CHAPTER 17

4. Refutation of the objection (16:10) that the people had not generally served idols

17:1–4

1          The sin of Judah is written with an iron stylus,1

Graven with a diamond point on the tablet of their heart,

On the horns of their altars;

2     As their children remember their altars,

And their images of Baal2 by3 the green trees, by the high hills.

3     My mountain together with4 the fields,

Thy substance and all thy treasures will I give up to spoil,

Thy heights!—for thy sin in all thy borders.

4     And thou shalt withhold thy hand from the inheritance which I have given thee;

And I cause thee to serve thy enemies in a land that thou knowest not:

For ye have kindled a fire in my nostrils that shall burn forever.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

The denial of having sinned against Jehovah (16:10) must mean that the fact of idolatry is denied. Against such a bold and shameless assertion the prophet rises here with visibly increasing indignation. He says that the sin of Judah is certified, and as it were, recorded in the archives, viz. (a in their own conscience, in which the memory of their idolatrous abominations is fixed like an ineffaceable brand, and (b) externally, on the horns of the altars, where the blood of the slaughtered children adheres as an equally ineffaceable memorial (Jer 17:1). These two testimonies were just as deep and inextinguishable to them, the actors present, as to the children the impression of that horrible cult which had snatched away so many from their midst would remain unforgetable. And so deep was this impression, that the mere sight of green trees and high hills was sufficient to refresh it continually (Jer 17:2). On the basis of the facts thus certified, the prophet repeats the announcement of the divine punishments, which will consist in plunder of substance, desolation of the land, according to the analogy of the year of release, and deportation into an unknown land (Jer 17:3 and 4).

Jer 17:1 and 2.5The sin of Judah … high hills.ORIGEN (Hom. XVI. ed. Lommatzsch., S. 301), ISID. HISP. (De Pass. Dom., Jer 22). GHISLER (ad h. l.) by Judah here understand Judas Iscariot.—Iron stylus. Comp. Job 19:24.—diamond point, שָׁמִיר, which occurs besides, in this sense, only in Ezek. 3:9; Zech. 7:12, appears to designate especially the diamond, which serves as a pointed cutting instrument, since everywhere else (Isai. 5:9; 7:23–25; 9:17; 10:17; 27:4) it is used in the meaning of “thorn.” Comp. HERZOG, Real-Enc. III., S. 642; WINER, R.-W.-B. I., S. 284.—On the tablet, etc. Passing momentary events make only a superficial impression. But whatever has exercised a long-continued and intensive activity is deeply graven. In opposition to the assertion (Jer 17:10) that Israel has not sinned against the Lord, the prophet points to the continuance of idolatry among the people, and the deep, inextinguishable traces, which it has left behind. These are double; of an external and internal sort. Internally is the conscience, the remembrance, the whole spiritual habitus, which keeps before Israel the fact of the long practised idolatry. Externally are the idol-altars, with the blood of the children offered upon them, crying towards heaven, which testify of the sin to all the world. It is therefore audacity on the part of the people to pretend that they have forgotten the fact. The expression write on the table of the heart is found also in Prov. 3:3; 7:3.—horns of the altars. That the idol-altars are meant is evident 1, from the plural, for there was but a single altar of Jehovah (J. D. MICHAELIS); 2, from the connection, for Israel’s sin was to be read only on the idol-altars, not on the altar of the Lord,—or on the latter only in so far as they had perhaps used it for idolatrous worship (comp. 2 Chron. 15:3; WINER, s. v. Brandopferaltar). The altars in Jer 17:2 are doubtless also those of the idols, and identical with those mentioned in Jer 17:1.—On the horns of the altar of burnt offering and the sprinkling of these with the blood of the guilt offering, comp. Exod. 27:2 (coll. Ps. 118:27); 29:12; Lev. 4:18, 25, 30, 34; 8:15; 9:9. That the idol-altars also had such horns is clear from Am. 3:14. Comp. WINER, R.-W.-B. s. v. Hörner.—Their altars, lit., youraltars. On the change of person comp. rems. on 5:14; 12:13.—remember. We may reject at the outset the ungrammatical explanations which either take כְּ=לְ (so that their children remember, LUTHER, ZWINGLE, substantially CALVIN) or understand God as the subject of remember (SEB. SCHMIDT, CLERICUS, CH. B. MICHAELIS). All those interpretations are at least very harsh, which regard the Jews as the subject, (ut recordantur filiorum suorum ita altarium, etc., i.e., their altars are as dear to their hearts as their children, R. SALOMO, D. KIMCHI, ABARBANEL, DIODATUS, MAURER; remembering their children, they remember also the altars on which they offered them, HITZIG) or which take כְּ in the sense of because, if, (JEROME, Chald., Arab., and many later) or which find the apodosis in Jer 17:3 (EWALD, UMBREIT). Since in Jer 17:1 there is evidently likewise the idea of a monumentum, a record assuring a perpetual remembrance, the reciprocal relation of Jer 17:1 and 2 is indicated at the outset. There is a third memorial of the sin denied by the Israelites, the testimony of which is the more unexceptionable as it proceeds from the mouth of children (Ps. 8:3; Matth. 21:16): the remembrance by the children of that horrible worship to which so many from their midst fell a sacrifice. The prophet points to an effect of that horrid ritual, which is not indeed elsewhere expressly testified, but is in itself entirely natural. Why should not Moloch have been the terror of the Israelitish children, when there was such real and sad ground for it, as is wanting in other bugbears which terrify the children of the present day?—Their children is therefore the subject of remember, and the construction is as ex. gr., 5:26; 6:7. Comp. NAEGELSB. Gr., § 95, 2.—Images, etc. The אֲשֵׁרִים are the masculine images of Baal [not of Astarte, as HENDERSON.—S. R. A.] (comp. 1 Ki. 14:23; 2 Ki. 17:10; 23:14, etc.) as אֲשֵׁרוֹת are primarily and in general the images corresponding to the female principle of Baal. What was their form is still undecided, also whether they had special relation to the service of Moloch. Should the latter not be the case, yet their relation to the murderous rites of child-sacrifice is beyond a doubt. For children were offered to Baal in all his forms, comp. 7:31; 19:5; 32:35. HERZOG, Real-Enc. I. S. 638; IX., S. 715.—By the green trees, על־עץ. HITZIG and GRAF rightly take עַל here in a causal sense connecting it with remember, not with altars. If the place was to be designated where the altars and images stood, we cannot conceive why the prophet should write “on green trees,” and deviate from the stereotyped form of “under every green tree.” It is accordingly more probable that it is to express that the mere sight of green trees and high hills awoke in the Israelite children the remembrance of those terrible altars and images. We can certainly show no passage in which עַל is used, after a verb of remembrance, of that which occasioned the remembrance. But all those passages are analogous in which עַל designates the occasioning circumstances in general, ex. gr., Gen. 26:7, 9; Ps. 44:32; 1 Sam. 4:13. Comp. עַל־מָה, Jer. 9:11; Job 13:14.

Jer 17:3. My mountain … in all thy borders. The words הררי בשׂדה are either connected with the preceding context in various ways (JEROME: Sacrificantes in agro; Syr.: in montibus et in deserto; Chald.: Super montes in agro; Arab.: in montibus et in agris;R. SALOMO, ABARBANEL, KIMCHI: O mons mi, qui in agro es, as a designation of Jerusalem, to which the previous context is addressed; ZWINGLI: ut filii recordantur ararum … collium, montium et agrorum;EWALD, MEIER: הַרְרֵי בַשָּׂדֶה as in apposition to גְּבָעוֹת), or with the following, when it is either rendered as in the vocative, and Zion, as the high place of the country και’ ἐξοχήν, or Israel as sacrificing on mountains, or fleeing to mountains (CALVIN), is understood by it, or it is connected with thy heights (LUTHER), or as an accusative with thy substance (montem meum una cum agro … dabo, GESENIUS, GAAB, ROSENMUELLER, UMBREIT). HITZIG calls attention to 18:14; 21:13, where Zion is designated as צוּר שָׂדַי and צוּר הֵמִּישֹׁר. But here the connection is quite different. In this place the prophet would evidently say that all property, movable and immovable, divine and human, dedicated to the service of God and the service of idols will be given up to plunder on account of their intensive (Jer 17:1, 2), as extensive and universally diffused sin (in all thy borders). For this reason also I do not believe that mountain is to be rendered as in the vocative. It is rather accusative, dependent on I will give, and the explanation already mentioned as that of GESENIUS, GAAB, ROSENMUELLER and UMBREIT, is the correct one. The mountain of the Lord also is desecrated; it therefore, in so far as it contains property that can be so treated, will also, like the fruitful field, be given up to plunder. The prophet says fields, because he wishes to designate only the land, which produces substance and treasures, or things that may be plundered. Thy substance and all, etc., is a more particular explanation of my mountain. It tells us how a mountain and fields can be plundered. Thy substance, thy treasures have primary reference to fields. But that also which the mountain contained belonged in a certain respect to the people, and they were likewise despoiled of it. On the subject comp. 27:16; 28:3; 52:17 sqq.—Thy heights is in antithesis to my mountain. Even the sanctuaries dedicated to the idols were to be objects of spoliation. It is clear that thy heights is governed by give, but its abrupt position is strange. If we could connect exclusively with for thy sin, this difficulty would be removed. But not only the high places, but all that has been previously mentioned is given up on account of their sin. SYRUS and the Arabic (MS. Oxon), omit thy heights altogether. HITZIG translates “for atonement,” comparing Zech. 14:17; Deut. 29:11, and with respect to the construction, Deut. 21:29. But the expression in all thy borders would then be quite feeble and superfluous. GRAF after GESENIUS, DE WETTE and others:—Thy heights with the sin cleaving thereto I give up. But was it necessary to guard against the thought that the Lord would give up the heights without the sin, or that He would omit the latter? How is such a separation of the heights and the sin even conceivable? Thy heights may then be regarded as an emphatic asyndeton.—For thy sin. Comp. Mic. 1:5; 2 Kings 24:3.—In all thy borders. This addition corresponds exactly to the previously stated extent of the punishment: Since the sin has been universally diffused, so all the possessions in the whole land will be made the means of punishment.

Jer 17:4. And thou shalt … forever. In this verse ובך causes the only difficulty. It has been either entirely passed over (SYRUS, Arab., LUTHER), or explained in a more or less forced manner, as unfreely (VATABLE), by thy iniquity, naked and bare, alone (so JEROME, on the ground of which EWALD would alter to לְבָדָד). But it is evident that Jeremiah had in view Deut. 15:2, 3. This has been recognized by many expositors. Some (ex. gr., SEB. SCHMIDT, ROSENM.) supply, therefore, יָדְֽךָ from Deut. 15:2. J. D. MICHAELIS was the first to suppose that יָדְֽךָ alone should be read. GRAF expresses this distinctly, and without doubt correctly. For on the one hand וּבְךָ, however interpreted, yields no satisfactory meaning. On the other hand the expression שׁמטּ יד מן ו׳, withhold thy hand, etc., corresponds perfectly to the connection. The year of release (comp. Deut. 15:1–13), so called from the שְׁמִטָּה, the release of the debtor from the oppressive hand of the creditor, coincides with the Sabbatic year (comp. Exod. 23:10, 11; Levit. 25:1–7), in which the land is to remain uncultivated (comp. SAALSCHUETZ, Mos. Recht., S. 162 ff.; HERZOG, R-Enc. XIII., S. 204 ff.). The state of desolation, in which the land will be in consequence of the destined exile of the people is in Lev. 26:24, 25 expressly compared with that Sabbatic year, or year of release, and is called the Sabbath-time of the land (שַׁבְתֹתֶיהָ). In 2 Chron. 36:21 (comp. 3 Esdr. 1:58) it is expressly set forth that the Babylonian captivity was the fulfilment of the divine word proclaimed by Jeremiah, according to which the land was promised its holiday (שָׁבָּתוֹת). But in no other place than this does Jeremiah intimate this thought. If now it is undoubted that this passage, with reference to Deut. 15:2 coll. Lev. 26:34, 35, designates the exile as a period of release for the land, we cannot avoid perceiving in וּבְךָ an altered form of the יָדְֽךָ of Deuteronomy. On I cause thee to serve, vide supra, on 15:14.—For ye have kindled, etc. The words are a free quotation from Deut. 32:22, while those in 15:14, at least in their first part, agree verbatim with the original passage.

Footnotes:

[1]Jer 17:1.—צפרן. This word, which occurs besides only in Deut. 21:12 is the nail, unguis, but since the finger-nail cannot be used for the engraving of ineffaceable writing, the word must mean a sharp, cutting instrument in general, in correspondence with the fundamental meaning of the root (= incidere, insculpere. Comp. Aram. טְפַר).

[2]Jer 17:2.—[A. V.: their groves; DE WETTE: their Astartes (but comp. EXEGET. Notes).—S. R. A.]

[3]Jer 17:2.—Explanations which render עַל as local = with, together with (אֵצֶל, R. SAL.), or cumulative = una cum (SEB. SCHMIDT and others) are as unsatisfactory as the reading בָּל־עֵץ, which is found in the Chald., Syr., and in 16 Codd. of KENNICOTT and 9 of DE ROSSI.

[4]Jer 17:3.—בִּ = in the midst, but in the sense of accompaniment, together with. Comp. 11:19; NAEGELSB. Gr., § 112, 5, a.

[5] The LXX. does not contain verses 1–4. Without doubt Jerome is correct in saying, forsitan pepercerunt populo suo. ORIGEN in the Hexapla gives under asterisks the following translation, which he found in other translators: Jer 17:1. Ἁμαρτια Ἰούδα γεγραπται ἐν γραφείῳ σιδηρῷ·, ἐν ὄνυχι ἀδαμαντίῳ, έγκεκολαμμἐνη ἐπἰ τοῦ στήθους τῆς καρδίας αὑτῶν, καὶ τοῖς κέρασι τῶν θυσιαστηρίων αὐτῶν.

Jer 17:2. H̔νἰκα ἀναμνησθῶσιν οἱ υὶοὶ αὐτῶν τἀ θυσιαστήρια αὐτῶν καὶ τὰ ἄλοη αύτῶν ἐπὶ ξύλου δασέος, ἐπἰ βουμῶν μετεὠρων, ὀρέων ἐν ἀγωρῷ.

Jer 17:3. Ἰσχύν σου καὶ πάντας θησαυρούς σου εἰς προνοὴνδώσω, τὰ ὐψηλά σου ἐν ἀμαρτίᾳ ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς ὁρίοις σου.

Jer 17:4. Kαὶ ἁφαιρθήσεται (αι. ἀφαιρεθήσῃ), καὶ ταπεινωθήσεται (αι. ταπεινωθήσῃ) ἀπὸ τῆς κληρονοηίσς σου, ἧς ἔδωκάσοι, καὶ ἀναβιβάσω σε ἐν τοῖς εχθροῖς σου ἐν τῃ γῆ ῇ οὐκ έ̓γνως· ὄτι πῦρ ἐγκἐκαυσται ἐν τῷ θυμῷ ηου, ἔως αιῶνος καυσθἤσεται. Τάδε λἐγει κύριος. Τhus in MONTFAUCON, Hexapl. Tom. II., p. 210.—EUSEBIUS also, Dem. Ev. X. 5 (comp. 2:25), communicates the words, remarking that he found them ἀν ταῖς τῶν λοιπῶν ἑρμηνευτῶν ἐκδόσεσι, ετι μετὰ παραδόσεως άστεμίσκων ἐν τοῖς ακριβἐσι τῶν παρα τοῖς Ο. ἀντιγρἀφοις DRUSIUS remarks that in nonnullis codd. græcis et in uno Vaticano leguntur sub asteriscis.

CONCLUSION (17:5–18)

1. Retrospective glance at the deep roots of the corruption

17:5–13

5          Thus saith Jehovah: Cursed the man, who trusts in men,

And makes flesh his arm, and whose heart departs from Jehovah.

6     He will be like one forsaken6 in the desert

And will not see when good comes,

And will dwell in the arid places in the wilderness,

In a land salt and uninhabited.

7     Blessed the man who trusts in Jehovah,

And whose confidence Jehovah is!

8     He is like a tree planted by water,

And which stretches forth7 its roots to8 the river,

And will not fear9 when the heat comes, and its leaf is green,

And in the year of drought it will not have care nor cease from fruit-bearing.

9     The heart is more deceitful than anything

And profoundly corrupt Who can know it?

10     I, Jehovah, search the heart, try the reins,

Even10 to give every one according to his way,

According to the fruit of his doings.

11     A partridge, which fosters without having laid,

Is he who accumulates riches not by right.

In the half of his days he will leave them,

And at his end he will be a fool.

12     O throne of glory, height11 of beginning, place of our sanctuary!

13     Hope of Israel, Jehovah!

All who forsake thee are put to shame!

Those who depart12 from me must be written in the earth,

Because they have forsaken the fountain of living water, Jehovah.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

This long discourse ends with a concluding address in two parts, the first of which relates to general, the second to personal matters. In the first (Jer 17:5–13) the prophet indicates the most inward and hidden roots of the spiritual and physical corruption of his people. He mentions three chief moral defects, attaching to each the corresponding punishment. At the head he places the perverse disposition, which regards not the Lord, but flesh as the source and treasure of all blessing (Jer 17:5). The punishment of this sin is mentioned in Jer 17:6, the shadow being further deepened in Jer 17:7 and 8 by the contrast there presented. The second radical defect, designated in Jer 17:9, is the perfidiousness of the heart in connection with its weakness. In consequence of this habitus, the human heart is unfathomable to human sight, yet the Lord is in a position to look through and to judge it (Jer 17:10). Avarice is designated as the third destructive root to which every means is right, to which, however, poverty and shame must follow as a just recompense (Jer 17:11).—The last two verses express once more in a comprehensive manner, and after a solemn invocation of Jehovah, the judgment of destruction on all those who have forsaken Jehovah, the fountain of living water (Jer 17:12, 13).

Jer 17:5 and 6. Thus saith Jehovah … salt and uninhabited. The prophet had in the previous context repeatedly designated the Lord as his and Israel’s only safety: 14:8, 22; 15:20, 21; 16:19. He, however, expressly intimated in 16:19, that the Israel of those times was wanting in confidence in this Saviour. Here he renders this sin of unbelief strongly prominent, portraying it according to its positive and its negative side. He mentions the positive side first. Man and flesh designate the totality of all earthly visible forces in antithesis to the spiritual power of the invisible God. It is precisely their visibility which withdraws the carnal mind from the invisible things to be apprehended by faith alone. The mind is first taken captive by things visible. Then having gained a firm footing in these, it breaks loose from the Invisible. It was so in the Fall. This confidence in things visible, however, is idolatry (comp. LUTHER’S explanation of the first commandment). Hence the curse may well be an allusion to Deut. 27:15 coll. 11:28.—Man and flesh. (אָדָם and בָּשָׂר) synonymous also in Isa. 31:3 coll. Job 10:4; Ps. 56:5. [“The Hebrew language, having three distinct words for man, has the advantage of our English in the finer shades of a passage like this, ‘cursed is the man (strong man) who trusteth in man (frail man of the earth) who maketh flesh (mere weakness) his arm.’ ” COWLES.—S. R. A.]—His arm, זְרוֹעַ, the organ for the exhibition of physical force. He who delivers over this function to another, i.e. makes him his arm, has him for his assistant, for protection and deliverance Comp. Isa. 33:2; Ps. 83:9.—A land salt, etc. Comp. Job 39:6; Ps. 107:34.—Will dwell. תשׁב intransitive, as in Jer 17:25; 30:18; 50:13, 39; Isa. 13:20.

Jer 17:7, 8. Blessed the man … fruit bearing. We might, suppose that these verses were so co-ordinate with the two preceding that the two pairs would constitute an independent, self-contained whole. But then the following verses would be entirely disconnected. I therefore think that verses 7 and 8 are to serve as a foil to the thought expressed in Jer 17:5, 6, which is shown to be the main thought by its position—As a tree. Comp. Ps. 1:3.—Drought. Comp. 14:1.

Jer 17:9 and 10. The heart is more deceitful … his doings. Were the hearts of men, and especially of the Israelites, upright and directed to the true and the good, they must agree in word and deed with that which the prophet has declared in Jer 17:5–8. But there is nothing in the world so deceitful as the human heart, which understands the art thoroughly of pursuing the evil under the appearance of wishing the right (comp. Jer 5 and 9:2–8). This deceitfulness is however only a symptom of the deep depravity, the incurable sickness by which the heart is possessed.—Deceitful, עקב. Comp. on 9:3. The word occurs here only as an adjective with this meaning.—Corrupt, אנשׁ. The meaning “desperate” is not contained in the word. It is everywhere = severely sick, incurable (15:18; 30:12, 15; Isa. 17:11; Mic. 1:9; Job 34:6), full of the deepest pain (Jer 17:16). No man is in a condition to see through the deceitful hypocrisy of the human heart, but the Lord can do it, and founds on this His knowledge, His strict and righteous judgment. Comp. 11:20; 12:3; 20:12.—Even to give. Separating the statement of the object from the fundamental declaration, the word even sets forth the independence of the latter. God is not omniscient merely for the purpose of judging, but in His essential nature. Comp. besides comm. on 6:2.

Jer 17:11. A partridge … be a fool. As the third root of spiritual and bodily corruption the prophet names avarice, which is the root of all evil (1 Tim. 6:10). The selfish inquire not about the right (comp. 5:1, 26 sqq.; 6:6, 7; 13:8, 10), therefore the blessing of God is also denied them. Lightly come lightly go. Forsaken and put to shame the unrighteous man is at last like the bird, of which it is said that it collects the young of others and fosters them, but is forsaken by them as soon as they perceive that a stranger has usurped a mother’s rights over them. The form of comparison is like that in Prov. 10:20; 11:22; 16:24, etc. It is doubtful what bird is to be understood by קֹרֵא. The word is found besides only in 1 Sam. 16:20. The ancient translators and most of the Comm. understand the partridge, and the dialects also favor this rendering. Only natural history does not confirm this peculiarity of the partridge. Comp. WINER s. v. Rebhuhn. [“The ancients believed that she stole the eggs of other birds and hatched them as her own. See EPIPHAN. Physiol. cap. 9.; ISID.Origg. 12:7.” HENDERSON.—S. R. A.].—Fosters. דָּגָר occurs besides only in Isa. 34:15. It is there expressly distinguished from בקע, to hatch, and can mean only the gathering together and cherishing by warmth of the newly hatched young. WINER quotes inter al. a passage from OLYMPIODORUS: ὁ πέρδιξ * * * τοὺς ἀλλοτρίους προσκαλε͂ιται νεοτ τούς οἵτινες γνόντες ὕστερον, ὅτι οὐκ εἰσὶν αὐτο̄υ, καταλιμπάνουσιν αὐτόν. This agrees admirably with the sense and connection of the passage, though it must still remain undecided whether we have here a real popular opinion existing at the time of Jeremiah, or only one deduced from this passage.—Shall leave them refers to the riches. On fool comp. 10:8, 14.

Jer 17:12 and 13. O throne of glory … Jehovah. Comprehensive conclusion in the form of a brief but solemn invocation of Jehovah. From Hope of Israel it is evident that the words of the prophet were addressed in the last instance to the person of the Lord. But he mentions first the exteriora, which are the places and bearers of His glory: his throne, the place where His throne stands, the sanctuary which surrounds it, for he wishes to set forth distinctly how foolish and criminal it is to do that, which he has censured in Jer 17:5, 9, 11 and which he afterwards comprises in one word, “forsake the Lord.” Israel has given up the truly real and eternal sanctuaries for the miserable high-places of idolatry. I do not therefore hold the view that Jer 17:12 is addressed to Jehovah Himself, for the reason given by GRAF, that the Lord cannot possibly be called place of sanctuary.—O throne of glory. Comp. 1 Sam. 2:8; Isa. 22:23; Jer. 14:21. The Lord’s throne appears in the Old Test in three degrees. First, Jerusalem is thus named (3:17), second, the ark of the covenant (Exod. 25:22; Ps. 80:2; 99:1), third, the proper, so to speak, and transcendent throne (Isa. 6:1; Ezek. 1:26; Dan. 7:9; Ps. 9:5; 11:3; 47:9; 110:1). These three degrees are however so connected, that he who forsakes one does the same to the other. The prophet has primarily in view here, as at any rate in 14:21, the visible throne of the Lord.—Height of beginning. The idea expressed by מָרוֹם has also several gradations. 1. Mt. Zion is called הַרֹ מְרוֹם ישׂראל, Ezek. 17:23: 20:40 coll. 34:14; Jer. 31:12. 2. It is very often used to designate the transcendent abode of Jehovah, Isa. 33:5; 57:15; Mic. 6:6; Jer. 25:30; Ps. 93:4; 68:19, etc. The expression מראשׁון, which occurs here only (comp. מֵרֹאשׁ, Prov. 8:23) agrees with מרום in both senses. For that transcendent abode is from the beginning, eternally existing (comp. Ps. 93:2), and Zion also as chosen from eternity is in idea the eternal dwelling-place of God. (Comp. Ps. 132:13, 14 coll. Exod. 15:17; 20:24; Deut. 5:12).—Place of our sanctuary. Comp. Isa. 60:13; Dan. 8:11. Even the sanctuary of Israel (מקדש) is a double one, an earthly and a heavenly. The former is made according to the type of the latter (Exod. 25:8, 9, 40; 26:30). Thus though the expression refers primarily to the earthly sanctuary the heavenly is not excluded. There is no objection to the impersonal rendering of these three substantives in the prophet’s addressing words of prayer to them. For what the prophet declares with respect to them: “All who forsake thee are put to shame,” would be quite unprejudicial even if “Hope of Israel,” etc., did not come between. But the three former are entirely sunk in this last conception, since it is only in and by Jehovah that they have any existence or meaning. Hence also the singular suffix in עֹזְבֶיךָ. The older commentators render throne of glory as nominative, either taking the first and the last three words together (solium gloriæ excelsum, ab initio locus sanctuarii nostri, CALVIN), or regarding throne (thronus, qui est altitudo ab æterno, est locus sanctuarii, SEB. SCHMIDT), or height (a throne in glory is the height of beginning, the place of our sanctuary, NEUMANN) as the nominative. According to these renderings however it is scarcely possible to find a suitable connection.—Hope of Israel. Comp. 14:8; 50:7.—Written in the earth. In the earth (in the dust, Job 14:8), where what is written will be speedily effaced, shall those who depart from me be written. The antithesis on the one hand would be to 17:1 (the sin in brass, the sinners in dust), on the other hand to the book of life (Exod. 32:32; Ps. 69:29; Dan. 12:1; Mal. 3:16; Luke 10:20; Phil. 4:3; Rev. 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 21:27). MEIER reads: they vanished away in the laud (Job 15:30), all who are recorded in it (17:1; 22:30) that they have forsaken the fountain, etc. This exegesis also is exposed to several objections: 1. that סוּר must be taken in the sense of vanish away: 2. the imperf. יִבָּתֵבוּ I therefore prefer to adhere to the reading of the Chethibh. The rapid change of person forms no objection to this. Comp. on 5:14; 9:7; 12:13; 17:1. The Lord then continues in confirmation of the prophet’s address.—Fountain, etc. Comp. 2:13; Ps. 36:10.

Footnotes:

[6]Jer 17:6.—כערער. The ancient translations all express here, doubtless on the ground of the antithesis in Jer 17:8, the name of a tree or shrub, while in Ps. 102 where alone the word occurs a second time, they all, in accordance with the context, express the idea of miser. Since now עַרְעָר is formed after the analogy of כַּבְכָּב ,זַלְזַל ,דַּרְדַּר ,נַלְנַל (כּוֹכָב), etc. (comp. OLSH. § 189, a; NAEGELSB. Gr., § 42, a, S. 87), since, further, the corresponding verbal root is given by 51:58 (עַרְעֵר תִּתְעַרְ עַר) unquestionably with the meaning denudare (comp. Isai. 23:13; 32:11; Hab. 3:9. מָעוֹר nuditas, עָרם nudus, עָרִירִי nudus, solitarius; Gen. 15:2; Lev. 20:20, 21; Jer. 22:30), the meaning of “naked, destitute, wretched,” is assured also in this passage. [HENDERSON: “I acquiesce in the opinion of Dr. ROBINSON, that it is the same as the Arab. عرعر Arar, the juniper-tree which is found in the vicinity of the Arabah, or the Great Valley, to the south of the Dead Sea. See Bibl. Res. II., 506. Thus DE WETTE: Wacholderbaum. The same form of the word occurs Ps. 102:18, where the idea conveyed is that of naked, destitute. The point of comparison in the two passages of our prophet is the forlorn appearance of a solitary juniper, deprived of all nourishment in the arid desert.”—HITZIG referring to the composition of Ps. 102, after the flight of Jonathan into the desert of Tekoa, and the connection with Jer. 48:6, where also flight is spoken of, decides that the word designates one who has flet or been driven into the desert, or one who has come into misfortune as starved or perishing.—S. R. A.]. On the words in 48:6, כַּעֲרוֹעֵר בַּפדְבָּר, comp. rems. there.

[7]Jer 17:8.—יובל. ἄπ. λεγ., synonymous with יבל, Isai. 30:25; 44:4.

[8]Jer 17:8.—עַל for אֵל as frequently in Jer. Comp. on 10:1.

[9]Jer 17:8.—ולא ירא. The Keri reads יִרְאֶח after Jer 17:6. The Chethibh should be punctuated יִרָא (Imperf. from יָרֵא), corresponding to יִרְאַנ, and is at any rate to be preferred; as also the ancient translations express it, with the exception of the Chaldee.

[10]Jer 17:10.—ולתת. Comp. 32:19. The Vau, which the ancient translations and many Codd. omit, is not so superfluous as GRAF supposes.

[11]Jer 17:12.—מרום might grammatically be in the accusative, but as בָּבוֹד appears to be contrasted with בּשֶׁת (3:24; 11:13), so does מרום ו׳ with בּמוֹת.

[12]Jer 17:13.—יסורי. The Chethibh יְסוּרַי would be formed like יְתוּר ,יְקוּם ,יָרִיב, (OLSH. § 212). The form יַסוּר as a noun, does not, however, occur elsewhere, and the sudden change of person is strange. The Keri reads וְסוּרַי. The meaning is the same (= those departing from me. Comp. קָמַי, 51:1); the form is likewise a rare one. (Yet comp. 2:21; Isa. 49:21; OLSH. § 172, b.) MEIER reads יָסיּרוּ.

2. PETITION OF THE PROPHET FOR THE SAFETY OF HIS PERSON AND THE HONOR OF HIS OFFICIAL MINISTRATIONS

17:14–18

14          Heal me, Jehovah, that I may be healed;

Deliver me that I may be delivered, for thou art my praise!

15     Behold, they say to me: Where is the word of Jehovah? Let it come now.

16     But I have not hastened away from being a pastor after thee;

And the calamitous day I have not desired, thou knowest.

That which went forth from my lips was from thee.

17     Be not13 a terror to me, my refuge in the day of distress!

18     My persecutors must be put to shame,

But I must not be put to shame;

They must be dismayed, but I must not be dismayed!

Bring14 upon them the day of calamity,

And doubly15 with destruction destroy them!

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

The second, personal half of the conclusion. The prophet prays for safety and deliverance for himself (Jer 17:14). In opposition to the scornful doubt in the fulfilment of his predictions, expressed in Jer 17:15, he prays on the ground of the fact that he had not hastened into the prophetic office, or declared his own inventions (Jer 17:16), that the Lord, his refuge, would not be a terror to him or suffer him to be put to shame, but his persecutors, and bring upon them the day of calamity and double destruction (Jer 17:17, 18).

Jer 17:14. Heal me … thou art my praise. The prophet begins with a prayer for safety and deliverance in general.—Heal me. Deut. 32:39; Ps. 6:3; 30:3.—My praise, the object of my confident boasting. Comp. Deut. 10:21;. Ps. 71:6.

Jer 17:15 and 16. Behold, they say … was from thee. The prophet resumes the thought in 15:10, 15–19 (coll. 20:7–12).—Where, etc. Comp. Isa. 5:19; Ezek. 12:22 sqq. It is used ironically also in Ps. 42:4, 11; 79:10; 2 Kings 18:34, etc.—On Let it come now, comp. 28:8, 9: Deut. 18:21, 22 coll. 13:2.—But I have not, etc. The prophet would deserve such scorn, if he had taken the word of the Lord into his mouth in his own strength, or deceitfully, as others did, 14:14, 15.—But he is not a pseudo-prophet, but a prophet against his will. Comp. 1:6 sqq.; 20:7.—The words I have not hastened (לא אצתי מ׳) have been variously explained. But all the commentators (when they do not alter the reading, as the Syr., which reads מֵרָעָה) concur in understanding רֹעֶה of the spiritual pastorate. The thought that he had not hastened from the pastoral office or spiritual pasture after Jehovah does not however suit the connection. For he can wish only to defend himself against the imputation of having hurried. It is very remarkable that not a single comm. has yet thought of taking רֹעֶה in a physical sense; doubtless because the knowledge of Jeremiah’s priestly descent has seemed to preclude the thought of his having been a shepherd. But why may not Jeremiah, who was called as a נַעַר to the prophetic office, have previously tended his father’s sheep? The shepherd’s state was rendered sacred to the Israelites by the example of their fathers, and kings as well as prophets had proceeded from it (comp. Am. 1:1; 7:14 coll. Exod. 3:1). Moreover the מִנְרָשׁ [pasture, common], which was possessed by every priestly and levitical city (comp. Josh. 21. and 1 Chron. 6.), was according to Num. 35:4 expressly intended “for the cattle.” Anathoth also had its מִגְרָשׁ (Josh. 21:18). Comp. HERZOG, R.-Enc. VI. S. 150. How well now it suits the connection if Jer. says: They scorn me as a prophet and yet I did not hurry away from being a shepherd (מִהִיוֹת רֹעֶה=מִרֹעֶה. Comp. 2:25; 48:2; Ps. 83:5; 1 Sam. 15:23, 26) after thee.—אוּץ = to press, to haste:Exod. 5:13; Josh. 10:13; Prov. 19:2; 21:5; 28:20.—אהריך. Comp. 2:2; 3:19. Going after Jehovah is in antithesis to going after the flock (comp. 1 Chr. 17:7). [HITZIG: “I have not hastened away not to keep after thee. In אוּץ is the idea of wilfulness, following one’s own impulse in any direction. ‘I did not struggle away so that I should not be pasturing,’ etc.אחריד does not suit the usual rendering of רעח as the trade of the shepherd, but leads to this, that Jahve is the shepherd, leader, and Jeremiah the lamb, Ps. 23:1. Willingly following him (comp. 1 Sam. 7:2; Numb. 14:24) he allowed himself to be fed by Jahve (comp. Prov. 10:21) with words of truth and with revelation, 15:16.” HENDERSON appears to follow HITZIG in this rendering.—WORDSWORTH: “Rather, I have not hastened backward from being a shepherd (a prophet) after thee. When I was called by Thee, I did not withdraw myself hastily from Thy service (see Gesen. 23), but I obeyed Thy call without delay: and I did not desire the woful day.”—So also COWLES.—S. R. A.]

And the calamitous day. Comp. rems. on Jer 17:9. From the connection the prophet can mean only the day of his entrance into the prophetic office. (Comp. 20:7 sqq.; 15:10, 11). For he needed not to give the assurance that he did not desire the day of calamity for the whole people. He might indeed have been reproached with loving to prophesy evil, but there is nothing of this in the text.—Thou knowest. Comp. 15:15.—That which went forth, etc. That which has gone forth from his lips, since he has been a prophet, God knows and approves, he has nothing then to fear from the criticism of men. Comp. Prov. 5:21; Lam. 2:19.

Jer 17:17 and 18. Be not a terror … destroy them. The negative petition, comp. Jer 17:14.—persecutors, pursuers. Comp. 15:15; 20:11.—doubly with destruction. Comp. 16:18.

Footnotes:

[13]Jer 17:17.—תּהְיֵה, comp. EWALD, § 224 c; NAEGELSB. Gr., § 38, Anm. 2.

[14]Jer 17:18.—חביא, a rare form instead of חָבִא, but comp. 1 Sam. 20:40; OLSH., § 256 b, S. 569.

[15]Jer 17:18.—כִשְׁנֶה (not מִשְׁנֵה) is accus. modi. Comp. NAEGELSB. Gr., § 70 g.

6. THE SIXTH DISCOURSE

(JER 17:19–27.)

This short passage is closely connected neither with what precedes nor with what follows. Many commentators have, indeed, devised an extensive frame, so as to include this passage in it together with the previous or subsequent context, but these artificial expedients are not satisfactory. The previous discourse is, as shown above, complete in itself, and requires no further addition. The following passages are also as peculiar and independent as this. This forms a small but important and in form a finished whole. Why should not the prophet have addressed short speeches to the people?

As to the date, all is in favor of the reign of Jehoiakim. 1. The state still exists in unenfeebled independence; no trace betrays that the power of the Chaldeans had become predominant, or that they were immediately threatening. 2. The censure of the transgression of so important a command corresponds rather with the times of the godless Jehoiakim, than of the pious Josiah. The great similarity with 22:1–5, which passage indubitably pertains to the reign of Jehoiakim, is in favor of referring this discourse to the same period. [HENDERSON: “Eichhorn, Rosenmüller and Maurer, are of opinion that this portion of the chapter belongs to the reign of Jehoiakim, who rapidly undid all the good which had been effected by Josiah, and among other evils encouraged the profanation of the Sabbath, with the due observance of which the prosperity of the State was bound up. The language of the prophet, however, is not objurgatory, as we should have expected, if the profanation in question had actually existed. It is rather that of caution and warning, with a promise of prosperity in case of obedience, and a threatening of destruction to the city in case of disobedience. It would seem, therefore, to belong to the time of Josiah, and to have been delivered in connection with or shortly after his reformation.”—HITZIG refers this passage together with chapter 18, to the period of Jeconiah, or that immediately following the death of Jehoiakim.—S. R. A.]

EXHORTATION TO HALLOW THE SABBATH

17:19–27

19Thus saith the LORD [Jehovah] unto me; Go and stand in the gate of the children of the people,16 whereby the kings of Judah come in, and by the which they20go out, and in all the gates of Jerusalem; And say unto them, Hear ye the word of the LORD [Jehovah], ye kings of Judah and all Judah, and all the inhabitants21of Jerusalem that enter in by these gates: Thus saith the LORD [Jehovah]; Take heed ye to yourselves [Care with foresight for your souls],17 and bear no burden on 22the Sabbath-day, nor bring it in by the gates of Jerusalem; neither carry forth a burden out of your houses on the Sabbath day, neither do ye any work, but hallow23ye the Sabbath-day, as I commanded your fathers. But they obeyed [heard] not, neither inclined their ear, but made their neck stiff, that they might not hear18 nor24receive instruction. And it shall come to pass, if ye diligently hearken unto me, saith the LORD [Jehovah] to bring in no burden through the gates of this city on the Sabbath-day, but hallow the Sabbath day to do [by doing] no work therein;19 25then shall there enter into [through] the gates of this city kings and princes20 sitting upon [who sit on] the throne of David, riding in chariots and on horses, they and their princes, the men of Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and this city26shall remain [be inhabited] forever. And they shall come from the cities of Judah and from the places about [environs of] Jerusalem and from the land of Benjamin, and from the plains and from the mountains, and from the south, bringing [people who bring] burnt offerings and sacrifices and meat-offerings and incense, and bringing27sacrifices of praise unto the house of the LORD [Jehovah]. But if ye will not hearken unto me to hallow the Sabbath day, and not to bear a burden, even entering [or enter] into the gates of Jerusalem on the Sabbath-day; then will I kindle a fire in the [your] gates thereof, and it shall devour the palaces of Jerusalem and it shall not be quenched.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Jeremiah is to go under the gate of the city and there warn all the people from the king downwards against the desecration of the Sabbath by bearing burdens and laboring as their fathers had done (Jer 17:18–23). If they would sanctify the Sabbath, their city should remain forever, and their gate should be witnesses of a lively traffic, of importance to the king’s house, the city and the temple (Jer 17:24–26). But if they should continue to desecrate the Sabbath, an inextinguishable fire should consume the gates and palaces of the city (Jer 17:27). Accordingly three parts may be distinguished in this passage.

Jer 17:19-23. Thus saith Jehovah … nor receive instruction.—Go, etc. Comp. 2:2; 3:12; 19:1.—Gate of the children of the people. This gate is mentioned here only. It is, therefore, difficult to determine its position with certainty, as according to VON RAUMER (Paläst., 4th Ed., S. 291), not two interpreters agree as to its position. The first question is whether it was a gate of the city or of the temple. GRAF correctly remarks that, with respect to a gate of the city יצאו must stand first and יבאו last (comp. 2 Chron. 23:8). The name בני־העם would also be a very strange one for a city gate. The expression occurs with three meanings. 1. It designates the difference between strangers and natives, although in this sense עם is found in the Old Testament not with the article, but only with suffixes: Gen. 23:11; Judges 14:16; Lev. 19:18; Ezek. 3:11; Num. 22:5; Lev. 20:17.—2. It designates a difference in rank among the people themselves, and in two degrees, the mass of the people in opposition to the king and the princes (2 Chron. 35:7 coll. 8), and again the commonalty in opposition to the more respectable classes (Jer. 26:23; 2 Kings 23:6).—3. The expression designates the difference between priests and not priests, in which sense it corresponds to our term “laity” (2 Chron. 35:5, 12, 13). It occurs only in the passages cited. Since now nothing is known of a gate of the city through which strangers might not pass, or of one through which only the kings and the dregs of the people, or only the kings and the rest of their subjects to the exclusion of the priests might pass, it follows that the gate must have been a gate of the temple through which only the laity went in and out, since special entrances were reserved for the priests. What gate it was it is difficult to say. The expression was probably not one in general use, but employed only by the priests, since according to the second explanation it included a somewhat dishonorable side-meaning. The rarity of the expression also justifies the conclusion that it was a temporary expression, i. e., in use only in those times, since as is well-known the city gates of Jerusalem bore successively different names. Comp. RAUMER’SPaläst. S. 290, 1.—When in 2 Chron. 23:5, the high-priest Jehoiada posted a third of his people at the שַׁעַר הַיְסוֹד, it is natural to suppose that this was the gate through which he expected Athaliah to pass. It is then further probable that this gate was identical with the one mentioned in our passage “whereby the kings of Judah went in and out.” [HENDERSON:—“The gate of the mass of the people … was in all probability the gate of David, corresponding to what is now called the Jaffa Gate, and was called the ‘people’s’ gate from the circumstance of its being the principal thorough fare for the tribes in the South, the West, and the North-West.”—S. R. A.] That this gate, even were it a gate of the temple, was adapted to the proclamation of this divine message, is evident if we reflect (a), that this gate also might by the purchase and sale of temple-necessaries (comp. Matth. 21:12) be the scene of Sabbath-desecrating traffic; (b) that even if this was not the case, at any rate the gate was one which was much frequented, perhaps more than all the rest.—Not do any work. Comp. Exod. 12:16; 20:8 sqq.; Deut. 5:12 sqq.—The Sabbath was the day of Jehovah (comp. the passages quoted) a monimentum temporale for his service, hence the observance of this day stood or fell with the worship of Jehovah.—But they obeyed not. The first half of Jer 17:23 is taken verbatim from 7:26.

Jer 17:23 is parenthetical, suggested by as I commanded, etc.

Jer 17:24-26. And it shall come … Jehovah Sitting upon the throne. Comp. 13:13; 22:4.—Shall remain. Comp. rems. on Jer 17:6.—Men of Judah. Comp. 32:44; 33:13; coll. Josh. 10:40; Judges 1:9; Deut. 1:7; Zech. 7:7.—The plains.שְׁפֵלָה is the low country between Joppa and Gaza, Josh. 9:1; 12:8; 15:33 sqq.; 1 Kings 10:27; Obad. 19; RAUMER, Paläst. S. 51.—South, נֶגֶב is the southern, as שְׁפֵלָה the western, מִרְבָּד the eastern, הָחָר the northern, parts of the tribe of Judah, separating the two last mentioned. Comp. Josh. 15:55 sqq.; 2 Sam. 24:7.

Jer 17:27. But if ye will not … not be quenched. The negation before to bear must also be referred to enter. Comp. Jer 17:21.—Will I kindle. Comp. 21:14; 49:27; Am. 1:14.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. On Jer 17:30. “It is no derogation to the sagacity of a teacher if he directs his public instructions, admonitions and warnings with some special adaptation to the rulers of the country. Only he must guard against offensive or abusive expressions, and see to it that he carefully distinguish between their office and their life, and be sure of his case, that he is not following the motions of nature, but the calling of the Lord. Acts 23:3; 1 Ki. 14:7, 8.” STARKE.

2. Man in this earthly life needs, besides work, rest also for body and soul. It would be inept to have one rest day for the body and another for the soul. It would be equally so to have more or fewer holidays than God has ordained by sanctification of the Seventh day, whereby He who is the creator of time has at the same time given us the fundamental principles of its division. As the rest of the body is both negative and positive (abstinence from labor and recuperation of forces) so also is that of the soul. The soul is from God, and must on its day of rest be freed from earthly cares and brought into the element of its heavenly origin, as it were into a cleansing and invigorating bath. The observance by Christians of the first, instead of the Seventh day, as a weekly holiday is well founded in the fact that the day of Christ’s resurrection is also a day of creation, and so much the more glorious as the new and imperishable world is more glorious than the old and perishable world.

3. “Neglect not church going. For though the unbelieving heathen thought it a foolish course to spend the day in idleness, yet temporal subsistence will not therefore fail, but rather will the weekly work of other days flourish the more. Matth. 6:33.” CRAMER.

4. [“God did not regard the external rite only, but rather the end, of which He speaks in Ex. 31:13, and in Ezek. 20:12. In both places He reminds us of the reason why He commanded the Jews to keep holy the Seventh day, and that was that it might be to them a symbol of sanctification. ‘I have given My Sabbaths,’ He says, ‘to you, that ye might know that I am your God who sanctifieth you.’… And it appears from other places that this command was typical—Christ being the substance. Col. 2:16.” CALVIN.—S. R. A.]

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

The weekly holiday as the day of Jehovah and as the day of the Lord. 1. What they have in common. The weekly holiday is in both cases (a) a monument of the loving care of our God (a) for our body (β) for our soul; (b) a right of God which forms on our part a holy obligation towards God, ourselves, and our neighbor. 2. The differences. (a) The day of Jehovah is founded on the creation of the perishable world; the day of the Lord is founded on the resurrection of Christ, as of a new, eternal world; (b) the observance of the day of Jehovah was only legal, i. e., (a) imposed by external compulsion, (β) by requirements to be fulfilled by outward observance;—the observance of the day of the Lord is to be more and more an evangelical one, i. e. (a) a free, (b) a spiritually free one, i. e., satisfying the right as well as the obligation of personality.

[“What blessings God has in store for those who make conscience of Sabbath sanctification. 1. The court shall flourish. The honor of the government is the joy of the kingdom, and the support of religion would contribute greatly to both. 2. The city shall flourish. Whatever supports religion tends to establish the civil interests of a land. 3. The country shall flourish. By this the flourishing of a country may be judged of. What does it do for the honor of God? Those who starve their religion either are poor, or are in a fair way to be so. 4. The church shall flourish. It is a true observation which some have made, That the streams of all religion run either deep or shallow, according as the banks of the Sabbath, are kept up or neglected.” HENRY.—S. R. A.]

Footnotes:

[16]Jer 17:19.—[HITZIG: Of the common man]. The Chethibh reads בני־עם, but this does not make any difference in the sense. If the absence of the article is not due to an oversight, it may be explained by the later, less exact use of language, of which we repeatedly find traces in Jeremiah (comp. 3:2; 6:16; 14:18).

[17]Jer 17:21.—בנפשׁובים. The construction is like Mal. 2:15, 16, בְּרוּחֲכֶם. But בִּ is not = by, per, after verbs of petition or conjuration (by your life not. Vid. GESEN., Thes. III., S. 1443), or=for the sake of (MEIER), but the Niphal involves the meaning of having regard to, observing, and בְּ depends on this. Comp. שִׁמְרוּ־מִי בַנֵּעַר, 2 Sam. 18:12. That this is the sense of the connection follows plainly from 2 Sam. 20:10, “took no heed to the sword;” Deut. 24:8, “take heed to the plague.” Comp. NAEGELSB. Gr., § 100, 3.

[18]Jer 17:23.—שׁומע [Chethibh, שׁמוע] HILLER in Arcano Kri et K’tib, remarks that the Masoretes, when they wished to indicate the Scriptio plena, in order that the difference of their reading might be remarked, set the mater lectionis in another place in the word. So also in 2:25; 9:7; 27:1; 29:23; 32:23. Comp. the Explicatio lectionum masoret. in the Hebrew Bible of SIMONIS, Halle, 1752.

[19]Jer 17:24.—On the form בֹּה. Comp. EWALD, § 84, b; 247, d. OLSH. § 96, c; 40, h.

[20]Jer 17:25.—וְשָׂרִים is strange. GRAF not without reason, assumes an oversight, caused by the frequent juxtaposition of the two words. Comp. 49:38; Hos. 13:10; 2 Sam. 18:5; 1 Chron. 24:6; 2 Chron. 28:21; 29:30; 30:12; Esth. 1:16, 21, etc.