Jeremiah 46-51

New English Translation

Footnotes

1. Jeremiah 46:1 sn Jeremiah was called to be a prophet not only to Judah and Jerusalem but to the nations (1:5, 10). The prophecies or oracles that are collected here in Jer 46-51 are found after 25:13a in the Greek version, where they are also found in a different order and with several textual differences. The issue of which represents the original writing is part of the broader issue of the editorial or redactional history of the book of Jeremiah, which went through several editions, two of which are referred to in Jer 36, i.e., the two scrolls written in the fourth year of Jehoiakim (605 b.c.). A third edition included all the preceding plus the material down to the time of the fall of Jerusalem (cf. the introduction in 1:1-3), and a fourth included all the preceding plus the materials in Jer 40-44. The oracles against the foreign nations collected here are consistent with the note of judgment sounded against all nations (including some not mentioned in Jer 46-51) in Jer 25. See the translator’s note on 25:13 for further details regarding the relationship that the oracles to the foreign nations may have to the judgment speeches in Jer 25.
2. Jeremiah 46:1 tn Heb “that which was.”
3. Jeremiah 46:2 sn The fourth year of Jehoiakim’s reign proved very significant in Jeremiah's prophecies. It was in that same year that he issued the prophecies against the foreign nations recorded in Jer 25 (and probably the prophecies recorded here in Jer 46-51). In that year he had Baruch record and read to the people gathered in the temple all the prophecies he had uttered against Judah and Jerusalem up to that point, in the hopes that they would repent and the nation would be spared. The fourth year of Jehoiakim (605 b.c.) marked a significant shift in the balance of power in Palestine. With the defeat of Necho at Carchemish in that year, the area came under the control of Nebuchadnezzar, and Judah and the surrounding nations had two options, either submit to Babylon and pay tribute, or suffer the consequences of death in war or exile in Babylon for failure to submit.
4. Jeremiah 46:2 tn Heb “Concerning Egypt: Concerning the army of Pharaoh Necho, king of Egypt, which was beside the Euphrates River at Carchemish, which Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, defeated in the fourth year of Jehoiakim, son of Josiah, king of Judah.” The sentence has been broken up, restructured, and introductory words supplied in the translation to make the sentences better conform with contemporary English style.
5. Jeremiah 46:3 tn Heb “Arrange shield and buckler.” The verb עָרַךְ (ʿarakh) refers to arranging or setting things in order, such as altars in a row, dishes on a table, or soldiers in ranks. Here the shields also stand for the soldiers holding them. The visual picture presented is of the shields aligning in position as the soldiers get into proper battle formation with shields at the ready. The צִנָּה (tsinnah; cf. BDB 857 s.v. III צִנָּה) is the long oval or rectangular “shield” that protected the whole body. And the מָגֵן (magen) is the smaller round “buckler,” which only protected the torso. The relative size of these two kinds of shields can be seen from the weight of each in 1 Kgs 10:16-17). Each soldier probably carried only one kind of shield. It is uncertain who is issuing the commands here. TEV adds, “The Egyptian officers shout,” which is the interpretation of J. A. Thompson (Jeremiah [NICOT], 688).
6. Jeremiah 46:3 tn Heb “Draw near.”
7. Jeremiah 46:4 tc The LXX reads προβάλετε (probalete), meaning “to hold before oneself, to present arms” (see LSJ s.v. προβάλλω B. III.). Instead of the MT’s מִרְקוּ (mir^equ), this may reflect an original הָרִקוּ (hariqu), from רִיק (riq), or הָרִמוּ (harimu), from רוּם (rum). Both readings assume a Hiphil form where the ה (he) was replaced by duplicating the מ (mem) ending the previous word. In Ps 35:3 the Hiphil of ריק (riq) means to draw a spear, while the Hiphil of רוּם (rum) would mean to raise [a spear]. tn Or “polish” or “clean.” The other three uses of the verb מָרַק (maraq) refer to scouring or polishing. The context refers to the final stages of battle preparations, so whether it was “polishing,” “drawing,” or “raising” spears (see tc note above), the main point seems to be to have them ready to use. Some translations say “sharpen” (NLT, NRSV), but this meaning does not fit the proposed readings and would be an earlier activity in battle preparations.
8. Jeremiah 46:4 sn A Hurrian loanword into Semitic. The Akkadian use refers to mail armor for either persons or horses.
9. Jeremiah 46:5 tn Heb “Why do I see?” or “Why have I seen?” The rendering is that of J. A. Thompson (Jeremiah [NICOT], 685, 88) and J. Bright (Jeremiah [AB], 301; TEV; NIV). The question is not asking for information but expressing surprise or wonder (see E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 951).sn The passage jumps forward in time here, moving from the Egyptian army being summoned to battle to a description of their being routed in defeat.
10. Jeremiah 46:5 tn Heb “Their soldiers.” These words are actually at the midpoint of the stanza as the subject of the third of the five verbs. However, as G. L. Keown, P. J. Scalise, and T. G. Smothers (Jeremiah 26-52 [WBC], 291) note, this is the subject of all five verbs: “are terrified,” “are retreating,” “have been defeated,” “have run away,” and “have not looked back.” The subject is put at the front to avoid an unidentified “they.”
11. Jeremiah 46:5 tn The verb יֻכַּתּוּ (yukkattu) is a Hophal imperfect from כָּתַת (katat). The imperfect can depict an action in progress, which fits the present timeframe of the verse. Many different constructions are employed to fit the present timeframe in this verse: predicate adj., participle, imperfect, perfect (for past action with continuing results), and a nominal clause.
12. Jeremiah 46:5 tn Heb “have not looked back.”
13. Jeremiah 46:5 tn Heb “Terror is all around.” This phrase also appears at Jer 6:25; 20:3 (cf. v. 4); 20:10; and, in a nearly identical form, Lam 2:22.
14. Jeremiah 46:6 tn The translation understands the articular adjectives to function as superlatives (cf. GKC 431 §133.g). The negator אַל (ʾal) usually occurs with the jussive, but the form here is imperfect (יָנוּס [yanus] rather than יָנָס [yanos]). It should be understood modally, as an abilitive modal (“unable to”) or deontic modal (ought not [try to]), or as expressing the speaker’s “conviction that something cannot happen” (GKC 317 §107.p).
15. Jeremiah 46:6 tn Heb “they stumbled and fell.” The words “in defeat” are added for clarity. The picture is not simply of having fallen down physically; it implies not getting up and therefore being defeated in battle. The account either moves ahead from the process of defeating Egypt to its defeat, or it follows a couple of soldiers amid the skirmish of v. 4 to their demise.
16. Jeremiah 46:7 tn The word translated “streams” here refers to the streams of the Nile (cf. Exod 7:19 and 8:1 for parallel usage).
17. Jeremiah 46:7 sn The time frame moves backward now to where it began in v. 3. Possibly v. 6 ends an oracle, and now Jeremiah continues on the same topic. Or it could be that the rhetoric of a single oracle starts at battle preparations and then, after showing what God has foreseen about the battle, returns to address those preparing for battle.
18. Jeremiah 46:8 sn Jeremiah shows the hubris of the Egyptian Pharoah by comparing his might to that of the Nile River. Isaiah 8:7-8 similarly pictures the armies of Assyria overcoming everything in their path.
19. Jeremiah 46:9 tn The words “Go ahead and” are not in the text but are intended to suggest the ironical nature of the commands here. Because the outcome has been made known, their actions will be pointless; they are only heading for a fall.
20. Jeremiah 46:9 sn The peoples referred to here are all known to have been mercenaries in the army of Egypt (see Nah 3:9; Ezek 30:5). The place names in Hebrew are actually Cush, Put, and Lud. “Cush” has already been identified in Jer 13:23 as the region along the Nile south of Egypt most commonly referred to as Ethiopia. The identification of “Put” and “Lud” are both debated, though it is generally felt that Put was a part of Libya and Lud is to be identified with Lydia in Asia Minor. For further discussion see M. J. Mellink, “Lud, Ludim” IDB 3:178, and T. O. Lambdin, “Put,” IDB 3:971.
21. Jeremiah 46:9 tn Heb “who grasp and bend the bow.”
22. Jeremiah 46:10 tn Heb “Lord Yahweh of Armies.” See the study note at 2:19 for the translation and significance of this title for God.
23. Jeremiah 46:10 tn Heb “a day of vengeance, for [the purpose of] taking vengeance against his adversaries.”sn Most commentators think that this is a reference to the Lord exacting vengeance on Pharaoh Necho for killing Josiah, carrying Jehoahaz off into captivity, and exacting heavy tribute on Judah in 609 b.c. (2 Kgs 23:29, 33-35).
24. Jeremiah 46:10 tn Heb “The sword will eat and be sated; it will drink its fill from their blood.”sn This passage is, of course, highly figurative. The Lord does not have a literal “sword,” but he uses agents of destruction like the Assyrian armies (called his “rod” in Isa 10:5-6) and the Babylonian armies (called his war club in Jer 51:20) to wreak vengeance on his foes. Likewise, swords do not “eat” or “drink.” What is meant here is that God will use this battle against the Egyptians to kill off many Egyptians until his vengeance is fully satisfied.
25. Jeremiah 46:11 tn Heb “balm.” See 8:22 and the notes on this phrase there.
26. Jeremiah 46:11 sn Heb “Virgin Daughter of Egypt.” See the study note on Jer 14:17 for the significance of the use of this figure. Here it may compare Egypt’s geographical isolation to the safety and protection enjoyed by a virgin living at home under her father’s protection (so F. B. Huey, Jeremiah, Lamentations [NAC], 379). By her involvement in the politics of Palestine Egypt had forfeited that safety and protection and was now suffering for it.
27. Jeremiah 46:11 tn Heb “In vain you multiply [= make use of many] medicines.”
28. Jeremiah 46:12 tn Heb “of your shame.” The “shame,” however, applies to the devastating defeat they will suffer.
29. Jeremiah 46:12 tn Heb “The earth is full of your cries.”
30. Jeremiah 46:12 tn The word “defeated” is added for clarity. The picture is not simply of having fallen down physically; it implies not getting up and therefore being defeated in battle. The verbs in this verse are in the perfect conjugation, translated past tense for the dynamic verbs and present tense for the stative verb (“fill”). This verse speaks from the same perspective as v. 2, which indicates that Egypt has been defeated.
31. Jeremiah 46:13 tn Heb “The word that the Lord spoke to the prophet Jeremiah about the coming of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon to attack the land of Egypt.”sn There is much debate in the commentaries regarding the dating and reference of this prophecy. It most likely refers to a time shortly after 604 b.c. when Nebuchadnezzar followed up his successful battle against Necho at Carchemish with a campaign into the Philistine plain that resulted in the conquest and sacking of Ashkelon. Nebuchadnezzar now stood poised on the border of Egypt to invade it. See J. A. Thompson, Jeremiah (NICOT), 691, and, for a fuller discussion including the other main options, see G. L. Keown, P. J. Scalise, T. G. Smothers, Jeremiah 26-52 (WBC), 287-88.
32. Jeremiah 46:14 tn Heb “Declare in Egypt and announce in Migdol and announce in Noph [= Memphis] and in Tahpanhes.” The sentence has been restructured to reflect the fact that the first command is a general one, followed by announcements in specific (representative?) cities.sn For the location of the cities of Migdol, Memphis, and Tahpanhes see the note on Jer 44:1. These were all cities in Lower or northern Egypt that would have been the first affected by an invasion.
33. Jeremiah 46:14 tn Heb “For the sword devours those who surround you.” The “sword” is again figurative of destructive forces. Here it refers to the forces of Nebuchadnezzar, which have already destroyed the Egyptian forces at Carchemish and have made victorious forays into the Philistine plain.
34. Jeremiah 46:15 tn The word translated “soldiers” (אַבִּירִים, ʾabbirim) is not the Hebrew word used of soldiers elsewhere in these oracles (גִּבּוֹרִים, gibborim). It is an adjective used as a noun that can apply to animals, i.e., a bull (Ps 50:13) or a stallion (Judg 5:22). Moreover, the form is masculine plural, and the verbs are singular. Hence, many modern commentaries and English versions follow the redivision of the first line presupposed by the Greek version (“Apis has fled” [נָס חַף, nas khaf]) and see this as a reference to the bull god of Memphis. However, the noun is used of soldiers in Lam 1:15, and the plural could be the distributive plural, i.e., each and every one (cf. GKC 464 §145.l and compare usage in Gen 27:29).
35. Jeremiah 46:15 tn The Hebrew word behind “defeated” only occurs here (in the Niphal) and in Prov 28:3 (in the Qal), where it refers to a rain that beats down grain. That idea would fit nicely with the idea of the soldiers being beaten down, or defeated. It is possible that the rarity of this verb (versus the common verb נוּס, nus, “flee”) and the ready identification of Apis with the bull calf (אַבִּיר, ʾabbir) have led to the reading of the Greek text (so C. von Orelli, Jeremiah, 327). The verbs in this verse and the following are in the perfect tense but should be understood as prophetic perfects, since the text is dealing with what will happen when Nebuchadnezzar comes into Egypt. The text of vv. 18-24 shows a greater verb mixture, with some perfects and some imperfects, at times even within the same verse (e.g., v. 22).
36. Jeremiah 46:15 tn Heb “the Lord will thrust them down.” However, the Lord is speaking (cf. clearly in v. 18), so the first person is adopted for the sake of consistency. This has been a consistent problem in the book of Jeremiah, where the prophet is so identified with the word of the Lord that he sometimes uses the first person and sometimes the third. It creates confusion for the average reader who is trying to follow the flow of the argument. So the pronoun has been shifted to the first person like this on numerous occasions. TEV and CEV have generally adopted the same policy, as have some other modern English versions at various points.
37. Jeremiah 46:16 tn Heb “he multiplied the one stumbling.” For the first person reference see the preceding translator’s note.
38. Jeremiah 46:16 tc The words “in their hurry to flee” are not in the text but appear to be necessary to clarify that the stumbling and falling here are not the same as in vv. 6, 12, where they occur in the context of defeat and destruction. The referent here appears to be the mercenary soldiers who, in their hurried flight to escape, stumble over one another and fall. This is fairly clear from the literal translation: “he multiplies the stumbling one. Also [= and] a man falls against a man, and they say [probably = saying; an epexegetical use of the vav (ו) consecutive (IBHS 551 §33.2.2a, and see Exod 2:10 as a parallel)] ‘Get up! Let’s go…’” A reference to the flight of the mercenaries is also seen in v. 21. Many of the modern commentaries and a few of the modern English versions follow the Greek text and take vv. 15a-16 very differently. The Greek reads, “Why has Apis fled from you? Your choice calf [i.e., Apis] has not remained. For the Lord has paralyzed him. And your multitudes have fainted and fallen; and each one said to his neighbor…” (reading רֻבְּךָ כָּשַׁל גַּם־נָפַל וַיֹּאמְרוּ אִישׁ אֶל־רֵעֵהוּ instead of כּוֹשֵׁל הִרְבָּה גַּם־נָפַל אִישׁ אֶל־רֵעֵהוּ). One would expect אִישׁ אֶל רֵעֵהוּ (ʾish ʾel reʿehu) to go with וַיֹּאמְרוּ (vayyoʾm^eru) because it is idiomatic in this expression (cf., e.g., Gen 11:3; Judg 6:29). However, אִישׁ אֶל־רֵעֵהוּ (ʾish ʾel-reʿehu) is also found with singular verbs as here in Exod 22:9; 33:11; 1 Sam 10:11. There is no doubt that the Hebrew text is the more difficult and thus probably original. The reading of the Greek version is not supported by any other text or version and looks like an attempt to smooth out a somewhat awkward Hebrew original.
39. Jeremiah 46:16 tn Heb “to our native lands from before the sword of the oppressor.” The compound preposition “from before” is regularly used in a causal sense (see BDB 818 s.v. פָּנֶה 6.a, b, c). The “sword” is again interpreted as a figure for the destructive power of an enemy army.
40. Jeremiah 46:17 tn Heb “is a noise.” Based on the context, “just a big” is an addition in the translation to suggest the idea of sarcasm. The reference is probably to Pharaoh's boast in v. 8.
41. Jeremiah 46:17 tn Heb “he has let the appointed time pass him by.” It is unclear what is meant by the reference to “appointed time” other than the fact that Pharaoh has missed his opportunity to do what he claimed to be able to do. The Greek text is again different here. It reads, “Call the name of Pharaoh Necho king of Egypt Saon esbeie moed,” reading קִרְאוּ שֵׁם (qirʾu shem) for קָרְאוּ שָׁם (qar^eʾu sham) and transliterating the last line.
42. Jeremiah 46:18 tn Heb “Yahweh of Armies.” For the significance of this title see the note at 2:19.
43. Jeremiah 46:18 tn Heb “As I live, oracle of the King, whose….” The indirect quote has been chosen to create a smoother English sentence and avoid embedding a quote within a quote.
44. Jeremiah 46:18 tn Heb “Like Tabor among the mountains and like Carmel by the sea he will come.” The addition of “conqueror” and “imposing” are implicit from the context and from the metaphor. They have been supplied in the translation to give the reader some idea of the meaning of the verse.sn Most of the commentaries point out that neither Tabor nor Carmel are all that tall in terms of sheer height. Mount Tabor, on the east end of the Jezreel Valley, is only about 1800 feet (540 m) tall. Mount Carmel, on the Mediterranean Coast, is only about 1700 feet (510 m) at its highest. However, all the commentators point out that the idea of imposing height and majesty are due to the fact that they are rugged mountains that stand out dominantly over their surroundings. The point of the simile is that Nebuchadnezzar and his army will stand out in power and might over all the surrounding kings and their armies.
45. Jeremiah 46:19 tn Heb “inhabitants of daughter Egypt.” Like the phrase “daughter Zion,” “daughter Egypt” is a poetic personification of the land, here perhaps to stress the idea of defenselessness.
46. Jeremiah 46:19 tn For the verb here see HALOT 675 s.v. II נָצָה Nif and compare the usage in Jer 4:7; 9:11 and 2 Kgs 19:25. BDB derives the verb from יָצַת (so BDB 428 s.v. יָצַת Niph, meaning “kindle, burn”) but still gives it the meaning “desolate” here and in 2:15 and 9:11.
47. Jeremiah 46:20 tn Heb “Egypt is a beautiful heifer. A gadfly from the north will come against her.” The metaphors have been turned into similes for the sake of clarity. The exact meaning of the word translated “stinging fly” is uncertain due to the fact that it occurs nowhere else in Hebrew literature. For a discussion of the meaning of the word, which probably refers to the “gadfly,” which bites and annoys livestock, see W. L. Holladay, Jeremiah (Hermeneia), 2:331. He also suggests, probably correctly, that the word is a collective referring to swarms of such insects (cf. the singular אַרְבֶּה [ʾarbeh] in v. 23, which always refers to swarms of locusts). The translation presupposes the emendation of the second בָּא (baʾ) to בָּהּ (bah) with a number of Hebrew mss and a number of the versions (cf. BHS, fn b).
48. Jeremiah 46:21 tn Heb “her hirelings in her midst.”
49. Jeremiah 46:21 tn The word “pampered” is not in the text. It is supplied in the translation to explain the probable meaning of the simile. The mercenaries were well cared for like stall-fed calves, but in the face of the danger they will prove no help because they will not stand their ground but will turn and run away. Some see the point of the simile to be that they too are fattened for slaughter. However, the next two lines do not fit that interpretation too well.
50. Jeremiah 46:21 tn The temporal use of the particle כִּי (ki; BDB 472 s.v. כִּי 2.a) seems more appropriate to the context than the causal use.
51. Jeremiah 46:22 tn Or “Egypt will rustle away like a snake”; Heb “her sound goes like the snake,” or “her sound [is] like the snake [when] it goes.” The meaning of the simile is debated. Some see a reference to the impotent hiss of a fleeing serpent (F. B. Huey, Jeremiah, Lamentations [NAC], 382), others the sound of a serpent stealthily crawling away when it is disturbed (H. Freedman, Jeremiah [SoBB], 297-98). The translation follows the former interpretation because of the irony involved.sn Several commentators point out the irony of the snake slithering away (or hissing away) in retreat. The coiled serpent was a part of the royal insignia, signifying Egypt’s readiness to strike. Pharaoh had boasted of great things (v. 8) but was just a big noise (v. 17); now all he could do was hiss as he beat his retreat (v. 22).
52. Jeremiah 46:23 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.” Again the first person is adopted because the Lord is speaking, and the indirect quotation is used to avoid an embedded quotation with quotation marks on either side.
53. Jeremiah 46:23 tn The precise meaning of this verse is uncertain. The Hebrew text reads, “They [those who enter in great force] will cut down her forest, oracle of the Lord, though it [the forest] cannot be searched out/through, for they [those who come in great force] are more numerous than locusts, and there is no number to them.” Some see the reference to the forest as metaphorical of Egypt’s population, which the Babylonian army decimates (H. Freedman, Jeremiah [SoBB], 298, and see BDB 420 s.v. I יַעַר 1.a, which refers to the forest as a figure of foes to be cut down and destroyed, and compare Isa 10:34). Others see the reference to literal trees and see the decimation of Egypt in general (C. von Orelli, Jeremiah, 329). And some find a continuation of the simile of the snake fleeing, the soldiers cutting down the trees because they cannot find it (J. A. Thompson, Jeremiah [NICOT], 693). However, the simile of v. 22a has already been dropped in v. 22b-d; they come against her. Hence it is probably best to view this as a continuation of the simile in v. 22c-d and see the reference as the Babylonian army coming against her, i.e., Egypt (the nation or people of Egypt), like woodcutters cutting down trees.
54. Jeremiah 46:24 tn Heb “Daughter Egypt.” See the translator’s note on v. 19.
55. Jeremiah 46:25 tn Heb “Yahweh of Armies, the God of Israel.” For the significance of this title see the note at 2:19.
56. Jeremiah 46:25 tn Heb “Amon of No.”sn The Egyptian city called No (נֹא, noʾ) in Hebrew was Thebes. It is located about 400 miles (666 km) south of modern-day Cairo. It was the capital of Upper or southern Egypt and the center for the worship of the god Amon, who became the state god of Egypt. Thebes is perhaps best known today for the magnificent temples at Karnak and Luxor on the east bank of the Nile.
57. Jeremiah 46:25 tc Heb “Behold, I will punish Amon of No and Pharaoh and Egypt and its gods and its kings and Pharaoh and all who trust in him.” There appears to be a copyist slip involving a double writing of וְעַל־פַּרְעֹה (v^eʿal-parʿoh). The present translation has followed the suggestion of BHS and deleted the first one, since the second is necessary for the syntactical connection, “Pharaoh and all who trust in him.”
58. Jeremiah 46:26 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
59. Jeremiah 46:27 sn Jer 46:27-28 are virtually the same as 30:10-11. The verses are more closely related to that context than to this. But the presence of a note of future hope for the Egyptians may have led to a note of encouragement also to the Judeans who were under threat of judgment at the same time (cf. the study notes on 46:2, 13 and 25:1-2 for the possible relative dating of these prophecies).
60. Jeremiah 46:27 tn Heb “And/But you do not be afraid, my servant Jacob.” Here and elsewhere in the verse the terms Jacob and Israel are poetic for the people of Israel descended from the patriarch Jacob. The terms have been supplied throughout with plural referents for greater clarity.
61. Jeremiah 46:27 tn Heb “For I will rescue you from far away, your descendants from the land of their captivity.”
62. Jeremiah 46:28 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.” Again the first person is adopted because the Lord is speaking, and the indirect quotation is used to avoid an embedded quotation with quotation marks on either side.
63. Jeremiah 46:28 tn The translation “entirely unpunished” is intended to reflect the emphatic construction of the infinitive absolute before the finite verb.
64. Jeremiah 47:1 tn Heb “that which was.”
65. Jeremiah 47:1 sn The precise dating of this prophecy is uncertain. Several proposals have been suggested, the most likely of which is that the prophecy was delivered in 609 b.c. in conjunction with Pharaoh Necho’s advance into Palestine to aid the Assyrians. That was the same year Josiah was killed by Necho at the battle of Megiddo and four years before Necho was defeated by Nebuchadnezzar, the foe from the north. The prophecy presupposes that Ashkelon is still in existence (v. 5); hence it must be before 604 b.c. For a fairly complete discussion of the options see G. L. Keown, P. J. Scalise, T. G. Smothers, Jeremiah 26-52 (WBC), 299-300.
66. Jeremiah 47:2 tn Heb “Behold! Waters are rising from the north.” The metaphor of enemy armies compared to overflowing water occurs also in Isa 8:8-9 (Assyria) and 46:7-8 (Egypt). Here it refers to the foe from the north (Jer 1:14; 4:6; etc), which is specifically identified with Babylon in Jer 25. The metaphor has been turned into a simile in the translation to help the average reader identify that a figure is involved, and to hint at the referent.
67. Jeremiah 47:3 tn Heb “From the noise of the stamping of the hoofs of his stallions, from the rattling of his chariots at the rumbling of their wheels, fathers will not turn to their children from sinking of hands.” According to BDB 952 s.v. רִפָּיוֹן, the “sinking of the hands” is figurative of helplessness caused by terror. A very similar figure appears with a related expression in Isa 35:3-4. The sentence has been restructured to put the subject up front and to suggest the same causal connections through shorter sentences more in keeping with contemporary English style. The figures have been interpreted for the sake of clarity for the average reader.
68. Jeremiah 47:4 tn Heb “For the Lord will.” The first person style has been adopted because the Lord is speaking (cf. v. 2).
69. Jeremiah 47:4 sn All the help that remains for Tyre and Sidon and that remnant that came from the island of Crete appear to be two qualifying phrases that refer to the Philistines, the last pertaining to their origin and the first to their vital alliance with Tyre and Sidon. “Crete” is literally “Caphtor,” which is generally identified with the island of Crete. The Philistines had come from there (Amos 9:7) in the wave of migration from the Aegean Islands during the twelfth and eleventh centuries. They had settled on the Philistine plain after having been repulsed from trying to enter Egypt.
70. Jeremiah 47:5 sn Shaving one’s head and gashing one’s body were customs to show mourning or sadness for the dead (cf. Deut 14:1; Mic 1:16; Ezek 27:31; Jer 16:6; 48:37).
71. Jeremiah 47:5 tn Or “you who are left alive on the Philistine plain.” Or “you who remain of the Anakim.” The translation follows the suggestion of several of the modern commentaries that the word עֵמֶק (ʿemeq) means “strength” or “power” here (see J. A. Thompson, Jeremiah [NICOT], 698; J. Bright, Jeremiah [AB], 310; and see also HALOT 803 s.v. II עֵמֶק). It is a rare homonym of the word that normally means “valley,” which seems to be an inappropriate designation of the Philistine plain. Many of the modern English versions and commentaries follow the Greek version, which reads here “remnant of the Anakim” (עֲנָקִים [ʿanaqim] instead of עִמְקָם [ʿimqam], a confusion of basically one letter). This emendation is followed by both BDB 771 s.v. עֵמֶק and KBL 716 s.v. עֵמֶק. The Anakim were generally associated with the southern region around Hebron, but an enclave of them was known to have settled in Gaza, Gath, and Ekron, three of the Philistine cities (cf. Josh 11:22). However, the facts that this judgment is directed against the Philistines, not the Anakim, and that this homonym apparently appears also in Jer 49:4 make the reading of “power” more likely here.
72. Jeremiah 47:6 tn The words “How long will you cry out” are not in the text, but some such introduction seems necessary because the rest of the speech assumes a personal subject.
73. Jeremiah 47:6 tn Heb “before you are quiet/at rest.”
74. Jeremiah 47:6 sn The passage is highly figurative. The sword of the Lord, which is itself a figure of the destructive agency of the enemy armies, is here addressed as a person and is encouraged by rhetorical questions (questions designed to dissuade) and commands to “be quiet,” “be at rest,” and “be silent,” all of which aim to get the Lord to call off the destruction against the Philistines.
75. Jeremiah 47:7 tn The reading here follows the Greek, Syriac, and Latin versions. The Hebrew text reads, “how can you rest,” as a continuation of the second person in v. 6.
76. Jeremiah 47:7 tn Heb “When the Lord has.” The first person is again adopted because the Lord has been speaking.
77. Jeremiah 47:7 tn Heb “Against Ashkelon and the sea coast, there he has appointed it.” For the switch to the first person see the preceding translator’s note. “There” is poetical and redundant, and the idea of “attacking” is implicit in “against.”
78. Jeremiah 48:1 tn Heb “Yahweh of Armies, the God of Israel.” For this title see 7:3 and the study note on 2:19.
79. Jeremiah 48:1 sn Moab was a country east of the Dead Sea whose boundaries varied greatly over time. Basically, it was the tableland between the Arnon River, about halfway up the Dead Sea, and the Zered River, which is roughly at the southern tip of the Dead Sea. When the Israelites entered Palestine, they were forbidden to take any of the Moabite territory, but they did capture the kingdom of Sihon north of the Arnon, which Sihon had taken from Moab. Several of the towns mentioned in the oracles of judgment against Moab here are in this territory north of the Arnon and were assigned to Reuben and Gad. Several are mentioned on the famous Moabite Stone, which details how Mesha king of Moab recovered from Israel many of these cities during the reign of Joram (852-841 b.c.; cf. 2 Kgs 3:4-5). It is usually assumed that Moab submitted to Nebuchadnezzar after the battle of Carchemish and that it remained loyal to him throughout most of this period, though representatives were present at Jerusalem in 594 b.c. when plans for revolt were apparently being discussed (Jer 27:3). Moabite contingents were used by Nebuchadnezzar in 598 b.c. to harass Jehoiakim after he rebelled (2 Kgs 24:2), so they must have remained loyal at that time. According to the Jewish historian Josephus, Nebuchadnezzar conquered Moab in 582 b.c. and destroyed many of its cities.
80. Jeremiah 48:1 tn Heb “Woe to Nebo for it is destroyed.” For the use of the Hebrew particle “Woe” (הוֹי, hoy), see the translator’s note on 22:13. The translation has taken this form because the phrase “Woe to” probably does not convey the proper meaning or significance to the modern reader. The verbs again are in the tense (Hebrew prophetic perfect) that views the action as if it were as good as done. The particle כִּי (ki) probably is causal, but the asseverative works better in the modified translation.
81. Jeremiah 48:1 sn Nebo and Kiriathaim were both north of the Arnon and were assigned to Reuben (Num 32:3; Josh 13:19). They are both mentioned on the Moabite Stone as having been recovered from Israel.
82. Jeremiah 48:1 tn Or “Misgab.” The translation here follows the majority of commentaries and English versions. Only REB sees this as a place name, “Misgab,” which is otherwise unknown. The constant use of this word to refer to a fortress, the presence of the article on the front of it, and the lack of any reference to a place of this name anywhere else argue against it being a place name. However, the fact that the verbs that accompany it are feminine, while the noun for “fortress” is masculine, causes some pause.
83. Jeremiah 48:1 tn For the meaning of the verb here see BDB 369 s.v. חָתַת Qal.1 and compare usage in Isa 7:8 and 30:31.
84. Jeremiah 48:2 sn Heshbon was originally a Moabite city but was captured by Sihon king of Og and made his capital (Num 21:26-30). It was captured from Sihon and originally assigned to the tribe of Reuben (Num 32:37; Josh 13:17). Later it was made a Levitical city and was assigned to the tribe of Gad (Josh 21:39). It formed the northern limits of Moab and was located about eighteen miles east of the northern tip of the Dead Sea.
85. Jeremiah 48:2 sn There is a wordplay in Hebrew on the word “Heshbon” and the word “plot” (חָשְׁבוּ, khash^evu).
86. Jeremiah 48:2 tn Heb “In Heshbon they plot evil against her [i.e., Moab].” The “they” is undefined, but it would scarcely be Moabites living in Heshbon. Hence TEV and CEV are probably correct in seeing a reference to the enemy, which would imply the conquest of this city that lay on the northern border of Moab.
87. Jeremiah 48:2 tn The meaning of this line is somewhat uncertain. The translation here follows all the modern English versions and commentaries in reading the place name “Madmen,” even though the place is otherwise unknown, and the Greek, Syriac, and Latin versions all read this word as an emphasizing infinitive absolute of the following verb, “will be destroyed,” i.e., דָּמוֹם יִדֹּמּוּ (damom yiddommu). Some see this word as a variant of the name Dimon in Isa 15:9, which in turn is a playful variant of the place name Dibon. There is once again a wordplay on the word “Madmen” and “will be destroyed”: מַדְמֵן (madmen) and יִדֹּמּוּ (yiddommu). For the meaning of the verb as “perish” or “be destroyed,” see Jer 8:14 and Ps 31:18.
88. Jeremiah 48:2 tn Heb “A sword will follow after you.” The sword is again figurative of destructive forces, here the army of the Babylonians.
89. Jeremiah 48:4 tc The reading here follows the Qere צְעִירֶיהָ (ts^eʿireha), which is the same noun found in Jer 14:3 in the sense of “servants.” Here it refers to the young ones, i.e., the children (cf. the use of the adjective BDB 859 s.v. I צָעִיר 2, and see Gen 43:33). Many of the modern commentaries and a few of the modern English versions follow the Greek version and read “their cry is heard as far as Zoar” (reading צֹעֲרָה, tsoʿarah; see, for example, J. A. Thompson, Jeremiah [NICOT], 699, n. 4, and BDB 858 s.v. צֹעַר). However, that leaves the verb with an indefinite subject (the verb is active third plural, not passive) not otherwise identified in the preceding context. Many of the modern English versions, such as NRSV, NJPS, and NIV, retain the Hebrew, as the present translation has done. In this case, the masculine plural noun furnishes a logical subject for the verb.
90. Jeremiah 48:5 tn Or “Indeed her fugitives will…” It is unclear what the subject of the verbs are in this verse. The verb in the first two lines, “climb” (יַעֲלֶה, yaʿaleh), is third masculine singular, and the verb in the second two lines, “will hear” (שָׁמֵעוּ, shameʿu), is third common plural. The causal particles at the beginning of the two halves of the verse can indicate some connection with the preceding, so the translation assumes that the children are still the subject. In this case, the singular verb would be an example of the distributive singular already referred to in the translator’s note on 46:15. The parallel passage in Isa 15:5 refers to the “fugitives” (בְּרִיחֶהָ, b^erikheha) with the same singular verb as here, and that may be the implied subject here.sn The location of Luhith and Horonaim are uncertain, but their connection with Zoar in Isa 15:5 suggests they are located in southern Moab. Zoar was at the southern tip of the Dead Sea.
91. Jeremiah 48:5 tn Heb “the distresses of the cry of destruction.” Many commentaries want to leave out the word “distresses” because it is missing from the Greek version and the parallel passage in Isa 15:5. However, it is in all the Hebrew mss and in the other early versions, and it is hard to see why it would be added here if it were not original.
92. Jeremiah 48:6 tc The meaning of this line is uncertain. The translation follows one reading of the Hebrew text. The Greek version reads, “Be like a wild donkey in the desert!” There are three points of debate in this line: the syntax of the verb form “be” (תִהְיֶינָה, tihyenah) and the text and meaning of the word translated “shrub” in the Hebrew text. This latter word only occurs with this meaning here and in Jer 17:6. A related word occurs in Ps 102:17 (102:18 HT). Elsewhere this spelling refers to the name Aroer, which designated a place in Moab on the edge of the Arnon River. Most commentators do not feel that a reference to that place is appropriate here because it was not in the desert. The Greek version reads “like a wild donkey” (reading כְּעָרוֹד [k^eʿarod] in place of כַּעֲרוֹעֵר [kaʿaroʿer]). That would make an appropriate simile here because the wild donkey enjoys its freedom and is hard to capture. G. L. Keown, P. J. Scalise, and T. G. Smothers (Jeremiah 26-52 [WBC], 312) explain the simile of the “shrub” as referring to the marginal and rudimentary existence of a displaced person. That may not be as optimistic as the reference to the wild donkey, but it does give an appropriate meaning. The third feminine plural verb “be” has been explained as due to the singular noun + suffix = “yourselves” (נַפְשְׁכֶם, nafsh^ekhem) being used as a collective (so S. R. Driver, Jeremiah, 368, with cross reference to GKC 462-63 §145.c). J. Bright (Jeremiah [AB], 314, n. e-e) follows a suggestion of D. N. Freedman in seeing the form (תִהְיֶינָה, tihyenah) as a mistake for the second masculine plural plus energic (תִהְיוּן, tihyun). Given the number of other textual difficulties in this passage, this is possible. The resultant meaning in either case is the same.
93. Jeremiah 48:7 sn Chemosh was the national god of Moab (see also Num 21:29). Child sacrifice appears to have been a part of his worship (2 Kgs 3:27). Solomon built a high place in Jerusalem for him (1 Kgs 11:7), and he appears to have been worshiped in Israel until Josiah tore that high place down (2 Kgs 23:13).
94. Jeremiah 48:7 sn The practice of carrying off the gods of captive nations has already been mentioned in the study note on 43:12. See also notes at Isa 46:1-2.
95. Jeremiah 48:8 tn Heb “The valley will be destroyed and the tableland laid waste.” However, in the context this surely refers to the towns and not to the valley and the tableland itself.sn Most commentaries see a reference to the towns in the Jordan valley referred to in Josh 13:27 and to the towns mentioned in Josh 13:15-17, which were on the high tableland or high plateau or plain north of the Arnon. The mention of the towns in the first half of the verse is broader than that because it would include all the towns in the southern half of Moab between the Arnon and Zered, as well as those mentioned in the second half of the verse in conjunction with the valley and the high plateau north of the Arnon.
96. Jeremiah 48:8 tn Heb “which/for/as the Lord has spoken.” The first person form has again been adopted because the Lord is the speaker throughout (cf. v. 1).
97. Jeremiah 48:9 tn Or “Scatter salt over Moab, for it will certainly be laid in ruins.” The meaning of these two lines is very uncertain. The Hebrew of these two lines presents several difficulties. It reads תְּנוּ־צִיץ לְמוֹאָב נָצֹא תֵּצֵא (t^enu-tsits l^emoʾav natsoʾ tetseʾ). Of the five words, two are extremely problematic, and the meaning of the second affects also the meaning of the last word, which normally means “go out.” The word צִיץ (tsits) regularly refers to a blossom or flower or the diadem on the front of Aaron’s mitre. BDB 851 s.v. II צִיץ gives a nuance “wings (coll),” based on the interpretation of Abu Walid and some medieval Jewish interpreters, who related it to an Aramaic root. But BDB says that meaning is dubious and refers to the Greek, which reads σημεῖα (sēmeia, “sign” or “sign post”). Along with KBL 802 s.v. I צִיץ and HALOT 959 s.v. II צִיץ, BDB suggests that the Greek presupposes the word צִיּוּן (tsiyyun) which refers to a road marker (Jer 31:21) or a gravestone (2 Kgs 23:17). That is the meaning followed here. Several modern commentaries and English versions have followed a proposal by W. Moran that the word is related to a Ugaritic word meaning salt (cf., e.g., J. Bright, Jeremiah [AB], 320). However, HALOT 959 s.v. II צִיץ questions the validity of this on philological grounds, saying that the meaning of salt does not really fit the Ugaritic either. The present translation follows the suggestions of the lexicons here and reads the word as though the Greek supported the meaning “gravestone.” The other difficulty is with the word נָצֹא (natsoʾ), which looks like a Qal infinitive absolute of an otherwise unattested root that BDB s.v. נָצָא says is defined in Gesenius’ Thesaurus as “fly.” However, BDB sees the meaning and the construction of an infinitive absolute of one root preceding an imperfect of another as improbable. Hence, most modern lexicons either emend the forms to read נָצֹה תִּצֶּה (natsoh titseh) from the root נָצָה (natsah), meaning “to fall into ruins” (so KBL 629 s.v. נָצָה Qal, and see, among others, J. A. Thompson, Jeremiah [NICOT], 700, n. 10, who notes that final א [alef] and final ה [he] are often confused; see the discussion and examples in GKC 216-17 §75.nn-rr). This is the option that this translation and a number of modern ones have taken. A second option is to see נָצֹא (natsoʾ) as an error for יָצֹא (yatsoʾ) and read the text in the sense of “she will certainly surrender,” a meaning that the verb יָצָא (yatsaʾ) has in 1 Sam 11:3 and Isa 36:6. The best discussion of this option, as well as a discussion on the problem of reading צִיץ (tsits) as salt, is found in G. L. Keown, P. J. Scalise, T. G. Smothers, Jeremiah 26-52 (WBC), 313-14.
98. Jeremiah 48:10 tn Heb “who withholds his sword from bloodshed.” This verse is an editorial aside (or apostrophe) warning the Babylonian destroyers to be diligent in carrying out the work of the Lord in destroying Moab.
99. Jeremiah 48:11 tn Heb “Therefore his taste remains in him, and his aroma is not changed.” The metaphor is changed into a simile in an attempt to help the reader understand the figure in the context.sn The picture is that of undisturbed complacency (cf. Zeph 1:12). Because Moab had never known the discipline of exile, she had remained as she always was.
100. Jeremiah 48:12 tn Heb “Therefore, behold, the days are coming, oracle of Yahweh, when I will send against him decanters [those who pour from one vessel to another], and they will decant him [pour him out], and they will empty his vessels and break their jars in pieces.” The verse continues the metaphor from the preceding verse, where Moab/the people of Moab are like wine left undisturbed in a jar, i.e., in their native land. In this verse the picture is that of the decanter emptying the wine from the vessels and then breaking the jars. The wine represents the people and the vessels the cities and towns where the people lived. The verse speaks of the exile of the people and the devastation of the land. The metaphor has been interpreted so it conveys meaning to the average reader.
101. Jeremiah 48:12 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
102. Jeremiah 48:13 tn Heb “Moab will be ashamed because of Chemosh as the house of Israel was ashamed because of Bethel, their [source of] confidence.” The “shame” is, of course, the disappointment and disillusionment because of the lack of help from these gods in which they trusted (for this nuance of the verb see BDB 101 s.v. בּוֹשׁ Qal.2 and compare usage in Jer 2:13 and Isa 20:5). Because of the parallelism, some see the reference to Bethel to be a reference to a West Semitic god worshiped by the people of Israel (see J. P. Hyatt, “Bethel [Deity],” IDB 1:390 for the arguments). However, there is no evidence in the OT that such a god was worshiped in Israel, and there is legitimate evidence that northern Israel placed its confidence in the calf god that Jeroboam set up in Bethel (cf. 1 Kgs 12:28-32; Hos 10:5; 8:5-6; Amos 7:10-17).
103. Jeremiah 48:15 tn Heb “will go down to the slaughter.”
104. Jeremiah 48:15 tn Heb “Yahweh of Armies.” For an explanation of the translation and meaning of this title, see the study note on 2:19.
105. Jeremiah 48:15 tn Heb “Oracle of the King whose name is Yahweh of armies.” The first person form has again been adopted because the Lord is the speaker throughout this oracle/ these oracles (cf. v. 1).
106. Jeremiah 48:17 tn For the use of the word “name” (שֵׁם, shem) for “fame” or “repute,” see BDB 1028 s.v. שֵׁם 2.b and compare the usage in Ezek 16:14 and 2 Chr 26:15.sn This refers both to the nearby nations and to those who lived farther away and had heard of Moab’s power and might only by repute.
107. Jeremiah 48:17 tn Heb “How is the strong staff broken, the beautiful rod!” “How” introduces a lament that is here rendered by “Alas.” The staff and rod refer to the support that Moab gave to others, not to the fact that she ruled over others, which was never the case. According to BDB 739 s.v. עוֹז 1, the “strong staff” is figurative of political power.
108. Jeremiah 48:18 tn Heb “sit in thirst.” The abstract “thirst” is put for the concrete, i.e., thirsty or parched ground (cf. Deut 8:19; Isa 35:7; Ps 107:33) for the concrete. There is no need to emend to “filth” (צֹאָה [tsoʾah] for צָמָא [tsamaʾ]) as is sometimes suggested.
109. Jeremiah 48:18 tn Heb “inhabitant of Daughter Dibon.” “Daughter” is used here, as often in Jeremiah, for the personification of a city, a country, or its inhabitants. The word “inhabitant” is to be understood as a collective, as also in v. 19.sn Dibon was an important fortified city located on the “King’s Highway,” the main north-south road in Transjordan. It was the site at which the Moabite Stone was found in 1868 and was one of the cities mentioned on it. It was four miles north of the Arnon River and thirteen miles east of the Dead Sea. It was one of the main cities on the northern plateau and had been conquered from Sihon and allotted to the tribe of Reuben (Josh 13:17).
110. Jeremiah 48:19 sn Aroer is probably the Aroer located a few miles south and west of Dibon on the edge of the Arnon River. It had formerly been the southern border of Sihon, king of Heshbon, and had been allotted to the tribe of Reuben (Josh 13:16). However, this whole territory had been taken over by the Arameans (2 Kgs 10:33; c. 842-800 b.c.), then by the Assyrians (Isa 15-16; c. 715-713 b.c.), and at this time was in the hands of the Moabites.
111. Jeremiah 48:21 sn See the study note on Jer 48:8 for reference to this tableland or high plain that lay between the Arnon and Heshbon.
112. Jeremiah 48:25 tn Heb “The horn of Moab will be cut off. His arm will be broken.” “Horn” and “arm” are both symbols of strength (see BDB 902 s.v. קֶרֶן 2 [and compare usage in Lam 2:3] and BDB 284 s.v. זְרוֹעַ 2 [and compare usage in 1 Sam 2:31]). The figures have been interpreted for the sake of clarity.
113. Jeremiah 48:25 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
114. Jeremiah 48:26 tn Heb “Make him drunk because he has magnified himself against the Lord.” The first person has again been adopted for consistency within a speech of the Lord. Almost all of the commentaries relate the figure of drunkenness to the figure of drinking the cup of God’s wrath spelled out in Jer 25, where reference is made at one point to the nations drinking, staggering, vomiting, and falling (25:27; see G. L. Keown, P. J. Scalise, T. G. Smothers, Jeremiah 26-52 [WBC], 316, for a full list of references to this figure, including this passage and 49:12-13; 51:6-10, 39, 57).
115. Jeremiah 48:26 tn The meaning of this word is uncertain. It is usually used of clapping the hands or the thigh in helpless anger or disgust. Hence J. Bright (Jeremiah [AB], 321) paraphrases, “shall vomit helplessly.” HALOT 722 s.v. II סָפַק relates this to an Aramaic word and sees a homonym meaning “vomit” or “spew out.” The translation here is that of BDB 706 s.v. סָפַק Qal.3, “splash (fall with a splash),” from the same root that refers to slapping or clapping the thigh.
116. Jeremiah 48:27 tn Heb “were they caught among thieves?”
117. Jeremiah 48:27 tn Heb “that you shook yourself.” But see the same verb in 18:16 in the active voice with the object “head” in a very similar context of contempt or derision.
118. Jeremiah 48:27 tc The reading here presupposes the emendation of דְבָרֶיךָ (d^evarekha, “your words”) to דַבֶּרְךָ (dabber^ekha, “your speaking”). BHS (cf. fn c) suggested the change on the basis of one of the Greek versions (Symmachus). For the idiom, compare BDB 191 s.v. דַּי 2.c.α.
119. Jeremiah 48:28 tn Heb “in the sides of the mouth of a pit/chasm.” The translation follows the suggestion of J. Bright, Jeremiah (AB), 321. The point of the simile is inaccessibility.
120. Jeremiah 48:29 tn Heb “We have heard of the pride of Moab—[he is] exceedingly proud—of his haughtiness, and his pride, and his haughtiness, and the loftiness of his heart.” These words are essentially all synonyms, three of them coming from the same Hebrew root (גָּאָה, gaʾah), and one of the words being used twice (גָּאוֹן, gaʾon). Since the first person singular is used in the next verse, the present translation considers the “we” of this verse to refer to the plural of majesty or the plural referring to the divine council, as in passages like Gen 1:26; 3:22; 11:7; Isa 6:8, and has translated in the singular to avoid possible confusion of who the “we” are. Most understand the reference to be to Jeremiah and his fellow Judeans.
121. Jeremiah 48:30 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
122. Jeremiah 48:30 tn The meaning of this verse is somewhat uncertain: Heb “I know, oracle of the Lord,/ his arrogance and [that it is?] not true; // his boastings accomplish that which is not true.” Several modern English versions and commentaries redivide the verse and read something like, “I know his insolence…his boastings are false; his deeds are false” (NRSV, REB). However, the word translated “deeds” in the last line is a verb in the third person plural and can only have as its logical grammatical subject the word “boastings.” The adjective כֵּן (ken) + the negative לֹא (lo’) are evidently repeated here and applied to two different subjects, “arrogance” and “boasting,” to emphasize that Moab’s arrogant boasts will prove “untrue” (cf. HALOT 459 s.v. II כֵּן 2.c for the meaning “untrue” for both this passage and the parallel one in Isa 16:6). There is some difference of opinion about the identification of the “I” in this verse. Most commentators see it as referring to the prophet. However, F. B. Huey (Jeremiah, Lamentations [NAC], 395) is probably correct in seeing it refer to the Lord. He points to the fact that the “I” in vv. 33, 35, 38 can only refer to God. The “I know” in v. 30 also clearly has the Lord as its subject. There are other cases in the book of Jeremiah where the Lord expresses his lament over the fate of a people (cf. 14:1-6, 17-18).
123. Jeremiah 48:31 tc The translation is based on the emendation of the Hebrew third masculine singular (יֶהְגֶּה, yehgeh) to the first singular (אֶהְגֶּה, ʾehgeh). This emendation is assumed by almost all of the modern English versions and commentaries even though the textual evidence for it is weak (only one Hebrew ms and the Eastern Qere according to BHS).
124. Jeremiah 48:32 tc Or “I will weep for the grapevines of Sibmah more than I will weep over the town of Jazer.” The translation here assumes that there has been a graphic confusion of מ (mem) with כ (kaf) or ב (bet). The parallel passage in Isa 16:9 has the preposition ב, and the Greek version presupposes the comparative idea “as with.” Many of the modern English versions render the passage with the comparative מִן (min) as in the alternate translation, but it is unclear what the force of the comparison would be here. The verse is actually in the second person, an apostrophe or direct address to the grapevine(s) of Sibmah. However, the translation has retained the third person throughout because such sudden shifts in person are uncommon in contemporary English literature and retaining the third person is smoother. The Hebrew text reads, “From/With the weeping of Jazer I will weep for you, vine of Sibmah. Your tendrils crossed over the sea. They reached unto the sea of Jazer. Upon your summer fruit and your vintage [grape harvest] the destroyer has fallen.”
125. Jeremiah 48:32 tn Heb “crossed over to the Sea.”
126. Jeremiah 48:32 tn Or “reached the sea of Jazer.” The Sea is generally taken to be a reference to the Dead Sea. The translation presupposes that the word “sea” is to be omitted before “Jazer.” The word is missing from two Hebrew mss, from the parallel passage in Isa 16:8, and from the Greek version. It may have arisen from a mistaken copying of the same word in the preceding line.sn Though there is some doubt about the precise location of these places, Sibmah is generally considered to have been located slightly north and west of Heshbon, with Jazer farther north toward the border of Ammon, not far from the city of Amman. Most commentators see the reference here (and in the parallel in Isa 16:8) to the spread of viticulture westward and northward from the vineyards of Sibmah. G. L. Keown, P. J. Scalise, and T. G. Smothers (Jeremiah 26-52 [WBC], 318-19), however, see the reference rather to the spread of trade in wine westward beyond the coast of the Mediterranean and eastward into the desert.
127. Jeremiah 48:32 tn Heb “her summer fruit.” See the translator’s note on 40:10 for the rendering here. According to BDB 657 s.v. נָפַל Qal.4.a, the verb means to “fall upon” or “attack,” but in the context it is probably metonymical for attack and destroy.
128. Jeremiah 48:33 tn Heb “from the garden land, even from the land of Moab.” Comparison with the parallel passage in Isa 16:10, and the translation of the Greek text here (which has only “the land of Moab”), suggest that the second phrase is appositional to the first.
129. Jeremiah 48:33 tn Heb “no one will tread [the grapes] with shout of joy.”
130. Jeremiah 48:33 tn Heb “shouts will not be shouts.” The text has been expanded contextually to explain that the shouts of those treading grapes in winepresses will come to an end (v. 33a-d) and be replaced by the shouts of the soldiers who trample down the vineyards (v. 32e-f). Cf. 25:30; 51:41 for the idea.
131. Jeremiah 48:34 tn The meaning of this verse is very uncertain. The ambiguity of the syntax and the apparent elliptical nature of this text make the meaning of this verse uncertain. The Hebrew text reads, “From the cry of Heshbon unto Elealeh unto Jahaz they utter their voice, from Zoar unto Horonaim, Eglath Shelishiyah.” The translation and interpretation here are based on interpreting the elliptical syntax here by the parallel passage in Isaiah 15:4-6, where cries of anguish rise from Heshbon and Elealeh that are heard all the way to Jahaz. The people flee southward, arriving at Zoar and Eglath Shelishiyah, where they voice the news of the destruction in the north. Hence, the present translation interprets the phrase “from the cry of Heshbon unto Elealeh” to be parallel to “Heshbon and Elealeh cry out” and take the preposition “from” with the verb “they utter their voice,” i.e., with the cry of Heshbon and Elealeh. The impersonal “they raise their voice” is then treated as a passive and made the subject of the whole verse. There is some debate about the identification of the waters of Nimrim. They may refer to the waters of the Wadi Nimrim, which enters the Jordan about eight miles north of the Dead Sea, or to those of the Wadi en-Numeirah, which flows into the southern tip of the Dead Sea from about ten miles south. Most commentators prefer the latter option because of association with Zoar. However, if the passage is talking about the destruction in the north that is reported in the south by the fleeing refugees, the reference is probably to the Wadi Nimrim in the north.sn Elealeh was about two miles (3.3 km) north of Heshbon. Jahaz was about twenty miles (33 km) south of it. These three cities were in the north, and Zoar, Horonaim, and Eglath Shelishiyah were apparently in the south. The verse is speaking about the news of destruction in the north spreading to the south. Comparison should be made with the parallel passage in Isa 15:4-6.
132. Jeremiah 48:35 tn Heb “high place[s].” For the meaning and significance of this term see the study note on 7:31.
133. Jeremiah 48:35 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
134. Jeremiah 48:37 tn Heb “upon every loin [there is] sackcloth.” The word “all” is restored here before “loin,” in agreement with a number of Hebrew mss and a number of versions. The words “in mourning” and “to show their sorrow” are not in the text. They have been supplied in the translation to give the average reader some idea of the significance of these acts.sn The actions referred to here were all acts used to mourn the dead (cf. Isa 15:2-3).
135. Jeremiah 48:38 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
136. Jeremiah 48:39 tn Heb “turn her back.”
137. Jeremiah 48:40 tn Heb “Behold! Like an eagle he will swoop and will spread his wings against Moab.” The sentence has been reordered in English to give a better logical flow, and the unidentified “he” has been identified as “a nation.” The nation is, of course, Babylon, but it is nowhere identified, so the referent has been left ambiguous.sn Conquering nations are often identified with an eagle flying swiftly to swoop down on its victims (cf. Deut 28:49). In this case the eagle is to be identified with the nation (or king) of Babylon (cf. Ezek 17:3, 12, where reference is to the removal of Jehoiachin [Jeconiah] and his replacement with Zedekiah).
138. Jeremiah 48:41 tn Parallelism argues that the word קְרִיּוֹת (q^eriyyot) be understood as the otherwise unattested feminine plural of the noun קִרְיָה (qiryah, “city”) rather than the place name Kerioth mentioned in v. 24 (cf. HALOT 1065 s.v. קִרְיָה). Both this noun and the parallel term “fortresses” are plural but are found with feminine singular verbs, being treated either as collectives or distributive plurals (cf. GKC 462-63 §145.c or 464 §145.l).
139. Jeremiah 48:41 tn Heb “The heart of the soldiers of Moab will be like the heart of a woman in labor.”
140. Jeremiah 48:42 tn Heb “Moab will be destroyed from [being] a people.”
141. Jeremiah 48:43 sn There is an extended use of assonance here and in the parallel passage in Isa 24:17. The Hebrew text reads פַּחַד וָפַחַת וָפָח (pakhad vafakhat vafakh). The assonance is intended to underscore the extensive trouble that is in store for them.
142. Jeremiah 48:43 tn Heb “are upon you, inhabitant of Moab.” This is another example of the rapid switch in person, or direct address (apostrophe) in the midst of a third person description or prediction, which the present translation typically keeps in the third person for smoother English style.
143. Jeremiah 48:43 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
144. Jeremiah 48:44 sn Jer 48:43-44a are in the main the same as Isa 24:17-18, which shows that the judgment was somewhat proverbial. For a very similar kind of argumentation see Amos 5:19; judgment is unavoidable.
145. Jeremiah 48:44 tn Heb “For I will bring upon her, even upon Moab, the year of her punishment.”
146. Jeremiah 48:44 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
147. Jeremiah 48:45 tn Or “of those noisy boasters.” Or “They will burn up the frontiers of Moab. They will burn up the mountain heights of those war-loving people.” The meaning of this verse is not entirely certain because of the highly figurative nature of the last two lines. The Hebrew text has been translated somewhat literally here. The Hebrew text reads, “In the shadow of Heshbon those fleeing stand without strength. For a fire goes forth from Heshbon, a flame from the midst of Sihon. And it devours the forehead of Moab and the skull of the sons of noise.” The meaning of the first part is fairly clear because v. 2 has already spoken of the conquest of Heshbon and a plot formed there to conquer the rest of the nation. The fire going forth from Heshbon would hence refer here to the conflagrations of war spreading from Heshbon to the rest of the country. The reference to the “midst of Sihon” is to be understood metonymically as a reference to the ruler for what he once ruled (cf. E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 583). The last two lines must describe more than the fugitives who stopped at Heshbon for protection because it refers to the forehead of Moab (a personification of the whole land or nation). It is unclear, however, why reference is made to the foreheads and skulls of the Moabites, other than the fact that this verse seems to be a readaptation or reuse of Num 24:17, where the verb used with them is “smite,” which fits nicely in the sense of martial destruction. Translated rather literally, the phrase about foreheads and skulls appears here to refer to the destruction by the fires of war of the Moabites, the part (forehead and skulls) put for the whole. TEV sees a reference here to the “frontiers” and “mountain heights” of Moab, and this would work nicely for “foreheads,” which is elsewhere used of the corner or border of a land in Neh 9:22. The word “crown” or “skull” might be a picturesque metaphor for the mountain heights of a land, but the word is never used elsewhere in such a figurative way. TEV (and CEV), which follows it, might be correct here, but there is no way to validate it. The meaning “war-loving people” for the phrase “sons of noise” is based on the suggestion of BDB 981 s.v. שָׁאוֹן 1, which relates the phrase to the dominant use for שָׁאוֹן (shaʾon), and is adopted also by TEV, CEV, and C. von Orelli, Jeremiah, 341. REB’s “braggarts” and NIV’s “noisy boasters” seem to base the nuance on the usage of שָׁאוֹן (shaʾon) in Jer 46:17, where Pharaoh is referred to as an empty noise, and on the reference to Moab’s arrogance and boasting in 48:29.sn This verse and the next are an apparent adaptation and reuse of a victory song in Num 21:28-29 and a prophecy in Num 24:17. That explains the reference to Sihon, the Amorite king who captured Heshbon and proceeded from there to capture most of northern Moab (the area between Heshbon and the Arnon), which has been referred to earlier in this prophecy. This prophecy appears to speak of the destruction of Moab, beginning from the same place, under the picture of a destructive fire that burns up all the people. The fire is a reference to the conflagrations of war by which the enemy captures the cities, sets them on fire, and burns all the people in them. What Sihon once did (Num 21:28-29), and what Balaam prophesied would happen to Moab in the future (by David? Num 24:17), are being reapplied to a new situation.
148. Jeremiah 48:46 tn Heb “Woe to you, Moab.” For the usage of this expression see 4:13, 31; 13:17; and the translator’s notes on 4:13 and 10:19.
149. Jeremiah 48:46 tn Heb “Your sons will be taken away into captivity, your daughters into exile.”
150. Jeremiah 48:47 tn See 29:14; 30:3; and the translator’s note on 29:14 for the idiom used here.
151. Jeremiah 48:47 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
152. Jeremiah 49:1 sn Ammonites. Ammon was a small kingdom to the north and east of Moab that was in constant conflict with the Transjordanian tribes of Reuben, Gad, and Manasseh over territorial rights to the lands north and south of the Jabbok River. Ammon mainly centered on the city of Rabbah, which is modern Amman. According to Judg 11:13, the Ammonites claimed the land between the Jabbok and the Arnon, but this was land taken from them by Sihon and Og, and then taken from Sihon and Og by the Israelites. The Ammonites attempted to expand into the territory of Israel in the Transjordan in the time of Jephthah (Judg 10-11) and the time of Saul (1 Sam 11). Apparently when Tiglath Pileser carried away the Israelite tribes in Transjordan in 733 b.c., the Ammonites took over possession of their cities (Jer 49:1). Like Moab they appear to have been loyal to Nebuchadnezzar in the early part of his reign, forming part of the contingent that he sent to harass Judah when Jehoiakim rebelled in 598 b.c. (2 Kgs 24:2). But along with Moab and Edom they sent representatives to plot rebellion against Nebuchadnezzar in 594 b.c. (Jer 27:3). The Ammonites were evidently in rebellion against him in 588 b.c. when he had to decide whether to attack Rabbah or Jerusalem first (Ezek 21:18-23 [21:23-28 HT]). They appear to have remained in rebellion after the destruction of Jerusalem because their king Baalis was behind the plot to assassinate Gedaliah and offered refuge to Ishmael after he carried it out (Jer 40:13; 41:15). According to the Jewish historian Josephus they were conquered in 582 b.c. by Nebuchadnezzar.
153. Jeremiah 49:1 tc The reading here and in v. 3 follows the reading of the Greek, Syriac, and Latin versions and the name found in 1 Kgs 11:5, 33 and 2 Kgs 23:13. The Hebrew reads “Malcom” both here, in v. 3, and in Zeph 1:5. This god is to be identified with the one known elsewhere as Molech (cf. 1 Kgs 11:7).
154. Jeremiah 49:1 tn Heb “Does not Israel have any sons? Does not he have any heir [or “heirs” as a collective]? Why [then] has Malcom taken possession of Gad and [why] do his [Malcom’s] people live in his [Gad’s] land?” A literal translation here will not produce any meaning without major commentary. Hence the meaning that is generally agreed on is reflected in an admittedly paraphrastic translation. The reference is to the fact that the Ammonites had taken possession of the cities that had been deserted when the Assyrians carried off the Transjordanian tribes in 733 b.c., assuming that the Israelites would not return in sufficient numbers to regain control of them. The expression “Why has Milcom taken possession” reflects the idea, common in the OT and the ancient Near East, that the god of a people drove out the previous inhabitants, gave their land to his worshipers to possess, and took up residence with them there (cf., e.g., Deut 1:21; Judg 11:24; and line 33-34 of the Moabite stone: “Chemosh said to me, ‘Go down, fight against Hauronen.’ And I went down [and I fought against the town and took it], and Chemosh dwelt there in my time.” [ANET 321]).
155. Jeremiah 49:2 tn Heb “oracle of the Lord.”
156. Jeremiah 49:2 tn Heb “a desolate tel.” For the explanation of what a “tel” is see the study note on 30:18.
157. Jeremiah 49:2 tn Heb “Its daughters will be burned with fire.” For the use of the word “daughters” to refer to the villages surrounding a larger city, see BDB 123 s.v. I בַּת 4 and compare the usage in Judg 1:27.
158. Jeremiah 49:2 tn Heb “says the Lord.” The first person is used to maintain the first person address throughout.
159. Jeremiah 49:3 tn Or “you women of Rabbah”; Heb “daughters of Rabbah.” It is difficult to tell whether the word “daughters” is used here in the same sense that it has in v. 2 (see the translator’s note there) or in the literal sense of “daughters.” The former has been preferred because the cities themselves (e.g., Heshbon) are called to wail in the earlier part of the verse, and the term “daughters” has been used in the previous verse of the surrounding villages.
160. Jeremiah 49:3 tc Or “Run back and forth inside the walls of your towns.” Or “slash yourselves with gashes.” The meaning of this line is uncertain. The Hebrew text reads, “run back and forth among the walls.” The word “run back and forth” is generally taken as a Hitpolel of a verb that means to “go about” in the Qal and to “go back and forth” in the Polel (cf. BDB 1002 s.v. I שׁוּט). The noun that follows in the Hebrew means “wall, hedge” and is quite commonly modified by the noun צֹאן (tsoʾn, “sheep”), referring to sheepfolds (cf., e.g., Num 32:36; 1 Sam 24:3). But the phrase “run back and forth among the sheepfolds” yields little meaning here. In Ps 89:40 (89:41 HT) the word “wall” is used in parallelism with fortified cities and refers to the walls of the city. That is the sense that is assumed in one of the alternate translations, with the words “of your towns” being supplied in the translation for clarification. However, that figure is a little odd in a context that speaks of mourning rites. Hence, some emend the word “walls” (גְּדֵרוֹת, g^ederot) to “gashes” (גְּדֻדוֹת, g^edudot), a word that has occurred in a similar context in Jer 48:37. That would involve only the common confusion of ר and ד. That is the reading adopted here, which fits the context nicely. The NRSV appears to go one step further, reading the verb as a Hitpolel from a root that is otherwise used only as a noun to mean “whip” or “scourge.” The NRSV has, “slash yourselves with whips,” which also makes excellent sense in the context but is not supported by any parallel use of the verb.
161. Jeremiah 49:3 sn Cf. Jer 48:7 and the study note there.
162. Jeremiah 49:4 tn Or “Why do you brag about your valleys, about the fruitfulness of your valleys.” The meaning of the first two lines of this verse are uncertain, primarily due to the ambiguity of the expression זָב עִמְקֵךְ (zav ʿimqekh). The form זָב (zav) is either a Qal perfect or Qal participle of a verb meaning flow. It is common in the expression “a land flowing with milk and honey” and in reference to the seminal discharge or discharge of blood that makes a man or woman unclean. BDB 264 s.v. זוּב Qal.2 sees it as an abbreviation of the idea of “flowing with milk and honey” that describes the fertility of Ammon’s valley. However, there are no other examples of such an ellipsis. Several modern English versions and commentaries have taken the word עֵמֶק (ʿemeq) not as a reference to a valley but as the homonym cited in the note on 47:5, referring in 49:4 to the flowing away of Ammon’s strength. That interpretation is followed here. Instead of explaining the plural ending on עֲמָקִים (ʿamaqim) as an enclitic ם (mem), as do others who follow this interpretation (e.g., J. Bright, Jeremiah [AB], 325), the present translation understands the plural as a plural of amplification (cf. GKC 397-98 §124.e and compare the noun “might” in Isa 40:26).
163. Jeremiah 49:4 tn Heb “apostate daughter.” This same term is applied to Israel in Jer 31:22 but seems inappropriate here for Ammon because she had never been loyal to the Lord and so could not be called “apostate.” However, if it is used about her rebellion against the Lord’s servant, Nebuchadnezzar, it might be appropriate (cf. Jer 27:6, 8). Hence the term “rebellious” stands in the translation to represent it. The word “daughter” is again a personification of the land (cf. BDB 123 s.v. בַּת 3) and is here translated “people of Ammon” to make the referent easier for the modern reader to identify.
164. Jeremiah 49:5 tn Heb “The Lord Yahweh of Armies.” For an explanation of the rendering here and of the significance of this title, see the study note on 2:19.
165. Jeremiah 49:5 tn Heb “You will be scattered, each man [straight] before him.”
166. Jeremiah 49:6 tn See Jer 29:14; 30:3; and the translator’s note on 29:14 for the idiom used here.
167. Jeremiah 49:6 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
168. Jeremiah 49:7 tn Heb “Yahweh of Armies.” See the study note on 2:19 for this title.
169. Jeremiah 49:7 sn Edom was a kingdom to the south and east of Judah. Its borders varied over time, but basically Edom lay in the hundred-mile strip between the Gulf of Aqaba on the south and the Zered River on the north. It straddled the Arabah leading down from the Dead Sea to the Gulf of Aqaba, having as its northern neighbors both Judah and Moab. A long history of hostility existed between Israel and Edom, making Edom one of the favorite subjects of the prophets’ oracles of judgment (cf., e.g., Isa 21:11-12; 34:5-15; 63:1-6; Amos 1:11-12; Ezek 25:12-14; 35:1-15; Obad 1-16). Not much is known about Edomites at this time other than that they participated in the discussions in 594 b.c. regarding rebellion against Nebuchadnezzar. According to Obadiah 10-16, they not only gloated over Judah’s downfall in 586 b.c. but participated in its plunder and killed some of those who were fleeing the country.
170. Jeremiah 49:7 sn Teman was the name of one of Esau’s descendants, the name of an Edomite clan, and the name of the district where they lived (Gen 36:11, 15, 34). Like the name Bozrah, it is used poetically for all of Edom (Jer 49:20; Ezek 25:13).
171. Jeremiah 49:7 tn Heb “Has counsel perished from men of understanding?”
172. Jeremiah 49:7 tn The meaning of this last word is based on the definitions given in KBL 668 s.v. II סָרַח Nif and HALOT 726 s.v. II סָרַח Nif, which give the nuance as “to be [or become] corrupt.” Instead, BDB 710 s.v. סָרַח Niph gives the nuance as “let loose (i.e., to be dismissed; to be gone),” deriving it from a verb used elsewhere of the overhanging of a curtain or a cliff.
173. Jeremiah 49:8 tn Heb “make deep to dwell.” The meaning of this phrase is debated. Some take it as a call for the Dedanites, who were not native to Edom, to go down from the heights of Edom and go back home (so G. L. Keown, P. J. Scalise, T. G. Smothers, Jeremiah 26-52 [WBC], 330). The majority of commentaries, however, take it as a call for the Dedanites to disassociate themselves from the Edomites and find remote hiding places to live in (so J. A. Thompson, Jeremiah [NICOT], 718). For the options see W. L. Holladay, Jeremiah (Hermeneia), 2:375.
174. Jeremiah 49:8 sn Dedan. The Dedanites were an Arabian tribe who lived to the southeast of Edom. They are warned here to disassociate themselves from Edom because Edom is about to suffer disaster.
175. Jeremiah 49:8 tn Heb “For I will bring the disaster of Esau upon him, the time when I will punish him.” Esau was the progenitor of the tribes and nation of Edom (cf. Gen 36:1, 8, 9, 19).
176. Jeremiah 49:9 tn The translation of this verse is generally based on the parallels in Obad 5. There the second line has an interrogative ה (he) in front of it. The question can still be assumed because questions can be asked in Hebrew without a formal marker (cf. GKC 473 §150.a and BDB 519 s.v. לֹא 1.a[e], and compare usage in 2 Kgs 5:26).
177. Jeremiah 49:9 tn The tense and nuance of the verb translated “pillage” are different from those of the verb in Obad 5. There the verb is the imperfect of גָּנַב (ganav, “to steal”). Here the verb is the perfect of a verb meaning “ruin” or “spoil.” The English versions and commentaries, however, almost all render the verb here much the same way as in Obad 5. The nuance must mean they “ruin, destroy” (by stealing) only as much as they need (Heb “their sufficiency”), and the verb is used as metonymical substitute, effect for cause. The perfect must be some kind of a future perfect: “would they not have destroyed only…” The negative question is carried over by ellipsis from the preceding lines.
178. Jeremiah 49:11 tn Or “Their children and relatives will all be destroyed. And none of their neighbors will say, ‘Leave your orphans with me, and I’ll keep them alive. Your widows can trust in me.’” This latter interpretation is based on a reading in a couple of the Greek versions (Symmachus and Lucian) and is accepted by several modern commentaries (J. Bright, J. A. Thompson, W. L. Holladay, and G. L. Keown, P. J. Scalise, T. G. Smothers). However, the majority of modern English versions do not follow it, and, lacking any other Hebrew or versional evidence, it is probably an interpretation to deal with the mitigation of what seems a prophecy of utter annihilation. There have been other cases in Jeremiah where a universal affirmation (either positive or negative) has been modified in the verses that follow. The verb in the second line תִּבְטָחוּ (tivtakhu) is highly unusual; it is a second masculine plural form with a feminine plural subject. The form is explained in GKC 127-28 §47.k and 160-61 §60.a, n. 1 as a pausal substitution for the normal form תִּבְטַחְנָה (tivtakhnah), with a similar form in Ezek 37:7 cited as a parallel.
179. Jeremiah 49:12 tn The words “of my wrath” after “cup” in the first line and “from the cup of my wrath” in the last line are not in the text but are implicit in the metaphor. They have been supplied in the translation for clarity.sn The reference here is to the cup of God’s wrath that is connected with the punishment of war at the hands of the Babylonians, referred to already in Jer 25:15-29. Those who do not deserve to drink are the innocent victims of war who get swept away with the guilty. Edom was certainly not one of the innocent victims, as is clear from this judgment speech and those referred to in the study note on 49:7.
180. Jeremiah 49:13 tn Heb “I swear by myself.” See 22:5 and the study note there.
181. Jeremiah 49:13 sn Bozrah appears to have been the chief city in Edom, its capital city (see its parallelism with Edom in Isa 34:6; 63:1; Jer 49:22). The reference to “its towns” (translated here “all the towns around it”) could then be a reference to all the towns in Edom. It was located about twenty-five miles southeast of the southern end of the Dead Sea, apparently in the district of Teman (see the parallelism in Amos 1:12).
182. Jeremiah 49:13 tn See the study note on 24:9 for the rendering of this term.
183. Jeremiah 49:14 tn The words “I said” are not in the text, but it is generally agreed that the words that follow are Jeremiah’s. The translation supplies “I said” to make clear that the speaker has shifted from the Lord to Jeremiah.
184. Jeremiah 49:14 tn Heb “Rise up for battle.” The idea “against her” is implicit from the context and has been supplied in the translation for clarity.
185. Jeremiah 49:15 tn The words “The Lord says to Edom” are not in the text. The translation supplies them to mark the shift from the address of the messenger summoning the nations to prepare for battle against Edom. The Lord is clearly the speaker (see the end of v. 16), and Edom is clearly the addressee. Such sudden shifts are common in Hebrew poetry, particularly Hebrew prophecy, but are extremely disruptive to a modern reader trying to follow the argument of a passage. TEV adds “The Lord said” and then retains the third person throughout. The CEV puts all of vv. 14-16 in the second person and uses indirect discourse in v. 15.
186. Jeremiah 49:16 tn The meaning of this feminine Hebrew noun (תִּפְלֶצֶת, tifletset) is uncertain because it occurs only here. However, it is related to a verb root referring to the shaking of pillars (of the earth; Job 9:6) and to a noun (מִפְלֶצֶת, mifletset) denoting “horror” or “shuddering” (Job 21:6; Isa 21:4; Ezek 7:18; Ps 55:6). This is the nuance accepted by BDB, KBL, HAL and a majority of the modern English versions. The suffix is an objective genitive. The following masculine singular verb suggests that the text here (הִשִּׁיא אֹתָךְ, hishiʾ ʾotakh) is in error for feminine הִשִּׁיאָתָךְ (hishiʾatakh; so G. L. Keown, P. J. Scalise, T. G. Smothers, Jeremiah 26-52 [WBC], 327, n. 16.a).
187. Jeremiah 49:16 tn The Hebrew text of the first four lines reads, “Your terror [= the terror you inspire] has deceived you, [and] the arrogance of your heart, you who dwell in the clefts of the rock, who occupy the heights of the hill.” The sentence is broken up and restructured to better conform with English style.
188. Jeremiah 49:17 sn This verse is very similar to Jer 19:8, where the same judgment is pronounced on Jerusalem. For the meaning of some of the terms here (“hiss out their scorn” and “all the disasters that have happened to it”), see the notes on that verse.
189. Jeremiah 49:19 tn See the study note on Jer 12:5 for the rendering of this term.
190. Jeremiah 49:19 tn “The pasture-ground on the everflowing river,” according to KBL 42 s.v. I אֵיתָן 1. The “everflowing river” refers to the Jordan.
191. Jeremiah 49:19 tn Heb “Behold, as a lion comes up from the thicket of the Jordan into the pastureland of everflowing water, so [reading כֵּן (ken) for כִּי (ki); or “indeed” (reading כִּי as an asseverative particle with J. A. Thompson, Jeremiah [NICOT], 719, n. 6)] I will suddenly chase him [Edom] from upon it [the land].” The sentence has been restructured to better conform with contemporary English style, and the significance of the simile drawn from the comparison has been spelled out for the sake of clarity. The form אַרְגִּיעָה (ʾargiʿah) is functioning here as an adverbial modifier in a verbal hendiadys (cf. GKC 386 §120.g).
192. Jeremiah 49:19 tn For the use of the interrogative מִי (mi) in the sense of “whoever” and functioning like an adjective, see BDB 567 s.v. מִי g and compare the usage in Prov 9:4, 16.
193. Jeremiah 49:19 tn For this verb in the sense of “arraign” or “call before the bar of justice,” compare Job 9:19 and see BDB 417 s.v. יָעַד Hiph.
194. Jeremiah 49:19 tn The interrogative מִי (mi) is rendered “there is no one” in each of the last three occurrences in this verse because it is used in a rhetorical question that expects the answer “no one” or “none.” It is, according to BDB 566 s.v. מִי f(c), equivalent to a rhetorical negative.
195. Jeremiah 49:19 tn In the Book of Jeremiah “shepherd” (רֹעֶה, roʿeh) often refers metaphorically to the ruler or leader (cf. BDB 945 s.v. I רָעָה Qal.1.d(2) and compare usage, e.g., in Jer 2:8; 23:1).
196. Jeremiah 49:20 tn Heb “Therefore, listen to the plan of the Lord that he has planned against Edom, and the purposes that he has purposed against…” The first person has again been adopted in the translation to avoid the shift from the first person address in v. 19 to the third person in v. 20, a shift that is common in Hebrew poetry, particularly Hebrew prophecy, but uncommon in contemporary English literature.
197. Jeremiah 49:20 sn Teman here appears to be a poetic equivalent for Edom in a common figure of speech for Hebrew poetry where the part is put for the whole. “The people of Teman” is thus equivalent to all the people of Edom.
198. Jeremiah 49:20 tn Heb “They will surely drag them off, namely the young ones of the flock. He will devastate their habitation [or “their sheepfold”] on account of them.” The figure of the lion among the flock of sheep appears to be carried on here, where the people and their homeland are referred to as a flock and their sheepfold. It is hard, however, to carry the figure over here into the translation, so the figures have been interpreted instead. Both of these last two sentences are introduced by a formula that indicates a strong affirmative oath (i.e., they are introduced by אִם לֹא [ʾim loʾ; cf. BDB 50 s.v. אִם 1.b(2)]). The subject of the verb “they will drag them off” is the indefinite third plural, which may be taken as a passive in English (cf. GKC 460 §144.g). The subject of the last line, which is the Lord, has been rendered in the first person for stylistic reasons (see the translator’s note on the beginning of the verse).
199. Jeremiah 49:21 tn Heb “At the sound of their downfall the earth will quake.” However, as in many other places, “earth” here metonymically stands for the inhabitants or people of the earth (see E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 578-79, and compare usage in 2 Sam 15:23 and Ps 66:4).
200. Jeremiah 49:21 tn Heb “the Red Sea,” of which the Gulf of Aqaba formed the northeastern arm. The land of Edom once reached this far according to 1 Kgs 9:26.
201. Jeremiah 49:22 sn Cf. Jer 48:40-41 for a similar prophecy about Moab. The parallelism here suggests that Bozrah, like Teman in v. 20, is a poetic equivalent for Edom.
202. Jeremiah 49:23 tn The words “The Lord spoke” and “he said” are not in the text. There is only a title here: “Concerning Damascus.” However, something needs to be supplied to show that these are the Lord’s words of judgment (cf. “oracle of the Lord” in v. 26 and “I” in v. 27). These words have been supplied in the translation for clarity and consistency with the introduction to the other judgment speeches.
203. Jeremiah 49:23 sn Damascus is a city in Syria, located below the eastern slopes of the Anti-Lebanon Mountains. It was the capital of the Aramean state, which was in constant hostility with Israel from the time of David until its destruction by the Assyrians in 732 b.c. At various times it was allied with the Aramean state of Hamath, which was farther north. Contingents from these Aramean states were involved in harassing Judah and Jerusalem in 598 b.c. when Jehoiakim rebelled (2 Kgs 24:2), but little is heard about them in the rest of the book of Jeremiah or in the history of this period.
204. Jeremiah 49:23 tn Heb “Hamath and Arpad.” There is no word for people in the text. The cities are being personified. However, since it is really the people who are involved, the present translation supplies the words “people of” both here and in v. 24 to aid the reader. The verbs in vv. 23-25 are all to be interpreted as prophetic perfects, the tense of the Hebrew verb that views an action as though it were as good as done. The verbs are clearly future in vv. 26-27, which begin with a “therefore.”sn Hamath was a city on the Orontes River about 110 miles (183 km) north of Damascus. Arpad was a city 95 miles (158 km) farther north from there. These two cities were in the path of the northern descent of the kings of Assyria and Babylonia and had been conquered earlier under the Assyrian kings (Isa 10:9; 36:19; 37:13). The apparent reference here is to their terror and loss of courage when they hear the news that Nebuchadnezzar’s armies are on the move toward them and Damascus. They would have been in the path of Nebuchadnezzar as he chased Necho south after the battle of Carchemish.
205. Jeremiah 49:23 tc The meaning of this verse is very uncertain. The Hebrew text apparently reads, “Hamath and Arpad are dismayed. They melt away because they have heard bad news. Anxiety is in the sea; it [the sea] cannot be quiet.” Many commentaries and English versions redivide the verse, have “like the sea” for “in the sea” (כַּיָּם [kayyam] for בַּיָּם [bayyam]), and read the feminine singular noun דְּאָגָה (d^eʾagah) as though it were the third masculine plural verb דָּאֲגוּ (daʾagu): “They are troubled like the sea.” The translation follows the emendation proposed in BHS and accepted by a number of commentaries (e.g., J. Bright, Jeremiah [AB], 333; J. A. Thompson, Jeremiah [NICOT], 723, n. 1). That emendation involves reading נָמֹג לִבָּם מִדְּאָגָה (namog libbam midd^eʾagah) instead of נָמֹגוּ בַּיָּם דְּאָגָה (namogu bayyam d^eʾagah). The translation also involves a double reading of “heart,” for the sake of English style, once in the sense of courage (BDB 525 s.v. לֵב 10), because that is the nuance that best fits “melts” in the English idiom, and once in the more general sense of hearts as the seat of fears, anxieties, and worries. The double translation is a concession to English style.
206. Jeremiah 49:25 tn Heb “city of praise.”
207. Jeremiah 49:25 tn Heb “city of joy.”
208. Jeremiah 49:25 tc Or “Why has that famous city not been abandoned, that city I once took delight in?” The translation follows the majority of modern commentaries in understanding לֹא (loʾ, “not”) before “abandoned” as a misunderstanding of the emphatic ל (lamed; so J. A. Thompson, Jeremiah [NICOT], 723, n. 3, and J. Bright, Jeremiah [AB], 333, n. c; see also IBHS 211-12 §11.2.10i and HALOT 485-86 s.v. II לְ for the phenomenon). The particle is missing from the Vulgate. The translation also follows the versions in omitting the suffix on the word “joy” that is found in the Hebrew text (see BHS note b for a listing of the versions). This gives a better connection with the preceding and the following verse than the alternate translation.
209. Jeremiah 49:26 tn Heb “Oracle of Yahweh of Armies.” For this title for God see the study note on 2:19.
210. Jeremiah 49:27 sn Ben Hadad was a common name borne by a number of the kings of Damascus, e.g., one during the time of Asa around 900 b.c. (cf. 1 Kgs 15:18-20), one a little later during the time of Omri and Ahab around 850 (1 Kgs 20), and one during the time of Jehoash about 800 (2 Kgs 13:24-25).
211. Jeremiah 49:28 sn Kedar appears to refer to an Arabic tribe of nomads descended from Ishmael (Gen 25:13). They are associated here with the people who live in the eastern desert (Heb “the children of the east”; בְּנֵי קֶדֶם, b^ene qedem). In Isa 21:16 they are associated with the Temanites and the Dedanites, Arabic tribes in the north Arabian desert. They were sheep breeders (Isa 60:7) who lived in tents (Ps 120:5) and unwalled villages (Isa 42:11). According to Assyrian records they clashed with Assyria from the time of Shalmaneser in 850 until the time of Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal in the late seventh century. According to the Babylonian Chronicles, Nebuchadnezzar defeated them in 599 b.c.
212. Jeremiah 49:28 sn Hazor. Nothing is know about this Hazor other than what is said here in vv. 28, 30, 33. They appear to be nomadic tent dwellers, too, who had a loose association with the Kedarites.
213. Jeremiah 49:28 tn The words “Army of Babylon” are not in the Hebrew text but are implicit from the context. They are supplied in the translation for clarity.
214. Jeremiah 49:28 sn Heb “the children of the east.” Nothing much is known about them other than their association with the Midianites and Amalekites in their attack on Israel in the time of Gideon (Judg 6:3, 33) and the fact that God would let tribes from the eastern desert capture Moab and Ammon in the future (Ezek 25:4, 10). Midian and Amalek were considered to be located in the region in north Arabia east of Ezion Geber. That would put them in the same general locality as the region of Kedar. The parallelism here suggests that they are the same as the people of Kedar. The words here are apparently addressed to the armies of Nebuchadnezzar.
215. Jeremiah 49:29 tn Or “Let their tents…be taken….Let their tent…be carried…. Let people shout….”
216. Jeremiah 49:29 sn This expression is a favorite theme in the book of Jeremiah. It describes the terrors of war awaiting the people of Judah and Jerusalem (6:25), the Egyptians at Carchemish (46:5), and here the Kedarites.
217. Jeremiah 49:30 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
218. Jeremiah 49:30 tn Heb “Make deep to dwell.” See Jer 49:8 and the translator’s note there. The use of this same phrase here argues against the alternative there of going down from a height and going back home.
219. Jeremiah 49:30 tn Heb “has counseled a counsel against you, has planned a plan against you.”
220. Jeremiah 49:31 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
221. Jeremiah 49:31 tn The words “Army of Babylon” are not in the text but are implicit from the context. They are supplied in the translation for clarity.
222. Jeremiah 49:31 tn Heb “no gates and no bar,” i.e., “that lives securely without gates or bars.” The phrase is used by the figure of species for genus (synecdoche) to refer to the fact that they have no defenses, i.e., no walls, gates, or bars on the gates. The figure has been interpreted in the translation for the benefit of the average reader.
223. Jeremiah 49:32 tn See the translator’s note at Jer 9:26 and compare the usage in 9:26 and 25:23.
224. Jeremiah 49:32 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
225. Jeremiah 49:33 sn Cf. Jer 9:11.
226. Jeremiah 49:33 sn Cf. Jer 49:18 and 50:40, where the same thing is said about Edom and Babylon.
227. Jeremiah 49:34 tn Heb “that which was.”
228. Jeremiah 49:34 sn Elam was a country on the eastern side of the Tigris River in what is now southwestern Iran. Its capital city was Susa. It was destroyed in 640 b.c. by Ashurbanipal after a long period of conflict with the Assyrian kings. Babylonian records suggest that Elam regained its independence shortly thereafter, perhaps as early as 625 b.c., and it was involved in the fall of Assyria in 612 b.c. If the date refers to the first year of Zedekiah’s rule (597 b.c.), this prophecy appears to be later than the previous ones (cf. the study notes on 46:2 and 47:1).
229. Jeremiah 49:34 tn Or “In the beginning of the reign.” For a discussion of the usage of the terms here see the translator’s note on 28:1. If this refers to the accession year, the dating would be 598/97 b.c.
230. Jeremiah 49:35 tn Heb “I will break the bow of Elam, the chief source of their might.” The phrase does not mean that God will break literal bows or that he will destroy their weapons (synecdoche of species for genus) or their military power (so Hos 1:5). Because of the parallelism, the “bow” here stands for the archers who wielded the bow and were the strongest force (or chief contingent) in their military.
231. Jeremiah 49:36 tn Or more simply, “I will bring enemies against Elam from every direction. / And I will scatter the people of Elam to the four winds. // There won’t be any nation / where the refugees of Elam will not go.” Or more literally, “I will bring the four winds against Elam / from the four quarters of heaven. / I will scatter….” However, the winds are not to be understood literally here. God isn’t going to “blow the Elamites” out of Elam with natural forces. The winds must figuratively represent enemy forces that God will use to drive them out. Translating literally would be misleading at this point.
232. Jeremiah 49:37 tn Heb “I will bring disaster upon them, even my fierce anger.”
233. Jeremiah 49:37 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
234. Jeremiah 49:37 tn Heb “I will send the sword after them.”
235. Jeremiah 49:38 tn Or “I will sit in judgment over Elam”; Heb “I will set up my throne in Elam.” Commentators are divided over whether this refers to a king sitting in judgment over his captured enemies or whether it refers to his formally establishing his rule over the country. Those who argue for the former idea point to the supposed parallels in 1:15 (which the present translation understands not to refer to this but to setting up siege) and 43:8-13. The parallelism in the verse here, however, argues that it refers to the Lord taking over the reins of government by destroying the former leaders.
236. Jeremiah 49:38 tn Heb “I will destroy king and leaders from there.”
237. Jeremiah 49:38 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
238. Jeremiah 49:39 tn See Jer 29:14; 30:3; and the translator’s note on 29:14 for the idiom used here.sn See a similar note on the reversal of Moab’s fortunes in Jer 48:47; compare also 46:26 for a future restoration of Egypt.
239. Jeremiah 50:1 tn Heb “the land of the Chaldeans.” See the study note on 21:4 for explanation.
240. Jeremiah 50:1 tn Heb “The word that the Lord spoke concerning Babylon, concerning the land of the Chaldeans, by the hand of Jeremiah the prophet.”
241. Jeremiah 50:2 tn The verbs are masculine plural. Jeremiah is calling on other unnamed messengers to spread the news.
242. Jeremiah 50:2 tn Heb “Raise a signal flag.”
243. Jeremiah 50:2 sn Bel was originally the name or title applied to the Sumerian storm god. During the height of Babylon’s power it became a title that was applied to Marduk, who was Babylon’s chief deity. As a title it means “Lord.” Here it is a poetical parallel reference to Marduk mentioned in the next line.
244. Jeremiah 50:2 tn The Hebrew word used here (גִּלּוּלִים, gillulim) is always used as a disdainful reference to idols. It is generally thought to have originally referred to “dung pellets” (cf. KBL 183 s.v. גִלּוּלִים). It is only one of several terms used in this way, such as “worthless things” (אַלִילִים, ʾalilim) and “vanities,” or “empty winds” (הֲבָלִים, havalim).
245. Jeremiah 50:2 tn The verbs here are all in the tense that views the actions as though they were already done (the Hebrew prophetic perfect). The verbs in the next verse are a mixture of prophetic perfects and imperfects that announce future actions.sn This refers to the fact that the idols that the Babylonians worshiped will not be able to protect them but will instead be carried off into exile with the Babylonians themselves (cf. Isa 46:1-2).
246. Jeremiah 50:3 sn A nation from the north refers to Medo-Persia, which at the time of the conquest of Babylon in 539 b.c. had conquered all the nations to the north, the northwest, and the northeast of Babylon, forming a vast empire to the north and east of Babylon. Contingents of these many nations were included in her army, and reference is made to them in 50:9 and 51:27-28. There is also some irony involved here because the “enemy from the north” referred to so often in Jeremiah (cf. 1:14; 4:6; 6:1) has been identified with Babylon (cf. 25:9). Here in a kind of talionic justice Judah’s nemesis from the north will be attacked and devastated by an enemy from the north.
247. Jeremiah 50:4 tn Heb “oracle of the Lord.”
248. Jeremiah 50:4 tn Heb “and the children of Israel will come, they and the children of Judah together. They shall go, weeping as they go, and they will seek the Lord their God.” The concept of “seeking” the Lord often has to do with seeking the Lord in worship (by sacrifice [Hos 5:6; 2 Chr 11:16]; by prayer [Zech 8:21, 22; 2 Sam 12:16; Isa 65:1; 2 Chr 15:4]). In Hos 7:10 it is in parallel with returning to the Lord. In Ps 69:6 it is in parallel with hoping in or trusting in the Lord. Perhaps the most helpful parallels here, however, are Hos 3:5 (in comparison with Jer 30:9) and 2 Chr 15:15, where it is in the context of a covenant commitment to be loyal to the Lord, which is similar to the context here (see the next verse). The translation is admittedly paraphrastic, but “seeking the Lord” here does not mean looking for God as though he were merely a person to be found.
249. Jeremiah 50:5 tc The translation here assumes that the Hebrew בֹּאוּ (boʾu; a Qal imperative masculine plural) should be read בָּאוּ (baʾu; a Qal perfect third plural). This reading is presupposed by the Greek version of Aquila, the Latin version, and the Targum (see BHS note a, which mistakenly assumes that the form must be imperfect).
250. Jeremiah 50:5 sn See Jer 32:40 and the study note there for the nature of this lasting agreement.
251. Jeremiah 50:6 sn The shepherds are the priests, prophets, and leaders who have led Israel into idolatry (2:8).
252. Jeremiah 50:6 sn The allusion here, if it is not merely a part of the metaphor of the wandering sheep, is to the worship of the false gods on the high hills (2:20; 3:2).
253. Jeremiah 50:7 tn This same Hebrew phrase, “the habitation of righteousness,” is found in Jer 31:23 in relation to Jerusalem in the future as “the place where righteousness dwells.” Here, however, it refers to the same entity as “their resting place” in v. 6 and means “true pasture.” For the meaning of “pasture” for the word נָוֶה (naveh), see 2 Sam 7:8 and especially Isa 65:10, where it is parallel with “resting place” for the flocks. For the meaning of “true” for צֶדֶק (tsedeq), see BDB 841 s.v. צֶדֶק 1. For the interpretation adopted here see G. L. Keown, P. J. Scalise, T. G. Smothers, Jeremiah 26-52 (WBC), 365. The same basic interpretation is reflected in NRSV, NJPS, and God’s Word.
254. Jeremiah 50:7 tn Heb “fathers.”
255. Jeremiah 50:7 sn These two verses appear to be a poetical summary of the argument of Jer 2, where the nation is accused of abandoning its loyalty to God and worshiping idols. Whereas those who tried to devour Israel were liable for punishment when Israel was loyal to God (2:3), the enemies of Israel who destroyed them (i.e., the Babylonians [but also the Assyrians], 50:17) argue that they are not liable for punishment because the Israelites have sinned against the Lord and thus deserve their fate.
256. Jeremiah 50:8 tn The words “People of Judah” are not in the Hebrew text but are implicit from the context. They have been supplied in the translation to clarify the subject of the address.
257. Jeremiah 50:8 tn Heb “the land of the Chaldeans.” See the study note on 21:4 for explanation.
258. Jeremiah 50:8 tn The words “Be the first to leave” are not in the text but spell out the significance of the simile that follows. They have been supplied in the translation for clarity.
259. Jeremiah 50:9 sn Some of these are named in Jer 51:27-28.
260. Jeremiah 50:9 tn Heb “She will be captured from there (i.e., from the north).”
261. Jeremiah 50:9 tc Read Heb מַשְׂכִּיל (maskil), with a number of Hebrew mss and some of the versions, in place of מַשְׁכִּיל (mashkil, “one who kills children”), with the majority of Hebrew mss and some of the versions. See BHS note d for the details.
262. Jeremiah 50:9 tn Or more freely, “Their arrows will be as successful at hitting their mark // as a skilled soldier—he always returns from battle with plunder.”sn That is, none of the arrows misses its mark.
263. Jeremiah 50:10 tn Heb “The land of the Chaldeans.” See the study note on 21:4 for explanation.
264. Jeremiah 50:10 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
265. Jeremiah 50:11 tn The words “People of Babylonia” are not in the text, but they are implicit in the reference in the next verse to “your mother,” which refers to the city and the land as the mother of its people. These words have been supplied in the translation to identify the referent of “you” and have been added for clarity.
266. Jeremiah 50:11 tn Or “my land.” The word can refer to either the land (Jer 2:7; 16:8) or the nation/people (Jer 12:7, 8, 9).
267. Jeremiah 50:11 tc Reading כְּעֶגְלֵי דֶשֶׁא (k^eʿegle desheʾ) or כְּעֵגֶל בַּדֶּשֶׁא (k^eʿegel baddesheʾ), as presupposed by the Greek and Latin versions (cf. BHS note d-d), in place of the reading in the Hebrew text, כְּעֶגְלָה דָשָׁה (k^eʿeglah dashah, “like a heifer treading out the grain”), which does not fit the verb (פּוּשׁ [push] = “spring about” [BDB 807 s.v. I פּוּשׁ] or “paw the ground” [KBL 756 s.v. פּוּשׁ]; compare Mal 3:20 for usage). This variant reading is also accepted by J. Bright, J. A. Thompson, F. B. Huey, and G. L. Keown, P. J. Scalise, T. G. Smothers.
268. Jeremiah 50:11 tn Heb “Though you rejoice, though you exult, you who have plundered my heritage, though you frolic like calves in a pasture and neigh like stallions, your mother…” The particle כִּי (ki) introduces a concessive protasis according to BDB 473 s.v. כִּי 2.c(a). Many interpret the particle as introducing the grounds for the next verse, i.e., “because…” The translation here will reflect the concessive by beginning the next verse with “But.” The long protasis has been broken up and restructured to better conform with contemporary English style.
269. Jeremiah 50:12 tn Heb “Your mother will be utterly shamed, the one who gave you birth…” The word “mother” and the parallel term “the one who gave you birth” are used metaphorically for the land of Babylonia. For the figure compare “mother” in Isa 50:1 (Zion) and Hos 2:2, 5 (2:4, 7 HT; Israel) and see BDB 52 s.v. אֵם 2 and 408 s.v. יָלַד Qal.2.c.
270. Jeremiah 50:12 tn Heb “Behold.” For the use of this particle see the translator’s note on 1:6.
271. Jeremiah 50:12 tn Heb “a מִדְבָּר (midbar, “wilderness”), a צִיָּה (tsiyyah, “an arid region, desert”), and an עֲרָבָה (ʿaravah, “arid rift valley”). These words overlap in meaning and are compiled together in the translation. See the note on these words in Isa 35:1.
272. Jeremiah 50:13 tn Heb “From [or Because of] the wrath of the Lord it will be uninhabited.” The causal connection is spelled out more clearly and actively, and the first person has been used because the speaker is the Lord. The referent “it” has been spelled out clearly from the later occurrence in the verse, “all who pass by Babylon.”
273. Jeremiah 50:13 sn Cf. Jer 49:17 and the study note there; see also the study notes on 18:16 and 19:8.
274. Jeremiah 50:14 tn Heb “all you who draw the bow.”
275. Jeremiah 50:14 tc The verb here should probably be read as a Qal imperative יְרוּ (y^eru) from יָרָה (yarah), with a few Hebrew mss, rather than a Qal imperative יְדוּ (y^edu) from יָדָה (yadah), with the majority of Hebrew mss. The verb יָדָה (yadah) does not otherwise occur in the Qal and only elsewhere in the Piel with a meaning “cast” (cf. KBL 363 s.v. I יָדָה). The verb יָרָה (yarah) is common in both the Qal and the Hiphil with the meaning of shooting arrows (cf. BDB 435 s.v. יָרָה Qal.3 and Hiph.2). The confusion between ד (dalet) and ר (resh) is very common.
276. Jeremiah 50:14 tn Heb “Shoot at her! Don’t save any arrows!”
277. Jeremiah 50:15 tn Heb “She has given her hand.” For the idiom here involving submission/surrender, see BDB 680 s.v. נָתַן Qal.1.z and compare the usage in 1 Chr 29:24 and 2 Chr 30:8. For a different interpretation, however, see the rather complete discussion in G. L. Keown, P. J. Scalise, and T. G. Smothers (Jeremiah 26-52 [WBC], 366), who see this as a reference to making a covenant. The verbs in this line and the next two lines are all Hebrew perfects, and most translators and commentaries see them as past. God’s Word, however, treats them as prophetic perfects and translates them as future. This is more likely in the light of the imperatives both before and after.
278. Jeremiah 50:15 tn The meaning of this word is uncertain. The definition here follows that of HALOT 91 s.v. אָשְׁיָה, which defines it on the basis of an Akkadian word and treats it as a loanword.
279. Jeremiah 50:15 tn Heb “Because it is the Lord’s vengeance.” The first person has again been used because the Lord is the speaker, and the nominal expression has been turned into a verbal one more in keeping with contemporary English style.
280. Jeremiah 50:16 tn Heb “Cut off the sower from Babylon, and the one who wields the sickle at harvest time.” For the meaning “kill” for the root “cut off,” see BDB 503 s.v. כָּרַת Qal.1.b and compare usage in Jer 11:19. The verb is common in this nuance in the Hiphil; see BDB 504 s.v. כָּרַת Hiph, 2.b.
281. Jeremiah 50:16 tn Heb “Because of [or out of fear of] the sword of the oppressor, let each of them turn toward his [own] people and each of them flee to his [own] country.” Compare a similar expression in 46:16, where the reference was to the flight of the mercenaries. Here it most likely refers to foreigners who are counseled to leave Babylon before they are caught up in the destruction. Many of the commentaries and English versions render the verbs as futures, but they are more probably third person commands (jussives). Compare the clear commands in v. 8 followed by essentially the same motivation. The “sword of the oppressor,” of course, refers to death at the hands of soldiers wielding all kinds of weapons, though the specific reference has been to the bow (v. 14).
282. Jeremiah 50:17 sn The king of Assyria devoured them. This refers to the devastation wrought on northern Israel by the kings of Assyria, beginning in 738 b.c. when Tiglath Pileser took Galilee and the Transjordanian territories and ending with the destruction and exile of the people of Samaria by Sargon in 722 b.c.
283. Jeremiah 50:17 tn The verb used here only occurs this one time in the Hebrew Bible. It is a denominative from the Hebrew word for “bones” (עֶצֶם, ʿetsem). BDB 1126 s.v. עֶָצַם, denom Pi defines it as “break his bones.” HALOT 822 s.v. II עָצַם Pi defines it as “gnaw on his bones.”sn If the prophecies mentioned in Jer 51:59-64 refer to all that is contained in Jer 50-51 (as some believe), this would have referred to the disasters of 605 b.c. and 598 b.c., as well as all the harassment that Israel experienced from Babylon up until the fourth year of Zedekiah (594 b.c.). If, on the other hand, the prophecy related in 51:59-64 refers to something less than this final form, the destruction of 587/6 b.c. could be included in 50:17 as well.
284. Jeremiah 50:18 tn Heb “Therefore, thus says Yahweh of Armies, the God of Israel.” The first person is again adopted because the Lord is speaking. For this title, “Yahweh of Armies,” compare 7:3 and the study note on 2:19.
285. Jeremiah 50:19 tn Heb “their soul [or hunger/appetite] will be satisfied.”
286. Jeremiah 50:19 sn The metaphor of Israel as a flock of sheep (v. 17) is continued here. The places named were all in Northern Israel and in the Transjordan, lands that were lost to the Assyrians in the period 738-722 b.c. All of these places were known for their fertility, for their woods and pastures. The hills (hill country) of Ephraim formed the center of Northern Israel. Mount Carmel lies on the seacoast of the Mediterranean, north and west of the hill country of Ephraim. Gilead formed the central part of Transjordan. Its name was used at times to refer to the territory between the Yarmuk and Jabbok Rivers, at times to the territory between the Yarmuk and the Arnon Rivers, and at times to all of Israel in the Transjordan. Bashan refers to the territory north of Gilead.
287. Jeremiah 50:20 tn Heb “In those days and at that time, oracle of the Lord, the iniquity [or guilt] of Israel will be sought, but there will be none, and the sins of Judah, but they will not be found.” The passive construction “will be sought” raises the question of who is doing the seeking, which is not really the main point. The translation has avoided this question by simply referring to the result, which is the main point.
288. Jeremiah 50:20 sn Cf. Jer 31:34; 33:8.
289. Jeremiah 50:20 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.” In this case it is necessary to place this in the first person because this is already in a quote whose speaker is identified as the Lord (v. 18).
290. Jeremiah 50:21 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
291. Jeremiah 50:21 sn The commands in this verse and in vv. 26-27 are directed to the armies from the north, who are referred to in v. 3 as “a nation from the north” and in v. 9 as a “host of mighty nations from the land of the north.” The addressee in this section shifts from one referent to another.
292. Jeremiah 50:21 sn Merathaim…Pekod. It is generally agreed that the names of these two regions were chosen for their potential for wordplay. Merathaim probably refers to a region in southern Babylon near where the Tigris and Euphrates come together before they empty into the Persian Gulf. It was known for its briny waters. In Hebrew the word would mean “double rebellion” and would stand as an epithet for the land of Babylon as a whole. Pekod refers to an Aramean people who lived on the eastern bank of the lower Tigris River. They are mentioned often in Assyrian texts and are mentioned in Ezek 23:23 as allies of Babylon. In Hebrew the word would mean “punishment.” As an epithet for the land of Babylon it would refer to the fact that Babylon was to be punished for her double rebellion against the Lord.
293. Jeremiah 50:21 tn Heb “Smite down and completely destroy after them.” The word translated “kill” or “smite down” is a word of uncertain meaning and derivation. BDB 352 s.v. III חָרַב relates it to an Aramaic word meaning “attack, smite down.” KBL 329-30 s.v. II חָרַב sees it as a denominative from the word חֶרֶב (kherev, “sword”), a derivation that many modern commentaries accept and reflect in the translation “put to the sword.” KBL, however, gives “to smite down; to slaughter,” which is roughly the equivalent of the meaning assigned to it in BDB. The word only occurs here and in v. 27 in the Qal and in 2 Kgs 3:23 in the Niphal, where it means something like “attacked one another, fought with one another.” Many commentators question the validity of the word “after them” (אַחֲרֵיהֶם, ʾakharehem), which occurs at the end of the line after “completely destroy.” The Targum reads “the last of them” (אַחֲרִיתָם, ʾakharitam), which is graphically very close and accepted by some commentators. The present translation has chosen to represent “after them” by a paraphrase at the sentence’s beginning: “Pursue them.”sn For the concept underlying the words translated here “completely destroy,” see the study note on Jer 25:9.
294. Jeremiah 50:21 tn Heb “Do according to all I have commanded you.”
295. Jeremiah 50:22 tn The words “of Babylonia” are not in the text but are implicit from the context. They have been supplied in the translation to clarify the referent.sn The verbs in vv. 22-25 are all descriptive of the present, but all of this is really to take place in the future. Hebrew poetry has a way of rendering future actions as though they were already accomplished. The poetry of this section makes it difficult, however, to render the verbs as future, as has been done regularly in the present translation.
296. Jeremiah 50:23 tn Heb “How broken and shattered is the hammer of all the earth!” The “hammer” is a metaphor for Babylon, which was God’s war club to shatter the nations and destroy kingdoms, just like Assyria is represented in Isa 10:5 as a rod and a war club. Some readers, however, might not pick up on the metaphor or identify the referent, so the translation has incorporated an identification of the metaphor and the referent within it. “See how” and “See what” are an attempt to capture the nuance of the Hebrew particle אֵיךְ (ʾekh), which here expresses an exclamation of satisfaction in a taunt song (cf. BDB 32 s.v. אֵיךְ 2 and compare usage in Isa 14:4, 12; Jer 50:23).
297. Jeremiah 50:24 tn Heb “You were found [or found out] and captured because you fought against the Lord.” The same causal connection is maintained by the order of the translation, which, however, puts more emphasis on the cause and connects it also more closely with the first half of the verse. The first person is used because the Lord is speaking of himself first in the first person (“I set”) and then in the third. The first person has been maintained throughout. Though it would be awkward, perhaps one could retain the reference to the Lord by translating, “I, the Lord.”
298. Jeremiah 50:25 tn Or “I have opened up my armory.”
299. Jeremiah 50:25 tn Heb “The Lord has opened up his armory and has brought out the weapons of his wrath.” The problem of the Lord referring to himself in the third person (or of the prophet speaking on his behalf) is again raised here and is again resolved by using the first person throughout. The construction “weapons of my wrath” would not convey any meaning to many readers, so the significance has been spelled out in the translation.sn The weapons are the nations that God is bringing from the north against them. The study notes have already identified Assyria as the “rod” or “war club” by which God vents his anger against Israel (Isa 10:5-6), and Babylon as a hammer or war club with which he shatters the nations (Jer 50:23; 51:20). Now God will use other nations as weapons to execute his wrath against Babylon. For a similar idea see Isa 13:2-5, where reference is made to marshaling the nations against Babylon. Some of the nations that the Lord will marshal against Babylon are named in Jer 51:27-28.
300. Jeremiah 50:25 tn Heb “the Lord Yahweh of Armies.” For an explanation of this rendering and the significance of this title, see the study note on 2:19.
301. Jeremiah 50:25 tn The words “of Babylonia” are not in the text but are implicit from the context. They have been supplied in the translation to clarify the referent.sn The verbs in vv. 22-25 are all descriptive of the present, but all of this is really to take place in the future. Hebrew poetry has a way of rendering future actions as though they were already accomplished. The poetry of this section makes it difficult, however, to render the verbs as future, as the present translation has regularly done.
302. Jeremiah 50:26 tn Heb “Come against her from the end.” There is a great deal of debate about the meaning of “from the end” (מִקֵּץ, miqqets). Some follow the suggestion of F. Giesebrecht in BDB 892 s.v. קָצֶה 3 and on the basis of the presumed parallel in Jer 51:31 emend the text to מִקָּצֶה (miqqatseh), which is interpreted as “on all sides,” i.e., “from every quarter/side.” However, the phrase does not mean that in Jer 51:31 but is used, as it is elsewhere, of “from one end to another,” i.e., in its entirety (so Gen 19:4). The only real parallel here is the use of the noun קֵץ (qets) with a suffix in Isa 37:24, referring to the remotest part, hence something like from the end (of the earth), i.e., from a far away place. The pronoun “her” has been clarified here as Babylonia in case someone might not see the connection between v. 25d and v. 26.
303. Jeremiah 50:26 tn Heb “Pile her up like heaps.” Many commentators understand the comparison to be to heaps of grain (compare usage of עֲרֵמָה [ʿaremah] in Hag 2:16; Neh 13:15; Ruth 3:7). However, BDB 790 s.v. עֲרֵמָה is more likely correct that this refers to heaps of ruins (compare the usage in Neh 4:2 [3:34 HT]).
304. Jeremiah 50:26 sn Cf. Jer 50:21 and see the study note on 25:9.
305. Jeremiah 50:26 tn Heb “Do not let there be to her a remnant.” According to BDB 984 s.v. שְׁאֵרִית, this refers to the last remnant of people, i.e., there won’t be any survivors. Cf. Jer 11:23.
306. Jeremiah 50:27 tn Heb “Kill all her young bulls.” Commentators almost universally agree that “young bulls” is figurative here for the princes and warriors (cf. BDB 831 s.v. פַּר 2.f, which compares Isa 34:7 and Ezek 39:18). This is virtually certain because of the reference to the time coming for them to be punished; this would scarcely fit literal bulls. For the verb rendered “kill” here, see the translator’s note on v. 21.
307. Jeremiah 50:27 tn Heb “Let them go down to the slaughter.”
308. Jeremiah 50:27 tn Or “How terrible it will be for them”; Heb “Woe to them.” See the study note on 22:13; compare usage in 23:1 and 48:1.
309. Jeremiah 50:27 tn The words “of reckoning” are not in the text but are implicit from the context. They are supplied in the translation for clarity.
310. Jeremiah 50:28 tn Heb “Hark! Fugitives and refugees from the land of Babylon to declare in Zion the vengeance of the Lord our God, vengeance for his temple.” For the meaning “Hark!” for the noun קוֹל (qol), see BDB 877 s.v. קוֹל 1.f and compare the usage in Jer 10:22. The syntax is elliptical because there is no main verb. The present translation has supplied the verb “come,” as many other English versions have done. The translation also expands the genitival expression “vengeance for his temple” to explain what all the commentaries agree is involved.sn This verse appears to be a parenthetical exclamation of the prophet in the midst of his report of what the Lord said through him. He throws himself into the future, sees the fall of Babylon, and hears the people reporting in Zion how God has destroyed Babylon to get revenge for the Babylonians destroying his temple. Jeremiah prophesied from 627 b.c. (see the study note on 1:2) until sometime after 586 b.c., after Jerusalem fell and he was taken to Egypt. The fall of Babylon occurred in 538 b.c., some fifty years later. However, Jeremiah had prophesied, as early as the first year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign (605 b.c.; Jer 25:1), that many nations and great kings would come and subject Babylon, the instrument of God’s wrath—his sword against the nations—to bondage (Jer 25:12-14).
311. Jeremiah 50:29 tn For this word see BDB 914 s.v. III רַב, compare usage in Prov 26:10 and Job 16:12, and see the use of the verb in Gen 49:23. Based on this evidence, it is not necessary to emend the form to רֹבִים (rovim), as many commentators contend.
312. Jeremiah 50:29 tn Heb “for she has acted insolently against the Lord.” Once again there is the problem of the Lord speaking about himself in the third person (or the prophet dropping his identification with the Lord). As in several other places, the present translation, along with several other modern English versions (TEV, CEV, NIrV), has substituted the first person to maintain consistency with the context.
313. Jeremiah 50:29 sn The Holy One of Israel is a common title for the Lord in the book of Isaiah. It is applied to the Lord only here and in 51:5 in the book of Jeremiah. It is a figure where an attribute of a person is put as a title of a person (compare “your majesty” for a king). It pictures the Lord as the sovereign king who rules over his covenant people and exercises moral authority over them.
314. Jeremiah 50:30 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
315. Jeremiah 50:31 tn Heb “Behold, I am against you, proud one.” The word “city” is not in the text, but it is generally agreed that the word is being used as a personification of the city, which had “proudly defied” the Lord (v. 29). The word “city” is supplied in the translation for clarity.
316. Jeremiah 50:31 tn Heb “oracle of the Lord Yahweh of Armies.” For the rendering of this title and an explanation of its significance, see the study note on 2:19.
317. Jeremiah 50:31 tn The particle כִּי (ki) is probably asseverative here (so J. A. Thompson, Jeremiah [NICOT], 739, n. 13, and cf. BDB 472 s.v. כִּי 1.e for other examples). This has been a common use of this particle in the book of Jeremiah.
318. Jeremiah 50:31 tn The words “of reckoning” are not in the text but are implicit from the context. They are supplied in the translation for clarity.
319. Jeremiah 50:31 sn Cf. v. 27.
320. Jeremiah 50:32 tn Heb “And the proud one will fall, and there will be no one to help him up. I will start a fire in his towns, and it will consume all that surround him.” The personification continues, but now the stance is indirect (third person) rather than direct (second person). For the modern reader who is not accustomed to such sudden shifts, it is easier if the second person is maintained. The personification of the city (or nation) as masculine is a little unusual; normally cities and nations are personified as feminine, as daughters or mothers.
321. Jeremiah 50:33 tn Heb “Yahweh of Armies.” For an explanation of this title see the study note on 2:19.
322. Jeremiah 50:33 tn Heb “Oppressed are the people of Israel and the people of Judah together,” i.e., both the people of Israel and Judah are oppressed. However, neither of these renderings is very poetic. The translation seeks to achieve the same meaning with better poetic expression.
323. Jeremiah 50:34 sn Heb “their redeemer.” The Hebrew term “redeemer” referred in Israelite family law to the nearest male relative, who was responsible for securing the freedom of a relative who had been sold into slavery. For further discussion of this term, as well as its metaphorical use to refer to God as the one who frees Israel from bondage in Egypt and from exile in Assyria and Babylonia, see the study note on 31:11.
324. Jeremiah 50:34 tn Heb “Yahweh of Armies.” For the rendering of this title see the study note on 2:19.
325. Jeremiah 50:34 tn Or “he will certainly champion.” The infinitive absolute before the finite verb here is probably functioning to intensify the verb rather than to express the certainty of the action (cf. GKC 333 §112.n, and compare usage in Gen 43:3 and 1 Sam 20:6 listed there).
326. Jeremiah 50:34 tn This appears to be another case where the particle לְמַעַן (l^emaʿan) introduces a result rather than giving the purpose or goal. See the translator’s note on 25:7, with a listing of other examples in the book of Jeremiah, and also the translator’s note on 27:10.
327. Jeremiah 50:34 tn Heb “he will bring rest to the earth and will cause unrest to.” The terms “rest” and “unrest” have been doubly translated to give more of the idea underlying these two concepts.
328. Jeremiah 50:34 tn This translation again reflects the problem, often encountered in these prophecies, where the Lord appears to be speaking but refers to himself in the third person. It would be possible to translate here using the first person as CEV and NIrV do. However, to sustain that over the whole verse results in a considerably greater degree of paraphrase. The verse could be rendered: “But I am strong and I will rescue them. I am the Lord who rules over all. I will champion their cause. And I will bring peace and rest to….”
329. Jeremiah 50:35 tn Heb “the Chaldeans.” For explanation of the rendering see the study note on 21:4. There is no verb in this clause. Therefore it is difficult to determine whether this should be understood as a command or as a prediction. The presence of vav (ו) consecutive perfects after a similar construction in vv. 36b, d, 37c, 38a, and the imperfects after “therefore” (לָכֵן, lakhen), all suggest the predictive or future nuance. However, the vav consecutive perfect could be used to carry on the nuance of command (cf. GKC 333 §112.q), but not in the sense of purpose as NRSV and NJPS render them.sn Heb “A sword against the Chaldeans.” The “sword” here is metaphorical for destructive forces in the persons of the armies of the north (vv. 3, 9), which the Lord is marshaling against Babylon and which he has addressed by way of command several times (e.g., vv. 14, 21, 26-27, 29). Cf. 46:14 and the study note there.
330. Jeremiah 50:35 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
331. Jeremiah 50:36 tn The meaning and the derivation of the word translated “false prophets” is uncertain. The same word appears in conjunction with the word for “diviners” in Isa 44:25, and probably also in Hos 11:6 in conjunction with the sword consuming them “because of their counsel.” BDB 95 s.v. III בַּד b sees this as a substitution of “empty talk” for “empty talkers” (the figure of metonymy) and refers to them as false prophets. KBL 108 s.v. II בַּד emends the form in both places to read בָּרִים (barim) in place of בַּדִּים (baddim), and defines the word on the basis of Akkadian to mean “soothsayer” (KBL 146 s.v. V בָּר). HALOT 105 s.v. V בַּד retains the pointing, derives it from an Amorite word found in the Mari letters, and defines it as “oracle priest.” However, G. L. Keown, P. J. Scalise, and T. G. Smothers (Jeremiah 26-52 [WBC], 368) call this identification into question because the word only occurs in one letter from Mari, and its meaning is uncertain there. It is hazardous to emend the text in two places, perhaps even three, in light of no textual evidence in any of the passages, and to define the word on the basis of an uncertain parallel. Hence the present translation opts here for the derivation and extended definition given in BDB.
332. Jeremiah 50:36 tn This translation follows the suggestion of BDB 383 s.v. I יָאַל Niph.2. Cf. Isa 19:13; Jer 5:4.
333. Jeremiah 50:36 tn The verb here (חָתַת, khatat) could also be rendered “be destroyed” (cf. BDB 369 s.v. חָתַת Qal.1, and compare the usage in Jer 48:20, 39). However, the parallelism with “shown to be fools” argues for the more dominant usage of “be dismayed” or “be filled with terror.” The verb, found in parallelism with both בּוֹשׁ (bosh, “be ashamed, dismayed”) and יָרֵא (yareʾ, “be afraid”), can refer to either emotion. Here it is more likely that they are filled with terror because of the approaching armies.
334. Jeremiah 50:37 tn Hebrew has “his” in both cases here whereas the rest of the possessive pronouns throughout vv. 35-37 are “her.” There is no explanation for this switch unless the third masculine singular refers as a distributive singular to the soldiers mentioned in the preceding verse (cf. GKC 464 §145.l). This is probably the case here, but to refer to “their horses and their chariots” in the midst of many references to “her” might create more confusion than what it is worth to be that precise.
335. Jeremiah 50:37 tn Or “in the country,” or “in her armies”; Heb “in her midst.”
336. Jeremiah 50:37 tn Heb “A sword against his horses and his chariots and against all the mixed company [or mixed multitude] in her midst, and they will become like women.” The sentence had to be split up because it is too long, and the continuation of the second half with its consequential statement would not fit together with the first half very well. Hence the subject and verb have been repeated. The Hebrew word translated “foreign troops” (עֶרֶב, ʿerev) is the same word that is used in 25:20 to refer to the foreign peoples living in Egypt, and in Exod 12:38 for the foreign people that accompanied Israel out of Egypt. Here the word is translated contextually to refer to foreign mercenaries, an identification that most of the commentaries and many of the modern English versions accept (see, e.g., J. Bright, Jeremiah [AB], 355; NRSV; NIV). The significance of the simile “they will become like women” has been spelled out for the sake of clarity.
337. Jeremiah 50:38 tc Heb “A drought [be] against her waters, and they will dry up.” Several of the commentaries and modern English versions accept the emendation proposed by BHS and read here “sword” (חֶרֶב [kherev] in place of חֹרֶב [khorev, “drought”], the change of only one vowel), in keeping with the rest of the context. According to BHS this reading is supported by the Lucianic and Hexaplaric recensions of the LXX (the Greek version) and the Syriac version. In this case, the drying up of the waters (of the canals) is attributed to neglect brought about by war conditions. However, it is just as likely that these versions are influenced by the repetition of the word “sword” as that the Hebrew and the other versions are influenced by the concept of “drying up” of the waters to read “drought.” Hence the present translation, along with the majority of modern English versions, retains the Hebrew “drought.”
338. Jeremiah 50:38 tn Heb “for it is a land of idols.” The “for,” however, goes back to the whole context, not just to the preceding prediction (cf. BDB 473-74 s.v. כִּי 1.c and compare usage in Isa 21:6 listed there).
339. Jeremiah 50:38 tc Or “Her people boast in.” This translation is based on the reading of the majority of Hebrew mss, which read יִתְהֹלָלוּ (yitholalu; cf. usage in Jer 46:9 and see also 25:16; 51:7). Two Hebrew mss and the versions read יִתְהַלָּלוּ (yithallalu; cf. usage in Jer 4:2; 9:23, 24 and Ps 97:7, where a parallel expression is found with “idols”). The reading is again basically the difference in one Hebrew vowel. All of the modern commentaries consulted, and all the modern English versions except NEB and REB, follow the Hebrew text here rather than the versions.
340. Jeremiah 50:38 tn Heb “by the terrors.” However, as HALOT 40 s.v. אֵימָה indicates, these are “images that cause terror” (a substitution of the effect for the cause). The translation of this line follows the interpretation of the majority of modern English versions and all the commentaries consulted. NIV, NCV, and God’s Word reflect a different syntax, understanding the subject to be the idols just mentioned rather than “her people,” which is supplied here for the sake of clarity (the Hebrew text merely says “they.”) Following that lead, one could render “but those idols will go mad with terror.” This makes excellent sense in the context, which often refers to effects (vv. 36b, d, 37c, 38b) of the war that is coming. However, that interpretation does not fit as well with the following “therefore/so,” which basically introduces a judgment or consequence after an accusation of sin.
341. Jeremiah 50:39 tn The identification of this bird has been called into question by G. R. Driver, “Birds in the Old Testament,” PEQ 87 (1955): 137-38. He refers to this bird as an owl. That identification, however, is not reflected in any of the lexicons, including the most recent, which still gives “ostrich” (HALOT 402 s.v. יַעֲנָה), as does W. S. McCullough, “Ostrich,” IDB 3:611. REB, NIV, NCV, and God’s Word all identify this bird as “owl/desert owl.”
342. Jeremiah 50:39 tn Heb “Therefore desert creatures will live with jackals, and ostriches will live in it.”
343. Jeremiah 50:39 tn Heb “It will never again be inhabited nor dwelt in unto generation and generation.” For the meaning of this last phrase compare the usage in Ps 100:5 and Isaiah 13:20. Since the first half of the verse has spoken of animals living there, it is necessary to add “people” and turn the passive verbs into active ones.
344. Jeremiah 50:40 tn Heb “‘As [when] God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah and the neighboring towns,’ oracle of the Lord, ‘no man will live there.’” The Lord is speaking, so the first person has been substituted for “God.” The sentence has again been broken up to better conform with contemporary English style.sn Cf. Jer 49:18, where the same prophecy is applied to Edom.
345. Jeremiah 50:40 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
346. Jeremiah 50:41 sn A mighty nation and many kings is an allusion to the Medo-Persian empire and the vassal kings who provided forces for the Medo-Persian armies.
347. Jeremiah 50:42 tn Heb “daughter Babylon.” The word “daughter” is a personification of the city of Babylon and its inhabitants.
348. Jeremiah 50:43 tn Heb “his hands will drop/hang limp.” For the meaning of this idiom see the translator’s note on 6:24.
349. Jeremiah 50:43 tn Heb “The king of Babylon hears report of them, and his hands hang limp.” The verbs are translated as future because the passage is prophetic and the verbs may be interpreted as prophetic perfects (the action viewed as if it were as good as done). In the parallel passage in 6:24, the verbs could be understood as present perfects because the passage could be viewed as in the present. Here it is future.
350. Jeremiah 50:43 sn Compare Jer 6:22-24, where almost the same exact words as 50:41-43 are applied to the people of Judah. The repetition of prophecies here and in the following verses emphasizes the talionic nature of God’s punishment of Babylon; as they have done to others, so it will be done to them (cf. 25:14; 50:15).
351. Jeremiah 50:45 tn The words “the people who inhabit” are not in the text but are implicit from the context. They have been supplied in the translation to clarify the referent.sn The verbs in vv. 22-25 are all descriptive of the present, but all of this is really to take place in the future. Hebrew poetry has a way of rendering future actions as though they were already accomplished. The poetry of this section makes it difficult, however, to render the verbs as future, as the present translation has regularly done.
352. Jeremiah 50:46 tn Heb “among the nations.” With the exception of this phrase, the different verb in v. 46a, the absence of a suffix on the word for “land” in v. 45d, the third-plural suffix instead of the third-singular suffix on the verb for “chase…off,” this passage is identical with 49:19-21, with the replacement of Babylon or the land of the Chaldeans for Edom. For the translation notes explaining the details of the translation here, see the translator’s notes on 49:19-21.sn This passage is virtually identical with Jer 49:19-21, with the replacement of Babylon and land of Babylonia for Edom and the inhabitants of Teman. As God used Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonians to destroy Edom, so he would use Cyrus, the Medes and Persians, and their allies to destroy Babylon (cf. 25:13, 14). As Nebuchadnezzar was God’s servant to whom all would be subject (25:9; 27:6), so Cyrus is called in Isaiah “his anointed one,” i.e., his chosen king, whom he will use to shatter other nations and set Israel free (Isa 45:1-4).
353. Jeremiah 51:1 sn The destructive wind is a figurative reference to the “foreign people” who will “winnow” Babylon and drive out all the people (v. 2). This figure has already been used in 4:11-12 and in 49:36. See the study note on 4:11-12 and the translator’s notes on 22:22 and 49:36.
354. Jeremiah 51:1 tn Or “I will arouse the spirit of hostility of a destroying nation”; Heb “I will stir up against Babylon…a destroying wind [or the spirit of a destroyer].” The word רוּחַ (ruakh) can refer to either a wind (BDB 924 s.v. רוּחַ 2.a) or a spirit (BDB 925 s.v. רוּחַ 2.g). It can be construed as either a noun followed by an adjectival participle (so, “a destroying wind”) or a noun followed by another noun in the “of” relationship (a construct or genitival relationship; so, “spirit of a destroyer”). The same noun with this same verb is translated “stir up the spirit of” in 1 Chr 5:26; 2 Chr 21:16; 36:22; Hag 1:14; and most importantly in Jer 51:11, where it refers to the king of the Medes. However, the majority of the exegetical tradition (all the commentaries consulted and all the English versions except NASB and NIV) opt for the “destructive wind,” primarily because of the figure of winnowing that is found in the next verse. The translation follows the main line exegetical tradition here for that same reason.
355. Jeremiah 51:1 sn Heb “the people who live in Leb Qamai.” “Leb Qamai” is a code name for “Chaldeans” formed on the principle of substituting the last letter of the alphabet for the first, the next to the last for the second, and so on. This same principle is used in referring to Babylon in 25:26 and 51:41 as “Sheshach.” See the study note on 25:26, where further details are given. There is no consensus on why the code name is used. The terms Babylon and Chaldeans (= Babylonians) have appeared regularly in this prophecy or collection of prophecies.
356. Jeremiah 51:2 tn Or “I will send foreign people against Babylonia.” The translation follows the reading of the Greek recensions of Aquila and Symmachus and the Latin version (the Vulgate). That reading is accepted by the majority of modern commentaries and several of the modern versions (e.g., NRSV, REB, NAB, and God’s Word). It fits better with the verb that follows it than the reading of the Hebrew text and the rest of the versions. The difference in the two readings is again only the difference in vocalization, the Hebrew text reading זָרִים (zarim) and the versions cited reading זֹרִים (zorim). If the Hebrew text is followed, there is a wordplay between the two words, “foreigners” and “winnow.” The words “like a wind blowing away chaff” have been supplied in the translation to clarify for the reader what “winnow” means.sn Winnowing involved throwing a mixture of grain and chaff (or straw) into the air and letting the wind blow away the lighter chaff, leaving the grain to fall on the ground. Since God considered all the Babylonians chaff, they would all be “blown away.”
357. Jeremiah 51:2 tn Or “They will strip her land bare like a wind blowing away chaff.” The alternate translation would be necessary if one were to adopt the alternate reading of the first line (the reading of the Hebrew text). The explanation of “winnow” would then be necessary in the second line. The verb translated “strip…bare” means literally “to empty out” (see BDB 132 s.v. בָּקַק Polel). It has been used in 19:7 in the Qal of “making void” Judah’s plans in a wordplay on the word for “bottle.” See the study note on 19:7 for further details.
358. Jeremiah 51:2 tn This assumes that the particle כִּי (ki) is temporal (cf. BDB 473 s.v. כִּי 2.a). This is the interpretation adopted also by NRSV and G. L. Keown, P. J. Scalise, T. G. Smothers, Jeremiah 26-52 (WBC), 349. J. Bright (Jeremiah [AB], 345) and J. A. Thompson (Jeremiah [NICOT], 747, n. 3) interpret it as asseverative or emphatic: “Truly, indeed.” Many of the modern English versions merely ignore it. Reading it as temporal makes it unnecessary to emend the following verb as Bright and Thompson do (from הָיוּ [hayu] to יִהְיוּ [yihyu]).
359. Jeremiah 51:2 tn Heb “in the day of disaster.”
360. Jeremiah 51:3 tc The text and consequent meaning of these first two lines are uncertain. The Masoretic reads literally, “Against let him string. Let him string, the one who strings his bow, and against let him raise himself up in his coat of armor.” This makes absolutely no sense, and the ancient versions and Hebrew mss did not agree in reading this same text. Many Hebrew mss and all the versions, as well as the Masoretes themselves (the text is left unpointed with a marginal note not to read it), delete the second “let him string.” The LXX (or Greek version) left out the words “against” at the beginning of the first two lines. It reads, “Let the archer bend his bow, and let the one who has armor put it on.” The Lucianic recension of the LXX and some Targum mss supplied the missing object “it” and thus read, “Let the archer ready his bow against it, and let him array himself against it in his coat of mail.” This makes good sense but does not answer the question of why the Hebrew text left off the suffix on the preposition twice in a row. Many Hebrew mss and the Syriac, Targum, and Vulgate (the Latin version) change the pointing of “against” (אֶל [ʾel]) to “not” (אַל [ʾal]) and thus read, “Let the archer not string the bow, and let him not array himself in his armor.” However, many commentators feel that this does not fit the context because it would apparently be addressed to the Babylonians, not the enemy, which would create a sudden shift in addressee with the second half of the verse. However, if it is understood in the sense taken here, it refers to the enemy not allowing the Babylonian archers to get ready for the battle, i.e., a surprise attack. This sense is suggested as an alternative in J. Bright, Jeremiah (AB), 346, n. u-u, and J. A. Thompson, Jeremiah (NICOT), 747, n. 5, and is the interpretation adopted in TEV, and probably also in NIrV.
361. Jeremiah 51:3 sn For the concept underlying this word, see the study note on “utterly destroy” in Jer 25:9 and compare the usage in 50:21, 26.
362. Jeremiah 51:4 tn The majority of English versions and the commentaries understand the vav (ו) consecutive + perfect as a future here: “They will fall.” However, it makes better sense, in the light of the commands in the previous verse, to understand this as an indirect third person command (= a jussive; see GKC 333 §112.q, r), as REB and NJPS do.
363. Jeremiah 51:4 tn Heb “the land of the Chaldeans.” See the study note on 21:4 for explanation.
364. Jeremiah 51:4 tn The words “cities” is not in the text. The text merely says “in her streets,” but the antecedent is “land” and must then refer to the streets of the cities in the land.
365. Jeremiah 51:5 tn Heb “widowed” (cf. BDB 48 s.v. אַלְמָן, an adjective occurring only here but related to the common word for “widow”). It is commonly translated as has been done here.sn The verses from v. 5 to v. 19 all speak of the Lord in the third person. The prophet, who is the spokesman for the Lord, (50:1) thus is speaking. However, the message is still from God because this was all what he spoke “through the prophet Jeremiah.”
366. Jeremiah 51:5 tn Heb “Yahweh of Armies.” For an explanation of this rendering see the study note on 2:19.
367. Jeremiah 51:5 tn Or “all, though their land was…” The majority of the modern English versions think the land here refers to the land of Israel and Judah (the text reads “their land,” and Israel and Judah are the nearest antecedents). In this case, the particle כִּי (ki) is concessive (cf. BDB 473 s.v. כִּי 2.c[b]). Many of the modern commentaries understand the referent to be the land of the Chaldeans/Babylonians. However, most of them feel that the line is connected as a causal statement to 51:2-4 and see the line as either textually or logically out of place. However, it need not be seen that way. It is parallel to the preceding and gives a second reason why they are to be destroyed. It also forms an excellent transition to the next lines, where the exiles and other foreigners are urged to flee and not get caught up in the destruction that is coming “because of her sin.” It might be helpful to note that both the adjective “widowed” and the suffix on “their God” are masculine singular, looking at Israel and Judah as one entity. The “their” then goes back not to Israel and Judah of the preceding lines but to the “them” in v. 4. This makes for a better connection with the following and understands the particle כִּי in its dominant usage, not an extremely rare one (see the comment in BDB 473 s.v. כִּי 2.c[b]). This interpretation is also reflected in RSV.
368. Jeremiah 51:5 sn See the note on the phrase “the Holy One of Israel” in 50:29.
369. Jeremiah 51:6 tn The words “you foreign people” are not in the text, and many think the referent is the exiles of Judah. While this is clearly the case in v. 45, the referent seems broader here, where the context speaks of every man going to his own country (v. 9).
370. Jeremiah 51:6 tn Heb “her.”
371. Jeremiah 51:6 tn Heb “paying to her a recompense [i.e., a payment in kind].”
372. Jeremiah 51:7 tn The words “of her wrath” are not in the Hebrew text but are supplied in the translation to help readers who are not familiar with the figure of the “cup of the Lord’s wrath.”sn The figure of the cup of the Lord’s wrath, invoked in Jer 25:15-29, is invoked again here, and Babylon is identified as the agent through which the wrath of the Lord is visited on the other nations. See the study note on 25:15 for explanation and further references.
373. Jeremiah 51:7 tn Heb “Upon the grounds of such conditions the nations have gone mad.”
374. Jeremiah 51:8 tn The verbs in this verse and the following are all in the Hebrew perfect tense, a tense often referring to a past action, or a past action with present results. However, as the translator’s notes have indicated, the prophets use this tense to view actions as if they were as good as done (the Hebrew prophetic perfect). The stance here is ideal, viewed as already accomplished.
375. Jeremiah 51:9 tn The words “Foreigners living there will say” are not in the text but are implicit from the third line. These words are generally assumed by the commentaries and are explicitly added in TEV and NCV, which are attempting to clarify the text for the average reader.
376. Jeremiah 51:9 tn Heb “Leave/abandon her.” However, it is smoother in the English translation to make this verb equivalent to the cohortative that follows.
377. Jeremiah 51:9 tn This is an admittedly very paraphrastic translation that tries to make the figurative nuance of the Hebrew original understandable for the average reader. The Hebrew text reads, “For her judgment [or punishment (cf. BDB 1078 s.v. מִשְׁפָּט 1.f) = ‘execution of judgment’] touches the heavens and is lifted up as far as the clouds.” The figure of hyperbole, or exaggeration, is being used here to indicate the vastness of Babylon’s punishment, which is the reason to escape (vv. 6, 9c). For this figure see Deut 1:28 in comparison with Num 13:28, and see also Deut 9:1. In both of the passages in Deut it refers to an exaggeration about the height of the walls of fortified cities. The figure also may be a play on Gen 11:4, where the nations gather in Babylon to build a tower that reaches to the skies. The present translation has interpreted the perfects here as prophetic, because the punishment has not happened yet or they would not be encouraging one another to leave and escape. For the idea here compare 50:16.
378. Jeremiah 51:10 tn The words “The exiles from Judah will say” are not in the text but are implicit from the words that follow. They are supplied in the translation to clearly identify for the reader the referent of “us.”
379. Jeremiah 51:10 tn There is some difference of opinion as to the best way to render the Hebrew expression here. Literally it means “brought forth our righteousnesses.” BDB 842 s.v. צְדָקָה 7.b interprets this of the “righteous acts” of the people of Judah and compares the usage in Isa 64:6; Ezek 3:20; 18:24; 33:13. However, Judah’s acts of righteousness (or more simply, their righteousness) were scarcely revealed in their deliverance. Most of the English versions and commentaries refer to “vindication,” i.e., the Lord has exonerated or proven Israel’s claims to be true. However, that would require more explanation than the idea of “deliverance,” which is a perfectly legitimate usage of the term (cf. BDB 842 s.v. צְדָקָה 6.a, and compare the usage in Isa 46:13; 51:6, 8; 56:1). The present translation interprets the plural form here as a plural of intensity or amplification (GKC 397-98 §124.e), and the suffix as a genitive of advantage (IBHS 147 §9.5.2e). This interpretation is also reflected in REB and God’s Word.
380. Jeremiah 51:11 sn The imperatives here and in v. 12 are directed to the soldiers in the armies of the kings from the north (here identified as the kings of Media [see also 50:3, 9; 51:27-28]). They have often been addressed in this prophecy as though they were a present force (see 50:14-16; 50:21 [and the study note there]; 50:26, 29; 51:3), though the passage as a whole is prophetic of the future. This gives some idea of the ideal stance that the prophets adopted when they spoke of the future as though already past (the use of the Hebrew prophetic perfect which has been referred to often in the translator’s notes).
381. Jeremiah 51:11 tn The meaning of this word is debated. The most thorough discussion of this word, including etymology and usage in the OT and Qumran, is in HALOT 1409-10 s.v. שֶׁלֶט, where the rendering “quiver” is accepted for all the uses of this word in the OT. For a discussion more readily accessible to English readers, see W. L. Holladay, Jeremiah (Hermeneia), 2:422-23. The meaning “quiver” fits better with the verb “fill” than the meaning “shield” that is adopted in BDB 1020 s.v. שֶׁלֶט. “Quiver” is the meaning adopted also in NRSV, REB, NAB, and NJPS.
382. Jeremiah 51:11 tn Heb “The Lord has stirred up the spirit of…” The verb is rendered here as a prophetic perfect. The rendering “arouse a spirit of hostility” is an attempt to render some meaning to the phrase and not simply ignore the word “spirit,” as many of the modern English versions do. For a fuller discussion, including cross references, see the translator’s note on v. 1.
383. Jeremiah 51:11 sn Media was a country in what is now northwestern Iran. At the time this prophecy was probably written, they were the dominating force in the northern region, the most likely enemy to Babylon. By the time Babylon fell in 538 b.c., the Medes had been conquered and incorporated in the Persian empire by Cyrus. However, several times in the Bible this entity is known under the combined entity of Media and Persia (Esth 1:3, 4, 18, 19; 10:2; Dan 5:28; 6:8, 12, 15; 8:20). Dan 5:31 credits the capture of Babylon to Darius the Mede, which may have been either another name for Cyrus or the name by which Daniel refers to a Median general named Gobryas.
384. Jeremiah 51:11 tn Heb “For it is the vengeance of the Lord, vengeance for his temple.” As in the parallel passage in 50:28, the genitival construction has been expanded in the translation to clarify for the English reader what the commentaries in general agree is involved.sn Verse 11c-f appears to be a parenthetical or editorial comment by Jeremiah to give some background for the attack that is summoned in vv. 11-12.
385. Jeremiah 51:12 tn Heb “Raise a banner against the walls of Babylon.”
386. Jeremiah 51:12 tn Heb “Strengthen the watch.”
387. Jeremiah 51:12 tn Heb “Station the guards.”
388. Jeremiah 51:12 tn Heb “Prepare ambushes.”sn Commands are addressed to the kings of the Medes to fully blockade the city by posting watchmen and setting soldiers in ambush to stop people from escaping the city (cf. 2 Kgs 25:4).
389. Jeremiah 51:12 tn Heb “For the Lord has both planned and done what he said concerning the people living in Babylon,” i.e., “he has carried out what he planned.” Here is an obvious case where the perfects are to be interpreted as prophetic; the commands imply that the attack is still future.
390. Jeremiah 51:13 sn Babylon was situated on the Euphrates River and surrounded by canals (also called “rivers”).
391. Jeremiah 51:13 tn Heb “You who live upon [or beside] many waters, rich in treasures, your end has come, the cubit of your cutting off.” The sentence has been restructured and paraphrased to provide clarity for the average reader. The meaning of the last phrase is debated. For a discussion of the two options see W. L. Holladay, Jeremiah (Hermeneia), 2:423. Most modern commentaries and English versions see an allusion to the figure in Isa 38:12, where the end of life is compared to a tapestry suddenly cut off from the loom. Hence, NRSV renders the last line as “the thread of your life is cut,” and TEV translates, “its thread of life is cut.” That idea is accepted also in HALOT 141 s.v. בצע Qal.1.
392. Jeremiah 51:14 tn Heb “Yahweh of Armies.” For an explanation of this rendering see the study note on 2:19.
393. Jeremiah 51:14 tn Heb “has sworn by himself.” See the study note on 22:5 for background.
394. Jeremiah 51:14 tn Heb “I will fill you with men like locusts.” The “you” refers to Babylon (Babylon is both the city and the land it ruled, Babylonia), which has been alluded to in the preceding verses under descriptive titles. The words “your land” have been used because of the way the preceding verse has been rendered, indicating people rather than the land or city. The “men” are, of course, enemy soldiers, compared to locusts both for their quantity and their destructiveness (see Joel 1:4). For the use of the particles כִּי אִם (ki ʾim) to introduce an oath, see BDB 475 s.v. כִּי אִם 2.c, and compare usage in 2 Kgs 5:20; one would normally expect אִם לֹא (cf. BDB 50 s.v. אִם 1.b[2]).
395. Jeremiah 51:15 tn The Hebrew participle here is intended to be connected with “Lord who rules over all” in the preceding verse. The passage is functioning to underline the Lord’s power to carry out what he has sworn, in contrast to the impotence of their idols, who will be put to shame and be dismayed (50:2).
396. Jeremiah 51:19 tn Heb “For he is the former of all [things] and the tribe of his inheritance.” This is the major exception to the verbatim repetition of 10:12-16 in 51:15-19. The word “Israel” appears before “the tribe of his inheritance” in 10:16. It is also found in a number of Hebrew mss, in the Lucianic recension of the LXX (the Greek version), the Aramaic Targums, and the Latin Vulgate. Most English versions and many commentaries assume it here. However, it is easier to explain why the word is added in a few of the versions and some Hebrew than to explain why it was left out. It is probable that the word is not original here because the addressees are different and the function of this hymnic piece is slightly different (see the study note on the next line for details). Here it makes good sense to understand that the Lord is being called the creator of the special tribe of people he claims as his own property (see the study note on the first line of 10:16).
397. Jeremiah 51:19 sn With the major exception discussed in the translator’s note on the preceding line, vv. 15-19 are a verbatim repetition of 10:12-16, with a few minor variations in spelling. There the passage was at the end of a section in which the Lord was addressing the Judeans and trying to convince them that the worship of idols was vain—the idols were impotent, but he is all powerful. Here the passage follows a solemn oath by the Lord who rules over all and is apparently directed to the Babylonians, emphasizing the power of the Lord to carry out his oath.
398. Jeremiah 51:20 tn Or “Media.” The referent is not identified in the text; the text merely says, “You are my war club.” Commentators in general identify the referent as Babylon because Babylon has been referred to as a hammer in 50:23, and Babylon is referred to in v. 25 as a “destroying mountain” (compare v. 20d). However, S. R. Driver, Jeremiah, 317, n. c maintains that v. 24 speaks against this. It does seem a little inconsistent to render the vav consecutive perfect at the beginning of v. 24 as future while rendering those in vv. 20b-23 as customary past. However, change in person from second masculine singular (vv. 20b-23) to the second masculine plural in “before your very eyes,” and its position at the end of the verse after “which they did in Zion,” argue that a change in address occurs there. Driver has to ignore the change in person and take “before your eyes” with the verb “repay” at the beginning to maintain the kind of consistency he seeks. The vav (ו) consecutive imperfect can be used for either the customary past (GKC 335-36 §112.dd, with cross reference back to GKC 331-32 §112.e) or the future (GKC 334 §112.x). Hence the present translation has followed the majority of commentaries (and English versions like TEV, NCV, CEV, NIrV) in understanding the referent as Babylon and v. 24 as a transition to vv. 25-26 (cf., e.g., J. Bright, Jeremiah [AB], 356-57, and J. A. Thompson, Jeremiah [NICOT], 756-57). If the referent is understood as Media, then the verbs in vv. 20-23 should all be translated as futures. See also the translator’s note on v. 24.
399. Jeremiah 51:20 tn This Hebrew word (מַפֵּץ, mappets) only occurs here in the Hebrew Bible, but its meaning is assured from the use of the verbs that follow, which are from the same root (נָפַץ, nafats), and there is a cognate noun מַפָּץ (mappats) that occurs in Ezek 9:2 in the sense of weapon of “smashing.”
400. Jeremiah 51:20 tn Heb “I smash nations with you.” This same structure is repeated throughout the series in vv. 20c-23.
401. Jeremiah 51:21 tn Heb “horse and its rider.” However, the terms are meant as generic or collective singulars (cf. GKC 395 §123.b) and are thus translated by the plural. The same thing is true of all the terms in vv. 21-23b. The terms in vv. 20c-d, 23c are plural.
402. Jeremiah 51:23 tn These two words are Akkadian loan words into Hebrew that often occur in this pairing (cf. Ezek 23:6, 12, 23; Jer 51:23, 28, 57). BDB 688 s.v. סָגָן (sagan) gives “prefect, ruler” as the basic definition for the second term, but neither works very well in a modern translation because “prefect” would be unknown to most readers, and “ruler” would suggest someone along the lines of a king, which these officials were not. The present translation has chosen “leaders” by default, assuming there is no other term that would be any more appropriate in light of the defects noted in “prefect” and “ruler.”
403. Jeremiah 51:24 tn Or “Media, you are my war club…I will use you to smash…leaders. So before your very eyes I will repay…for all the wicked things they did in Zion.” For explanation see the translator’s note on v. 20. The position of the phrase “before your eyes” at the end of the verse after “which they did in Zion,” and the change in person from second masculine singular in vv. 20b-23 (“I used you to smite”) to second masculine plural in “before your eyes,” argue that a change in referent/addressee occurs in this verse. To maintain that the referent in vv. 20-23 is Media/Cyrus requires that this position and change in person be ignored; “before your eyes” then is attached to “I will repay.” The present translation follows J. A. Thompson (Jeremiah [NICOT], 757) and F. B. Huey (Jeremiah, Lamentations [NAC], 423) in seeing the referent as the Judeans who had witnessed the destruction of Zion/Jerusalem. The word “Judean” has been supplied for the sake of identifying the referent for the modern reader.
404. Jeremiah 51:24 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
405. Jeremiah 51:25 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
406. Jeremiah 51:25 tn The word “Babylon” is not in the text but is universally understood as the referent. It is supplied in the translation here to clarify the referent for the sake of the average reader.
407. Jeremiah 51:25 tn Heb “I will reach out my hand against you.” See the translator’s note on 6:12 for explanation.
408. Jeremiah 51:25 tn Heb “I am against you, oh destroying mountain that destroys all the earth. I will reach out my hand against you and roll you down from the cliffs and make you a mountain of burning.” The interpretation adopted here follows the lines suggested by S. R. Driver, Jeremiah, 318, n. c and reflected also in BDB 977 s.v. שְׂרֵפָה. Babylon is addressed as a destructive mountain because it is being compared to a volcano. The Lord, however, will make it a “burned-out mountain,” i.e., an extinct volcano that is barren and desolate. This interpretation seems, to this translator, to fit the details of the text more consistently than alternative ones, which separate the concept of “destroying/destructive” from “mountain,” explain the figure of the mountain as symbolizing the dominating political position of Babylon, and take the “mountain of burning” to be a “burned [or burned over] mountain.” The use of similes in place of metaphors makes it easier for the modern reader to understand the figures. It also more easily incorporates the dissonant figure of “rolling you down from the cliffs,” which involves the figure of personification.sn The figure here involves comparing Babylon to a destructive volcano that the Lord makes burned-out, i.e., he will destroy her power to destroy. The figure of personification is also involved because the Lord addresses the mountain and rolls her off the cliffs, an act normally inapplicable to a mountain.
409. Jeremiah 51:26 tn This is a fairly literal translation of the original, which reads, “No one will take from you a stone for a cornerstone or a stone for foundations.” There is no unanimity in the commentaries, with many feeling that the figure of the burned mountain continues, and others feeling that the figure here shifts to a burned city whose stones are too burned to be used in building. The latter is the interpretation adopted here (see, e.g., F. B. Huey, Jeremiah, Lamentations [NAC], 423; W. L. Holladay, Jeremiah [Hermeneia], 2:426; NCV).sn The figure here shifts to that of a burned-up city whose stones cannot be used for building. Babylon will become a permanent heap of ruins.
410. Jeremiah 51:26 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
411. Jeremiah 51:27 tn Heb “Raise up a standard on the earth. Blow a ram’s horn among the nations. Consecrate nations against her.” According to BDB 651 s.v. נֵס 1, the raising of a standard was a signal of a war—a summons to assemble and attack (see usage in Isa 5:26; 13:2; Jer 51:12). The “blowing of the ram’s horn” was also a signal to rally behind a leader and join in an attack (see Judg 3:27; 6:34). For the meaning of “consecrate nations against her,” see the study note on 6:4. The usage of this phrase goes back to the concept of holy war, where soldiers had to be consecrated for battle by the offering of a sacrifice. The phrase has probably lost its ritual usage in later times and become idiomatic for making necessary preparations for war.
412. Jeremiah 51:27 sn Ararat, Minni, and Ashkenaz were three kingdoms located in the Lake Van-Lake Urmia region that are now parts of eastern Turkey and northwestern Iran. These kingdoms were conquered and made vassal states by the Medes in the early sixth century. The Medes were the dominant country in this region from around 590 b.c. until they were conquered and incorporated into the Persian empire by Cyrus in 550 b.c.
413. Jeremiah 51:27 tn The translation of this line is uncertain because it includes a word only occurring here and in Nah 3:17, where it is found in parallelism with a word used only once and likewise uncertain in meaning. The word here is probably related to the Akkadian word tupsharru, which refers to a scribe (Heb “a tablet writer”). The exact function of this official is disputed. KBL 356 s.v. טִפְסָר relates it to a “recruiting officer,” a sense which is reflected in NAB. The majority of modern English versions render “commander” or “marshal,” following the suggestion of BDB 381 s.v. טִפְסָר. G. L. Keown, P. J. Scalise, T. G. Smothers (Jeremiah 26-52 [WBC], 351) translate “recruiter (scribe)” but explain the function (on p. 371) as that of recording the plunder captured in war. The rendering here follows that of TEV and God’s Word and is the nuance suggested by the majority of modern English versions, who rendered “appoint a marshal/commander against it.”
414. Jeremiah 51:27 sn This is probably a poetic or shorthand way of referring to the cavalry and chariotry where horse is put for “rider” and “driver.”
415. Jeremiah 51:27 tn Heb “Bring up horses like bristly locusts.” The meaning of the Hebrew word “bristly” (סָמָר, samar) is uncertain because the word only occurs here. It is generally related to a verb meaning “to bristle” that occurs in Job 4:15 and Ps 119:120. Exactly what is meant by “bristly” in connection with “locust” is uncertain, though most relate it to a stage of the locust in which its wings are still encased in a rough, horny casing. J. A. Thompson (Jeremiah [NICOT], 759) adds that this is when the locust is very destructive. However, no other commentary mentions this. Therefore the present translation omits the word because it is of uncertain meaning and significance. For a fuller discussion of the way the word has been rendered, see W. L. Holladay, Jeremiah (Hermeneia), 2:427.
416. Jeremiah 51:28 tn See the first translator’s note on 51:27 and compare also 6:4 and the study note there.
417. Jeremiah 51:28 tn See the translator’s note at 51:23 for the rendering of the terms here.
418. Jeremiah 51:28 tc The Hebrew text has a confusing switch of possessive pronouns in this verse: “Consecrate the nations against her, the kings of the Medes, her governors and prefects, and all the land of his dominion.” This has led to a number of different resolutions. The LXX (the Greek version) renders the word “kings” as singular and levels all the pronouns to “his,” paraphrasing the final clause and combining it with “king of the Medes” to read “and of all the earth.” The Latin Vulgate levels them all to the third masculine plural, and this is followed by the present translation, as well as a number of other modern English versions (NASB, NIV, NRSV, TEV, NCV). The ASV and NJPS understand the feminine to refer to Media, i.e., “her governors and all her prefects,” and understand the masculine in the last line to be a distributive singular referring back to the lands each of the governors and prefects ruled over. This is probably correct, but since governors and prefects refer to officials appointed over provinces and vassal states, it amounts to much the same interpretation that the Latin Vulgate, the present translation, and other modern English versions have given.
419. Jeremiah 51:29 sn The figure here, common in the poetic tradition, is of the Lord going forth to do battle against his foes, and the earth’s reaction to it is compared to a person trembling with fear and writhing in agony, agony like that of a woman in labor (cf. Judg 5:4; Nah 1:2-5; Hab 3:1-15 [especially v. 6]).
420. Jeremiah 51:29 tn Heb “For the plans of the Lord have been carried out to make the land of Babylon…” The passive has been turned into an active and the sentence broken up to better conform with contemporary English style. For the meaning of the verb קוּם (qum) in the sense used here, see BDB 878 s.v. קוּם 7.g and compare the usage in Prov 19:21 and Isa 46:10.
421. Jeremiah 51:29 tn The verbs in this verse and v. 30 are all in the past tense in Hebrew, in the tense that views the action as already as good as done (the Hebrew prophetic perfect). The verb in v. 31a, however, is imperfect, viewing the action as future; the perfects that follow are all dependent on that future. Verse 33 looks forward to a time when Babylon will be harvested and trampled like grain on the threshing floor, and the imperatives imply a time in the future. Hence the present translation has rendered all the verbs in vv. 29-30 as future.
422. Jeremiah 51:30 tn Heb “Their strength is dry.” This is a figurative nuance of the word “dry” that BDB 677 s.v. נָשַׁת Qal.1 explains as meaning “fails.” The idea of “strength to do battle” is implicit from the context and is supplied in the translation here for clarity.
423. Jeremiah 51:30 tn Heb “They have become women.” The metaphor has been turned into a simile and the significance of the comparison drawn out for the sake of clarity. See 50:37 for the same figure.
424. Jeremiah 51:30 tn Heb “Her dwelling places have been set on fire. Her bars [i.e., the bars on the gates of her cities] have been broken.” The present translation has substituted the word “gates” for “bars” because the intent of the figure is to show that the bars of the gates have been broken, giving access to the city. “Gates” makes it easier for the modern reader to understand the figure.
425. Jeremiah 51:31 tn Heb “Runner will run to meet runner and…” The intent is to portray a relay of runners carrying the news that follows on in vv. 31d-33 to the king of Babylon. The present translation attempts to spell out the significance.
426. Jeremiah 51:31 tn Heb “Runner will run to meet runner, and messenger to meet messenger, to report to the king of Babylon that his city has been taken in [its] entirety.” There is general agreement among the commentaries that the first two lines refer to messengers converging on the king of Babylon from every direction, bringing news the sum total of which is reported in the lines that follow. For the meaning of the last phrase see BDB 892 s.v. קָצֶה 3 and compare the usage in Gen 19:4 and Isa 56:11. The sentence has been broken down and restructured to better conform with contemporary English style.
427. Jeremiah 51:32 tn The words “They will report that” have been supplied in the translation to show the linkage between this verse and the previous one. This is still a part of the report of the messengers. The meaning of the word translated “reed marshes” has seemed inappropriate to some commentators because it elsewhere refers to “pools.” However, all the commentaries consulted agree that the word here refers to the reedy marshes that surrounded Babylon. (For a fuller discussion regarding the meaning of this word and attempts to connect it with a word meaning “fortress,” see W. L. Holladay, Jeremiah [Hermeneia], 2:427.)sn Babylon was a city covering over a thousand acres that was surrounded by two walls, the inner one 21 feet (6.3 m) thick and the outer one 11 feet (3.3 m) thick. To provide the city further security, other walls were built to its south and east, and irrigation ditches and canals to it north and east were flooded to prevent direct access. The “fords” were crossings for the Euphrates River, which ran right through the city, and for the ditches and canals. The “reed marshes” were low-lying areas around the city where reeds grew. Burning them would deprive any fugitives of places to hide and flush out any who had already escaped.
428. Jeremiah 51:33 sn Heb “Daughter Babylon.” See the study note at 50:42 for explanation.
429. Jeremiah 51:33 tn Heb “Daughter Babylon will be [or “is”; there is no verb, and the tense has to be supplied from the context] like a threshing floor at the time one tramples it. Yet a little while and the time of the harvest will come for her.” It is generally agreed that there are two figures here: one of leveling the threshing floor and stamping it into a smooth, hard surface, and the other of the harvest, where the grain is cut, taken to the threshing floor, threshed by trampling the sheaves of grain to loosen the grain from the straw, and finally winnowed by throwing the mixture into the air (cf., e.g., J. A. Thompson, Jeremiah [NICOT], 760). The translation has sought to convey those ideas as clearly as possible without digressing too far from the literal.sn There are two figures involved here: one of the threshing floor being leveled and stamped down hard and smooth, and the other of the harvest. At harvest time the stalks of grain were cut down, gathered in sheaves, and taken to the harvest floor, where the grain was loosened from the husk by driving oxen and threshing sleds over them. The grain was then separated from the mixture of grain, straw, and husks by repeatedly throwing it in the air and letting the wind blow away the lighter husks and ground-up straw. The figure of harvest is often used of judgment in the OT. See, e.g., Joel 3:13 (4:13 HT) and Hos 6:11, and compare also Mic 4:12-13 and Jer 51:2, where different steps in this process are also used figuratively in connection with judgment. Babylon will be leveled to the ground and its people cut down in judgment.
430. Jeremiah 51:34 tn This verse is extremely difficult to translate because of the shifting imagery, the confusion over the meaning of one of the verbs, and the apparent inconsistency of the pronominal suffixes here with those in the following verse, which everyone agrees is connected with it. The pronominal suffixes are first common plural, but the versions all read them as first common singular, which the Masoretes also do in the Qere. That reading has been followed here for consistency with the next verse, which identifies the speaker as the person living in Zion and as the personified city of Jerusalem. The Hebrew text reads, “Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon devoured me [cf. 50:7, 17] and threw me into confusion. He set me down an empty dish. He swallowed me like a monster from the deep [cf. BDB 1072 s.v. תַּנִּין 3 and compare usage in Isa 27:1; Ezek 29:3; 32:2]. He filled his belly with my dainties. He rinsed me out [cf. BDB s.v. דּוּח Hiph.2 and compare the usage in Isa 4:4].” The verb “throw into confusion” has proved troublesome because its normal meaning does not seem appropriate. Hence various proposals have been made to understand it in a different sense. The present translation has followed W. L. Holladay (Jeremiah [Hermeneia], 2:428) in understanding the verb to mean “disperse” or “rout” (see NAB). The last line has seemed out of place and has often been emended to read, “He has spewed me out” (so NIV and NRSV, a reading that presupposes הִדִּיחָנִי [hiddikhani] for הֱדִיחָנִי [hedikhani]). The reading of the MT is not inappropriate if it is combined with the imagery of an empty jar and hence is retained here (see F. B. Huey, Jeremiah, Lamentations [NAC], 425, n. 59; H. Freedman, Jeremiah [SoBB], 344; NJPS). The lines have been combined to keep the imagery together.sn The speaker in this verse and the next is the personified city of Jerusalem. She laments her fate at the hands of the king of Babylon and calls down a curse on Babylon and the people who live in Babylonia. Here Nebuchadnezzar is depicted as a monster of the deep that has devoured Jerusalem, swallowed her down, and filled its belly with her riches, leaving her an empty dish that has been rinsed clean.
431. Jeremiah 51:35 tn Heb “‘The violence done to me and to my flesh be upon Babylon,’ says the one living in Zion. ‘My blood be upon those living in Chaldea,’ says Jerusalem.” For the usage of the genitive here in the phrase “violence done to me and my relatives,” see GKC 414 §128.a (a construct governing two objects) and IBHS 303 §16.4d (an objective genitive). For the nuance of “pay” in the sense of retribution, see BDB 756 s.v. עַל 7.a(b) and compare the usage in Judg 9:24. For the use of שְׁאֵר (sh^eʾer) in the sense of “relatives,” see BDB 985 s.v. שְׁאֵר 2 and compare NJPS. For the use of “blood” in this idiom, see BDB 197 s.v. דָּם 2.k and compare the usage in 2 Sam 4:11 and Ezek 3:18, 20. The lines have been reversed for better English style.
432. Jeremiah 51:36 tn Heb “I will avenge your vengeance [= I will take vengeance for you; the phrase involves a verb and a cognate accusative].” The meaning of the phrase has been spelled out in more readily understandable terms.
433. Jeremiah 51:36 tn Heb “I will dry up her [Babylon’s] sea and make her fountain dry.” “Their” has been substituted for “her” because the word “Babylonians” has been inserted in the previous clause and is easier to understand than “her” as a personification of Babylon.sn The referent for their sea is not clear. Most interpreters take it as a figure for the rivers and canals surrounding Babylon. But some apply it to the reservoir that the wife of Nebuchadnezzar, Queen Nictoris, had made.
434. Jeremiah 51:37 tn Heb “a heap of ruins, a haunt for jackals.” Cf. 9:11.
435. Jeremiah 51:37 tn Heb “without an inhabitant.”
436. Jeremiah 51:38 tn Heb “They [the Babylonians] all roar like lions. They growl like the cubs of lions.” For the usage of יַחְדָו (yakhdav) meaning “all,” see Isa 10:8; 18:6; 41:20. The translation strives to convey in clear terms what is the generally accepted meaning of the simile (cf., e.g., J. Bright, Jeremiah [AB], 358, and J. A. Thompson, Jeremiah [NICOT], 762).
437. Jeremiah 51:39 tn Heb “When they are hot.”
438. Jeremiah 51:39 tc The translation follows the suggestion of KBL 707 s.v. עָלַז and a number of modern commentaries (e.g., Bright, J. A. Thompson, and W. L. Holladay) in reading יְעֻלְּפוּ (yeʿull^efu), in the sense of “swoon away” or “grow faint” (see KBL 710 s.v. עָלַף Pual), instead of יַעֲלֹזוּ (yaʿalozu; “they will exult”). The former appears to be the verb read by the LXX (the Greek version) when they translated καρωθῶσιν (karōthōsin, “they will be stupefied”). For parallel usage KBL cites Isa 51:20. This fits the context much better than the Masoretic reading.
439. Jeremiah 51:39 sn The central figure here is the cup of the Lord’s wrath (cf. 25:15-29, especially v. 26). The Babylonians have been made to drink it so deeply that they fall into a drunken sleep from which they will never wake up (i.e., they die, death being compared to sleep [cf. Pss 13:3 (13:4 HT); 76:5 (76:6 HT); 90:5]). Cf. Jer 51:57 for this same figure.
440. Jeremiah 51:39 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
441. Jeremiah 51:40 tn Heb “I will bring them down like lambs to be slaughtered, like rams and he-goats.”sn This statement is highly ironic in light of the fact that the Babylonians were compared to lions and lion cubs (v. 38). Here they are like lambs, rams, and male goats that are to be led off to be slaughtered.
442. Jeremiah 51:41 sn Heb “Sheshach.” The study note on Jer 25:26 explains the use of this name for Babylon; see a similar phenomemon in a note on 51:1. Babylon is here called “the pride of the whole earth” because it was renowned for its size, its fortifications, and its beautiful buildings.
443. Jeremiah 51:41 tn Heb “How Sheshach has been captured, and the pride of the whole earth has been seized! How Babylon has become an object of horror among the nations!” For the usage of “How” here, see the translator’s note on 50:23.sn This is part of a taunt song (see Isa 14:4) and assumes prophetically that the city has already been captured. The verbs in vv. 41-43a are all in the Hebrew tense that the prophets often use to look at the future as “a done deal” (the so-called prophetic perfect). In v. 44, which is still a part of this picture, the verbs are in the future. The Hebrew tense has been retained here and in vv. 42-43, but it should be remembered that the standpoint is prophetic and future.
444. Jeremiah 51:42 tn For the meaning “multitude” here rather than “tumult,” see BDB 242 s.v. הָמוֹן 3.c, which says that this refers to a great throng of people under the figure of an overwhelming mass of waves. The word is used of a multitude of soldiers, or a vast army, in 1 Sam 14:16 and 1 Kgs 20:13, 18 (cf. BDB 242 s.v. הָמוֹן 3.a for further references).
445. Jeremiah 51:42 tn Heb “The sea has risen up over Babylon. She has been covered by the multitude of its waves.”sn This is a poetic and figurative reference to the enemies of Babylon, the foe from the north (see 50:3, 9; 51:27-28), which has attacked Babylon in wave after wave. This same figure is used in Isa 17:12. In Isa 8:7-8 the king of Assyria (and his troops) are compared to the Euphrates, which rises up and floods over the whole land of Israel and Judah. This same figure, but with application to Babylon, is assumed in Jer 47:2-3. In Jer 46:7-8 this figure is employed in a taunt of Egypt, which had boasted that it would cover the earth like the flooding of the Nile.
446. Jeremiah 51:43 tn Heb “a land of dryness (צִיָּה, tsiyyah) and an arid rift valley (עֲרָבָה, ʿaravah).” The translation combines these overlapping terms to emphasize the core of the imagery. See the note on these terms at Isa 35:1.
447. Jeremiah 51:43 tn Heb “Her towns have become a desolation, a dry land and a desert, a land any man does not live in them [i.e., “her towns”] and a son of man [= human being] does not pass through them.” Here the present translation has followed the suggestion of BHS and a number of the modern commentaries in deleting the second occurrence of the word “land,” in which case the words that follow are not a relative clause but independent statements. A number of modern English versions appear to ignore the third plural feminine suffixes that refer back to the cities and apply the statements that follow to the land.
448. Jeremiah 51:44 tn Heb “And I will punish Bel in Babylon…And the nations will not come streaming to him anymore. Yea, the walls of Babylon have fallen.” The verbs in the first two lines are vav consecutive perfects, and the verb in the third line is an imperfect, all looking at the future. That indicates that the perfect that follows and the perfects that precede are all prophetic perfects. The translation adopted seemed to be the best way to make the transition from the pasts, which were adopted in conjunction with the taunting use of אֵיךְ (ʾekh) in v. 41, to the futures in v. 44. For the usage of גַּם (gam) to indicate a climax, “yea” or “indeed,” see BDB 169 s.v. גַּם 3. It seemed to be impossible to render the meaning of v. 44 in any comprehensible way, even in a paraphrase.sn In the ancient Near East the victory of a nation over another nation was attributed to its gods. The reference is a poetic way of referring to the fact that God will be victorious over Babylon and its chief god, Bel/Marduk (see the study note on 50:2 for explanation). The reference to the disgorging of what Bel had swallowed is to captured people and plundered loot that had been taken to Babylon under the auspices of the victory of Bel over the foreign god (cf. Dan 5:2-4). The plundered treasures and captive people will be set free, and nations will no longer need to pay homage to Bel because Babylon will be destroyed.
449. Jeremiah 51:45 tn Heb “Go out from her [Babylon’s] midst, my people. Save each man his life from the fierce anger of the Lord.” The verb has been paraphrased to prevent gender specific terms.sn Cf. Jer 50:8-10; 51:6, where the significance of saving oneself from the fierce anger of the Lord is clarified.
450. Jeremiah 51:47 tn Heb “That being so, look, days are approaching.” לָכֵן (lakhen) often introduces the effect of an action. That may be the case here, the turmoil outlined in v. 46 serving as the catalyst for the culminating divine judgment described in v. 47. Another possibility is that לָכֵן here has an asseverative force (“certainly”), as in Isa 26:14 and perhaps Jer 5:2 (see the note there). In this case the word almost has the force of “for, since,” because it presents a cause for an accompanying effect. See Judg 8:7 and the discussion of Isa 26:14 in BDB 486-87 s.v. כֵּן 3.d.
451. Jeremiah 51:47 tn Or “all her slain will fall in her midst.” In other words, her people will be overtaken by judgment and be unable to escape. The dead will lie in heaps in the very heart of the city and land.
452. Jeremiah 51:48 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
453. Jeremiah 51:49 tn The infinitive construct is used here to indicate what is about to take place. See IBHS 610 §36.2.3g.
454. Jeremiah 51:49 tn Heb “the slain of Israel.” The words “because of” are supplied in the translation for clarification. The preceding context makes it clear that Babylon would be judged for its atrocities against Israel (see especially 50:33-34; 51:10, 24, 35).
455. Jeremiah 51:49 tn The juxtaposition of גַם…גַם (gam…gam), often “both…and,” here indicates correspondence. See BDB 169 s.v. גַּם 4. Appropriately, Babylon will fall slain just as her victims, including God’s covenant people, did.
456. Jeremiah 51:50 sn God’s exiled people are told to leave doomed Babylon (see v. 45).
457. Jeremiah 51:50 tn Heb “don’t stand.”
458. Jeremiah 51:50 tn Heb “let Jerusalem go up upon your heart.” The “heart” is often viewed as the seat of one’s mental faculties and thought life.
459. Jeremiah 51:51 sn The exiles lament the way they have been humiliated.
460. Jeremiah 51:51 tn Heb “we have heard an insult.”
461. Jeremiah 51:51 tn Heb “disgrace covers our face.”
462. Jeremiah 51:51 tn Or “holy places, sanctuaries.”
463. Jeremiah 51:52 tn Heb “that being so, look, days are approaching.” Here לָכֵן (lakhen) introduces the Lord’s response to the people’s lament (v. 51). It has the force of “yes, but” or “that may be true.” See Judg 11:8 and BDB 486-87 s.v. כֵּן 3.d.
464. Jeremiah 51:52 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
465. Jeremiah 51:53 tn Or “ascends [into] heaven.” Note the use of the phrase in Deut 30:12; 2 Kgs 2:11; Amos 9:2.
466. Jeremiah 51:53 tn Heb “and even if she fortifies her strong, elevated place.”
467. Jeremiah 51:53 tn Heb “from me destroyers will go against her.”
468. Jeremiah 51:53 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
469. Jeremiah 51:55 tn The antecedent of the third masculine plural pronominal suffix is not entirely clear. It probably refers back to the “destroyers” mentioned in v. 53 as the agents of God’s judgment on Babylon.
470. Jeremiah 51:55 tn Or “mighty waters.”
471. Jeremiah 51:55 tn Heb “and the noise of their sound will be given.”
472. Jeremiah 51:56 tn Heb “for a destroyer is coming against her, against Babylon.”
473. Jeremiah 51:56 tn The Piel form (which would be intransitive here, see GKC 142 §52.k) should probably be emended to Qal.
474. Jeremiah 51:56 tn Or “God of retribution.”
475. Jeremiah 51:56 tn The infinitive absolute emphasizes the following finite verb. Another option is to translate, “he certainly pays one back.” The translation assumes that the imperfect verbal form here describes the Lord’s characteristic actions. Another option is to take it as referring specifically to his judgment on Babylon, in which case one should translate, “he will pay (Babylon) back in full.”
476. Jeremiah 51:57 sn For discussion of the terms “governors” and “leaders,” see the note at Jer 51:23.
477. Jeremiah 51:57 sn See the note at Jer 51:39.
478. Jeremiah 51:57 tn For the title “Yahweh of Armies” see the study note on Jer 2:19.
479. Jeremiah 51:58 sn See the note at Jer 2:19.
480. Jeremiah 51:58 tn The text has the plural “walls,” but many Hebrew mss read the singular “wall,” which is also supported by the ancient Greek version. The modifying adjective “thick” is singular as well.
481. Jeremiah 51:58 tn The infinitive absolute emphasizes the following finite verb. Another option is to translate, “will certainly be demolished.”
482. Jeremiah 51:58 tn Heb “for what is empty.”
483. Jeremiah 51:58 tn Heb “and the nations for fire, and they grow weary.”
484. Jeremiah 51:59 sn This would be 582 b.c.
485. Jeremiah 51:59 tn Heb “an officer of rest.”
486. Jeremiah 51:60 tn Or “wrote.”
487. Jeremiah 51:60 tn Or “disaster”; or “calamity.”
488. Jeremiah 51:60 tn Heb “words” (or “things”).
489. Jeremiah 51:61 tn Heb “see [that].”
490. Jeremiah 51:61 tn Heb “words” (or “things”).
491. Jeremiah 51:63 tn The word “River” is not in the Hebrew text but has been supplied for clarity.
492. Jeremiah 51:64 sn The final chapter of the book of Jeremiah does not mention Jeremiah or record any of his prophecies.