الكتاب المقدس

Expositor's Bible Commentary Jeremiah 37:1 And king Zedekiah the son of Josiah reigned instead of Coniah the son of Jehoiakim, whom Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon made king in the land of Judah. CHAPTER XI A BROKEN COVENANT Jeremiah 21:1-10 , Jeremiah 34:1-22 , Jeremiah 37:1-10 "All the princes and peoplechanged their minds and reduced to bondage again all the slaves whom they had set free." Jeremiah 34:10-11 IN our previous chapter we saw that, at the point where the fragmentary record of the abortive conspiracy in the fourth year of Zedekiah came to an abrupt conclusion, Jeremiah seemed to have regained the ascendency he enjoyed under Josiah. The Jewish government had relinquished their schemes of rebellion and acquiesced once more in the supremacy of Babylon. We may possibly gather from a later chapter that Zedekiah himself paid a visit to Nebuchadnezzar to assure him of his loyalty. If so, the embassy of Elasah ben Shaphan and Gemariah ben Hilkiah was intended to assure a favourable reception for their master. The history of the next few years is lost in obscurity, but when the curtain again rises everything is changed and Judah is once more in revolt against the Chaldeans. No doubt one cause of this fresh change of policy was the renewed activity of Egypt. In the account of the conspiracy in Zedekiah’s fourth year, there is a significant absence of any reference to Egypt. Jeremiah succeeded in baffling his opponents partly because their fears of Babylon were not quieted by any assurance of Egyptian support. Now there seemed a better prospect of a successful insurrection. About the seventh year of Zedekiah, Psammetichus II of Egypt was succeeded by his brother Pharaoh Hophra, the son of Josiah’s conqueror, Pharaoh Necho. When Hophra-the Apries of Herodotus-had completed the reconquest of Ethiopia, he made a fresh attempt to carry out his father’s policy and to reestablish the ancient Egyptian supremacy in Western Asia; and, as of old, Egypt began by tampering with the allegiance of the Syrian vassals of Babylon. According to Ezekiel, { Ezekiel 17:15 } Zedekiah took the initiative: "he rebelled against him (Nebuchadnezzar) by sending his ambassadors into Egypt, that they might give him horses and much people." The knowledge that an able and victorious general was seated on the Egyptian throne, along with the secret intrigues of his agents and partisans, was too much for Zedekiah’s discretion. Jeremiah’s advice was disregarded. The king surrendered himself to the guidance-we might almost say, the control-of the Egyptian party in Jerusalem; he violated his oath of allegiance to his suzerain, and the frail and battered ship of state was once more embarked on the stormy waters of rebellion. Nebuchadnezzar promptly prepared to grapple with the reviving strength of Egypt in a renewed contest for the lordship of Syria. Probably Egypt and Judah had other allies, but they are not expressly mentioned. A little later Tyre was besieged by Nebuchadnezzar; but as Ezekiel { Ezekiel 26:2 } represents Tyre as exulting over the fall of Jerusalem, she can hardly have been a benevolent neutral, much less a faithful ally. Moreover, when Nebuchadnezzar began his march into Syria, he hesitated whether he should first attack Jerusalem or Rabbath Ammon:- "The king of Babylon stood at the parting of the way to use divination: he shook the arrows to and fro, he consulted the teraphim, he looked in the liver." { Ezekiel 21:21 } Later on Baalis, king of Ammon, received the Jewish refugees and supported those who were most irreconcilable in their hostility to Nebuchadnezzar. Nevertheless the Ammonites were denounced by Jeremiah for occupying the territory of Gad, and by Ezekiel { Ezekiel 25:1-7 } for sharing the exultation of Tyre over the ruin of Judah. Probably Baalis played a double part. He may have promised support to Zedekiah, and then purchased his own pardon by betraying his ally. Nevertheless the hearty support of Egypt was worth more than the alliance of any number of the petty neighbouring states, and Nebuchadnezzar levied a great army to meet this ancient and formidable enemy of Assyria and Babylon. He marched into Judah with "all his army, and all the kingdoms of the earth that were under his dominion, and all the peoples," and "fought against Jerusalem and all the cities thereof." At the beginning of the siege Zedekiah’s heart began to fail him. The course of events seemed to confirm Jeremiah’s threats, and the king, with pathetic inconsistency, sought to be reassured by the prophet himself. He sent Pashhur ben Malchiah and Zephaniah ben Maaseiah to Jeremiah with the message:- "Inquire, I pray thee, of Jehovah for us, for Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon maketh war against us: peradventure Jehovah wilt deal with us according to all His wondrous works, that he may go up from us." The memories of the great deliverance from Sennacherib were fresh and vivid in men’s minds. Isaiah’s denunciations had been as uncompromising as Jeremiah’s, and yet Hezekiah had been spared. "Peradventure," thought his anxious descendant, "the prophet may yet be charged with gracious messages that Jehovah repents Him of the evil and will even now rescue His Holy City." But the timid appeal only called forth a yet sterner sentence of doom. Formidable as were the enemies against whom Zedekiah craved protection, they were to be reinforced by more terrible allies; man and beast should die of a great pestilence, and Jehovah Himself should be their enemy:- "I will turn back the weapons of war that are in your hands, wherewith ye fight against the king of Babylon and the Chaldeans I Myself will fight against you with an outstretched hand and a strong arm, in anger and fury and great wrath." The city should be taken and burnt with fire, and the king and all others who survived should be carried away captive. Only on one condition might better terms be obtained:- "Behold, I set before you the way of life and the way of death. He that abideth in this city shall die by the sword, the famine, and the pestilence; but he that goeth out, and falleth to the besieging Chaldeans, shall live, and his life shall be unto him for a prey." { Jeremiah 21:1-10 } On another occasion Zephaniah ben Maaseiah with a certain Tehucal ben Shelemiah was sent by the king to the prophet with the entreaty, "Pray now unto Jehovah our God for us." We are not told the sequel to this mission, but it is probably represented by the opening verses of chapter 34. This section has the direct and personal note which characterises the dealings of Hebrew prophets with their sovereigns. Doubtless the partisans of Egypt had had a severe struggle with Jeremiah before they captured the ear of the Jewish king, and Zedekiah was possessed to the very last with a half superstitious anxiety to keep on good terms with the prophet. Jehovah’s "iron pillar and brasen wall" would make no concession to these royal blandishments: his message had been rejected, his Master had been slighted and defied, the Chosen People and the Holy City were being betrayed to their ruin; Jeremiah would not refrain from denouncing this iniquity because the king who had sanctioned it tried to flatter his vanity by sending deferential deputations of important notables. This is the Divine sentence:- "I will give this city into the hand of the king of Babylon, And he shall burn it with fire. Thou shalt not escape out of his hand; Thou shalt assuredly be taken prisoner; Thou shalt be delivered into his hand. Thou shalt see the king of Babylon, face to face; He shall speak to thee, mouth to mouth, And thou shalt go to Babylon." Yet there should be one doubtful mitigation of his punishment:- "Thou shalt not die by the sword; Thou shalt die in peace: With the burnings of thy fathers, the former kings that were before thee, So shall they make a burning for thee; And they shall lament thee, saying, Alas lord! For it is I that have spoken the word-it is the utterance of Jehovah." King and people were not proof against the combined terrors of the prophetic rebukes and the besieging enemy. Jeremiah regained his influence, and Jerusalem gave an earnest of the sincerity of her repentance by entering into a covenant for the emancipation of all Hebrew slaves. Deuteronomy had reenacted the ancient law that their bondage should terminate at the end of six years, { Deuteronomy 15:12 ; Cf. Exodus 21:2 ; Exodus 23:10 } but this had hot been observed: "Your fathers hearkened not unto Me, neither inclined their ear." { Jeremiah 34:14 } A large proportion of those then in slavery must have served more than six years; { Jeremiah 34:13 } and partly because of the difficulty of discrimination at such a crisis, partly by way of atonement, the Jews undertook to liberate all their slaves. This solemn reparation was made because the limitation of servitude was part of the national Torah, "the covenant that Jehovah made with their fathers in the day that He brought them forth out of the land of Egypt"- i.e., the Deuteronomic Code. Hence it implied the renewed recognition of Deuteronomy, and the restoration of the ecclesiastical order established by Josiah’s reforms. Even Josiah’s methods were imitated. He had assembled the people at the Temple and made them enter into "a covenant before Jehovah, to walk after Jehovah, to keep His commandments and testimonies and statutes with all their heart and soul, to perform the words of this covenant that were written in this book. And all the people entered into the covenant." { 2 Kings 23:3 } So now Zedekiah in turn caused the people to make a covenant before Jehovah, "in the house which was called by His name," { Jeremiah 34:14 } "that every one should release his Hebrew slaves, male and female, and that no one should enslave a brother Jew." { Jeremiah 34:9 } A further sanction had been given to this vow by the observance of an ancient and significant rite. When Jehovah promised to Abraham a seed countless as the stars of heaven, He condescended to ratify His promise by causing the symbols of His presence-a smoking furnace and a burning lamp-to pass between the divided halves of a heifer, a she-goat, a ram, and between a turtle dove and a young pigeon. { Genesis 15:1-21 } Now, in like manner, a calf was cut in twain, the two halves laid opposite each other, and "the princes of Judah and Jerusalem, the eunuchs, the priests, and all the people of the land passed between the parts of the calf." { Jeremiah 34:19 } Similarly, after the death of Alexander the Great, the contending factions in the Macedonian army ratified a compromise by passing between the two halves of a dog. Such symbols spoke for themselves: those who used them laid themselves under a curse; they prayed that if they violated the covenant they might be slain and mutilated like the divided animals. This covenant was forthwith carried into effect, the princes and people liberating their Hebrew slaves according to their vow. We cannot, however, compare this event with the abolition of slavery in British colonies or with Abraham Lincoln’s Decree of Emancipation. The scale is altogether different: Hebrew bondage had no horrors to compare with those of the American plantations; and moreover, even at the moment, the practical results cannot have been great. Shut up in a beleaguered city, harassed by the miseries and terrors of a siege, the freedmen would see little to rejoice over in their new found freedom. Unless their friends were in Jerusalem they could not rejoin them, and in most cases they could only obtain sustenance by remaining in the households of their former masters, or by serving in the defending army. Probably this special ordinance of Deuteronomy was selected as the subject of a solemn covenant, because it not only afforded an opportunity of atoning for past sin, but also provided the means of strengthening the national defence. Such expedients were common in ancient states in moments of extreme peril. In view of Jeremiah’s persistent efforts, both before and after this incident, to make his countrymen loyally accept the Chaldean supremacy, we cannot doubt that he hoped to make terms between Zedekiah and Nebuchadnezzar. Apparently no tidings of Pharaoh Hophra’s advance had reached Jerusalem; and the nonappearance of his "horses and much people" had discredited the Egyptian party, and enabled Jeremiah to overthrow their influence with the king and people. Egypt, after all her promises, had once more proved herself a broken reed; there was nothing left but to throw themselves on Nebuchadnezzar’s mercy. But the situation was once more entirely changed by the news that Pharaoh Hophra had come forth out of Egypt "with a mighty army and a great company." { Ezekiel 17:17 } The sentinels on the walls of Jerusalem saw the besiegers break up their encampment, and march away to meet the relieving army. All thought of submitting to Babylon was given up. Indeed, if Pharaoh Hophra were to be victorious, the Jews must of necessity accept his supremacy. Meanwhile they revelled in their respite from present distress and imminent danger. Surely the new covenant was bearing fruit. Jehovah had been propitiated by their promise to observe the Torah; Pharaoh was the instrument by which God would deliver His people; or even if the Egyptians were defeated, the Divine resources were not exhausted. When Tirhakah advanced to the relief of Hezekiah, he was defeated at Eltekeh, yet Sennacherib had returned home baffled and disgraced. Naturally the partisans of Egypt, the opponents of Jeremiah, recovered their control of the king and the government. The king sent, perhaps at the first news of the Egyptian advance, to inquire of Jeremiah concerning their prospects of success. What seemed to every one else a Divine deliverance was to him a national misfortune; the hopes he had once more indulged of averting the ruin of Judah were again dashed to the ground. His answer is bitter and gloomy:- "Behold, Pharaoh’s army, which is come forth to help you, Shall return to Egypt into their own land. The Chaldeans shall come again, and fight against this city; They shall take it, and burn it with fire. Thus saith Jehovah: Do not deceive yourselves, saying, The Chaldeans shall surely depart from us: They shall not depart. Though ye had smitten the whole army of the Chaldeans that fight against you, And there remained none but wounded men among them, Yet should they rise up every man in his tent, And burn this city with fire." Jeremiah’s protest was unavailing, and only confirmed the king and princes in their adherence to Egypt. Moreover Jeremiah had now formally disclaimed any sympathy with this great deliverance, which Pharaoh-and presumably Jehovah-had wrought for Judah. Hence it was clear that the people did not owe this blessing to the covenant to which they had submitted themselves by Jeremiah’s guidance. As at Megiddo, Jehovah had shown once more that He was with Pharaoh and against Jeremiah. Probably they would best please God by renouncing Jeremiah and all his works-the covenant included. Moreover they could take back their slaves with a clear conscience, to their own great comfort and satisfaction. True, they had sworn in the Temple with solemn and striking ceremonies, but then Jehovah Himself had manifestly released them from their oath. "All the princes and people changed their mind, and reduced to bondage again all the slaves whom they had set free." The freedmen had been rejoicing with their former masters in the prospect of national deliverance; the date of their emancipation was to mark the beginning of a new era of Jewish happiness and prosperity. When the siege was raised and the Chaldeans driven away, they could use their freedom in rebuilding the ruined cities and cultivating the wasted lands. To all such dreams there came a sudden and rough awakening: they were dragged back to their former hopeless bondage-a happy augury for the new dispensation of Divine protection and blessing! Jeremiah turned upon them in fierce wrath, like that of Elijah against Ahab when he met him taking possession of Naboth’s vineyard. They had profaned the name of Jehovah, and- "Therefore thus saith Jehovah: Ye have not hearkened unto Me to proclaim A release every one to his brother and his neighbour: Behold, I proclaim a release for you-it is the utterance of Jehovah- Unto the sword, the pestilence, and the famine; And I will make you a terror among all the kingdoms of the earth." The prophet plays upon the word "release" with grim irony. The Jews had repudiated the "release" which they had promised under solemn oath to their brethren, but Jehovah would not allow them to be so easily quit of their covenant. There should be a "release" after all, and they themselves should have the benefit of it-a "release" from happiness and prosperity, from the sacred bounds of the Temple, the Holy City, and the Land of Promise-a "release" unto "the sword, the pestilence, and the famine." "I will give the men that have transgressed My covenant into the hands of their enemies . . . Their dead bodies shall be meat for the fowls of heaven . . . And for the beasts of the earth, Zedekiah king of Judah and his princes will I give into the hand of . . . The host of the king of Babylon, which are gone up from you. Behold, I will command-it is the utterance of Jehovah- And will bring them back unto this city: They shall fight against it, and take it, and burn it with fire. I will lay the cities of Judah waste, without inhabitant." Another broken covenant was added to the list of Judah’s sins, another promise of amendment speedily lost in disappointment and condemnation. Jeremiah might well say with his favourite Hosea:- "Oh Judah, what shall I do unto thee? Your goodness is as a morning cloud, And as the dew that goeth early away." { Hosea 6:4 } This incident has many morals; one of the most obvious is the futility of the most stringent oaths and the most solemn symbolic ritual. Whatever influence oaths may have in causing a would be liar to speak the truth, they are very poor guarantees for the performance of contracts. William the Conqueror profited little by Harold’s oath to help him to the crown of England, though it was sworn over the relics of holy saints. Wulfnoth’s whisper in Tennyson’s drama- "Swear thou today, tomorrow is thine own"- states the principle on which many oaths have been taken. The famous "blush of Sigismund" over the violation of his safe conduct to Huss was rather a token of unusual sensitiveness than a confession of exceptional guilt. The Christian Church has exalted perfidy into a sacred obligation. As Milman says:- "The fatal doctrine, confirmed by long usage, by the decrees of Pontiffs, by the assent of all ecclesiastics, and the acquiescence of the Christian world, that no promise, no oath, was binding to a heretic, had hardly been questioned, never repudiated." At first sight an oath seems to give firm assurance to a promise; what was merely a promise to man is made into a promise to God. What can be more binding upon the conscience than a promise to God? True; but He to whom the promise is made may always release from its performance. To persist in what God neither requires nor desires because of a promise to God seems absurd and even wicked. It has been said that men "have a way of calling everything they want to do a dispensation of Providence." Similarly, there are many Nays by which a man may persuade himself that God has cancelled his vows, especially if he belongs to an infallible Church with a Divine commission to grant dispensations. No doubt these Jewish slaveholders had full sacerdotal absolution from their pledge. The priests had slaves of their own. Failing ecclesiastical aid, Satan himself will play the casuist-it is one of his favourite parts-and will find the traitor full justification for breaking the most solemn contract with Heaven. If a man’s whole soul and purpose go with his promise, oaths are superfluous; otherwise, they are useless. However, the main lesson of the incident lies in its added testimony to the supreme importance which the prophets attached to social righteousness. When Jeremiah wished to knit together again the bonds of fellowship between Judah and its God, he did not make them enter into a covenant to observe ritual or to cultivate pious sentiments, but to release their slaves. It has been said that a gentleman may be known by the way in which he treats his servants; a man’s religion is better tested by his behaviour to his helpless dependents than by his attendance on the means of grace or his predilection for pious conversation. If we were right in supposing that the government supported Jeremiah because the act of emancipation would furnish recruits to man the walls, this illustrates the ultimate dependence of society upon the working classes. In emergencies, desperate efforts are made to coerce or cajole them into supporting governments by which they have been neglected or oppressed. The sequel to this covenant shows how barren and transient are concessions begotten by the terror of imminent ruin. The social covenant between all classes of the community needs to be woven strand by strand through long years of mutual helpfulness and goodwill, of peace and prosperity, if it is to endure the strain of national peril and disaster. Jeremiah 37:11 And it came to pass, that when the army of the Chaldeans was broken up from Jerusalem for fear of Pharaoh's army, CHAPTER XII JEREMIAH’S IMPRISONMENT Jeremiah 37:11-21 , Jeremiah 38:1-28 , Jeremiah 39:15-18 "Jeremiah abode in the court of the guard until the day that Jerusalem was taken."- Jeremiah 38:28 "WHEN the Chaldean army was broken up from Jerusalem for fear of Pharaoh’s army, Jeremiah went forth out of Jerusalem to go into the land of Benjamin "to transact certain family business at Anathoth. {Cf. Jeremiah 32:6-8 } He had announced that all who remained in the city should perish, and that only those who deserted to the Chaldeans should escape. In these troubled times all who sought to enter or leave Jerusalem were subjected to close scrutiny, and when Jeremiah wished to pass through the gate of Benjamin he was stopped by the officer in charge-Irijah ben Shelemiah ben Hananiah-and accused of being about to practise himself what he had preached to the people: "Thou fallest away to the Chaldeans." The suspicion was natural enough; for, although the Chaldeans had raised the siege and marched away to the southwest, while the gate of Benjamin was on the north of the city, Irijah might reasonably suppose that they had left detachments in the neighbourhood, and that this zealous advocate of submission to Babylon had special information on the subject. Jeremiah indeed had the strongest motives for seeking safety in flight. The party whom he had consistently denounced had full control of the government, and even if they spared him for the present any decisive victory over the enemy would be the signal for his execution. When once Pharaoh Hophra was in full march upon Jerusalem at the head of a victorious army, his friends would show no mercy to Jeremiah. Probably Irijah was eager to believe in the prophet’s treachery, and ready to snatch at any pretext for arresting him. The name of the captain’s grandfather-Hananiah-is too common to suggest any connection with the prophet who withstood Jeremiah; but we may be sure that at this crisis the gates were in charge of trusty adherents of the princes of the Egyptian party. Jeremiah would be suspected and detested by such men as these. His vehement denial of the charge was received with real or feigned incredulity; Irijah "hearkened not unto him." The arrest took place "in the midst of the people." The gate was crowded with other Jews hurrying out of Jerusalem: citizens eager to breathe more freely after being cooped up in the overcrowded city; countrymen anxious to find out what their farms and homesteads had suffered at the hands of the invaders; not a few, perhaps, bound on the very errand of which Jeremiah was accused, friends of Babylon, convinced that Nebuchadnezzar would ultimately triumph, and hoping to find favour and security in his camp. Critical events of Jeremiah’s life had often been transacted before a great assembly; for instance, his own address and trial in the Temple, and the reading of the roll. He knew the practical value of a dramatic situation. This time he had sought the crowd, rather to avoid than attract attention; but when he was challenged by Irijah, the accusation and denial must have been heard by all around. The soldiers of the guard, necessarily hostile to the man who had counselled submission, gathered round to secure their prisoner; for a time the gate was blocked by the guards and spectators. The latter do not seem to have interfered. Formerly the priests and prophets and all the people had laid hold on Jeremiah, and afterwards all the people had acquitted him by acclamation. Now his enemies were content to leave him in the hands of the soldiers, and his friends, if he had any, were afraid to attempt a rescue. Moreover men’s minds were not at leisure and craving for new excitement, as at Temple festivals; they were preoccupied, and eager to get out of the city. While the news quickly spread that Jeremiah had been arrested as he was trying to desert, his guards cleared a way through the crowd, and brought the prisoner before the princes. The latter seem to have acted as a Committee of National Defence; they may either have been sitting at the time, or a meeting, as on a previous occasion, { Jeremiah 26:10 } may have been called when it was known that Jeremiah had been arrested. Among them were probably those enumerated later on: { Jeremiah 38:1 } Shephatiah ben Mattan, Gedaliah ben Pashhur, Jucal ben Shelemiah, and Pashhur ben Malchiah. Shephatiah and Gedaliah are named only here; possibly Gedaliah’s father was Pashhur ben Immer, who beat Jeremiah and put him in the stocks. Both Jucal and Pashhur ben Malchiah had been sent by the king to consult Jeremiah. Jucal may have been the son of the Shelemiah who was sent to arrest Jeremiah and Baruch after the reading of the roll. We note the absence of the princes who then formed Baruch’s audience, some of whom tried to dissuade Jehoiakim from burning the roll; and we especially miss the prophet’s former friend and protector, Ahikam ben Shaphan. Fifteen or sixteen years had elapsed since these earlier events; some of Jeremiah’s adherents were dead, others in exile, others powerless to help him. We may safely conclude that his judges were his personal and political enemies. Jeremiah was now their discomfited rival. A few weeks before he had been master of the city and the court. Pharaoh Hophra’s advance had enabled them to overthrow him. We can understand that they would at once take Irijah’s view of the case. They treated their fallen antagonist as a criminal taken in the act: "they were wroth with him," i.e., they overwhelmed him with a torrent of abuse; "they beat him, and put him in prison in the house of Jonathan the secretary." But this imprisonment in a private house was not mild and honourable confinement under the care of a distinguished noble, who was rather courteous host than harsh gaoler . "They had made that the prison," duly provided with a dungeon and cells, to which Jeremiah was consigned and where he remained "many days." Prison accommodation at Jerusalem was limited; the Jewish government preferred more summary methods of dealing with malefactors. The revolution which had placed the present government in power had given them special occasion for a prison. They had defeated rivals whom they did not venture to execute publicly, but who might be more safely starved and tortured to death in secret. For such a fate they destined Jeremiah. We shall not do injustice to Jonathan the secretary if we compare the hospitality which he extended to his unwilling guests with the treatment of modern Armenians in Turkish prisons. Yet the prophet remained alive "for many days"; probably his enemies reflected that even if he did not succumb earlier to the hardships of his imprisonment, his execution would suitably adorn the looked for triumph of Pharaoh Hophra. Few however of the "many days" had passed before men’s exultant anticipations of victory and deliverance began to give place to anxious forebodings. They had hoped to hear that Nebuchadnezzar had been defeated and was in headlong retreat to Chaldea; they had been prepared to join in the pursuit of the routed army, to gratify their revenge by massacring the fugitives, and to share the plunder with their Egyptian allies. The fortunes of war belied their hopes: Pharaoh retreated, either after a battle or perhaps even without fighting. The return of the enemy was announced by the renewed influx of the country people to seek the shelter of the fortifications, and soon the Jews crowded to the walls as Nebuchadnezzar’s vanguard appeared in sight and the Chaldeans occupied their old lines and reformed the siege of the doomed city. There was no longer any doubt that prudence dictated immediate surrender. It was the only course by which the people might be spared some of the horrors of a prolonged siege, followed by the sack of the city. But the princes who controlled the government were too deeply compromised with Egypt to dare to hope for mercy. With Jeremiah out of the way, they were able to induce the king and the people to maintain their resistance, and the siege went on. But though Zedekiah was, for the most part, powerless in the hands of the princes, he ventured now and then to assert himself in minor matters, and, like other feeble sovereigns, derived some consolation amidst his many troubles from intriguing with the opposition against his own ministers. His feeling and behaviour towards Jeremiah were similar to those of Charles IX towards Coligny, only circumstances made the Jewish king a more efficient protector of Jeremiah. At this new and disastrous turn of affairs, which was an exact fulfilment of Jeremiah’s warnings, the king was naturally inclined to revert to his former faith in the prophet-if indeed he had ever really been able to shake himself free from his influence. Left to himself he would have done his best to make terms with Nebuchadnezzar, as Jehoiakim and Jehoiachin had done before him. The only trustworthy channel of help, human or divine, was Jeremiah. Accordingly he sent secretly to the prison and had the prophet brought into the palace. There in some inner chamber, carefully guarded from intrusion by the slaves of the palace, Zedekiah received the man who now for more than forty years had been the chief counsellor of the kings of Judah, often in spite of themselves. Like Saul on the eve of Gilboa, he was too impatient to let disaster be its own herald; the silence of Heaven seemed more terrible than any spoken doom, and again like Saul he turned in his perplexity and despair to the prophet who had rebuked and condemned him. "Is there any word from Jehovah? And Jeremiah said, There is: thou shalt be delivered into the hand of the king of Babylon." The Church is rightly proud of Ambrose rebuking Theodosius at the height of his power and glory, and of Thomas a Becket, unarmed and yet defiant before his murderers; but the Jewish prophet showed himself capable of a simpler and grander heroism. For "many days" he had endured squalor, confinement, and semi-starvation. His body must have been enfeebled and his spirit depressed. Weak and contemptible as Zedekiah was, yet he was the prophet’s only earthly protector from the malice of his enemies. He intended to utilise this interview for an appeal for release from his present prison. Thus he had every motive for conciliating the man who asked him for a word from Jehovah. He was probably alone with Zedekiah, and was not nerved to self-sacrifice by any opportunity of making public testimony to the truth, and yet he was faithful alike to God and to the poor helpless king-"Thou shalt be delivered into the hand of the king of Babylon." And then he proceeds, with what seems to us inconsequent audacity, to ask a favour. Did ever petitioner to a king preface his supplication with so strange a preamble? This was the request:- "Now hear, I pray thee, O my lord the king: let my supplication, I pray thee, be accepted before thee; that thou do not cause me to return to the house of Jonathan the secretary, lest I die there." "Then Zedekiah the king commanded, and they committed Jeremiah into the court of the guard, and they gave him daily a loaf of bread out of the bakers’ street." A loaf of bread is not sumptuous f

Thus saith the Lord, Deceive not yourselves, saying, The Chaldeans shall surely depart from us: for they shall not depart. Jeremiah 37:9, 10 The punishment of evil W. L. Watkinson. The great teaching of the text is that we must not allow appearances to mislead us respecting the fact and certainty of the law of retribution. God has threatened the transgressor with severe penalties, and we may be sure that these penalties will be inflicted, however unlikely such retribution may sometimes seem, and however long it may be delayed. By wonderful ways God brings His judgments to pass. I. WE MARK SOME ILLUSTRATIONS OF THE LAW OF RETRIBUTION FURNISHED BY THE HISTORY OF THE NATIONS. Very memorable was the retribution that Israel brought on Egypt. At the other end of their national history, Israel itself furnishes a most striking illustration of the working of the law of retribution through all improbabilities. When the Christ was crucified through weakness, the people cried, "His blood be upon us, and upon our children." How unlikely did it seem that the Victim of Calvary could ever be avenged upon an unjust nation! And yet that "wounded Man" rose up invested with strange powers, and burned their city with fire. And let us not think that these instances of retribution are to be placed in the category of the miraculous; they were the natural consequences of great denials of truth and justice. Men unjustly "pierced through" are terrible avengers in all ages and nations. For centuries did the kings and nobles of France oppress the peasantry; it is impossible for us to think adequately of the vast hopeless wretchedness of the people from the cradle to the grave. When Louis XVI. came to the throne it seemed incredible that the long-suffering people would ever avenge themselves upon the powerful classes by whom they were ground to the dust, and yet by a marvellous series of events the wounded men arose in awful wrath, burning palaces with fire and trampling greatness underfoot. "Pierced through" were those hungry hopeless millions; but the day of doom came, and every bleeding wretch arose invincible with torch and sword. For generations the African was wronged by the American; he was bought and sold as are the dumb driven cattle, and it seemed as if the fetters of a shameful degradation were riveted upon him for ever. "Was there a shied or spear seen among forty thousand in Israel?" As late as 1854 Wendell Phillips wrote despairingly, "Indeed, the Government has fallen rote the hands of the slave power completely. So far as national politics are concerned, we are beaten — there's no hope The future seems to unfold a vast slave empire united with Brazil, and darkening the whole West. I hope I may be a false prophet, but the sky was never so dark." And yet immediately after this the "wounded men" arose, deluging the land with blood, and burning the cities of the great Republic with fire. Some of our writers argue that retribution does not follow on national wrong-doing, because territory gained by cruelty, treachery, bloodshed, is not as a matter of fact torn away from its guilty conquerors, but such ill-acquired territory remains a permanent portion of their splendid empire. But there are other ways of inflicting retribution upon a nation than by immediately depriving it of provinces. There is something very like irony in the government of God, and He sometimes punishes the victors through the spoil. Our Indian Empire is said to have been ill-gotten, and yet we retain it, that country being to Britain what the tail is to the peacock — our glory and pride. But the gilded train, it will be remembered, has been already splashed with blood, and the end is not yet. Retribution may not come in the form of specially inflicted judgments, but it will come. No pestilence, war, earthquake, or famine marks the Divine displeasure, but the retribution arises out of the iniquity. With great injustice and cruelty the French drove out the Huguenot, but in expelling these sons of faith, genius, industry, virtue, the French fatally impoverished their national life, and they are suffering to-day from these missing, elements which none may restore. Retribution may not be revealed in material disaster, but it will come. As Mommsen, one of the greatest of historians, declares, "History has a Nemesis for every sin !" It may seem that all might and majesty are with an unjust nation and that "wounded men" only are on the other side; but at God's call wounded men are Michaels wielding flaming swords. The foolishness of God is wiser than men." Sometimes we are greatly amazed and perplexed at the way in which history unfolds itself — it would seem as if the diplomacy of evil were too much for the Ruler of the world, as if Providence made hesitating moves, weak moves, fatal moves; but we have only to wait a while to know that God's foolishness is wiser than men. "He taketh the wise in their own craftiness"; "The Lord shall have them in derision." "The weakness of God is stronger than men." The sun is sometimes weak, but its earliest ray in the dawn is more than all our electric lights, the first faint beam of the spring is infinitely more than all the sparks of our kindling; the sea is sometimes weak — it is a mill-pond, we say — but in its softest ripple is a suggestion of power that fills us with awe; the wind is sometimes weak, but in the gentlest zephyr is hinted the majesty of infinite strength. Nature shows how the weakness of God is immeasurably stronger than men; so does history with equal clearness. The oft-quoted saying, "Providence is always on the side of the big battalions," is one with an imposing sound, but it is disproved by history over and over again. The world's Ruler defeated Pharaoh with frogs and flies; He humbled Israel with the grasshopper; He smeared the splendour of Herod with worms; on the plains of Russia He broke the power of Napoleon with a snowflake. God has no need to despatch an archangel; when once He is angry, a microbe will do. II. WE NOTE THE LAW OF RETRIBUTION AS EXEMPLIFIED IN THE INDIVIDUAL LIFE. The great law works infallibly in the personal history as it does in the national life. God has wonderful ways of confounding us, and we may be sure that our sins will find us out. 1. Let us not permit ourselves to be deceived by flattering prophets. Loudly does revelation declare the obligation of righteousness, and grievous are the judgments that it pronounces against transgressors, but this in our age has been accepted in quite a modified sense. Men will now hardly allow such a word as, "wrath"; they will not permit a man to suffer simply as a punishment for his sin; the violation of laws human and divine must be condoned and passed over with the ]east reprobation and vengeance. Let us rejoice in the growth of the sentiment of humanity, but we must shut our ears to the effeminate and sentimental teaching which will inevitably relax and destroy a noble morality. God is merciful, but fire does not forget to burn, teeth to tear, water to drown, and no transgression of the law can pass without detection and punishment. "And it shall come to pass, that him that escapeth the sword of Hazael shall Jehu slay." God's complex system of retribution permits not the cleverest sinner to slip through. 2. Let us not deceive ourselves because appearances seem to promise immunity. Our modern knowledge of science, of the unity and interdependence of all things, of the continuity and persistence of force and "motion, of the inviolable integrity of all organisms, ought to make it easy to us to believe that whatsoever a man soweth that shall he reap, however appearances may promise otherwise. Let us not be beguiled by the immediate aspects of life and circumstance. God's blind men watch us; His lame men run us down; His deaf men filch our secrets; His dumb men impeach us; His wounded men arise, every man a messenger of revenge. 3. Let us not deceive ourselves because judgment is delayed. In contending with God we are plotting against a Wisdom that seems sometimes to hesitate and fail; but never is that Wisdom more profound than in the moments of seeming perplexity, and if we yield to flattering hopes of victory, our final overthrow will only be the more complete and irreparable for these protractions of the conflict. In contending with God we are warring with a Power that ever and anon seems baffled and beaten; it seems to retreat, it allows us to win skirmishes here and there — only the more conspicuously to crush us in the decisive battle, if we persist to fight it out to the bitter end. In contending with God we are provoking a Justice which sometimes seems in. capable of asserting itself; but inveterate perversity discovers in the event that all such hesitations and delays were the whettings of a sword which needs not to smite twice. Slowly it may be, but surely, do we ripen for judgment; and when once ripe, how little a thing is necessary to precipitate the calamity! As the Hindoos say, "When men are ripe for slaughter, even straws turn into thunderbolts." 4. Let us improve the gracious respite. Many rebel altogether against the doctrine of grace, sternly insisting on inexorable law, justice, retribution; they utterly reprobate the ideas of repentance, forgiveness, and salvation. But mercy is a fact as much as justice is. Within that great system of severities we call nature there are ameliorative arrangements softening the rigours of broken law; in human life and government, too, which is nature still, only on a higher plane, mercy and forgiveness assert themselves, and society greatly prizes the gracious quality; and it is therefore a mistake, judged by the light of nature, to make an antithesis of equity and grace, as if these qualities were mutually antagonistic and eternally irreconcilable — they both exist side by side in this tangible human world with which we are so familiar. Now, the grand burden of the Gospel is to bring into fullest light that doctrine of mercy hinted by nature, and to show us that grace is not arbitrariness, the negation of law, the neglect of justice, but that the fullest and most splendid revelation of grace may take place on the basis of eternal truth and justice. ( W. L. Watkinson. ) And it came to pass, that when the army of the Chaldeans was broken up from Jerusalem. Jeremiah 37:11-21 Jeremiah persecuted G. F. Pentecost, D. D. After the captivity and death of Jehoiakim, his brother Zedekiah, another son of Josiah, sat upon the throne. He seems to have been of weak and superstitious rather than of vicious character, though it is said that neither he nor his servants, nor the people of the land, hearkened unto the words of Jeremiah. They Seemed to be infatuated with the idea that Jerusalem had, with the help of their Egyptian allies, strength to resist the assaults and siege of the Chaldeans. False prophets had persuaded the king that he would break the Chaldean yoke, and as this event was more favourable to his own wishes than were the stern words of Jeremiah, they had been accepted as truthful, while the true prophet was discredited. Jeremiah seems to have been at liberty in the meantime. The king had sent a message to him to pray for the deliverance of the city from the besieging Chaldeans. Jeremiah had again told the king plainly that the city was doomed. The Egyptian army had in the meantime come up, and the Chaldeans had withdrawn. Yet the Word of the Lord came to Jeremiah to tell the king that this was but a temporary withdrawal of the enemy; that they would return again; and, moreover, that even though the Chaldeans should be reduced to a few wounded men, even they should rise up and burn the city. When God was for Jerusalem, He could make them victorious over their foes, though they were but a handful, and without weapons; but when He was against them, He could make their foes, however small a company of wounded men, to have complete victory over them. I. JEREMIAH IMPRISONED. The advent of the Egyptian allies had compelled the Chaldeans to raise the siege; and the gates of the city were opened so that the people could go in and out again at will. This opportunity was seized on by Jeremiah to leave the city for the country, which action led to his arrest and imprisonment. 1. Jeremiah goes forth. The question of what was the object for which the prophet left the city, has given rise to much discussion. The reading of the authorised version simply is that "he went" (or purposed) "to go into the land of Benjamin, to separate himself thence in the midst of the people." This is not very intelligible. It has been supposed that there was a new allotment of land in the tribe of Benjamin, and that Jeremiah had gone up to secure his portion. The simple fact is that, having left the city or been observed in the act of so doing, suspicions as to his purpose were aroused in the mind of the keeper of the gate, and so he was arrested. Jeremiah was perfectly free and within his rights as a citizen to depart from the city if he chose, and to go up into the land of Benjamin, where he belonged; but whether he was wise under the existing circumstances is a question 2. Accused and arrested. As the prophet was departing from the city by the gate of Benjamin, a captain of the guard being there and recognising him, either suspected him of desertion to the enemy, or hating him for his prophecies against Jerusalem, feigned suspicion, charged him with the treason of intending to desert the city and go over to the Chaldeans, and arrested him. The times were critical, and suspicions were rife on every hand. Jeremiah had persistently declared that the city would fall into the hand of the Chaldeans; had advised the king and the people quietly to accept the situation and surrender; had warned them again and again that resistance was not only useless, but would bring worse calamities upon them. All this, of course, irritated the people, and made Jeremiah very unpopular. Though he was free in the city, he was the object of universal execration and hatred. Under these circumstances it would have been wiser for Jeremiah to have remained in the city and taken his part with the inhabitants; certainly it was unwise to lay himself open to a suspicion of desertion by leaving the city at such a time, just after the delivery of his last message to the king. Possibly he did not think that his visit to the country would be misconstrued. Innocent men are not always men of prudence. Jeremiah's visit to the country may have been perfectly justifiable and harmless, yet it had She appearance of evil to those who were of suspicious inclinations. It is not always wise to do the lawful things which lie before us, even though there be no actual harm in the action. The prophet's business to the country seems to have been entirely of a private character. Perhaps he was disgusted with the king and people, and just left the city in that state of mind. In any case he should have taken counsel of God and considered the circumstances before exposing himself to the suspicions and malice of his enemies. In times of excitement and contention between God and an evil-thinking generation, His servants have need to walk with the greatest circumspection. On the other hand, the action of the captain of the guard was most reprehensible, and illustrates the injustice with which unbelieving and wicked men are commonly disposed to treat God's people. He had no real ground for suspecting Jeremiah of treachery and desertion to the enemy. But enemies who wish to find an occasion against God's people can readily do so. Unbelievers are apt to judge the actions of God's people by their own method of procedure. I heard an officer in the English army say last autumn that all missionaries in India were the merest mercenaries; that their only motive in coming out here was salary. I asked him why, and on what ground he made such a charge. His reply was that he could conceive of no other motive, and admitted that nothing would induce him to devote his life to trying to convert heathen but a good round salary. I immediately denounced him as a mere mercenary soldier and not a patriot. 3. Jeremiah's denial. Upon being charged with treasonable intentions m leaving the city, Jeremiah indignantly denied that he had any such purpose. He met the charge with a simple sharp word. "It is false"; or, as the margin has it: "A lie; I fall not away to the Chaldeans." He was both indignant at his arrest, and, perhaps, from the heat of his denial, more so still at the charge of treachery. To defame a man's good name is often more intolerable than the prospect of endurance of any amount of physical suffering. Joseph in Egypt thus suffered, being innocent; Moses suffered in like manner; David seemed to care more that Saul could think him capable of conspiring against his life than for the persecution with which he was pursued, and sought more earnestly to clear his name than to save his life. The first question that arises out of this part of the story is: How should we meet such false charges as this, under which Jeremiah was arrested? That must depend on circumstances. Paul defended himself by an elaborate argument. Jesus adopted more than one method. Oftentimes He refuted the charges which the Jews brought against Him, by showing them how absurd their statements were, as in the case when they charged Him with being the agent of the devil. Again, when He was under the cruel and awful charge of blasphemy, when death was hanging over Him, He met the judge and false witnesses with perfect silence. Silence does not always give consent. There are circumstances when it is better to suffer both in reputation and body rather than attempt a defence. There may be higher interests involved even than the preservation of a good name and life itself. While it is perfectly right to assert innocence if one be innocent, sometimes silence is a more effectual answer than denial. Time often proves the best vindicator. I once heard Mr. Spurgeon say that he never attempted to brush off mud that was thrown at him, for he was sure that to attempt to do so would only result in smearing himself with the filth; but that he always waited till it was dry, and then he could deal with it as dust, and get rid of it without a stain being left behind. It has been truly said that if we only take care of our characters, God will in the end vindicate our reputations ( Matthew 5:11, 12 ). Though Jeremiah indignantly denied the charge, the denial did him no good. It was not the truth which his enemies were seeking, but only an occasion to persecute him. So we are told that the captain "hearkened not to him," but carried him to the princes. 4. He is imprisoned. Irijah took the prophet to the princes. These were not the same who befriended him in the previous reign and took measures to conceal him from the wrath of Jehoiakim, but another cabinet who were in authority under Zedekiah. They were as willing to believe the charge of treason against Jeremiah as was the captain to prefer it. We have, however, learned that to suffer for Christ's sake is a part of the privilege which is accorded to every disciple. There seems to be a double necessity for this. First we must ourselves, even as did Jesus Himself, learn obedience by the things which we suffer, and so to be "perfected through suffering" ( Hebrews 5:8 ; Hebrews 2:10 ; comp. 1 Peter 2:21, 23 ; 1 Peter 5:10 ). Besides, it is a matter of clear demonstration that suffering for the truth has always been the most powerful testimony thereto. II. THE KING AND JEREMIAH. After the prophet had been many days in prison, the weak king sent for him secretly, and brought him out of prison to make inquiry of him. This was a triumph for Jeremiah and a humiliation for the king. In the long-run, the highest and haughtiest enemies of God will have to bow to the lowliest of His friends. There are many instances where men who have scoffed at religion and mocked at His messengers have, in moments of great fear and extremity, sought out the very people whom they have despised and persecuted to beg for intercession with God on their behalf. The city was apparently re-invested by the Chaldeans, and in great straits for food (ver. 21), and the king hoped that at last the prophet would relent and secure some favourable word from the Lord. He seems, like all unbelievers, to have had the curious idea of God, that He might be brought round to favour if only the prophets could be won over first ( Numbers 22 ., 23.). 1. Is there any word from the Lord! This was the king's question put to Jeremiah. The Lord had previously given to the king a very sure word (ver. 10), but he still vainly clung to the hope that the word of God would be altered, though there was not the least evidence that the king or the people had altered their lives. There are many persons in our day expecting that in the end, notwithstanding that the word of God, finally communicated to us in the Bible, is God's last word to this world, the Almighty will change His mind and not punish persistent sinners. Yet there was a word from the Lord. It was very brief, and exactly to the point. "And Jeremiah said, There is: for, said He, thou shalt be delivered into the hand of the king of Babylon." Now this was a very brave and courageous action on the part of Jeremiah. If ever a man might have been tempted to temporise and prophesy smooth things, this was the time. There is nothing more sublime in this world than a clear and undisguised declaration of the truth under any and all circumstances. 2. Jeremiah pleads his own cause. Having first delivered the message from the Lord, wholly regardless of what might be the effect upon the mind and disposition of the king, he now ventures to plead for his own release from prison. It is a great testimony to Jeremiah's loyalty to God that he suffered his own private and personal interests to be in the background until he had delivered the Lord's message. He put his plea on two grounds: First, his absolute innocence of any wrong done to either the king or the people. Why had he been cast into prison? The only thing that could be said against him was that he had delivered the Lord's word as he had received it. Could he do less than that? ( Acts 4:19 .) Would the king have had him speak lies to please the princes and the people, which must ultimately have brought them much damage? Secondly, he appeals to the truth of his predictions, and asks the king to produce the false prophets who had flattered him and the people with pleasant lies ( Jeremiah 28:1 , &c., 29:27-32). Had their false prophecies done the king any good? Was it not now manifest that they were false friends as well as false prophets? He therefore pleaded with the king not to add to his already heavy account of iniquity by keeping him unjustly in prison. 3. The prophet's sufferings mitigated. The king was evidently moved by the prophet's plea; but he was afraid of his princes, and did not dare to grant the full petition of the prophet, but he so far ordered a mitigation of his imprisonment, that he was taken out of the stocks and the dungeon and simply confined in the gaol court. Jeremiah was, as we have said, a shrinking and retiring man by nature, and keenly sensitive to physical pain. His imprisonment was very severe, though there was worse in store for him (see the next chapter). He felt that to stay in that dungeon and in the "cabins" would end in his death. The king softened his imprisonment and ordered the prophet to be fed with a piece of bread from the baker's street as long as there was bread to be had in the besieged city. In this incident we see how God tempers the severity of suffering even when He does not entirely deliver us from it. ( G. F. Pentecost, D. D. ) Is there any word from the Lord?... There is. Jeremiah 37:17 Is there any word from the Lord? James Paterson, M. A. The man who asked this momentous question belonged to the class of solemn triflers. He came with the right question in his mouth, and sometimes to get a right question is to be half-way on to the answer. To get the question rightly stated is ofttimes already the answer half-given. And he came with his question to the right quarter. He had come to the man that had a living connection with God. Yet we know from the way he treated the answer to the question that he came in the wrong spirit. Not that there was any gaiety or carelessness about his manner. He was as solemn as solemn could be when he asked this question of the prophet of God, "Is there any word from the Lord?" But he went away to show that he had been merely trifling with the question. And what was possible for Zedekiah is possible for you and for me. We may come to the Word of God with the right question in our mouth, we may come with a solemn reverent manner about us, we may pride ourselves that we are not of those who make jokes about the Word of God, or treat the ordinances of God's house with any levity, we may pride ourselves that we are not of those who turn the house of God into a theatre or place of amusement, we have the conviction that the institution of God's house is meant to get us into a closer connection with God, we believe that the Word of God which lies before us is a very message from God to man, and we come to the open Bible Sunday after Sunday with this question professedly, "Is there any word from Jehovah?" any word from Jehovah about my duty for to-day, about my duty for to-morrow — is there any word from Jehovah? We have got the right question, and we come in a reverent manner. God forbid that we should be triflers as Zedekiah was, and mistake solemnity of manner for obedience to the Word of God. By his sword on the field of battle the King of Babylon had won this right — the right to put on the head of whomsoever he would the crown of Judah. He offered it to Mattaniah; he offered it, accompanied by one condition. The King of Babylon could not afford that Judah should form an alliance with Egypt, that great rival power to him. He was in a gracious mood, and though he had conquered Israel, he was willing that an Israelite — one of the seed royal should yet hold the throne of David. And in that gracious mood he offered to Mattaniah the throne of Judah, accompanying his offer with this simple condition: he asked him to swear loyalty to the King of Babylon, and take an oath of allegiance to the King of Babylon. It was meant to keep the King of Judah from forming an alliance with a hostile power, from forming an alliance with Egypt. And Mattaniah had sense to see it was a grand offer that was made him. He knew that this king had power to take him away in chains to Babylon, and to take his people with him. He knew that human nature was frail, he knew that this new-made king had much reason to keep him walking in the path of gratitude. But knowing that human nature was frail, he wanted to fence him in by the continual remembrance of that oath, and he changed his name from Mattaniah, "the gift of Jehovah," to Zedekiah, "the justice of Jehovah." And ever afterwards when that king's name was mentioned, it would take his mind back to that oath when he sware by the justice of Jehovah that he would be loyal to the king who had so befriended him. At first he felt no inconvenience from his vow, but as the years passed on his gratitude seemed to melt away. The King of Egypt made overtures to him, and his people were inclined to listen. He had prophets in great number, and they urged him to accept the overtures of the King of Egypt. There was one prophet in his city that warned him that he could not do a dishonourable thing and prosper. There was one prophet who reminded him that the man of God was a man who, though he swore to his hurt, would keep his oath. We may suppose that Jeremiah pleaded with Zedekiah even with tears "Do the righteous thing." What will the heathen nations say, what will outsiders say, if the people of God break their bargain and lightly hold their oaths? Will not they, blaspheme the God of Israel? An honourable heathen man will keep his oath. So spoke Jeremiah, as he pleaded with his king, but his warning voice fell unheeded on that deaf ear. By and by came the army of the Chaldeans and besieged Jerusalem. They were closely shut up for a while, and still the prophet of God was allowed to remain in the prison. The king had secret hopes that the King of Egypt would come to his help, and so long as he had hope from another quarter he would not trouble the messenger of God. By and by the army of the Chaldeans removed from the city. They went away to fight the army that was coming from Egypt to help the besieged. The general that was at the head of these forces knew well how to conduct a campaign. He had no desire that the army that was coming to help Israel should get the length of Jerusalem. He would rather deal with them separately. He went and met the army and turned it aside the way that it came, and then he came back to the city and closely invested it on every side. Then, when all hope of Egypt was shut off; then, when Zedekiah had proved that they who lean on Egypt lean on a broken reed which enters into the heart of man and pierces him; then it was that the old, old story was told. When death is thundering at the door the scoffer takes down the Bible from the shelf. So was it with Zedekiah. So long as he had one single hope from men, of being himself able to overcome, or of getting help from Egypt — so long he left the prophet of God to pine in the prison cell, and did not feel it necessary to go and seek help from him. But when at last all hope of being saved in any other way was taken away, then he secretly came to the messenger of Jehovah as the scoffer secretly takes out the Bible and tries to find out what the Word of the Lord is. Then he came and asked this question, "Is there any word from the Lord?" Zedekiah had made God the last shift, and God had a good excuse for withholding any light from the king who had acted so dishonourably. But He is long-suffering, He is patient, even though we make Him the last shift. Even from the bed of death ofttimes He hears the cry for mercy and reveals His will. "There is," said Jeremiah, "there is word from the Lord to thee. Thou shalt be delivered into the hand of the King of Babylon." An honest, kindly, blunt, definite statement. "Thou shalt delivered into the hand of the King of Babylon." Ah, sometimes we have seen it in the individual, that deceitful disease consumption has laid hold on him, and the prophets of smooth things say, "You will get better"; and they feed his hopes upon this; and .the prophet of God comes his way and tells him he is a dying man, that there is no escape for him. It is felt to be impend. The prophets of smooth things would not have plainly said, "Thou shalt be delivered into the hands of the King of Babylon." They would have hid that. But this is the kinder way of the two. Yet Zedekiah did not act upon the light that he had received. Somehow he had a hope that he would escape. Even though the walls had a breach in them there was that private way of escape. That was his last resource, and so long as he thought there was the least possibility of escape he was scarcely prepared to receive the Word of the Lord, this message that God had sent to him, so that he did not act upon it. He bore no grudge to the prophet for speaking so plainly. He had no unkindly feelings towards him, but the opposite, he had very kindly feelings towards him, and was willing to run a serious risk of difficulty with his cabinet rather than not do kindness to the prophet of Jehovah, the faithful servant of king and country. And thus it came to pass that they were again brought together in friendly conference. He had done an act of kindness to the prophet of the Lord. The cup of cold water that is given to a disciple never loses its reward. After that deed of kindness done there was a fuller revelation of the will of God. At first it had only been, "Thou shalt be delivered into the hand of the King of Babylon," and the second time Jeremiah pointed to the way of salvation. "Escape there is none if you are to trust to your own power to fight or to trust to Egypt. There is no escape; thou shalt be delivered into the hand of the King of Babylon. The simple question is whether you are going just now to give yourself into his hands or are going to wait until you are dragged by force by his servants into his presence." "Go forth now." he says, "and surrender to him, and though thy sin has been great he will pardon thee. Surrender to him, lay down thine arms, yield to h

37:1-10 Numbers witness the fatal effects of other men's sins, yet heedlessly step into their places, and follow the same destructive course. When in distress, we ought to desire the prayers of ministers and Christian friends. And it is common for those to desire to be prayed for, who will not be advised; yet sinners are often hardened by a pause in judgments. But if God help us not, no creature can. Whatever instruments God has determined to use, they shall do the work, though they seem unlikely. 37:11-21 There are times when it is the wisdom of good men to retire, to enter into their chambers, and to shut the doors, Isa 26:20. Jeremiah was seized as a deserter, and committed to prison. But it is no new thing for the best friends of the church to be belied, as in the interests of her worst enemies. When thus falsely accused, we may deny the charge, and commit our cause to Him who judges righteously. Jeremiah obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful, and would not, to obtain mercy of man, be unfaithful to God or to his prince; he tells the king the whole truth. When Jeremiah delivered God's message, he spake with boldness; but when he made his own request, he spake submissively. A lion in God's cause must be a lamb in his own. And God gave Jeremiah favour in the eyes of the king. The Lord God can make even the cells of a prison become pastures to his people, and will raise up friends to provide for them, so that in the days of famine they shall be satisfied.