Historical

Footnotes

1. 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.
2. 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).
3. 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]).
4. Jeremiah 49:2 tn Heb “oracle of the Lord.”
5. Jeremiah 49:2 tn Heb “a desolate tel.” For the explanation of what a “tel” is see the study note on 30:18.
6. 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.
7. Jeremiah 49:2 tn Heb “says the Lord.” The first person is used to maintain the first person address throughout.
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. Jeremiah 49:3 sn Cf. Jer 48:7 and the study note there.
11. 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).
12. 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.
13. 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.
14. Jeremiah 49:5 tn Heb “You will be scattered, each man [straight] before him.”
15. Jeremiah 49:6 tn See Jer 29:14; 30:3; and the translator’s note on 29:14 for the idiom used here.
16. Jeremiah 49:6 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
17. Jeremiah 49:7 tn Heb “Yahweh of Armies.” See the study note on 2:19 for this title.
18. 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.
19. 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).
20. Jeremiah 49:7 tn Heb “Has counsel perished from men of understanding?”
21. 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.
22. 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.
23. 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.
24. 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).
25. 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).
26. 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.
27. 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.
28. 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.
29. Jeremiah 49:13 tn Heb “I swear by myself.” See 22:5 and the study note there.
30. 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).
31. Jeremiah 49:13 tn See the study note on 24:9 for the rendering of this term.
32. 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.
33. 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.
34. 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.
35. 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).
36. 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.
37. 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.
38. Jeremiah 49:19 tn See the study note on Jer 12:5 for the rendering of this term.
39. 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.
40. 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).
41. 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.
42. 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.
43. 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.
44. 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).
45. 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.
46. 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.
47. 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).
48. 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).
49. 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.
50. 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.
51. 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.
52. 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.
53. 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.
54. 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.
55. Jeremiah 49:25 tn Heb “city of praise.”
56. Jeremiah 49:25 tn Heb “city of joy.”
57. 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.
58. Jeremiah 49:26 tn Heb “Oracle of Yahweh of Armies.” For this title for God see the study note on 2:19.
59. 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).
60. 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.
61. 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.
62. 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.
63. 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.
64. Jeremiah 49:29 tn Or “Let their tents…be taken….Let their tent…be carried…. Let people shout….”
65. 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.
66. Jeremiah 49:30 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
67. 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.
68. Jeremiah 49:30 tn Heb “has counseled a counsel against you, has planned a plan against you.”
69. Jeremiah 49:31 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
70. 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.
71. 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.
72. Jeremiah 49:32 tn See the translator’s note at Jer 9:26 and compare the usage in 9:26 and 25:23.
73. Jeremiah 49:32 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
74. Jeremiah 49:33 sn Cf. Jer 9:11.
75. Jeremiah 49:33 sn Cf. Jer 49:18 and 50:40, where the same thing is said about Edom and Babylon.
76. Jeremiah 49:34 tn Heb “that which was.”
77. 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).
78. 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.
79. 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.
80. 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.
81. Jeremiah 49:37 tn Heb “I will bring disaster upon them, even my fierce anger.”
82. Jeremiah 49:37 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
83. Jeremiah 49:37 tn Heb “I will send the sword after them.”
84. 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.
85. Jeremiah 49:38 tn Heb “I will destroy king and leaders from there.”
86. Jeremiah 49:38 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
87. 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.
88. Jeremiah 50:1 tn Heb “the land of the Chaldeans.” See the study note on 21:4 for explanation.
89. 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.”
90. Jeremiah 50:2 tn The verbs are masculine plural. Jeremiah is calling on other unnamed messengers to spread the news.
91. Jeremiah 50:2 tn Heb “Raise a signal flag.”
92. 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.
93. 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).
94. 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).
95. 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.
96. Jeremiah 50:4 tn Heb “oracle of the Lord.”
97. 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.
98. 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).
99. Jeremiah 50:5 sn See Jer 32:40 and the study note there for the nature of this lasting agreement.
100. Jeremiah 50:6 sn The shepherds are the priests, prophets, and leaders who have led Israel into idolatry (2:8).
101. 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).
102. 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.
103. Jeremiah 50:7 tn Heb “fathers.”
104. 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.
105. 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.
106. Jeremiah 50:8 tn Heb “the land of the Chaldeans.” See the study note on 21:4 for explanation.
107. 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.
108. Jeremiah 50:9 sn Some of these are named in Jer 51:27-28.
109. Jeremiah 50:9 tn Heb “She will be captured from there (i.e., from the north).”
110. 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.
111. 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.
112. Jeremiah 50:10 tn Heb “The land of the Chaldeans.” See the study note on 21:4 for explanation.
113. Jeremiah 50:10 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
114. 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.
115. 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).
116. 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.
117. 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.
118. 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.
119. Jeremiah 50:12 tn Heb “Behold.” For the use of this particle see the translator’s note on 1:6.
120. 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.
121. 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.”
122. Jeremiah 50:13 sn Cf. Jer 49:17 and the study note there; see also the study notes on 18:16 and 19:8.
123. Jeremiah 50:14 tn Heb “all you who draw the bow.”
124. 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.
125. Jeremiah 50:14 tn Heb “Shoot at her! Don’t save any arrows!”
126. 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.
127. 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.
128. 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.
129. 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.
130. 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).
131. 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.
132. 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.
133. 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.
134. Jeremiah 50:19 tn Heb “their soul [or hunger/appetite] will be satisfied.”
135. 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.
136. 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.
137. Jeremiah 50:20 sn Cf. Jer 31:34; 33:8.
138. 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).
139. Jeremiah 50:21 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
140. 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.
141. 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.
142. 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.
143. Jeremiah 50:21 tn Heb “Do according to all I have commanded you.”
144. 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.
145. 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).
146. 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.”
147. Jeremiah 50:25 tn Or “I have opened up my armory.”
148. 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.
149. 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.
150. 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.
151. 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.
152. 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]).
153. Jeremiah 50:26 sn Cf. Jer 50:21 and see the study note on 25:9.
154. 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.
155. 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.
156. Jeremiah 50:27 tn Heb “Let them go down to the slaughter.”
157. 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.
158. 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.
159. 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).
160. 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.
161. 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.
162. 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.
163. Jeremiah 50:30 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
164. 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.
165. 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.
166. 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.
167. 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.
168. Jeremiah 50:31 sn Cf. v. 27.
169. 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.
170. Jeremiah 50:33 tn Heb “Yahweh of Armies.” For an explanation of this title see the study note on 2:19.
171. 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.
172. 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.
173. Jeremiah 50:34 tn Heb “Yahweh of Armies.” For the rendering of this title see the study note on 2:19.
174. 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).
175. 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.
176. 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.
177. 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….”
178. 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.
179. Jeremiah 50:35 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
180. 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.
181. 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.
182. 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.
183. 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.
184. Jeremiah 50:37 tn Or “in the country,” or “in her armies”; Heb “in her midst.”
185. 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.
186. 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.”
187. 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).
188. 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.
189. 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.
190. 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.”
191. Jeremiah 50:39 tn Heb “Therefore desert creatures will live with jackals, and ostriches will live in it.”
192. 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.
193. 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.
194. Jeremiah 50:40 tn Heb “Oracle of the Lord.”
195. 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.
196. Jeremiah 50:42 tn Heb “daughter Babylon.” The word “daughter” is a personification of the city of Babylon and its inhabitants.
197. 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.
198. 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.
199. 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).
200. 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.
201. 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).