Jer 4:2 | KD | STEP | The answer of the Lord . - Jer 4:1. " If thou returnest, Israel, saith Jahveh, returnest to me; and if thou puttest away thine abominations from before my face, and strayest not , Jer 4:2. and swearest, As Jahveh liveth, in truth, with right, and uprightness; then shall the nations bless themselves in Him, and in Him make their boast ." Graf errs in taking these verses as a wish: if thou wouldst but repent...and swear...and if they blessed themselves. His reason is, that the conversion and reconciliation with Jahveh has not yet taken place, and are yet only hoped for; and he cites passages for אם with the force of a wish, as ; , where, however, נא or לוּ is joined with it. But if we take all the verbs in the same construction, we get a very cumbrous result; and the reason alleged proceeds upon a prosaic misconception of the dramatic nature of the prophet’s mode of presentation from onwards. Just as there the prophet hears in spirit the penitent supplication of the people, so here he hears the Lord’s answer to this supplication, by inward vision seeing the future as already present. The early commentators have followed the example of the lxx and Vulg. in construing the two verses differently, and take אלי and ולא תנוּד as apodoses: if thou returnest, Israel, then return to me; or, if thou, Israel, returnest to me, then shalt thou return, sc. into thy fatherland; and if thou puttest away thine abominations from before mine eyes, then shalt thou no longer wander; and if thou swearest...then will they bless themselves. But by reason of its position after נאם יהוה it is impossible to connect אלי with the protasis. It would be more natural to take אלי תּשׁוּב as apodosis, the אלי being put first for the sake of emphasis. But if we take it as apodosis at all, the apodosis of the second half of the verse does not rightly correspond to that of the first half. לא תנוּד would need to be translated, "then shalt thou no longer wander without fixed habitation," and so would refer to the condition of the people as exiled. but for this נוּד is not a suitable expression. Besides, it is difficult to justify the introduction of אם before ונשׁבּאתּ, since an apodosis has already preceded. For these reasons we are bound to prefer the view of Ew. and Hitz., that and contain nothing but protases. The removal of the abominations from before God’s face is the utter extirpation of idolatry, the negative moment of the return to the Lord; and the swearing by the life of Jahveh is added as a positive expression of their acknowledgment of the true God. תנוּד is the wandering of the idolatrous people after this and the other false god, and Jer 3:13. "And strayest not" serves to strengthen "puttest away thine abominations." A sincere return to God demanded not only the destruction of images and the suppression of idol-worship, but also the giving up of all wandering after idols, i.e., seeking or longing after other gods. Similarly, swearing by Jahveh is strengthened by the additions: בּאמת, in truth, not deceptively (לשׁקר, ), and with right and uprightness, i.e., in a just cause, and with honest intentions. - The promise, "they shall bless themselves," etc., has in it an allusion to the patriarchal promises in ; ; ; ; , but it is not, as most commentators, following Jerome, suppose, a direct citation of these, and certainly not "a learned quotation from a book" (Ew.), in which case בּו would be referable, as in those promises, to Israel, the seed of Abraham, and would stand for בּך. This is put out of the question by the parallel וּבּו יתהלּלוּ, which never occurs but with the sense of glorying in God the Lord; cf. , ; 64:11; , and Jer 9:22. Hence it follows that בּו must be referred, as Calv. refers it, to יהוה, just as in : the nations will bless themselves in or with Jahveh, i.e., will desire and appropriate the blessing of Jahveh and glory in the true God. Even under this acceptation, the only one that can be justified from an exegetical point of view, the words stand in manifest relation to the patriarchal blessing. If the heathen peoples bless themselves in the name of Jahveh, then are they become partakers of the salvation that comes from Jahveh; and if this blessing comes to them as a consequence of the true conversion of Israel to the Lord, as a fruit of this, then it has come to them through Israel as the channel, as the patriarchal blessings declare disertis verbis . Jeremiah does not lay stress upon this intermediate agency of Israel, but leaves it to be indirectly understood from the unmistakeable allusion to the older promise. The reason for the application thus given by Jeremiah to the divine promise made to the patriarchs is found in the aim and scope of the present discourse. The appointment of Israel to be the channel of salvation for the nations is an outcome of the calling grace of God, and the fulfilment of this gracious plan on the part of God is an exercise of the same grace - a grace which Israel by its apostasy does not reject, but helps onwards towards its ordained issue. The return of apostate Israel to its God is indeed necessary ere the destined end be attained; it is not, however, the ground of the blessing of the nations, but only one means towards the consummation of the divine plan of redemption, a plan which embraces all mankind. Israel’s apostasy delayed this consummation; the conversion of Israel will have for its issue the blessing of the nations.

‏ Jeremiah 4:2

Jer 4:1-2 The answer of the Lord. - Jer 4:1. "If thou returnest, Israel, saith Jahveh, returnest to me; and if thou puttest away thine abominations from before my face, and strayest not, Jer 4:2. and swearest, As Jahveh liveth, in truth, with right, and uprightness; then shall the nations bless themselves in Him, and in Him make their boast." Graf errs in taking these verses as a wish: if thou wouldst but repent...and swear...and if they blessed themselves. His reason is, that the conversion and reconciliation with Jahveh has not yet taken place, and are yet only hoped for; and he cites passages for אם with the force of a wish, as Gen 13:3; Gen 28:13, where, however, נא or לוּ is joined with it. But if we take all the verbs in the same construction, we get a very cumbrous result; and the reason alleged proceeds upon a prosaic misconception of the dramatic nature of the prophet’s mode of presentation from Jer 3:21 onwards. Just as there the prophet hears in spirit the penitent supplication of the people, so here he hears the Lord’s answer to this supplication, by inward vision seeing the future as already present. The early commentators have followed the example of the lxx and Vulg. in construing the two verses differently, and take אלי and ולא תנוּד as apodoses: if thou returnest, Israel, then return to me; or, if thou, Israel, returnest to me, then shalt thou return, sc. into thy fatherland; and if thou puttest away thine abominations from before mine eyes, then shalt thou no longer wander; and if thou swearest...then will they bless themselves. But by reason of its position after נאם יהוה it is impossible to connect אלי with the protasis. It would be more natural to take אלי תּשׁוּב as apodosis, the אלי being put first for the sake of emphasis. But if we take it as apodosis at all, the apodosis of the second half of the verse does not rightly correspond to that of the first half. לא תנוּד would need to be translated, "then shalt thou no longer wander without fixed habitation," and so would refer to the condition of the people as exiled. but for this נוּד is not a suitable expression. Besides, it is difficult to justify the introduction of אם before ונשׁבּאתּ, since an apodosis has already preceded. For these reasons we are bound to prefer the view of Ew. and Hitz., that Jer 4:1 and Jer 4:2 contain nothing but protases. The removal of the abominations from before God’s face is the utter extirpation of idolatry, the negative moment of the return to the Lord; and the swearing by the life of Jahveh is added as a positive expression of their acknowledgment of the true God. תנוּד is the wandering of the idolatrous people after this and the other false god, Jer 2:23 and Jer 3:13. "And strayest not" serves to strengthen "puttest away thine abominations." A sincere return to God demanded not only the destruction of images and the suppression of idol-worship, but also the giving up of all wandering after idols, i.e., seeking or longing after other gods. Similarly, swearing by Jahveh is strengthened by the additions: בּאמת, in truth, not deceptively (לשׁקר, Jer 5:2), and with right and uprightness, i.e., in a just cause, and with honest intentions. - The promise, "they shall bless themselves," etc., has in it an allusion to the patriarchal promises in Gen 12:3; Gen 18:18; Gen 22:18; Gen 26:4; Gen 28:14, but it is not, as most commentators, following Jerome, suppose, a direct citation of these, and certainly not "a learned quotation from a book" (Ew.), in which case בּו would be referable, as in those promises, to Israel, the seed of Abraham, and would stand for בּך. This is put out of the question by the parallel וּבּו יתהלּלוּ, which never occurs but with the sense of glorying in God the Lord; cf. Isa 41:16, Psa 34:3; 64:11; Psa 105:3, and Jer 9:22. Hence it follows that בּו must be referred, as Calv. refers it, to יהוה, just as in Isa 65:16 : the nations will bless themselves in or with Jahveh, i.e., will desire and appropriate the blessing of Jahveh and glory in the true God. Even under this acceptation, the only one that can be justified from an exegetical point of view, the words stand in manifest relation to the patriarchal blessing. If the heathen peoples bless themselves in the name of Jahveh, then are they become partakers of the salvation that comes from Jahveh; and if this blessing comes to them as a consequence of the true conversion of Israel to the Lord, as a fruit of this, then it has come to them through Israel as the channel, as the patriarchal blessings declare disertis verbis. Jeremiah does not lay stress upon this intermediate agency of Israel, but leaves it to be indirectly understood from the unmistakeable allusion to the older promise. The reason for the application thus given by Jeremiah to the divine promise made to the patriarchs is found in the aim and scope of the present discourse. The appointment of Israel to be the channel of salvation for the nations is an outcome of the calling grace of God, and the fulfilment of this gracious plan on the part of God is an exercise of the same grace - a grace which Israel by its apostasy does not reject, but helps onwards towards its ordained issue. The return of apostate Israel to its God is indeed necessary ere the destined end be attained; it is not, however, the ground of the blessing of the nations, but only one means towards the consummation of the divine plan of redemption, a plan which embraces all mankind. Israel’s apostasy delayed this consummation; the conversion of Israel will have for its issue the blessing of the nations.