ki_23:4; Eze_8:5-14).
CALVI , "Lest the Jews should murmur and complain that God was too rigorous,
the Prophet adds, that they were not given up to destruction without the justest
reasons. How so? They had done evil To do evil here means, that they had not
offended in one thing, but had given themselves up to wickedness and evil doings. It
is the same as though he had said, that they were so corrupt that they were wholly
inured to the doing of evil, and had by long use contracted evil habits; for they
continually provoked God. But as they flattered themselves, the Prophet reminds
them here of God’s judgment: “It is enough, “he says, “that the Judge condemns
you; for if ye see not your wickedness nor acknowledge your sin, yet this will not
avail you; for God declares that you are guilty in his sight.”
We see that there is an implied contrast between the sight of God and the delusions
by which hypocrites soothed themselves, while they made evasions or perversely
excused their sins, or sought to escape by circuitous windings. God then shews that
his own sight, or knowledge, is sufficient, how blind soever man may be, and
however the whole world may connive at their sins.
He adds one kind of sin, that they had set up their abominations (212) in the
Temple. This refers to superstitions. But as we have seen elsewhere, and shall often
have to observe, the Prophets frequently reproved sins by mentioning only one sin
for the whole. Then what was especially wicked in the people he states, and that was,
that the Temple was polluted with superstitions. We have already said, that it was
an intolerable sacrilege to pollute the Temple with abominations, which was then
the only true Temple in the world: for it was God’s will that sacrifices should be
offered to him in that one place; and he had carefully described everything
necessary for a right worship. When, therefore, the Jews polluted that very Temple,
how abominable was such a profanation? It was not then without reason that the
Prophet brings forward what was especially wicked in the people, — that God’s
house was polluted with superstitious and many spurious ceremonies, and that there
his whole worship was vitiated. The rest to-morrow.
COFFMA , ""For the children of Judah have done that which was evil in my sight,
saith Jehovah: they have set their abominations in the house which is called by my
name, to defile it. And they have built the high places of Tophet, which is in the
valley of the son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire;
which I commanded not, neither came it into my mind."
In the ew Testament, the word Gehenna, a synonym for "hell" is derived from the
"valley of the son of Hinnom," that infamous ravine south of Jerusalem where the
brazen statue of Molech was situated, and which was the scene of Judah's child-
sacrifices to that pagan deity. Josiah had defiled it; but apparently Jehoiachim had
rededicated it; and, as Feinberg stated it, "This passage reveals that their children
were actually burned."[25]

147. "Which I commanded not ..." (Jeremiah 7:31). Of course, God disclaimed any such
thing as the sacrifice of children as having any connection whatever with what he
had ordained. Let it be noted here that "going beyond" what God has commanded
for his worship proved a great disaster for Judah; and we do not believe that
modern Protestantism in "going beyond" what God has commanded in such things
as the worship of God with man-made instruments of music can possibly be pleasing
to God. (See Revelation 22:18; Acts 17:25; and 2 John 1:1:9).
"The have set their abominations in the house which is called by my name ..."
(Jeremiah 7:30). 2 Kings 21:5 records the acts of Manasseh in this desecration; but
it leaves us wondering if the vulgar immorality of the pagan worship was actually
perpetrated in the temple itself in connection with the pagan deities thus installed.
The strong inference would appear to favor the actual practice of licentiousness in
the temple itself.
"Thus Israel revealed her deep degradation by introducing into the house of her
God such unspeakable practices as ritual prostitution and other fertility rites."[26]
The horrible practices just mentioned, along with the incredible sacrifices of their
sons and daughters to Molech, shouted to high heaven for the vengeance of God
against such practices. Matthew Henry commented that Judah, "Burned their
children alive, killed them, killed them in the most cruel manner imaginable, to
honor and appease those idols that were devils and not gods."[27]
BE SO , "Verse 30-31
Jeremiah 7:30-31. They have set up their abominations, &c. — They have set up
images and altars for idolatrous worship even in my temple, and the courts near it.
This seems to be spoken of what was done in the times of Manasseh, or Amon, 2
Kings 21:4; 2 Kings 21:7; 2 Chronicles 33:4. And they have built the high places of
Tophet — To burn their sons and their daughters in the fire. Concerning this
unnatural and cruel custom of burning their children, by way of sacrifice to Moloch,
which was derived from the Canaanites, see notes on Leviticus 18:21; 2 Kings 23:10;
Isaiah 30:33. Which I commanded them not — But, on the contrary, expressed the
greatest detestation of it, and forbade it under the severest penalties: see Leviticus
20:1-5. The words are spoken by the figure called meiosis, by which a great deal less
is expressed than is implied; a way of speaking frequent in Scripture. Thus,
Deuteronomy 17:3, God, speaking of the worship of the host of heaven, adds, Which
I have not commanded, meaning, which I expressly forbade. So God, reproving the
idolatry of the Jews, says, Isaiah 65:12, They choose things wherein I delighted not,
that is, which I utterly abhorred. And Jeremiah (Jeremiah 2:8) calls idols, things
that do not profit, meaning, that their worship was not only insignificant, but
likewise extremely wicked and destructive. Thus St. Paul expresses the vilest sins, by
calling them things which are not convenient, Romans 1:28.
ELLICOTT, "(30) In the house which is called by my name.—This had been done

148. by Ahaz (2 Chronicles 28:2), and after the Temple had been cleansed by Hezekiah (2
Chronicles 29:5) had been repeated by Manasseh (2 Kings 21:4-7; 2 Chronicles
33:3-7). Josiah’s reformation again checked the tendency to idolatry (2 Kings 23:4; 2
Chronicles 34:3); but it is quite possible that the pendulum swung back again when
his death left the idolatrous party in Judah free to act, and that this special
aggravation of the evil, the desecration of the Temple of Jehovah by “abominations”
of idol-worship, re-appeared together with the worship of the Queen of Heaven and
the sacrifices to Molech.
PETT, "Jeremiah 7:30
“For the children of Judah have done what is evil in my sight, the word of YHWH,
they have set their abominations in the house which is called by my name, to defile
it.”
The fault of the children of Judah was depicted as threefold:
· Firstly they had done evil in His sight, including their worship of the Queen
of Heaven, something confirmed by the infallible word of YHWH.
· Secondly they had set their abominations (Asherah images/poles; etc.) in the
very house that was called by His ame, an act of great blasphemy.
· Thirdly they had built high places in Topheth in order to offer their children
as sacrifices to the gods, thus committing mass murder and sacrilege.
The three activities together indicated a totality of evil.
‘They have done evil in His sight.’ They had turned after other gods, they had
worshipped Baal on the high hills, they had worshipped the Queen of Heaven in
their houses, and they had regularly broken the covenant by their ways, and it had
all been done in front of His very eyes. ‘For all things are open to the eyes of Him
with Whom we have to do’ (Hebrews 4:13).
‘They have set their abominations in the house which is called by My ame.’ They
had even gone so far as to set up abominations in His house, the house that bore the
very ame of YHWH. It is clear from this that (unless it is simply referring to their
past history, which is not likely as otherwise the fact that it was ion the past might
have been commended) they had images or pagan pillars or pagan altars in the
Temple itself, which suggests that this was written in the time of Jehoiakim (or
Zedekiah) because Josiah had previously cleared the Temple of such things in the
twelfth year of his reign (2 Chronicles 34:4) prior to Jeremiah’s call. This was thus a
new act, causing gross offence to YHWH, and demonstrating that they had failed to
learn the lessons of the past, but were instead repeating them.

149. 31 They have built the high places of Topheth in
the Valley of Ben Hinnom to burn their sons and
daughters in the fire—something I did not
command, nor did it enter my mind.
BAR ES, "Jer_7:31
The high places - Here, probably, not natural hills, but artificial mounts, on which
the altars were erected.
Tophet (marginal reference note) is not here a proper name; as applied to Baal-
worship the term is not an ordinary one, but almost unique to Jeremiah. Comparing this
verse with Jer_19:5; Jer_32:35, it will be found that Baal is in those passages substituted
for Tophet. Just as it is the practice of the prophets to substitute “Bosheth, shame,” for
Baal (see Jer_3:24), so here Jeremiah uses “Tophet, an object of abhorrence” (compare
Job_17:6 note), in just the same way.
Valley of the son of Hinnom - See Jos_15:8 note.
To burn ... - The children were not burned alive, but slain first Eze_16:21.
CLARKE, "Tophet - in the valley of the son of Hinnom - Tophet was the place
in that valley where the continual fires were kept up, in and through which they
consecrated their children to Moloch.
GILL, "And they have built the high places of Tophet,.... Where was the idol
Moloch; and which place had its name, as Jarchi thinks, from the beating of drums, that
the parents of the children that were burnt might not hear the cry of them: which is in
the valley of the son of Hinnom; a valley near Jerusalem, and lay to the south of it, Jos_
15:8,
to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire: which was done, as Jarchi
says, by putting them into the arms of the brasen image Moloch, heated hot. The account
he gives of Tophet is this,
"Tophet is Moloch, which was made of brass; and they heated him from his lower parts;
and his hands being stretched out, and made hot, they put the child between his hands,
and it was burnt; when it vehemently cried out; but the priests beat a drum, that the
father might not hear the voice of his son, and his heart might not be moved:''
but in this he is mistaken; for "Tophet" was not the name of an idol, but of a place, as is
clear from this and the following verse. There is some agreement between this account of

150. Jarchi, and that which Diodorus Siculus (z) gives of Saturn, to whom children were
sacrificed by the Carthaginians; who had, he says, a brasen image of Saturn, which
stretched out his hands, inclining to the earth; so that a child put upon them rolled
down, and fell into a chasm full of fire:
which I commanded them not: not in my law, as the Targum; nor by any of the
prophets, as Jarchi paraphrases it; he commanded them, as Kimchi observes, to burn
their beasts, but not their sons and daughters. The instance of Abraham offering up
Isaac will not justify it. The case of Jephthah's daughter, if sacrificed, was not by divine
command. The giving of seed to Moloch, and letting any pass through the fire to him, is
expressly forbidden, Lev_18:21,
neither came it into my heart; it was not so much as thought of by him, still less
desired, and much less commanded by him. Jarchi's note is,
"though I spoke to Abraham to slay his son, it did not enter into my heart that he should
slay him, but to make known his righteousness.''
JAMISO , "high places of Tophet — the altars [Horsley] of Tophet; erected to
Moloch, on the heights along the south of the valley facing Zion.
burn ... sons — (Psa_106:38).
commanded ... not — put for, “I forbade expressly” (Deu_17:3; Deu_12:31). See on
Jer_2:23; see on Isa_30:33.
CALVI , "Jeremiah in this verse also inveighs against those superstitions by which
the Jews had corrupted the true and pure worship of God. He says, that they had
builded high places, which was prohibited in the law. (Leviticus 26:30.) ow God, as
it has been before said, prefers obedience to all sacrifices, (1 Samuel 15:22 :) hence
the Prophet justly condemned them, that they forsook the Temple and built for
themselves high places or groves, and also altars.
He then mentions one particular place, even Tophet in the valley of Hinnom The
prophets, in order to render the place detestable, no doubt designated the infernal
regions by ‫תפת‬ , Tophet, and ‫הנם‬ ‫,גיא‬ gia enom. For when Isaiah speaks, in the
thirtieth chapter, of the eternal punishment of the wicked, he mentions Tophet,
which is the same word as we find here. As to the valley of Hinnom, it is called in
Greek Gehenna, and is taken to designate eternal death, or the torments which
await all the wicked. In a similar manner the word Paradise is metaphorically taken
for the blessed state and for the eternal inheritance; for God so placed man at first
in that eastern garden, that he might in a manner protect him under his own wings.
As then the blessing and favor of God shone on that place where Adam first dwelt,
that it might be a certain image of celestial life and of true happiness, so they called
the glory, prepared for all God’s children in heaven, Paradise. So also on the other
hand the prophets called hell ‫הנם‬ ‫,גיא‬ gia enom, in order that the Jews might detest
those impious and sacrilegious modes of worship by which their fathers had
polluted themselves. And for the same reason they call hell, Tophet. The ancients
also say, that it was a place in the suburbs of the city. They were not wont then to

151. assemble afar off for the sake of these abominations, since the place was within sight
of the Temple, and they knew that there was the only true altar approved by God,
and that it was not lawful to offer sacrifices anywhere else. Since they knew this,
and God had set such a place before their eyes, the greater was their madness, when
they preferred a filthy spot in which to worship God according to their own will, or
rather according to their own wantonness.
Of this so great an audacity Jeremiah now complains: They builded for themselves
high places, in Tophet, even in the valley He introduces the word son; but it is called
‫גיא‬ ‫,הנם‬ gia enom, the valley of Hinnom; whence comes the word Gehenna, as we
have already said.
He adds, that they might burn their sons and their daughters It was a horrible and
prodigious madness for parents not to spare their own children, but to cast them
into the fire; for they must have been so seized with a diabolic fury as to divest
themselves of all human feelings: and yet they had a plausible reason, as they
supposed; for it was a zeal worthy of all praise to prefer God to their own children.
When therefore they cast their children into the fire, this kind of zeal might have
deceived the simple; and to this was added a pretext derived from example, for
Abraham was prepared to sacrifice his own son. But it hence appears what men will
do when they are led away by an inconsiderate zeal; for from the beginning of the
world the source of all superstitions has been this, — that men have devised for
themselves various modes of worship, and have given themselves the liberty to seek
a way of their own to pacify God.
As to the pretended example, they were so blind as not to distinguish between
themselves and Abraham; for he was commanded to offer his son, (Genesis 22:2;)
but they, without any command, attempted to do the same thing; this was extreme
presumption. As to Abraham, he obeyed God; and he could not have been led
astray, when he knew that such a sacrifice was approved by God. But when the
Jews emulated his zeal, it was an extreme folly; and they were especially culpable,
because they neglected God’s command and wholly disregarded it. They were,
however, so far carried away by their own wantonness as to cast their own children
into the fire, and under the pretense of piety: so great and so savage a cruelty
prevailed among them. We hence perceive that there is no end of sinning, when men
give themselves up to their own inventions; for God surrenders those to Satan, that
they may be led by the spirit of giddiness and of madness and of stupidity. Let us
therefore learn ever to regard what God approves: and let this be the very
beginning of our inquiry, whenever we undertake anything, whether God
commands it; and this course ought especially to be observed with regard to his
worship; for, as it has been already stated, religion is especially founded on faith,
and faith is based on the word of God: and hence it is here added —
Which I commanded them not, and which never came to my mind This reason
ought to be carefully noticed, for God here cuts off from men every occasion for
making evasions, since he condemns by this one phrase, “I have not commanded
them,” whatever the Jews devised. There is then no other argument needed to

152. condemn superstitions, than that they are not commanded by God: for when men
allow themselves to worship God according to their own fancies, and attend not to
his commands, they pervert true religion. And if this principle was adopted by the
Papists, all those fictitious modes of worship, in which they absurdly exercise
themselves, would fall to the ground. It is indeed a horrible thing for the Papists to
seek to discharge their duties towards God by performing their own superstitions.
There is an immense number of them, as it is well known, and as it manifestly
appears. Were they to admit this principle, that we cannot rightly worship God
except by obeying his word, they would be delivered from their deep abyss of error.
The Prophet’s words then are very important, when he says, that God had
commanded no such thing, and that it never came to his mind; as though he had
said, that men assume too much wisdom, when they devise what he never required,
nay, what he never knew. It is indeed certain, that there was nothing hid from God,
even before it was done: but God here assumes the character of man, as though he
had said, that what the Jews devised was unknown to him, as his own law was
sufficient.
ow, as the words Tophet and Gehenna were so stigmatized by the prophets, we
may hence learn how displeasing to God is every idolatry and profanation of his
true and pure worship: for he compares these notorious places in which the Jews
performed so sedulously their devotions, to the infernal regions. And hence at this
day, when the Papists boast of what they call their devotions, we may justly say, that
there are as many gates, through which they throw themselves headlong into hell, as
there are modes of worship devised by them for the purpose of conciliating God. It
follows —
COKE, "Jeremiah 7:31. The high places of Tophet— The valley of Hinnom, or of
the son of Hinnom, was near Jerusalem, and was the scene of those horrid sacrifices
which the Israelites, in imitation of their idolatrous neighbours, made of their
Children to Moloch. Tophet was the particular spot in the valley where the fires
were made, into which the poor innocent victims were thrown; and is supposed to
have derived its name from the drums and tabrets, which were beaten in order to
drown the children's cries. The high places, ‫במות‬ bamoth, were in all probability
artificial mounts, or tumuli, thrown up about the place for the purpose of
performing some of the rites with which these sacrifices were accompanied; or from
which the persons assembled might command a view of the dreadful spectacle.
TRAPP, "Jeremiah 7:31 And they have built the high places of Tophet, which [is] in
the valley of the son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire;
which I commanded [them] not, neither came it into my heart.
Ver. 31. To burn their sons and their daughters.] Haply in a sinful imitation of
Abraham or Jephthah; or else after the example of the Canaanites [Deuteronomy
12:31] and other heathens, who thus sacrificed to the devil, commanding them so to
do by his oracles, though Hercules taught the Italians to offer unto him rather men
made of wax. (a)

153. ELLICOTT, "(31) High places.— ot the same word as in Jeremiah 7:29, but
bamoth, as in the “high places” of Baal, in umbers 22:41; umbers 23:3, the
Bamoth-baal of Joshua 13:17. The word had become almost technical for the
mounds, natural or (as in this passage) artificial, on which altars to Jehovah or to
other gods were erected, and appears in 1 Samuel 9:12; 1 Kings 3:4; Ezekiel 20:29;
Amos 7:9.
Tophet.—This appears to have been originally, not a local name, but a descriptive
epithet. The word appears in Job 17:6 (“by-word” in the Authorised version) as a
thing spat upon and loathed. Its use is probably therefore analogous to the scorn
with which the prophets substituted bosheth, the “shameful thing,” for Baal (e.g.,
Jeremiah 3:24; Jeremiah 11:13). When the prediction is repeated in Jeremiah 19:5;
Jeremiah 32:35, we have the “high places of Baal,” and “Tophet” here is obviously
substituted for that name in indignant contempt. The word in Isaiah 30:33, though
not identical in form (Tophteh, not Tophet), had probably the same meaning. Other
etymologies give as the meaning of the word “a garden,” “a place of burning,” or “a
place of drums,” i.e., a music grove, and so connect it more closely with the Molech
ritual. Possibly the last was the original meaning of the name, for which, as said
above, the prophets used the term of opprobrium.
The son of Hinnom.—Possibly the first recorded owner, or a local hero. The name is
perpetuated in later Jewish language in Ge-henna = Ge-Hinnom = the vale of
Hinnom. It was older than the Molech worship with which it became identified, and
appears in the “Doomsday Book” of Israel (Joshua 15:8; Joshua 18:16).
To burn their sons and their daughters.—The words are important as determining
the character of the act more vaguely described in Jeremiah 32:35, as “making to
pass through the fire.” The children were, in some cases at least, actually burnt,
though often, perhaps (see Ezekiel 16:21), slain first. Horrible as the practice seems
to us, it was part of the Canaanite or Phœnician worship of Molech or Malcom
(Leviticus 18:21; Leviticus 20:2-5), and had been practised by Ahaz (2 Kings 16:3; 2
Chronicles 28:3) and Manasseh (2 Kings 21:6; 2 Chronicles 33:6).
PETT, "Jeremiah 7:31
“And they have built the high places of Topheth, which is in the valley of the son of
Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire, which I did not
command, nor did it come into my mind.”
But even worse they had built the high places of Topheth. ‘Topheth’ may mean ‘the
hearth’ (tephath with the vowels altered to the vowels of bosheth = shame)
indicating that it was a place of burning. The high places were erected there for the
purpose of offering their children as human sacrifices ‘in the fire’. This was against
all that YHWH had taught. It was ‘beyond His imagination’. He had of course once
called Abraham to sacrifice his son, but only so that He could teach the lesson that
such sacrifice was not required (Genesis 22).

154. Topheth was in the valley of the sons of Hinnom, an ancient valley known by that
name in the time of Joshua (Joshua 15:8; Joshua 18:16), probably after its owner.
This valley was also used for the burning of refuse, something which eventually
made it a symbol of God’s fiery judgment (Gehenna = ge hinnom = the valley of
Hinnom). To look over the walls of Jerusalem at night at the refuse fires continually
burning far below in the valley must have been an awesome sight and readily
recalled God’s fiery judgment.
Elsewhere Jeremiah linked these sacrifices with the worship of Baal (‘lord’), see
Jeremiah 19:5, although in most of the Old Testament they are connected with the
fierce Ammonite god named Molech (melech = king, altered to take the vowels of
bosheth = shame) who was worshipped throughout the area (e.g. 2 Kings 23:10).
This suggests a certain syncretism between the two gods, which may well have taken
place because Molech was called ‘Lord Melech’ = Baal Melech = ‘Lord King’.
PULPIT, "The high places of Tophet; rather, the high places of the Topheth—(on
the "high places" (Hebrew bamoth)—here probably artificial mounds to erect the
altars upon, and on "the Topheth," see Commentary on 1 Kings). In the valley of
the son of Hinnom. Hitzig and others would take Hinnom as a noun meaning
"groaning" (Rashi, the great Jewish commentator. had already proposed this view),
which is at first sight very plausible. But this name of the valley is already found in
the description of the boundaries of Judah and Benjamin in Joshua 15:8; Joshua
18:16. To burn their sons, etc. (On the worship of Moloch (Saturn), see on Le
Joshua 18:21, and comp. Ezekiel 16:20, Ezekiel 16:21, from which it appears that
the children were first slain before being "caused to pass through the fire.")
32 So beware, the days are coming, declares the
Lord, when people will no longer call it Topheth
or the Valley of Ben Hinnom, but the Valley of
Slaughter, for they will bury the dead in Topheth
until there is no more room.
BAR ES, "Jer_7:32

155. The valley of slaughter - Where they killed their helpless children, there shall they
be slaughtered helplessly by their enemies.
Till there be no place - Rather, for want of room elsewhere.
CLARKE, "The valley of slaughter - The place where the slaughtered thousands
of this rebellious people shall be cast, in order to their being burnt, or becoming food for
the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air, Jer_7:33. These words are repeated, and
their meaning more particularly explained, Jer_19:6-15.
GILL, "Therefore, behold, the days come, saith the Lord,.... And they were
coming on apace; a little longer, and they would be come; for it was but a few years after
this ere Jerusalem was besieged and taken by the army of the Chaldeans, and the
slaughter made after mentioned:
that it shall no more be called Tophet: no more be used for such barbarous and
idolatrous worship; and no more have its name from such a shocking circumstance:
nor the valley of the son of Hinnom; as it had been from the times of Joshua:
but the valley of slaughter: or, "of the slain"; as the Targum, Septuagint, Syriac, and
Arabic versions; because of the multitude of men that should be killed there, or brought
there to be buried; as follows:
for they shall bury in Tophet till there be no place: till there be no more room to
bury there; or, "because there was no place" (a) elsewhere; the number of the slain being
so many: this was in righteous judgment, that where they had sacrificed their children,
there they should be slain, at least buried.
HE RY 32-34, " The destruction of Jerusalem appears here very terrible. That
speaks misery enough in general (Jer_7:29), The Lord hath rejected and forsaken the
generation of his wrath. Sin makes those the generation of God's wrath that had ben the
generation of his love. And God will reject and quite forsake those who have thus made
themselves vessels of wrath fitted to destruction. He will disown them for his. “Verily, I
say unto you, I know you not.” And he will give them up to the terrors of their own guilt,
and leave them in those hands. (1.) Death shall triumph over them, Jer_7:32. 33. Sin
reigns unto death; for that is the wages of it, the end of those things. Tophet, the valley
adjoining to Jerusalem, shall be called the valley of slaughter, for there multitudes shall
be slain, when, in their sallies out of the city and their attempts to escape, they fall into
the hands of the besiegers. Or it shall be called the valley of slaughtered ones, because
thither the corpses of those that are slain shall be brought to be buried, all other burying
places being full; and there they shall bury until there be no more place to make a grave.
This intimates the multitude of those that shall die by the sword, pestilence, and famine.
Death shall ride on prosperously, with dreadful pomp and power, conquering and to
conquer. The slain of the Lord shall be many. This valley of Tophet was a place where
the citizens of Jerusalem walked to take the air; but it shall now be spoiled for that use,
for it shall be so full of graves that there shall be no walking there, because of the danger

156. of contracting a ceremonial pollution by the touch of a grave. There it was that they
sacrificed some of their children, and dedicated others to Moloch, and there they should
fall as victims to divine justice. Tophet had formerly been the burying place, or burning
place, of the dead bodies of the besiegers, when the Assyrian army was routed by an
angel; and for this it was ordained of old, Isa_30:33. But they having forgotten this
mercy, and made it the place of their sin, God will now turn it into a burying place for the
besieged. In allusion to this valley, hell is in the New Testament called Gehenna - the
valley of Hinnom, for there were buried both the invading Assyrians and the revolting
Jews; so hell is a receptacle after death both for infidels and hypocrites, the open
enemies of God's church and its treacherous friends; it is the congregation of the dead;
it is prepared for the generation of God's wrath. But so great shall that slaughter be that
even the spacious valley of Tophet shall not be able to contain the slain; and at length
there shall not be enough left alive to bury the dead, so that the carcases of the people
shall be meat for the birds and beasts of prey, that shall feed upon them like carrion, and
none shall have the concern or courage to frighten them away, as Rizpah did from the
dead bodies of Saul's sons, 2 Sa. 28:26, Thy carcase shall be meat to the fowls and
beasts, and no man shall drive them away. Thus do the law and the prophets agree, and
the execution with both. The decent burying of the dead is a piece of humanity, in
remembrance of what the dead body has been - the tabernacle of a reasonable soul. Nay,
it is a piece of divinity, in expectation of what the dead body shall be at the resurrection.
The want of it has sometimes been an instance of the rage of men against God's
witnesses, Rev_11:9. Here it is threatened as an instance of the wrath of God against his
enemies, and is an intimation that evil pursues sinners even after death. (2.) Joy shall
depart from them (Jer_7:34): Then will I cause to cease the voice of mirth. God had
called by his prophets, and by less judgments, to weeping and mourning; but they
walked contrary to him, and would hear of nothing but joy and gladness, Isa_22:12, Isa_
22:13. And what came of it? Now God called to lamentation (Jer_7:29), and he made his
call effectual, leaving them neither cause nor heart for joy and gladness. Those that will
not weep shall weep; those that will not by the grace of God be cured of their vain mirth
shall by the justice of God be deprived of all mirth; for when God judges he will
overcome. It is threatened here that there shall be nothing to rejoice in. There shall be
none of the joy of weddings; no mirth, for there shall be no marriages. The comforts of
life shall be abandoned, and all care to keep up mankind upon earth cast off; there shall
be none of the voice of the bridegroom and the bride, no music, no nuptial songs. Nor
shall there be any more of the joy of the harvest, for the land shall be desolate,
uncultivated and unimproved. Both the cities of Judah and the streets of Jerusalem
shall look thus melancholy; and when they thus look about them, and see no cause to
rejoice, no marvel if they retire into themselves and find no heart to rejoice. Note, God
can soon mar the mirth of the most jovial, and make it to cease, which is a reason why
we should always rejoice with trembling, be merry and wise.
JAMISO , "valley of slaughter — so named because of the great slaughter of the
Jews about to take place at Jerusalem: a just retribution of their sin in slaying their
children to Moloch in Tophet.
no place — no room, namely, to bury in, so many shall be those slain by the
Chaldeans (Jer_19:11; Eze_6:5).

157. K&D, "Jer_7:32
Therefore God will make the place of their sins the scene of judgment on the sinners.
There shall come days when men will call the valley of these abominations the valley of
slaughter, i.e., shall make it into such a valley. Where they have sacrificed their children
to Moloch, they shall themselves be slaughtered, massacred by their enemies. And in this
valley, as an unclean place (Jer_19:13), shall they be buried "for want of room;" since,
because of the vast numbers of the slain, there will be nowhere else to put them.
CALVI , "The Prophet denounces a punishment, though the Jews thought that
they deserved a reward. The case is the same with the Papists at this day, who
thoughtlessly boast, when they heap together many abominations; for they think
that God is bound as it were by a law, not to overlook so much diligence. But the
Prophet shews how grossly deceived they are who worship God superstitiously,
without the authority of his word; for he threatens them here with the heaviest
judgment, — Called no more, he says, shall it be Tophet, nor The valley of the son of
Hinnom; but The valley of slaughter shall it be called; for the whole land was to be
filled with slaughters.
He adds, Bury shall they there, for elsewhere there will be no place (213) He
intimates that so great would be the slaughters, that Jerusalem would not contain
the dead: hence, he says, graves will be made in Tophet; and many also will be slain
there. A dead body, we know, was unclean by the Law; and it was not lawful to
offer sacrifices to God near graves. ( umbers 19:11.) The Prophet then shows, that
when the Jews foolishly consecrated that place to God, they committed a dreadful
profanation, for that place was to be wholly filled with dead bodies, and polluted
also by the slaughter of men. We hence see what the superstitious do when they
follow their own devices — that they provoke God’s wrath; for by the grievousness
of the punishment we may form a judgment as to the degree in which God
abominates all false modes of worship, which men devise without the warrant of his
law; for we must ever remember this principle, I commanded it not, nor hath it ever
come to my mind It follows —
COFFMA , ""Therefore the days come, saith Jehovah, it shall no more be called
Tophet, nor the Valley of the son of Hinnom, but the valley of Slaughter: for they
shall bury in Tophet till there be no place to bury. And the dead bodies of this
people shall be food for the birds of the heavens, and for the beasts of the earth; and
none shall frighten them away. Then will I cause to cease from the cries of Judah,
and from the streets of Jerusalem the voice of mirth and the voice of gladness, the
voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride; for the land shall become a
waste."
The horrible slaughter in the valley of Hinnom doubtless took place when Jerusalem
fell to Babylon. "Where once the people had butchered their children, they
themselves would be butchered and exposed to the birds of prey, left unburied and
exposed."[28]
There are overtones here that suggest the cataclysmic Judgment of the Last Day

158. that shall terminate the probation of Adam's race (Revelation 18:23-24).
COKE, "Jeremiah 7:32. But The valley of slaughter— The reason of this name is
given in the words immediately following; for they shall bury in Tophet till there be
no place:—"Till it is intirely filled, and there is no vacant space left." Houbigant
and the Vulgate render the last clause, And they shall bury in Tophet, because there
shall be no place; "Every other place shall be full of carnage, and Tophet shall
become the slaughtering-place of Jerusalem. There those dead bodies shall be cast
out, to which they shall not deign to grant sepulture. The time shall come when
there shall be so great a slaughter in Jerusalem, that, the graves being insufficient to
bury the dead, they shall be forced to throw them into Tophet, and leave them
without interment." This prediction received its last and most perfect
accomplishment in the war of ebuchadnezzar against the Jews, and that of the
Romans against the same people. Josephus informs us, that in this latter war an
infinite number of dead bodies were thrown over the walls, and left in the vallies
round the city; insomuch that Titus himself, beholding this spectacle, could not help
lifting up his hands to heaven, and calling God to witness that he had no part in
these inhuman practices. Josiah began to pollute Tophet, by casting filth into it, and
scattering there the dust and ashes of the idols which he had broken to pieces and
burned; See 2 Kings 23:10. Compare this with chap. 19: where Jeremiah repeats the
same threatenings with more latitude and force; declaring that Tophet shall become
the lay-stall of Jerusalem, and that Jerusalem herself shall be reduced to the
condition of Tophet; that is to say, polluted and filled with dead bodies. In chap.
Jeremiah 31:40 he calls it, The valley of the dead bodies. See Calmet.
TRAPP, "Jeremiah 7:32 Therefore, behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that it
shall no more be called Tophet, nor the valley of the son of Hinnom, but the valley of
slaughter: for they shall bury in Tophet, till there be no place.
Ver. 32. It shall no more be called Tophet.] Unless it be quasi Mophet, i.e.,
Portentum.
or the valley of the son of Hinnom.] As it had been called from Joshua’s days.
[Joshua 15:8]
But the valley of slaughter.] Or, Gehaharegah; for the great slaughter that the
Chaldees shall make there. Ecce congrua poena peccato, saith Oecolampadius.
For they shall bury in Tophet.] It shall become a polyandrion, or common burial
place, till there be no place or room left.
BE SO , "Verses 32-34
Jeremiah 7:32-34. It shall be no more called Tophet, but The valley of Slaughter —
King Josiah first of all defiled this place, as the text speaks, 2 Kings 23:10; that is,

159. polluted it by burying dead bodies in it, by casting filth into it, and scattering there
the dust and ashes of the idols which he had broken to pieces and burned. And
afterward, when great numbers died in the siege of Jerusalem, and the famine that
followed upon it, it became a common burying-place of the Jews: see Jeremiah 19:6.
Whereby was fulfilled that prophecy of Ezekiel 6:5, I will lay the dead carcasses of
the children of Israel before their idols. They shall bury in Tophet till there be no
place — Till it be entirely filled, and there be no vacant place left. The Vulgate reads
this clause, “They shall be buried in Tophet, because there shall be no place,” which
reading Houbigant approves. “The time shall come when there shall be so great a
slaughter in Jerusalem, that, the graves being insufficient to bury the dead, they
shall be forced to throw them into Tophet, and leave them without interment. This
prediction received its last and perfect completion in the war of ebuchadnezzar
against the Jews, and that of the Romans against the same people. Josephus informs
us, that in this latter war an infinite number of dead bodies were thrown over the
walls, and left in the valleys round the city; insomuch, that Titus himself, beholding
this spectacle, could not help lifting up his hands to heaven, and calling God to
witness that he had no part in these inhuman practices.” In chap. 19., Jeremiah
“repeats the same threatenings with more latitude and force; declaring that Tophet
shall become the lay-stall of Jerusalem, and that Jerusalem herself shall be reduced
to the condition of Tophet; that is to say, polluted and filled with dead bodies.” And
in Jeremiah 31:40, he calls it the valley of the dead bodies. Then will I cause to cease
the voice of mirth, &c. — All kinds and degrees of mirth shall cease, all places shall
be filled with lamentation and wo, their singing shall be turned into sighing, and
they shall lay aside all things that are for the comfort of human society. The voice of
the bridegroom, and the voice of the bride — Persons will have no encouragement to
marry when they see nothing but ruin and desolation before their eyes.
ELLICOTT, "(31) High places.— ot the same word as in Jeremiah 7:29, but
bamoth, as in the “high places” of Baal, in umbers 22:41; umbers 23:3, the
Bamoth-baal of Joshua 13:17. The word had become almost technical for the
mounds, natural or (as in this passage) artificial, on which altars to Jehovah or to
other gods were erected, and appears in 1 Samuel 9:12; 1 Kings 3:4; Ezekiel 20:29;
Amos 7:9.
Tophet.—This appears to have been originally, not a local name, but a descriptive
epithet. The word appears in Job 17:6 (“by-word” in the Authorised version) as a
thing spat upon and loathed. Its use is probably therefore analogous to the scorn
with which the prophets substituted bosheth, the “shameful thing,” for Baal (e.g.,
Jeremiah 3:24; Jeremiah 11:13). When the prediction is repeated in Jeremiah 19:5;
Jeremiah 32:35, we have the “high places of Baal,” and “Tophet” here is obviously
substituted for that name in indignant contempt. The word in Isaiah 30:33, though
not identical in form (Tophteh, not Tophet), had probably the same meaning. Other
etymologies give as the meaning of the word “a garden,” “a place of burning,” or “a
place of drums,” i.e., a music grove, and so connect it more closely with the Molech
ritual. Possibly the last was the original meaning of the name, for which, as said
above, the prophets used the term of opprobrium.

160. The son of Hinnom.—Possibly the first recorded owner, or a local hero. The name is
perpetuated in later Jewish language in Ge-henna = Ge-Hinnom = the vale of
Hinnom. It was older than the Molech worship with which it became identified, and
appears in the “Doomsday Book” of Israel (Joshua 15:8; Joshua 18:16).
To burn their sons and their daughters.—The words are important as determining
the character of the act more vaguely described in Jeremiah 32:35, as “making to
pass through the fire.” The children were, in some cases at least, actually burnt,
though often, perhaps (see Ezekiel 16:21), slain first. Horrible as the practice seems
to us, it was part of the Canaanite or Phœnician worship of Molech or Malcom
(Leviticus 18:21; Leviticus 20:2-5), and had been practised by Ahaz (2 Kings 16:3; 2
Chronicles 28:3) and Manasseh (2 Kings 21:6; 2 Chronicles 33:6).
PETT, "Jeremiah 7:32
“Therefore, behold, the days come, the word of YHWH, that it will no more be
called Topheth, nor The valley of the son of Hinnom, but The valley of Slaughter,
for they will bury in Topheth, until there is no place left for burying.”
Because of these evil sacrifices which took place there the name of the valley would
in the future be changed to ‘the valley of Slaughter’. This would be because it would
be used as a convenient burial ground, but so great would be the numbers to be
buried there as a result of the coming invasion that it would be filled up with graves
so much so that there would be no room for any more. It was certainly fitting that
those who sacrificed their own children there in such a terrible manner should find
themselves buried, or even left unburied, in the place where they had done it.
33 Then the carcasses of this people will become
food for the birds and the wild animals, and there
will be no one to frighten them away.
GILL, "And the carcasses of this people shall be meat for the fowls of the
heaven, and for the beasts of the earth,.... That is, those which remain unburied,
for which there will be found no place to bury them in; all places, particularly Tophet,
being so full of dead bodies; not to have a burial, which is here threatened, was
accounted a great judgment:

161. and none shall fray them away; or frighten them away; that is, drive away the fowls
and the beasts from the carcasses. The sense is, either that there should be such a vast
consumption of men, that there would be none left to do this, and so the fowls and
beasts might prey upon the carcasses without any disturbance; or else that those that
were left would be so devoid of humanity, as not to do this office for the dead.
JAMISO , "fray — scare or frighten (Deu_28:26). Typical of the last great battle
between the Lord’s host and the apostasy (Rev_19:17, Rev_19:18, Rev_19:21).
K&D, "Jer_7:33
Even the number of the dead will be so great that the corpses shall remain unburied,
shall become food for beasts of prey, which no one will scare away. This is taken almost
literally from Deu_28:26.
CALVI , "Jeremiah threatens them with something more grievous than death
itself, — that God would impress the marks of his wrath even on their dead bodies.
It is indeed true what a heathen poet says,
“That the loss of a grave is not great,” ( Virgil, aeneid;)
but we must on the other hand remember that burying has been held as a sacred
custom in all ages; for it was a symbol of the last resurrection. Barbarous then were
the words, “Give me a stick, if you fear that birds will eat my dead body;” as the
cynic, who had ordered his body to be cast into the field, derided what was said in
answer to him, “The wild beasts and birds will devour thee:” “Oh,” said he, “let me
have a stick, and I will drive them away;” intimating by such a saying, that he
would then be without any feeling; but he shewed that he entertained no hope of
immortality. But it was God’s will that the custom of burying should prevail among
all nations, that in death itself there might be some evidence or intimation of the last
resurrection. When therefore the Prophet declares here and in other places that the
Jews would be without a burial, he doubtless enhances the vengeance of God.
We indeed know that some of the most holy men had not been buried; for the
prophets were sometimes exposed to wild beasts and birds: and the whole Church
complains in Psalms 79:2, that the dead bodies of the saints were exposed and
became food for birds and wild beasts. This has sometimes happened; for God often
mixes the good with the evil in temporal punishments, as he makes his sun to rise on
the good and the evil: but yet of itself and for the most part, it is an evidence of a
curse, when a man’s body is cast away without any burial.
It is this then that the Prophet means when he says, The carcase of this people shall
be meat for the birds of the air and for the beasts of the earth, and there will be
none to terrify them; (214) that is, there will be no one to perform the humane office
of driving the beasts away, the very thing which nature itself would lead one to do.
If any one now objects and says, that in this case the faithful could not be
distinguished from the reprobate, the answer is plainly this, — that when the honor

162. of a burial is denied to the faithful, God will become the avenger. But this does not
prove that God does not in this way inflict a visible punishment on the reprobate,
and thus expose them to reproach by whom he has been despised. He afterwards
adds —
And the carcase of this people shall be for meat
To the bird of heaven and to the beast of the earth,
And there will be no terrifier.
— Ed.
TRAPP, "Jeremiah 7:33 And the carcases of this people shall be meat for the fowls
of the heaven, and for the beasts of the earth; and none shall fray [them] away.
Ver. 33. And the carcases of this people,] (a) Their murrain carcases, as the Vulgate
rendereth it.
Shall be meat for the fowls of the heaven.] Whereby we may also understand the
devils of hell, saith Oecolampadius.
PETT, "Jeremiah 7:33
“And the dead bodies of this people will be food for the birds of the heavens, and for
the beasts of the earth, and none will frighten them away.”
But worse. Many alive at that time would be slain without there being room to bury
them, with the result that their dead bodies would be flung on the ground and left
for the vultures, and for scavenging beasts like the jackal. Such exposure was
usually the fate of criminals and was looked on as the ultimate disgrace. And
because the living would all be in exile there would be no one left to scare such
scavengers away (contrast 2 Samuel 21:10). This would be a literal fulfilment of the
curse in Deuteronomy 28:26, (which should be consulted).
34 I will bring an end to the sounds of joy and
gladness and to the voices of bride and
bridegroom in the towns of Judah and the streets
of Jerusalem, for the land will become desolate.

163. BAR ES, "Silence and desolation are to settle upon the whole land.
CLARKE, "Then will I cause to cease - the voice of mirth - There shall no
longer be in Jerusalem any cause of joy; they shall neither marry nor be given in
marriage, for the land shall be totally desolated. Such horrible sins required such a
horrible punishment. And they must be horrible, when they move God to destroy the
work of his own hands.
GILL, "Then will I cause to cease from the cities of Judah, and from the
streets of Jerusalem,.... Signifying that the devastation should not only be in and
about Jerusalem, but should reach all over the land of Judea; since in all cities, towns,
and villages, would cease
the voice of mirth, and the voice of gladness; upon any account whatever; and,
instead of that, mourning, weeping, and lamentation:
the voice of the bridegroom, and the voice of the bride; no marrying, and giving
in marriage, and so no expressions of joy on such occasions; and consequently no
likelihood, at present, of repeopling the city of Jerusalem, and the other cities of Judah:
for the land shall be desolate; without people to dwell in it, and till it. The
Septuagint, Syriac, and Arabic versions, read, "the whole land".
JAMISO , "Referring to the joyous songs and music with which the bride and
bridegroom were escorted in the procession to the home of the latter from that of the
former; a custom still prevalent in the East (Jer_16:9; Isa_24:7, Isa_24:8; Rev_18:23).
K&D, "Jer_7:34
Thus the Lord will put an end to all joyfulness in life throughout the land: cf. Hos_
2:13; Eze_26:13. The voice of the bridegroom and the bride is a circumlocution for the
mirth of marriage festivities; cf. 1 Macc. 9:39. All joy will be dumb, for the land shall
become a waste; as the people had been warned, in Lev_26:31, Lev_26:33, would be the
case if they forsook the Lord.
CALVI , "He still continues the same subject; for he denounces on the Jews the
punishment which they had deserved. He more fully expresses what he mentioned in

164. the last verse respecting the shameful and dreadful barbarity that would follow the
slaughter; for the whole country would not only be harassed by the enemy, but
wholly laid waste: for when sounds of joy and gladness cease, all places are filled
with lamentations; and when no marriages are celebrated, it is a sign of devastation.
But by marriage, the Prophet, stating a part for the whole, understands whatever
was necessary for the preservation of society; it is the same as though he had said,
“There shall be now no marrying:” for without marriages the human race cannot
continue. Hence this cessation would be the same, as though he had said, that they
would be wholly regardless of all those things necessary to perpetuate mankind. He
thus adds nothing new, but expands what we have before observed, — that the
whole land would be filled with dead bodies, and that there would be such
lamentation as to deter men from all their usual and ordinary habits: he afterwards
shews more fully the same thing.
COKE, "Verse 34
Jeremiah 7:34. Then will I cause to cease, &c.— "There shall be no more marriages;
no more shall the voice of mirth and rejoicing be heard; or the sound of musical
instruments, which usually attends this sort of festivals." See Pindar's third Pythian
Ode, line 30.
REFLECTIO S.—1st, This chapter begins a new sermon and prophesy, designed,
as the former, to lead the people to repentance.
1. Directions are given to the prophet what to speak, and where to deliver his
message. He must proclaim the word of the Lord, without adding thereto, or
diminishing therefrom; and stand in the gate of the house of the Lord, the most
frequented place, where those who came up to worship might hear; probably at one
of the three great festivals, when the concourse was greatest. ote; (1) A large
auditory is desirable, where the words of truth are dispensed. (2.) We must not be
afraid of being censured for extravagant zeal: when in general the ministers of the
sanctuary are careless, we cannot be faithful without being singular.
2. The general contents of his discourse are, an exhortation to repentance, with a
gracious promise annexed. Thus saith the Lord of hosts, at whose command, and by
whose authority, he speaks, the God of Israel, whom they, as his people, are
peculiarly bound to obey; Amend your ways, and your doings; make a thorough
change in them, for they are at present utterly perverse; and I will cause you to
dwell in this place; to enjoy their land, and the temple service, and not remove into
captivity, as would infallibly be the case if they continued impenitent.
3. He specifies the particulars, which immediately, heartily, and thoroughly, must be
amended; and they are summed up in two points, as being their grand evils,
oppression and idolatry. They must be just; their magistrates impartial; no allowed
dishonesty permitted in their dealings; the fatherless and widows must not be
injured, nor innocent blood any more defile the land; and all false gods must be

165. utterly rejected and abhorred: then God will make their abode in the good land
given to their fathers both safe and lasting. ote; God only saith to the sinner, Do
thyself no harm: all that he requires of us is purely for our own good and happiness.
4. He rebukes their vain confidence, and urges them no longer to trust in their
formal duties and external privileges. The false prophets magnified the outward
service of the temple, as if in this all godliness consisted; and they readily embraced
a religion which rested in mere externals of worship, and required no inward
mortification of sin. The temple of the Lord was ever in their mouths, their boast
and confidence; and while thrice a-year they attended there, they thought they
fulfilled their duty. But alas! these were lying words, a delusive hope, which could
not profit them, while they looked no further than the ritual service, and exercised
no faith in the Messiah, which alone gave it any efficacy, and especially while all
their sins continued unrepented of, and indulged. Will ye steal? or, ye do steal. He
expostulates on their absurdity, and charges them with abominations. They
continued in murder, theft, perjury, adultery, idolatry; and yet dared appear before
God in the temple, as if their sacrifices could atone for their crimes; and impudently
affected still to pass for true servants and worshippers of God; saying in their
words, or, which spoke as loud, in their actions, we are delivered to do all these
abominations; either they thought themselves at liberty to sin, after they had
appeared at the temple with their sacrifices; or, that having been delivered so long,
they might go on still with impunity in their iniquities. This with deepest indignation
God beholds, and upbraids them with. Is this house, which is called by my name,
become a den of robbers in your eyes? as robbers take refuge in their den, so did
they in the temple, thinking to cover their enormities with the cloak of ceremonies
and sacrifices; but vain before God were these wretched coverings. Behold, I have
seen it, saith the Lord, their hypocrisy great as their impiety. ote; (1.) Many pride
themselves in a form of godliness, who are strangers to the power of it; and, while
they boast of the church, and their attendance thrice in a year at the Lord's table,
are in fact the farthest from the kingdom of God. (2.) To plead the sacrifice of Christ
for sin, as a licence to continue in it, is the most detestable abuse of Gospel grace. (3.)
Few dare avow what, notwithstanding, their conduct evidently declares. (4.) The
guise of godliness may pass upon men, but no hypocrisy can be concealed from the
heart-searching God.
5. He sets before them, for their admonition, and to shew the vanity of their hopes,
the destruction of Israel, notwithstanding the tabernacle once pitched in Shiloh. Let
them go thither, and read, on the ruins of this once-famed abode of God's ark, the
insufficiency of that protection, when the wickedness of the worshippers, and of the
priests, provoked God's wrath against them, Joshua 18:1. 1 Samuel 4:4-11. Psalms
78:60-67 and such would be their doom, since such had been their sins. With like
abominations they had offended God, and equally deaf to the repeated admonitions
of God's prophets had they been; therefore the temple and city of Jerusalem shall
become as Shiloh, a desolation, and God will cast off the whole people of Judah, as
he had already done by their brethren of Israel, who were gone long since into
captivity. ote; (1.) God's judgments on others are warnings to us to avoid their
ways, if we would escape their punishment. (2.) They who follow the examples of

166. sinners will surely suffer with them. (3.) They who are cast off from God are truly
miserable, and must, as the necessary consequence, be shortly cast down into hell.
2nd, Their own prayers and services were so hypocritical and abominable, that no
good could be expected from them; but the prophet still continued their advocate,
and his prayers were usually more or less availing; but God will cut off from them
every resource.
1. He is forbidden to pray for them. Much as the prophet had their salvation at
heart, God's decree is fixed, prayer comes too late, their ruin is determined. ote;
(1.) They who preach to sinners must pray for them; yea, though they revile and
persecute. (2.) In a desperate state is that people, concerning whom God refuses to
be intreated, and shuts up the mouths of his prophets.
2. God assigns the reasons for his prohibition; their impudent iniquities, and
incorrigible obstinacy. Openly, in the cities of Judah, yea, in the very streets of
Jerusalem, under the prophet's eye, unawed by his presence, and unaffected with
his warnings, they performed their idolatrous rites, offering meat-offerings and
drink-offerings to the queen of heaven, the moon, consecrated for a goddess, and to
their other idols; and in this work all ages and sexes joined; so universal was the
corruption spread! The very children gathered the wood, while their fathers kindled
the fire, and the women kneaded the cakes, to provoke God to anger. See how
carefully idolaters initiated betimes their children in the service of their idols; shall
we be less solicitous to instruct ours in the knowledge of the living God? Could they
so freely part with their bread and wine in these detestable rites; and shall not we
more liberally in God's service break our bread to the hungry, and open our bottle
to the thirsty?
3. He threatens them with the dire consequences of this conduct. Do they provoke
me to anger? o: such perturbation as we feel, enters not into the Eternal Mind. Or
does he receive any damage by their wickedness? o: as their goodness could not
add to his self-sufficient bliss and happiness, neither can their wickedness take from
it. The hurt that they do is only to themselves, bringing upon their own heads swift
destruction. Therefore thus saith the Lord God, Behold, mine anger and my fury
shall be poured out upon this place; a deluge of wrath, such as swept away the
world of the ungodly, or which fell upon devoted Sodom. The temple and city shall
be utterly destroyed; both man and beast be consumed; and the very trees and fruits
of the ground devoured by the fire of divine wrath. It shall burn with irresistible
fury, and shall not be quenched. And herein we have an awful representation of the
punishment of all the wicked in hell, who depart accursed into everlasting fire.
3rdly, As they placed so much dependance on their sacrifices to procure their
acceptance with God, God will have them know that these are insignificant and
vain, while they mistook their end, and perverted their institution. Put your burnt-
offerings unto your sacrifices, and eat flesh; either give over such vain oblations,
and use them rather at your own tables; or add never so many or expensive
offerings, and pretend never so religiously to eat them before the Lord; they are

167. utterly unacceptable, while the love and power of sin remain unsubdued in your
hearts. For,
1. Obedience, not sacrifice, is the great thing which God requires. The ten
commandments were first delivered to their fathers in the wilderness; and, though
sacrifices were afterwards instituted, it was not for their own sake, but in order to
lead them by faith to the great Antetype, whose atonement was therein represented;
exclusive of which, they were utterly useless and unacceptable. The principal part,
therefore, of the Sinai covenant was, Obey my voice; and to this the promise was
annexed, I will be your God, and ye shall be my people; protecting them from their
enemies, and preserving them in the possession of the promised land; and as long as
they thus carefully walked in all God's ways, so long it should be well with them,
and prosperity continually attend them.
2. Disobedience to the moral law is their great offence, and this had been their case
from their very coming out of Egypt to that day. Their fathers and they had
together rejected God's law, to walk after the imagination of their own evil heart;
and, instead of advancing in the ways of holiness and happiness, turned back into
the paths of sin and misery, and this in opposition to long and repeated warnings,
brought them from those divinely-appointed ministers, whom God from time to time
raised up to admonish them of the evil and danger of their ways. Instead of
amending, every generation grew worse, and more hardened, till the measure of
their iniquities now rose to the brim; therefore the prophet is commanded to speak
all these words unto them; those charges of their rebellion and obstinacy, and those
warnings of their impending ruin. ot that these would have any effect; God
foretels him, that they would not hearken, nor answer to his calls: but, to leave them
inexcusable in their wickedness, thou shalt say unto them. This is a nation that
obeyeth not the voice of the Lord their God, which relation aggravated their
disobedience; nor receiveth correction; they will not be taught by the word, nor
reclaimed by the rod: truth is perished, and is cut off from their mouth; they are
false and faithless to God and man; nothing but lies, insincerity, and hypocrisy, are
to be found among them, and therefore nothing but ruin to be expected. ote; We
must not cease to admonish sinners, though we see no prospect of reclaiming them;
we must speak, if but for a testimony against them.
4thly, Jerusalem, in the prospect of her approaching desolations, is called upon to
cut off her hair, in token of deepest mourning, Job 1:20 and on the high places, the
scene of her abominations, to lift up an exceeding bitter cry, as rejected of God,
devoted to wrath, and given up into the hands of her cruel enemies.
1. Her sin is exceeding sinful. They have done evil in my sight, saith the Lord;
continued in a course of open and daring impiety: particularly their abominable
idolatries provoked him, which they had carried to such an enormous height, that in
God's own house they had dared to set up their images, and rear their altars, as if
they designed on purpose to defile that holy place; and their sacrifices were as
horrid and inhuman as their deities were detestable. They built the high places of
Tophet, where Moloch's hated image stood, and, deaf to the cries of nature, and the

168. shrieks of murdered infants, their parents, lost to every feeling of natural affection,
burnt their children in the fire. It is said, that this was performed by heating the
brazen idol red hot, and then the parent laid the child on his arms, while the priests
beat drums to drown the horrid shrieks and cries: sacrifices which God never
commanded, and such as he never thought of enjoining his worshippers. ote;
When sin has hardened the heart, it is amazing to what a pitch of barbarity and
inhumanity men may go.
2. The vengeance denounced for this is exceedingly terrible. Tophet, the scene of
these abominations, shall shortly change its name for the valley of slaughter, or of
the slain; for there shall multitudes fall by the sword, or be carried thither to be
buried; multitudes so great, that graves shall be wanting for them, and the unburied
corpses lie for meat to the fowls of heaven, and beasts of the earth, and not a man
left to carry them away. Deserted now are the streets of Jerusalem; no voice of joy is
heard, no congratulations of the bride or bridegroom, but the sound of mournful
lamentations; or the land is become so desolate, that none are left to weep, and more
melancholy silence reigns. ote; God will soon change sinful mirth into everlasting
mourning: we need rejoice with trembling.
TRAPP, "Jeremiah 7:34 Then will I cause to cease from the cities of Judah, and
from the streets of Jerusalem, the voice of mirth, and the voice of gladness, the voice
of the bridegroom, and the voice of the bride: for the land shall be desolate.
Ver. 34. Then will I cause to cease.] Laetitia in luctum convertetur, plausus in
planctum, &c. Their singing shall be turned into sighing, their hollowing into
howling, &c.
The voice of the bridegroom.] o catches or canzonets shall be sung at weddings; no
Epithalamia
ELLICOTT, "(34) Then will I cause to cease . . . the voice of mirth.—The special
imagery of the picture of desolation is characteristic of Jeremiah (Jeremiah 16:9;
Jeremiah 25:10; Jeremiah 33:11). o words could paint the utter break-up of the
life of the nation more forcibly. othing is heard but wailing and lamentation, or,
more terrible even than that, there is the utter silence of solitude. The capacity for
joy and the occasions for rejoicing (comp. 1 Maccabees 9:39 for the bridal rejoicings
of Israel) belong alike to the past.
Shall be desolate.—The same word as in the “waste places” of Isaiah 51:3; Isaiah
58:12; it is used in Ezekiel 13:4 for the haunts of the “foxes,” or rather the “jackals”
of the “deserts,” but always of places that, having been once inhabited, have fallen
into ruins (Leviticus 26:31).
PETT, "Jeremiah 7:34

169. “Then will I cause to cease from the cities of Judah, and from the streets of
Jerusalem, the voice of mirth and the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom
and the voice of the bride, for the land will become a waste.”
At that time YHWH would remove all joy from the people. The voice of mirth and
gladness, and the voice of the bride and bridegroom, would be heard no more in the
cities of Judah and the streets of Jerusalem, because the whole land would have
been laid waste. Bride and bridegroom were especially mentioned because they were
seen as representing the pinnacle of human happiness. But even they would have no
cause for rejoicing. It was also at weddings that men knew the highest level of
merriment, when the wine flowed freely, even for the poor. But there would be none
now, for there would be nothing to celebrate. It may also be as an indication that life
had come completely to a halt. Marriage would simply become a reminder of what
had been.
PULPIT, "The land shall be desolate; rather, shall become a waste. The curse
denounced upon the disobedient people in Le 26:31, 33 (for another parallel
between this chapter and Leviticus 26:1-46; see Leviticus 26:23). In both passages
the word for "waste" is khorbah, which, as Dr. Payne Smith remarks, is "used only
of places which, having once been inhabited, have then fallen into ruin." Hebrew is
rich in synonyms for the idea of "desolation."