Now when Ebedmelech the Ethiopian, a eunuch, who was in the king’s house, heard that they had put Jeremiah in the dungeon (the king was then sitting in Benjamin’s gate), Ebedmelech went out of the king’s house, and spoke to the king, saying, “My lord the king, these men have done evil in all that they have done to Jeremiah the prophet, whom they have cast into the dungeon. He is likely to die in the place where he is, because of the famine; for there is no more bread in the city.”
Then the king commanded Ebedmelech the Ethiopian, saying, “Take from here thirty men with you, and take up Jeremiah the prophet out of the dungeon, before he dies.”
So Ebedmelech took the men with him, and went into the house of the king under the treasury, and took from there rags and worn-out garments, and let them down by cords into the dungeon to Jeremiah. Ebedmelech the Ethiopian said to Jeremiah, “Now put these rags and worn-out garments under your armpits under the cords.” Jeremiah did so.
So they drew up Jeremiah with the cords, and took him up out of the dungeon; and Jeremiah remained in the court of the guard.
Then Zedekiah the king sent and took Jeremiah the prophet to himself into the third entry that is in Yahweh’s house. Then the king said to Jeremiah, “I will ask you something. Hide nothing from me.”
Then Jeremiah said to Zedekiah, “If I declare it to you, will you not surely put me to death? If I give you counsel, you will not listen to me.”
So Zedekiah the king swore secretly to Jeremiah, saying, “As Yahweh lives, who made us this soul, I will not put you to death, neither will I give you into the hand of these men who seek your life.”
Then Jeremiah said to Zedekiah, “Yahweh, the God of Armies, the God of Israel, says: ‘If you will go out to the king of Babylon’s princes, then your soul will live, and this city will not be burned with fire. You will live, along with your house. But if you will not go out to the king of Babylon’s princes, then this city will be given into the hand of the Chaldeans, and they will burn it with fire, and you won’t escape out of their hand.’ ”
Zedekiah the king said to Jeremiah, “I am afraid of the Jews who have defected to the Chaldeans, lest they deliver me into their hand, and they mock me.”
But Jeremiah said, “They won’t deliver you. Obey, I beg you, Yahweh’s voice, in that which I speak to you; so it will be well with you, and your soul will live. But if you refuse to go out, this is the word that Yahweh has shown me:
‘Behold, all the women who are left in the king of Judah’s house will be brought out to the king of Babylon’s princes, and those women will say, “Your familiar friends have turned on you, and have prevailed over you. Your feet are sunk in the mire, they have turned away from you.”
They will bring out all your wives and your children to the Chaldeans. You won’t escape out of their hand, but will be taken by the hand of the king of Babylon. You will cause this city to be burned with fire.’ ”
Then Zedekiah said to Jeremiah, “Let no man know of these words, and you won’t die. But if the princes hear that I have talked with you, and they come to you, and tell you, ‘Declare to us now what you have said to the king; don’t hide it from us, and we will not put you to death; also tell us what the king said to you;’ then you shall tell them, ‘I presented my supplication before the king, that he would not cause me to return to Jonathan’s house, to die there.’ ”
Then all the princes came to Jeremiah, and asked him; and he told them according to all these words that the king had commanded. So they stopped speaking with him; for the matter was not perceived.
So Jeremiah stayed in the court of the guard until the day that Jerusalem was taken.
John Calvin 1540 · Public Domain On vv7–28 Jeremiah relates here how he was delivered from death;…
Jeremiah relates here how he was delivered from death; for he could not have lived long in the mire; partly, because he must have died through want; and partly, he must have been starved through cold and suffocated with the filth of the dungeon. But God rescued him in a wonderful manner through the aid of Ebedmelech, an Ethiopian. He was an alien, and this is expressly said, that we may know, that among the king’s counselors there was no one who resisted so great a wickedness. But there was one found, an Ethiopian, who came to the aid of God’s Prophet.
There is then implied here a comparison between an Ethiopian, an alien, and all the Jews, who professed themselves to be the holy seed of Abraham, who had been circumcised, and boasted loudly of God’s law and covenant; and yet there was not one among them, who would stretch forth his hand to the holy servant of God! It may be there were some who pitied him, but courage was wanting; so that no one dared to open his mouth, for it was a reproach to patronize the holy man. They, then, preferred the favor of the ungodly to their own duty. But there was an Ethiopian so courageous, that he dared to accuse all the king’s couriers and the other princes. There is, then, no doubt but that the Spirit by the mouth of the Ethiopian brought a perpetual disgrace on the king’s princes, who passed themselves as the children of Abraham, and boasted in high terms of God’s covenant. A similar case is represented by Christ in a parable, when he says that a Levite and a priest passed by a wounded man and disregarded him, but that help was brought to him by a Samaritan. (Luke 10:30-35.) His purpose, no doubt, was to condemn the Jews, even the Levites and the priests, for their barbarity in caring nothing for the life of a miserable man in his extremity. So also, in this place, the Ethiopian is set forth to us as an example, for he alone had the feeling of kindness and humanity, so as to bring help to the holy Prophet, and to rescue him, as it were, from immediate death and the grave: but we see all the king’s couriers either wholly torpid or influenced by the same spirit of rage and cruelty, as to be mortal enemies to the holy man, because he freely and openly declared to them the command of God.
Read full note →
And Jeremiah says that Ebed-melech heard, etc. We may hence conclude, that he was anxious about the safety of the holy Prophet, and that he had his friends who watched the proceedings. It is then added, that he was in the palace, but that the king was sitting in the gate of Benjamin; for kings were wont to administer justice in the gates, and to have there their tribunal; and it was there that the people held their regular assemblies. The king, then, was sitting in the gate of Benjamin But, in the meantime, his palace was a place of execution and the den of robbers. We hence see that the sloth of the king is here denoted, for he apparently performed the proper office of a king, but neglected the principal part of it, for he suffered a holy man to be east into a pit. As, then, he thus exposed the Prophet’s life to the will of the princes, it is evident that he was but an empty shadow, though he stood there as the judge of the people, and had there a sacred tribunal.
John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On vv7, 9, 10, 13, 17, 19, 22, 26 Hebrew, Cushite, or Ethiopian.
Hebrew, Cushite, or Ethiopian.
To hear matters and give sentence.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv7–28 Jer 38:7 Now when Ebedmelech the Ethiopian, one of…
Jer 38:7 Now when Ebedmelech the Ethiopian, one of the eunuchs which was in the king’s house, heard that they had put Jeremiah in the dungeon; the king then sitting in the gate of Benjamin;
Ver. 7. Now when Ebedmelech the Ethiopian.] But a proselyte, and a religious prince; a stranger, but (as that good Samaritan in the Gospel) more merciful than any of the Jewish nation, who gloried in their privileges. See Rom 2:26-27.
Read full note →
One of the eunuchs.] And eunuchs, say the Rabbis, are ordinarily more cruel than other men; but so was not this Cushite. Piety is the fountain of all virtues whatsoever.
Which was in the king’s house.] As Obadiah was in Ahab’s, Nehemiah in Artaxerxes’s; some good people in Herod’s; {Luk 8:3} and Nero’s; {Php 4:22} Cromwell and Cranmer in Henry VIII’s.
The king then sitting in the gate of Benjamin.] Sitting in judgment, where Jeremiah’s enemies had once apprehended him for a fugitive, but durst not try it out with him, though Ebedmelech there entreated with the king for him in the presence of some of them, as it is probable.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain On vv7, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 Ebed-melech was unquestionably the name of the person, though…
Ebed-melech was unquestionably the name of the person, though some interpret it appellatively a servant of the king. It is particularly noted that he was an Ethiopian or a Cushite, to let us know that this prophet of the Lord found more kindness from a stranger, that was a native heathen, than from his own countrymen. Princes were wont to keep eunuchs in their houses in those countries, 2Ki 9:32; Dan 1:9; Act 8:27. It should seem the princes had privately put Jeremiah into this miserable place, but yet the noise of it came to Ebed-melech’s ear, who was attending in the court. The gates of the city were places where princes were wont to sit to execute justice, and to receive petitions, and give answers, 2Sa 19:8; Pr 31:23, &c.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Matthew Henry 1710 · Public Domain On v14 In the foregoing chapter we had the king in…
In the foregoing chapter we had the king in close conference with Jeremiah, and here again, though (Jer 38:5) he had given him up into the hands of his enemies; such a struggle there was in the breast of this unhappy prince between his convictions and his corruptions. Observe,
I. The honour that Zedekiah did to the prophet. When he was newly fetched out of the dungeon he sent for him to advise with him privately. He met him in the third entry, or (as the margin reads it) the principal entry, that is in, or leads towards, or adjoins to, the house of the Lord, Jer 38:14. In appointing this place of interview with the prophet perhaps he intended to show a respect and reverence for the house of God, which was proper enough now that he was desiring to hear the word of God. Zedekiah would ask Jeremiah a thing; it should rather be rendered, a word. "I am here asking thee for a word of prediction, of counsel, of comfort, a word from the Lord, Jer 37:17. Whatever word thou has for me hide it not from me; let me know the worst." He had been told plainly what things would come to in the foregoing chapter, but, like Balaam, he asks again, in hopes to get a more pleasing answer, as if God, who is in one mind, were altogether such a one as himself, who was in many minds.
Read full note →
II. The bargain that Jeremiah made with him before he would give him his advice, Jer 38:15. He would stipulate, 1. For his own safety. Zedekiah would have him deal faithfully with him: "And if I do," says Jeremiah, "wilt thou not put me to death? I am afraid thou wilt" (so some take it); "what else can I expect when thou art led blindfold by the princes?" Not that Jeremiah was backward to seal the doctrine he preached with his blood, when he was called to do so; but, in doing our duty, we ought to use all lawful means for our own preservation; even the apostles of Christ did so. 2. He would answer for the success of his advice, being no less concerned for Zedekiah's welfare than for his own. He is willing to give him wholesome advice, and does not upbraid him with his unkindness in suffering him to be put into the dungeon, nor bid him go and consult with his princes, whose judgments he had such a value for. Ministers must with meekness instruct even those that oppose themselves, and render good for evil. He is desirous that he should hear counsel and receive instruction: "Wilt thou not hearken unto me? Surely thou wilt; I am in hopes to find thee pliable at last, and now in this thy day willing to know the things that belong to thy peace." Note, Then, and then only, there is hope of sinners, when they are willing to hearken to good counsel. Some read it as spoken despairingly: "If I give thee counsel, thou wilt not hearken unto me; I have reason to fear thou wilt not, and then I might as well keep my counsel to myself." Note, Ministers have little heart to speak to those who have long and often turned a deaf ear to them. Now, as to this latter concern of Jeremiah's, Zedekiah makes him no answer, will not promise to hearken to his advice: though he desires to know what is the mind of God, yet he will reserve himself a liberty, when he does know it, to do as he things fit; as if it were the prerogative of a prince not to have his ruin prevented by good counsel. But, as to the prophet's safety, he promises him, upon the word of a king, and confirms his promise with an oath, that, whatever he should say to him, no advantage should be taken against him for it: I will neither put thee to death nor deliver thee into the hands of those that will, Jer 38:16. This, he thought, was a mighty favour, and yet Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar, when Daniel read their doom, not only protected him, but preferred and rewarded him, Dan 2:48; Dan 2:29. Zedekiah's oath on this occasion is solemn, and very observable: "As the Lord liveth, who made us this soul, who gave me my life and thee thine, I dare not take away thy life unjustly, knowing that then I should forfeit my own to him that is the Lord of life." Note, God is the Father of spirits; souls are his workmanship, and they are more fearfully and wonderfully made than bodies are. The soul both of the greatest prince and of the poorest prisoner is of God's making. He fashioneth their hearts alike easily. In all our appeals to God, and in all our dealings both with ourselves and others, we ought to consider this, that the living God made us these souls.
III. The good advice that Jeremiah gave him, with good reasons why he should take it, not from any prudence or politics of his own, but in the name of the Lord, the God of hosts and God of Israel. Not as a statesman, but as a prophet, he advises him by all means to surrender himself and his city to the king of Babylon's princes: "Go forth to them, and make the best terms thou canst with them," Jer 38:17. This was the advice he had given to the people (Jer 38:2, and before, Jer 21:9), to submit to divine judgments, and not think of contending with them. Note, In dealing with God, that which is good counsel to the meanest is so to the greatest, for there is no respect of persons with him. To persuade him to take this counsel, he sets before him good and evil, life and death. 1. If he will tamely yield, he shall save his children from the sword and Jerusalem from the flames. The white flag is yet hung out; if he will be acknowledge God's justice, he shall experience his mercy: The city shall not be burnt, and thou shalt live and thy house. But, 2. If he will obstinately stand it out, it will be the ruin both of his house and Jerusalem (Jer 38:18); for when God judges he will overcome. This is the case of sinners with God; let them humbly submit to his grace and government and they shall live; let them take hold on his strength, that they may make peace, and they shall make peace; but, if they harden their hearts against his proposals, it will certainly be to their destruction: they must either bend or break.
IV. The objection which Zedekiah made against the prophet's advice, Jer 38:19. Jeremiah spoke to him by prophecy, in the name of God, and therefore if he had had a due regard to the divine authority, wisdom, and goodness, as soon as he understood what the mind of God was he would immediately have acquiesced in it and resolved to observe it, without disputing; but, as if it had been the dictate only of Jeremiah's prudence, he advances against it some prudential considerations of his own: but human wisdom is folly when it contradicts the divine counsel. All he suggests is, "I am afraid, not of the Chaldeans; their princes are men of honour, but of the Jews, that have already gone over to the Chaldeans; when they see me follow them, and who had so much opposed their going, they will laugh at me, and say, Hast thou also become weak as water?" Isa 14:10. Now, 1. It was not at all likely that he should be thus exposed and ridiculed, that the Chaldeans should so far gratify the Jews, or trample upon him, as to deliver him into their hands; nor that the Jews, who were themselves captives, should be in such a gay humour as to make a jest of the misery of their prince. Note, We often frighten ourselves from our duty by foolish, causeless, groundless, fears, that are merely the creatures of our own fancy and imagination. 2. If he should be taunted at a little by the Jews, could he not despise it and make light of it? What harm would it do him? Note, Those have very weak and fretful spirits indeed that cannot bear to be laughed at for that which is both their duty and their interest. 3. Though it had been really the greatest personal mischief that he could imagine it to be, yet he ought to have ventured it, in obedience to God, and for the preservation of his family and city. He thought it would be looked upon as a piece of cowardice to surrender; whereas it would be really an instance of true courage cheerfully to bear a less evil, the mocking of the Jews, for the avoiding of a greater, the ruin of his family and kingdom.
V. The pressing importunity with which Jeremiah followed the advice he had given the king. He assures him that, if he would comply with the will of God herein, the thing he feared should not come upon him (Jer 38:20): They shall not deliver thee up, but treat thee as becomes thy character. He begs of him, after all the foolish games he had played, to manage wisely the last stake, and now at length to do well for himself: Obey, I beseech thee, the voice of the Lord, because it is his voice, so it shall be well unto thee. But he tells him what would be the consequence if he would not obey. 1. He himself would fall into the hands of the Chaldeans, as implacable enemies, whom he might now make his friends by throwing himself into their hands. if he must fall, he should contrive how to fall easily: "Thou shalt not escape, as thou hopest to do," Jer 38:23. 2. He would himself be chargeable with the destruction of Jerusalem, which he pretended a concern for the preservation of: "Thou shalt cause this city to be burnt with fire, for by a little submission and self-denial thou mightest have prevented it." Thus subjects often suffer for the pride and wilfulness of their rulers, who should be their protectors, but prove their destroyers. 3. Whereas he causelessly feared an unjust reproach for surrendering, he should certainly fall under a just reproach for standing it out, and that from women too, Jer 38:22. The court ladies who were left when Jehoiakim and Jeconiah were carried away will now at length fall into the hands of the enemy, and they shall say, "The men of thy peace, whom thou didst consult with and confide in, and who promised thee peace if thou wouldst be ruled by them, have set thee on, have encouraged thee to be bold and brace and hold out to the last extremity; and see what comes of it? They, by prevailing upon thee, have prevailed against thee, and thou findest those thy real enemies that would be thought thy only friends. Now thy feet are sunk in the mire, thou art embarrassed, and hast noway to help thyself; thy feet cannot get forward, but are turned away back." Thus will Zedekiah be bantered by the women, when all his wives and children shall be made a prey to the conquerors, Jer 38:23. Note, What we seek to avoid by sin will be justly brought upon us by the righteousness of God. And those that decline the way of duty for fear of reproach will certainly meet with much greater reproach in the way of disobedience. The fear of the wicked, it shall come upon him, Pro 10:24.
VI. The care which Zedekiah took to keep this conference private (Jer 38:24): Let no man know of these words. he does not at all incline to take God's counsel, nor so much as promise to consider of it; for so obstinate has he been to the calls of God, and so wilful in the ways of sin, that though he has good counsel given him he seems to be given up to walk in his own counsels. He has nothing to object against Jeremiah's advice, and yet he will not follow it. Many hear God's words, but will not do them. 1. Jeremiah is charged to let no man know of what had passed between the king and him. Zedekiah is concerned to keep it private, not so much for Jeremiah's safety (for he knew the princes could do him no hurt without his permission), but for his own reputation. Note, Many have really a better affection to good men and good things than they are willing to own. God's prophets are manifest in their consciences (Co2 5:11), but they care not for manifesting that to the world; they would rather do them a kindness than have it known that they do: such, it is to be feared, love the praise of men more than the praise of God. 2. He is instructed what to say to the princes if they should examine him about it. He must tell them that he was petitioning the king not to remand him back to the house of Jonathan the scribe (Jer 38:25, Jer 38:26), and he did tell them so (Jer 38:27), and no doubt it was true: he would not let slip so fair an opportunity of engaging the king's favour; so that this was no lie or equivocation, but a part of the truth, which it was lawful for him to put them off with when he was under no obligation at all to tell them the whole truth. Note, Though we must be harmless as doves, so as never to tell a wilful lie, yet we must be wise as serpents, so as not needlessly to expose ourselves to danger by telling all we know.
Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain On vv7–28 Now when Ebedmelech the Ethiopian,.... The Targum renders it,
Now when Ebedmelech the Ethiopian,.... The Targum renders it,
"a servant of King Zedekiah;''
Read full note →
which Jarchi, and other writers, following, make Zedekiah to be the Ethiopian; so called, because as an Ethiopian differs in his skin, so Zedekiah differed in his righteousness, from the rest of his generation; and this his servant, he, with others (r), takes to be Baruch the son of Neriah, but without any foundation; but, as Kimchi observes, with whom Abarbinel and Ben Melech agree, had this word "Ebedmelech" been an appellation, the usual article would have been prefixed before the word "king", as in the next clause; and somewhere or other his name would have been given; but it is a proper name, as Ahimelech, and Abimelech. A servant of the king he might be, and doubtless he was; and perhaps had this name given him when he became a proselyte; for such he seems to be, and a good man; who had a great regard to the prophet, because he was one; and had more piety and humanity in him, though an Ethiopian, than those who were Israelites by birth:
one of the eunuchs which was in the king's house; an officer at court; one of the gentlemen of the bedchamber. Josephus (s) says he was in great honour; so the Targum renders it,
"a great man;''
a man in high office, of great authority; taking it to be a name of office, as it sometimes is; though it may be understood, in a proper sense, of a castrated person; for such there were very commonly in kings' palaces, employed in one office or another, and especially in the bedchamber: now this man
heard that they had put Jeremiah in the dungeon; for though the princes did it with all possible secrecy, it was known at court, and came to the ears of this good man; and indeed the dungeon was not far from the court; and some have thought he might have heard the groans of Jeremiah in it; however, he came to the hearing of it, and was affected with the relation of his case, and determined to save him, if possible:
the king then sitting in the gate of Benjamin; the same in which the prophet was taken, Jer 37:13; here he sat to hear and try causes, courts of judicature being held in gates of cities; or to receive petitions; or rather it may be to consult about the present state of affairs, what was best to be done in defence of the city, and to annoy the besiegers; and it may be to have a view of the enemy's camp, and to sally out upon them; for that he was here in order to make his escape is not likely.
(r) Pirke Eliezer, c. 53. Shalshelet Hakabala, fol. 13. 1. (s) Antiqu. l. 10. c. 7. sect. 5.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain On vv10, 19, 22 Thirty men - Probably the king commanded Ebed-melech to…
Thirty men - Probably the king commanded Ebed-melech to take thirty men to guard him against any opposition.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv7, 9, 10, 11, 14, 16, 17, 19, 22, 23, 26, 27 Verse 7. Ebed-melech] The servant of the king, one…
Verse 7. Ebed-melech] The servant of the king, one of the eunuchs who belonged to the palace. Perhaps it should be read, "Now, a servant of the king, a Cushite, one of the eunuchs," &c.
The king then sitting in the gate of Benjamin] To give audience, and to administer justice. We have often seen that the gates of cities were the places of public judicature.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On vv7, 10, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, 24 Jer 38:7-9. Now when Ebed-melech the Ethiopian — Or…
Jer 38:7-9. Now when Ebed-melech the Ethiopian — Or Cushite, as the Hebrew is. His country seems to be mentioned to let us know that this prophet of the Lord found more kindness from a stranger, who was a native heathen, than from his own countrymen; one of the eunuchs which was in the king’s house — That is, one of the court officers. It is probable that the princes had put Jeremiah into this miserable place privately, but by some means the report of what they had done providentially reached this officer’s ears. The king then sitting in the gate of Benjamin — Namely, to hear the complaints of the people, and to administer justice; the courts for that purpose being usually held in the gates of the city. Ebed-melech went forth and spake to the king — The zeal as well as courage of this good officer was very remarkable. He did not stay till the king returned to his house: but went to him as he was sitting in the gate administering justice, where doubtless he was not alone, but was probably attended by some of those very princes who had thrown Jeremiah into the dungeon: Ebed- melech, however, was not afraid of them, but complains openly to the king of their cruelty to Jeremiah, saying, My lord the king, these men have done evil in all that they have done to Jeremiah — They deal unjustly with him, for he had not deserved any punishment at all, and they deal barbarously with him, so as they used not to deal with the vilest malefactors. And he is like to die — Hebrew, וימת תחתיו, he will die upon the spot; for hunger, for there is no bread — That is, as some interpret the clause, “There was no need for those who desired his death to put him into so filthy and loathsome a place; since, if he had continued in the court of the prison, he must have died through the famine which threatens the city. The words, however, are more literally rendered, When there is no longer any bread in the city. Ebed-melech supposed with reason that when the bread failed, Jeremiah must perish with hunger in the dungeon; for he would be of course neglected, and not have it in his power to make those shifts for subsistence which persons at liberty might avail themselves of. Such was the compassion which the stranger had for the Lord’s prophet, whom his own countrymen would have destroyed! And God, who put these sentiments of pity and benevolence into Ebed-melech’s heart, afterward recompensed him by delivering him from death when the city was taken, Jer 39:15-16. But how remarkable it is, that in the whole city of Jerusalem no person was found, save this Ethiopian, to appear publicly, as the friend and advocate of the prophet in his distress! Thus is the justice of God vindicated in giving up this people into the hands of their enemies, when there was not a single person of their nation willing to hazard his life or character in the cause of God, to save the life of one who had been known among them for a true prophet between twenty and thirty years.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain On vv7, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 19, 22, 23, 28 Ebed-melech - i. e., the king’s slave. By “Ethiopian”…
Ebed-melech - i. e., the king’s slave. By “Ethiopian” or Cushite is meant the Cushite of Africa, or negro. It seems (compare 2Ki 23:11) as if such eunuchs (or, chamberlains) took their names from the king, while the royal family and the princes generally bore names compounded with the appellations of the Deity.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain On vv7, 9, 12, 14, 17, 19, 20, 22, 26 Eunuch. Officer over 30, ver. 10. (Haydock) --- He…
Eunuch. Officer over 30, ver. 10. (Haydock) --- He was afterwards rewarded, chap. xxxix. 15. (Calmet) --- God moves some to pity the distressed, till he recompense their patience. (Worthington)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures 1864 · Public Domain On v28 1. Jeremiah liberated from the court of the guard…
B. THE EVENTS SUBSEQUENT TO THE CAPTURE OF JERUSALEM (CHS. 39–44)
1. Jeremiah liberated from the court of the guard and given in charge to Gedaliah
Read full note →
Jer_38:28 to Jer_39:14
28b. And he was there1 [And it came to pass] when Jerusalem was taken, XXXIX. 1 (In the ninth year of Zedekiah king of Judah, in the tenth month, came Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon and all his army against Jerusalem, and they besieged 2it. And in the eleventh year of Zedekiah, in the fourth month, the ninth day 3of the month, the city was broken up. And [that] all the princes of the king of Babylon came in, and sat in the middle gate, even Nergal sharezer, Samgar-nebo, Sarsechim, Rab-saris, [or the chief of the eunuchs] Nergal sharezer, Rab-mag [or the chief of the Magi], with all the residue of the princes of the king of Babylon.
4And it came to pass, that when Zedekiah the king of Judah saw them, and all the men-of-war [or and all the men-of-war saw them], then they fled and went out of the city by night, by the way of [to] the king’s garden, by the gate betwixt the 5two walls: and he went out the way of the plain. But the Chaldeans’ army pursued [hastened] after them, and overtook Zedekiah in the plains of Jericho: and when they had taken him [and took him] they [and] brought him up to Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon to Riblah in the land of Hamath, where he gave 6[held]2 judgment upon him. Then the king of Babylon slew the sons of Zedekiah in Riblah before his eyes: also the king of Babylon slew all the nobles of Judah. 7Moreover he put out Zedekiah’s eyes, and bound him with chains [a double chain], 8to carry [take] him to Babylon. And the Chaldeans burned the king’s house, and the houses of the people, with fire, and brake down the walls of Jerusalem.
9Then Nebuzar-adan the captain of the guard [halberdiers, lit.: executioners carried away captive into Babylon the remnant of the people that remained in the city, and those that fell away, that fell to him [the deserters, who had gone over to 10him], with the rest of the people that remained. But Nebuzar adan the captain of the guard left of the poor of the people, which had nothing, in the land of Judah,11and gave them vineyards and fields3 at the same time. Now Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon gave charge concerning Jeremiah to Nebuzar-adan the captain 12of the guard, saying, Take him, and look well to him, [set thine eyes upon him] 13and do him no harm; but do unto him even as he shall say unto thee. So Nebuzar-adan the captain of the guard sent, and Nebushasban, Rab-saris [chief of the eunuchs] and Nergal-sharezer, Rab-mag [chief of the Magi], and all the king 14of Babylon’s princes: Even they sent, and took Jeremiah out of the court of the prison [guard], and committed him unto Gedaliah the son of Ahikam the son of Shaphan, that he should carry him home [into the house]: so he dwelt among the people.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
The text of this chapter is interwoven with portions from chap. 52 (2 Kings 25). Immediately after the opening words an abridged account is interpolated from Jer_52:4-7 (2Ki_25:1-4), of the capture of the city mentioned in these words (Jer_39:1-2). Then after Jer_39:3, Jer_39:4-10 a similarly abridged account of the flight, capture and punishment of the king, and of the burning of the city and deportation of the people is added from Jer_52:7-16 (2Ki_25:4-12). What further follows (Jer_39:11-14) is not derived from elsewhere, but with Jer_38:28 b, and Jer_39:3, forms the only independent portion of this section, Jer_39:1-14. The question, whether the statements in vers 11–13, agree with Jer_39:3, will be treated in the Exeg. Rems. Here it may simply be observed that after the excision thus made the original constituents of the section are occupied purely with the person of the prophet, informing us that by order of Nebuchadnezzar, the captain of dragoons Nebuzar-adan has the prophet brought out of the court of the guard and given in charge to Gedaliah, son of Ahikam, after which Jeremiah remained “among the people.”
Jer_38:28—Jer_39:2. And it came to pass . . . broken up. As the verses 1, 2 cannot in any way be grammatically connected with the preceding and following context, they may be regarded as a parenthesis. The mention of the capture of Jerusalem in Jer_38:28 b occasioned the insertion of this chronological notice relating thereto. It is evident that this insertion was not made by the prophet himself, but proceeded from a later source. Even Keil acknowledges that the account of the destruction of Jerusalem, which is contained in two recensions, Jeremiah 52 and 2Ki_24:18 to 2Ki_25:4, cannot have proceeded from the hand of the prophet (comp. Commentar zu den BB. d. Könige, 1865, S. 10, 11 with which, however, what is said in S. 378 Anm., does not quite agree). Since now vers Jer_39:1-2 are taken from that account of the destruction of Jerusalem which we find in Jeremiah 52 and 2 Kings 25, and this account (comp. the narrative of Jehoiachin’s end, Jer_52:31-34), must necessarily be of later date than Jeremiah, the extract from that account cannot have been made by Jeremiah. These verses are, therefore, to be regarded as a gloss, which probably came into the text, not by the will of the author, but by the fault of the transcriber. Once having entered the text, they pressed back also those words at the close of the previous chapter, since the parenthesis was doubtless then found to be too long and disjointed, and the connection of the words with Jer_39:3 impracticable. What means the oldest commentators took to fit the words to the previous context, we have already seen.
Jer_39:3. That all the princes . . king of Babylon. These words attach themselves as we have shown to Jer_38:28 b. How long after the capture of the city this event took place, the words themselves do not inform us. For the connection of the sentence, Jer_38:28 b, may designate both an immediate chronological sequence, or a longer interval. Let us first regard more particularly the place and object of the assembly, and the persons assembled. The place is called the gate of the middle. As is well known, David had first conquered and fortified (2Sa_5:7; 2Sa_5:9) Mount Zion, the city of David, which Josephus (Antiq. V., 2, 2) calls the καθύπερθεν πόλις in distinction from the κάτω πόλις. The expression seems to denote one of the gates in the wall separating this upper and lower city. It does not occur elsewhere. Perhaps, however, עִיר הַתִּיכֹנָה (Keriחָצֵר הַתִּיכֹנָה) 2Ki_20:4 is connected with it. Arnold (Herz.: R.-Enc. XVIII., S. 629) [Smith, Dict., I. 1027] supposes that the middle gate is to be sought in the middle of the north wall of Mt. Zion. If the gate of the middle is then to be sought, not in the outer city-wall, but in the interior of the city, perhaps as the main entrance to the upper city, it appears to be a central point quite favorable for the commander’s purpose. At the same time the sitting of the commander in this gate, as the central point of the city-life (comp. on the significance of the gate in this regard, Herzog’sR.-Enc. XIV., S. 721) may have been the signal of the formal and solemn taking possession. In taking their places where the rulers and elders of Jerusalem were accustomed to discharge their office, the Chaldean princes gave it to be understood that they were now masters of the city. That they had “taken up their quarters” in the gate, as Graf supposes, I do not think. For a gate is no place for living in, least of all for princes. As we perceive from 2Ki_25:1 (Jer_52:4), Nebuchadnezzar himself began the siege, but left its continuation to his generals, he himself being at the time of the capture in Riblah (2Ki_25:6; Jer_25:9; Jer_39:5). These generals are now enumerated. Hitzig has made the ingenious conjecture, that the four names which we here read, are to be reduced to three, of which each is followed by an official title. Thus Nergal-sharezer bears the title Samgar, which in the Persian signifies “he who has the cup,” so that it is equivalent to Rabshakeh (Isa_36:2) the cup-bearer. Nebo, which in compound names never occurs in the last place (which is certainly correct), is to be connected with the following name. Sar-sechim is identical with Rab-saris (for סָכִי from סָכָה, or שָׂכָהsecare, from which שָׂכִּיןknife, is equivalent to eunuch). This idle, sportive accumulation of designations of a man has now after Nebo supplanted the second half of the real name, Shasban (Jer_39:13). We thus obtain three names, each with a title: 1. Nergal-sharezer, cup-bearer; 2. Nebushasban, chief-eunuch; 3. Nergal-sharezer, chief-magian. This conjecture, on which Graf has bestowed his approbation, is very plausible, especially as Rabsaris is certainly called Nebushasban in Jer_39:13, and we cannot conceive why the chief-eunuch, of which there cannot well have been more than one, bears a different name in Jer_39:3, from that in Jer_39:13. According to Hitzig the last two names in Jer_39:13 agree with the corresponding ones in Jer_39:3, the only difference being in the first name, which is however fully explained by the circumstance, that during the interval which had elapsed between Jer_39:3 and Jer_39:15, Nebuzar-adan, who was highest in rank of all the princes, had arrived, and is therefore named first in the latter passage instead of the Nergal-sharezer of Jer_39:3. The sense and connection are thus in favor of Hitzig’s conjecture, but it still lacks a secure etymological basis. That Samgar means cupbearer, and Sar-sechim is equivalent to Rab-saris, is not yet sufficiently proved. On the name Nergal-sharezer comp. Niebuhr, Ass. u. Bab., S. 37, 42, 43, Anm. [On the identification of Nergal-sharezer with Neriglissat, son-in-law of Nebuchadnezzar, see Rawlinson, Ancient Monarchies, III. 232, 528, and Smith’sBible Dictionary, s. v.—S. R. A.] On Nebo also, Ib. S. 30, 34.
Jer_39:4-10. And it came to pass . . at the same time. This passage is, as already remarked, taken with abbreviations from Jer_52:7-16 (2Ki_25:4-12). The object is evidently to give, in a compressed picture of the general distress, a background to the original representation, relating merely to the fate of the prophet. That this was necessary, together with Jeremiah 52, must be doubted. For what author will unnecessarily write the same thing twice over? Or would not the author of Jeremiah 39 expect that the reader could himself derive the necessary elucidation of this narrative from ch 52? Jer_39:4-10 is however taken from Jeremiah 52, not from 2 Kings 25. For if we compare Jer_39:4 with Jer_52:7; Jer_39:5 with Jer_52:8-9; Jer_39:6 with Jer_52:10 (N. B.: the slaughter of the princes is not mentioned in 2 Kings 25) and Jer_39:7 with Jer_52:11, we shall find that the present, passage contains all which distinguishes the narrative of Jeremiah 52. from that in 2 Kings 25, while in no point does it agree with 2 Kings 25 in opposition to Jeremiah 52. In the verses Jer_39:8-10 the narrative in relation both to Jeremiah 52 and 2 Kings 25 is so much abbreviated, that any special relationship with one of the two passages is not perceptible. They differ in this section however only in single words, which have no bearing on the essential import, so that we may say that the present text is related to Jeremiah 52, as well as to 2 Kings 25, as extract and elucidation. On this more below. If, now, Jer_39:4-10 is indisputably of later date than Jeremiah 52, so as to presuppose this chapter, we cannot avoid regarding the text as originally a marginal gloss, which was gradually by the fault of the transcriber incorporated into the text. As regards particular points, the words “And it came to pass that when Zedekiah,” Jer_39:4, may be recognized as a skillfully added connecting gloss, for 1, the original text contains nothing of this; but lets the flight follow immediately on the breaking in of the Chaldeans, Jer_52:7; 2Ki_25:4; 2 Kings 2, it is also in itself improbable, that Zedekiah deferred his flight till the Chaldean princes had taken their post in the middle gate. The flight was effectuated in a direction opposite to that in which the enemies from the North approached, viz., by the exit to the South “on the way to the garden of the king through the gate between the double wall.” This garden of the king is mentioned only in Neh_3:15, where it borders on the pool of Siloah. Comp. Arnold in Herzog, R.-Enc., XVIII., S. 630 u. 635; Leyreb in the same, XIV. S. 371. [Smith,Dict., I., 653]. According to Arnold this garden of the king is probably identical with the garden of Uzza (2Ki_21:18; 2Ki_21:26). The gate between the double walls also is mentioned only here and in the parallel passages. It is to be sought for in the exit of the Tyropæon, and is probably identical with the gate of the fountain (Neh_2:14; Neh_3:15; Neh_12:37). Comp. Arnold, S. 629 et pass.; Thenius, BB. d. Könige, S. 456; Robinson, Pal. II., S. 142.—The double-wall mentioned besides here (and parallel passages) only in Isa_22:11, appears to have been a double connection between Zion and Ophel. But concerning this there are various views. Comp. Thenius, The graves of the kings of Judah in Illgru’sZeitschr. f. hist. Theol., 1844, I. S. 18 sqq.; Herzog, R.-Enc., V. S. 157; XIV. S. 374; XVIII. S. 633; Keil.BB. d. Kön., S. 381.
From this southern exit Zedekiah turned eastward to the עֲרָבָה. This is the general term for the plain or vale of the Jordan, both on its eastern (comp. Deu_1:1; Deu_3:17; Deu_4:49; Jos_12:1) and its western shore (comp. Jos_8:14; Jos_11:2; Jos_11:16; 2Sa_2:29). Yet it seems as though Arabah is not only to be taken in a narrower and wider sense, (in the wider it comprises the entire depression of the lake Gennesaret to the Elamitic gulf, of which the southern half, from the southern end of the Dead Sea, is still called Wady el Araba) but to be generally of a fluctuating character. For in Deu_11:30 for instance the region of Sichem, where Mts. Ebal and Gerizim are situated, is reckoned to the Arabah. Zedekiah is overtaken in the עַרְבוֹת יְרֵחוֹ. This is a part of the Arabah, the enlargement of the Jordan-valley, three leagues wide, near Jericho, watered by the brook of Elisha.
The captured king is taken to Riblah, the northern boundary city of Palestine, at the source of the Orontes, (Num_34:11) the point of juncture for the roads eastward to the Euphrates, southward to Damascus and the Jordan, and westward to Phœnicia, which had previously been the head-quarters of Pharaoh Necho (2Ki_23:33). Here Nebuchadnezzar held judgment over him. Nebuchadnezzar had made him king (2Ki_24:17), Zedekiah was therefore a rebel against him (Jer_52:3; 2Ki_24:20).
The punishment which Zedekiah had to suffer for his revolt was a cruel one: his children were slain before his eyes, likewise all the great men of Judah (הֹרֵי for שָׂרֵי Jer_52:10 probably as a reminiscence from Jer 27:30); he himself was blinded and carried in chains to Babylon. From to carry, Jer_39:7, onwards, the abridgement is great and in so far unfortunate that one main point is Omitted, viz., the circumstance that Nebuchadnezzar on the news of the capture of Jerusalem sent the captain of his body-guard, Nebuzaradan, to Jerusalem, who arrived there four weeks after the capture. The mention of this circumstance was important, because without it the appearance of Nebuzar-adan, from Jer_39:9 onwards, is wholly unaccounted for. One consequence of this omission is also that in Jer_39:8 it is not Nebuzar-adan who burns the city, but the Chaldeans. Why the temple is not mentioned among the objects burned is not clear. In Jer_39:4 the obscure and superfluous words “the poor of the people,” found in Jer_52:15, are omitted, and instead of “that fell to the king of Babylon,” we have simply “that fell to him,” עָלָיו (2Ki_25:11, עַל מֶלֶךְ ב׳, almost the only point in which Jeremiah 39 approaches more nearly to 2 Kings 25 than Jeremiah 52). Since the king of Babylon has not been named just before (comp Jer_39:6 fin.) “to him” can refer only to the Nebuzar adan mentioned in the following verse; a reference which cannot be historically justified, since by the deserters mentioned are to be understood such only as went over before the conquest. After the deserters our text mentions besides “the remnant of the people.” In antithesis to the “remnant of the people that remained in the city” can be understood only the inhabitants remaining in the country. In the place of the second הָעָם we find in 2Ki_25:11הֶהָמֹן, in Jer_52:15הָאָמֹן. The former denotes “tumult, multitude of people” (comp. Isa_13:4; Isa_17:12) and our text takes the latter doubtless in the same sense. Whether correctly is another question. Comp. rems. on Jer_52:15. Nebuzar-adan, the “captain of the guard,” is here named for the first time. Sent by the king to Jerusalem on receipt of the news that Jerusalem is taken (comp. Jer_52:12; 2Ki_25:8), he immediately assumes the chief command, as is evident from this passage, and the following (Jer_39:10-12; Jer_40:1-6). The nature of his office, as well as the expression “who stood before the king” in Jer_52:12, indicate that he took precedence of all other princes.—The tenth verse, in this differing from the rest, contains an extension of the original text, the expression “the poor” being explained by the addition “which had nothing,” wanting in Jeremiah 52 and 2 Kings 25. The author evidently held it to be desirable (though unnecessary), to call attention to the fact that דַּל is not here to be taken in the sense of “afflictus, miser.” The brief phrase “for vine-dressers and for husbandmen” in Jer_52:16; 2Ki_25:12 (Keri) he extends into a sentence.—The words “at the same time” (in the same day) are to mark the difference in time between what was last narrated and what follows. It might otherwise have seemed as if the events narrated in Jer_39:11 occurred contemporaneously with those in Jer_39:9-10.
Jer_39:11-14. Now Nebuchadnezzar . . . among the people. Struensee, Movers, Graf, Meier, dispute the genuineness of Jer_39:11-13, Hitzig only of Jer_39:13. The objections to the authenticity appear to be the following: 1. The commission given to Nebuzar-adan is, according to Jer_40:1, not executed. Only in Rama (Jer_40:1) does Nebuzar-adan (comp. Jer_40:4) what according to Jer_39:11-12 he was commanded to do. 2. If Nebuzar-adan, who according to Jer_52:12 came to Jerusalem four weeks after its capture, first ordered the liberation of Jeremiah from the court of the guard, Jeremiah had remained there four weeks after the capture, which is in contradiction to Jer 38:28. 3. The three vers. are wanting in the LXX. 4. As to Jer_39:13 in particular, it is a mere connecting clause, rendered necessary by the insertion of Jer_39:11-12. For Jer_39:14 could not be connected directly with Jer_39:12; for the subject of “sent” would then be obscure. By the mention of Nebuzar-adan the connection with Jer_39:12 and the previous context, and by the mention of the other princes the connection with Jer_39:13 is established. I do not think that these arguments are conclusive. As to the first point, Nebuzar-adan certainly made the necessary arrangements for the execution of his commission. He liberated the prophet from the court of the guard, and entrusted him to Gedaliah for his further maintenance. But he seems not to have been in a condition to keep the prophet specially in view, so that he might be preserved from any personal malignity. In the confusion which was necessarily connected with the destruction of the city, the prophet, who voluntarily or involuntarily had been included in the multitude of the people, was treated like the rest. He was bound like the others. It was only in Ramah, where probably the first halt was made, and the arrangement of the caravan was definitely adjusted, that the captain of the halberdiers remembered his commission with respect to the prophet. There he liberated him from the chains, which he had borne “among all that were carried away captive” (Jer_40:1) and committed him the second time to Gedaliah (Jer_40:6). With regard to the second point it should first of all be remarked that “day,” Jer_38:28, must not necessarily be understood in the most restricted sense. This word, as is well known, frequently designates the period of an historical event in general, without any thought of a day of twenty-four hours. Comp. Jer_7:25; Jer_11:7; Jdg_18:30, etc. If now we consider that the princes who, according to Jer_39:3, sat down in the middle gate, thus took possession of Jerusalem in the name of the Chaldean king, but could not undertake further measures with respect to the fate of the city till they had heard from him, it cannot truly be surprising that for four weeks, till the arrival of Nebuzar-adan (Jer_52:12) things remained essentially as before, and that thus Jeremiah could not be removed from the court of the guard. The absence of the Jer_39:11-13 in the LXX. (which moreover omits the whole section 4–13, while it has Jer_39:1-2) is of no significance, the reasons for it being apparent. The translator wished by the omission of Jer_39:11-12 to avoid an apparent contradiction, by the omission of Jer_39:13 a repetition. As to the fourth argument it falls to pieces of itself, in so far that Jer_39:13 seems necessary in any case, whether we regard Jer_39:11-12 as genuine or not. The names of the princes might indeed be named together after וַיִּשְׁלְחוּ. But we see that the author’s thoughts (after Jer_39:11-12) were so much occupied with Nebuzar-adan that he names him first and as the chief personage (hence וַיִּשְׁלַח Jer_39:13), adding the rest only by way of supplement. When now after the long series of names and titles he repeated the principal verb once more, and in the plural, this is evidently done purely in the interest of perspicuity. We cannot then regard the arguments against the genuineness of Jer_39:11-13 as valid. On the other hand the following positively favor the genuineness: 1. In point of idiom there is nothing which is foreign to the prophet’s usage. It is worth notice that in Jer_39:11 the name of the Chaldean king is Nebuchadrezzar (as Jeremiah is always accustomed to write it) while in Jer_39:5 we read Nebuchadnezzar. The expression בְּיַד is one current in Jeremiah. It is found thirty-eight times, more frequently than in any of the other prophets. The expression שִׂים עֵינֶיךָ is found besides here and Jer_40:4 only in Gen_44:21. The phrase “do him no harm” (on the Dag. f. in רָּע comp. Olsh. § 83, f.) is not indeed specifically Jeremian, but by no means as Graf asserts, an unnecessary explanatory addition. Could it have been unnecessary to enjoin on Nebuzar-adan that no harm should be done to Jeremiah? Was this beyond the reach of possibility? The actual fate of the prophet gives the answer to this question. Or could the רָּע be omitted? Then we should have an ambiguous expression. For, strictly taken, the sentence without רָע would make it Nebuzar-adan’s duty to behave indifferently towards Jeremiah 2. It is in favor of the authenticity that the passage (Jer_39:11-13) is shown to be neither a foreign property, borrowed from elsewhere (like Jer_39:1-2; Jeremiah 4-10), nor an interruption of the connection, but on the contrary as necessary to furnish a perfectly clear picture of the occurrences. That the passage is not borrowed is acknowledged by all. That the course of Nebuzar-adan, as it is related in Jer_40:1-6 presupposes a commission of Nebuchadnezzar is involved in the nature of the case. For how could Nebuzar-adan dare to distinguish a single person with such favors if he had not been sure of the approval of his master? And is it then improbable that this approval was assured to him by a positive commission? Must an interpolator have invented this commission when Nebuchadnezzar may have heard a thousand times from the mouth of deserters that there was a prophet in Jerusalem who incessantly and with constant danger to his life had designated Nebuchadnezzar as an instrument in the hand of the Lord and submission to him as the only way of escape? And if Nebuchadnezzar had heard this, is there any reason for regarding the commission as the idle, unhistorical conjecture of a later editor? I believe that the narrative in Jer_39:11-14, in most intimate connection with Jer_39:3, presents us with the events in a perfectly natural manner, both as to form and contents. It is not at all necessary to take וַיְצַו, Jer_39:11, as pluperfect. For this command was actually given after the event related in Jer_39:3, which we have regarded above as the act of solemn taking possession. After Nebuchadnezzar had received the news of the capture of Jerusalem he sent Nebuzar-adan with his further orders. Among these was one respecting the person of the prophet. This alone is here mentioned, as the subject of the verses Jer_39:3; Jer_39:11-14, is simply the personal experiences of Jeremiah. In the execution of this commission, the princes, at whose head no longer stood Nergalsharezer but Nebuzar-adan, had the prophet taken out of the court of the guard. This could not be done before, because till the arrival of Nebuchadnezzar all had to remain in general the same as it had been at the capture of the city. Jeremiah was now given in charge to Gedaliah, the son of Ahikam. This Ahikam, of a noble family (comp. 2Ki_22:12; 2Ki_22:14), had already favored the prophet (Jer_26:24). Gedaliah evidently belonged to that small party, who having taken Jeremiah’s prophecies as the rule of their political course, had gone over to the Chaldeans (Jer_38:19). Gedaliah was to bring the prophet from the court of the guard אֶל־הַבַּיִת. By this some have understood the temple (Hitzig), others the king’s house (Graf, et al.). But according to Jer_52:13 (2Ki_25:9), both these were burned down by Nebuzar-adan, together with the other houses of Jerusalem, directly on his arrival. And assuredly those large public buildings were not the last to which the Chaldeans applied the destroying hand. It is credible that some private dwellings might be preserved to the last, to afford shelter to some privileged persons. “Into the house” may thus designate the genus, private dwelling in general, in contrast to “quarters at the public expense,” such as the court afforded, it thus remaining undecided whether the private dwelling in which Jeremiah was taken were Gedaliah’s own house, or some other. In this private dwelling Jeremiah was not placed under confinement. He could freely go in and out. And so he had intercourse with the people, doubtless warning and comforting them with his prophetic words, and was thus in the vast confusion of the destruction, plundering and deportation, treated by the soldiers who had charge of the details like the mass of the populace, i.e., bound in chains, and placed in the trains of captives. Nebuchadnezzar’s order thus remained unobeyed, without any fault of Nebuzar-adan and Gedaliah, till they reached the station of Ramah.
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
1. On Jer_39:11-12. “Elucet inde veritas illius Salomonis (Pro_21:1): Cor regis in manu Dei, quo vult illud inclinat.” Förster.
2. On Jer_39:11-14. “Nebuchadnezzar the king and Ebed-melech the Ethiopian enhanced the guilt of the Jews. For these, although they were heathens, were not shy of the prophet. The Jews, however, who had grown up with the prophetic words, paid no regard to the divine word, but on the contrary subjected the prophet to manifold maltreatment.” Theodoret.
3. On Jer_39:11-14. “Deus ex iisdem hominibus diversa singulis disponit præmia, qui ex iisdem elementis pro meritorum qualitate electis et reprobis diversas impendit remunerationes. Nam aqua maris rubri, quæ cultores Dei illæsos servabat Israelitas, eadem interfecit Ægyptios idololatras. Similiter flamma camini, quæ regis Babylonis juxta fornacem atroces interfecit ministros, eadem laudantes et benedicentes Dominum in medio ignis conservavit pueros, unde vir sapiens in laudibus Dei ait: creatura enim tibi factori deserviens excandescit in tormentum adversus injustos et lenior fit ad benefaciendum pro his, qui in te confidunt (Sap. 16, 24).” Rhabanus Maurus in Ghisler.
4. On Jer_39:15-18. “Well for him, whose help is the God of Jacob, whose hope is in the Lord his God (Psa_146:5). Well for the people, whose God is the Lord (Psa_144:15). For of what avail was it to Zedekiah that he was king? And of what injury was it to Ebed-melech that he was a servant? For the former had to endure all on account of his ungodliness, while the latter on account of his piety suffered no evil.” Theodoret.
5. On Jer_39:15-18. “Ecce principes, qui Jeremiam expetiverunt ad carceris pænam, Chaldaicæ captivitatis perpessi sunt vindictam. Hic autem Eunuchus, qui prophetam liberavit de carcere, Domino remunerante perfecta potitus est libertate.” Rhabanus Maurus in Ghisler.
6. On Jer_39:15-18. “This pious courtier had interceded for the prophet with the king, but the prophet had again interceded for him with God the Lord. Ebed-melech had drawn him out of the pit, but Jeremiah draws him by his prayer from the jaws of all Chaldean war-vortices. Those who receive a prophet shall receive a prophet’s reward (Mat_10:41). Preachers do their patrons more good than they get from them.” Cramer.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
1. On Jer_39:11-14. Jeremiah’s deliverance an example of how wonderfully the Lord helps His own. 1. While in Jerusalem his fellow believers hate and persecute him, the heathen king in Riblah thinks of him, and commands to liberate him. 2. While the city of Jerusalem with all its population perishes, he is protected and brought into safety.
2. On Jer_39:15-18. What can we learn from the example of the believing Ebed-melech? 1. That faith is not connected with limits of any external communion; 2, that assent and confidence pertain to its nature (Jer_39:18); 3, that there is an internal (Jer_39:16) and external (Jer_39:17) reward of faith.
Footnotes:
[1]Jer_38:28 b.—These words cannot either logically or grammatically be connected with the previous context. The Vulg. and Chald. translate ungrammatically: et factum est, ut caperetur Hierosolyma. The Syr. omits the words altogether. The LXX. translate merely וְהָיָה, connecting it immediately with Jer_39:1. On the other hand, an entirely appropriate sense and connection is furnished, if the words are connected with Jer_39:3. On וְהָיָה, comp rems. on Jer_37:11. The Masoretes, moreover, objected to the present division of the text, as may be seen from their פִסְקָא בְּאֶמְצַע פְסוּקָא (lacuna in medio versu). Comp. Gesen.: Lehrgeb., S. 124; Hupfeld, Stud. u. Krit., 1837, S. 835. Similar cases are found in Gen_35:22; Num. 25:19; Jos_4:1; Eze_3:16, etc. Comp. Fuerst, Propylæa Masoræ, § 29 in the Concordance, p. 1369.—In Jer_39:1 בֶּעָשׂוֹר לַחדֶֹשׁ wanting in our text, possibly through the oversight of the transcriber; הוּא is likewise wanting before וְכָל־חֵילוֹ; וַיָּצֻרוּ עָלֶיהָ is contracted from the longer sentence “and pitched against it, and built forts against it round about, so the city was besieged.” Finally הָבְקְעָה הָעְיר is contracted from “the famine prevailed (was sore) in the city, and there was no bread for the people of the land, and the city was broken up.” It is evident that the author of this text was concerned only to present the main thoughts.
[2]Jer_39:5.—The expression דַּבֵּר מִשְׁפָטִים אֵת פ׳ for “to hold judgment,” occurs only in Jer_1:16; Jer_4:12; Jer_12:1. The present account also has the form hero only, while in 2Ki_25:6 we find מִשְׁכָּט. Moreover the expression is not found elsewhere with the following אֵת and with the meaning “litigare, hold judgment,” but it signifies elsewhere (Psa_37:30; Isa_32:7) simply “to speak justice.”—This is a point which would favor the Jeremian origin of Jeremiah 52 (comp. Haevernick, Einl., II. 3, S. 233), if this grammatical agreement might not be due to other causes.
[3]Jer_39:10.—יְגֵבִים is ἅπ. λεγ.
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain On vv7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 28 Ebed-melech--The Hebrew designation given this Ethiopian, meaning "king's servant."…
Ebed-melech--The Hebrew designation given this Ethiopian, meaning "king's servant." Already, even at this early time, God wished to show what good reason there was for calling the Gentiles to salvation. An Ethiopian stranger saves the prophet whom his own countrymen, the Jews, tried to destroy. So the Gentiles believed in Christ whom the Jews crucified, and Ethiopians were among the earliest converts (Act 2:10, Act 2:41; Act 8:27-39). Ebed-melech probably was keeper of the royal harem, and so had private access to the king. The eunuchs over harems in the present day are mostly from Nubia or Abyssinia.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain On vv7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 22, 24, 26 7. Ebed-melech the Ethiopian — The import of the…
7. Ebed-melech the Ethiopian — The import of the name is “servant of the king.” In 2Ki_23:11, another eunuch is called Nathan-melech — “gift of the king.” From such examples it would seem not improbable that it was not unusual for slaves to take their names from their masters. He was an Ethiopian, and so it was given to an Ethiopian to be a saviour of the prophet. As he is mentioned, we cannot but think of another Ethiopian, also a eunuch, who became the messenger of salvation to his own country, as related in Acts 8.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain On vv7, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 26, 27, 28 7. Ebed-melech the Ethiopian] a negro eunuch, attached to…
7. Ebed-melech the Ethiopian] a negro eunuch, attached to the court or harem after the Eastern custom. See on Jer_13:23.
the gate of Benjamin] See on ch. Jer_37:13.
Read full note →
7–13. See introd. summary to section.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain On vv7, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 23 (7) Bbed-melech the Ethiopian.—The name signifies “servant of the…
(7) Bbed-melech the Ethiopian.—The name signifies “servant of the king,” but the absence of the article in the Hebrew makes it probable that it had come to be used as a proper name, and so both the LXX. and Vulgate take it. The use of Ethiopian or Cushite slaves in the king’s household, probably as keeping guard over the harem, had been of some standing; perhaps even as early as the time of David, as in the case of Cushr (or the Cushite), in 2Sa_18:21. Then, as in other countries and times (Terent., Eunuch, i. 2), there was a fashion which led princes and men of wealth to think that eunuchs were part of their magnificence. The law of Moses, it may be noted, forbade such mutilation in the case of Israelites (Deu_23:1). In Psa_87:4, we find probably a record of the admission of such persons on the register of the citizens of Zion. Of the previous history of the Eunuch thus named we know nothing but he appears here as the favourite of the king, using his influence to protect the prophet. The Ethiopian descent of Jehudi (Jer_36:21) may probably have brought him into contact with an officer of the king’s household of the same race, and Ebed-melech’s feelings may have been drawn to the prophet by what he thus heard.
In the gate of Benjamin.—This was on the northern wall of the city, the most exposed to the attack of the invading army, and the king apparently had gone there either to direct the operations of the defence, or, perhaps, to prevent others from following, as they might think, Jeremiah’s example, and either deserting to the enemy or abandoning the defence of the city (Jer_37:13). Ebed-melech had accordingly to leave the palace, and went to seek the king at his post, in order to obtain an order of release in time to save the prophet’s life. He alone, as if inheriting the blessing of Isa_56:3-6, has the courage to appear as the friend of the persecuted.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain On vv7, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24, 27, 28 Ebed-melech the Ethiopian. The name means "the king"s slave."…
Ebed-melech the Ethiopian. The name means "the king"s slave." Ebers remarks that the eunuchs employed in the modern East are nearly all negroes, on whom the shameful operation has been performed by Copts in Upper Egypt. Zedekiah"s harem is referred to in vers. 22, 23.
Vers. 7-13. Ebed-Melech; or, unlooked for sympathy and help.
Read full note →
I ITS CIRCUMSTANCES. These were such as to impress the mind of the prophet. He was deliberately consigned by the princes of the people to the dungeon, and the king consented, so that there would appear to be no appeal. His heart must have failed him as he felt himself sinking in the mire. In a prison like that he was in imminent danger of being forgotten and starved. Apparently it was intended as an effectual means of "putting out of the way." And all this was due to what? Doing his duty. The very persons whom he sought to benefit either turned against or ignored him. The whole situation was desperate. It appeared as if no human help could save. It is just at such times that faith receives its confirming, ultimate lessons.
II ITS CHARACTER.
1. In itself. It Was:
(1) Thoughtful. It has been suggested that, as the dungeon was in the palace, "he came to the knowledge of it by hearing Jeremiah"s moans." This may or may not have been; but when he knew of the situation of the prophet he was concerned and full of sympathy. It is this spirit which true religion, and especially the gospel of Christ, ever fosters, and the world has need of it.
(2) Prompt. In a question like that of a few hours at the utmost, no delay had to be made if the prisoner was to be saved. As the king was "then sitting in the gate of Benjamin," he went out immediately and sought an audience. And he urged expedition. One of the finest recommendations of help is that it is given when it is needed. The case is taken up as if it were his own. How many philanthropies miss fire because they are kept too long without being carried into effect? Bis dat qui cito dat.
(3) Courageous. He went straight to the king, by whose order he must have known the thing had been done, and spoke with quick, nervous fearlessness and condemnation. There was not only feeling here, but principle. He was evidently careless as to the consequences to himself.
(4) Practical. Ebed-Melech meant that the thing should be done, and so he took the requisite steps to carry it out. Everything is thought Of and applied to the purpose. Even in the "old cast clouts" there is evidence of forethought and careful, if novel, application of means to ends.
2. In its origin. Ebed-Melech was:
(1) An alien. A negro, and not a Jew, and one from his office disqualified from participating in the benefits of the covenant. It is the more remarkable that none of Jeremiah"s countrymen interposed.
(2) A servant of a vicious king. The establishments of such princes are usually stamped with the same character, and their members are but the creatures of their masters. There is something doubly unlooked for, therefore, in such an advocate and friend. It is like a salutation from one of "Caesar"s household.
(3) It is also probable that he was one called out by the occasion. No mention of him is made either before or after.
III WHAT IT TEACHES.
1. True religion does not depend upon conventional forms. Not that these are therefore without value, but they are not of the essence of religion. It is Divine faith, with its outflowing charities and works, that alone can save man and glorify God. Rahab the harlot and Naaman the Syrian are but instances of many for really outside of the kingdom of God, but really within it. Let each ask, "Am I, who have received so much privilege, really a child of grace?
2. The kingdom of God is always stronger than it seems. As to Elijah the assurance," Yet I have left me seven, thousand, in Israel," so to Jeremiah is this experience. We are never justified in despairing of human nature if God be in his world.
3. Implicit trust in God as the only Saviour. The raising up of such a deliverer was so unique and unexpected as to call attention to it as a work of God, It was supernatural and special, and spoke of gracious intervention. He would not abandon his servant, nor will he any who put their trust in him. M.
Vers. 7-13. A friend in need.
I THE NATIONALITY OF EBED-MELECH. An Ethiopian. Jeremiah had asked in prophecy, "Can the Ethiopian change his skin?" from which question we may assume that Ethiopians were well known in Israel. One cannot but feel that here we have a sort of counterpart to that other Ethiopian eunuch of whom we read in the New Testament. The Ethiopian Ebed-Melech helps Jeremiah in his temporal need; Philip helps the servant of Queen Candace in his spiritual need. What a rebuke there is here to bigoted and frenzied patriotism! if, indeed, "patriotism" is the proper word to be used and not rather a spirit of blind nationality. Perhaps the very fact that Ebed-Melech was an alien helped him to see needs and duties, cruelty and injustice, which were hidden from the eyes of the natives. Even natives would be obliged to admit that Ebed-Melech could not be expected to look on the position with their traditionary eyes. Even so it was reserved for a Gentile to say at the Crucifixion, "Truly this was the Son of God.
II THE HUMANITY OF EBED-MELECH. That the eunuch should have pitied the prophet sunk in the dungeon mire may not seem at first a matter to be singled out for special notice. Why should a man be praised for humanity more than for honesty? We must, however, recollect the difference of times. Those who put Jeremiah in the dungeon thought it served him quite right. And yet if there is nothing extraordinary in the humanity of Ebed-Melech, there must be something exceptionally fiendish in the conduct of those who put the prophet in the dungeon; whereas, in point of fact, they were only doing a usual thing. What a long time it has taken to work the world up even to its present attainments in humanity and compassionate feeling! And still through all these centuries Ebed-Melech rebukes us for our too often thoughtlessness and forgetfulness with respect to human pain.
III THE COURAGE OF EBED-MELECH. He could not do a thing of this sort without making enemies and running into peril. The humane man has often to be a brave man, going into elements of danger for the sake of humanity, as a lifeboat crew must do, or a hand of explorers in a colliery accident. But there are also exercises of humanity which demand moral courage courage that will stand alone in protesting against cruelties and brutalities that have been accepted through long custom. If we are resolved to be consistent and thorough in our humanity, we must be prepared for ridicule and scorn. There are only too many who will check us in humane endeavours by calling them mere sentimentality and weakness.
IV THE INFLUENCE OF EBED-MELECH. His office tells us that he was a man about the court, and his action here tells us that he was a man who had influence with the king. What we see of his conduct here makes us feel that he had won his influence in a perfectly legitimate way. Thus at last the opportunity comes for making good use of it. Here is an example of how good a thing it is to cultivate influence with those in authority, if it can be done in a right way without flattery and servility. Men like kings need some one near them to speak the truth plainly and effectually.
V THE THOUGHTFULNESS OF EBED-MELECH. Something more is needed than the king"s permission to get Jeremiah out of the dungeon. Probably his stay in a miry, pestilential hole had made him very feeble. Ebed-Melech was evidently a man who could take in all that needed to be done in any difficulty. Just the sort of man who could free usefulness in things that were cast away as worn out and useless. "Useless" is only our ignorant way of naming things we cannot use. The humane man must be thoughtful as well as courageous. Y.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain On vv7, 19 Ebed-melech the Ethiopian.
Jer_38:7-13
Ebed-melech the Ethiopian.
Read full note →
Ebed-melech the Ethiopian
A slave from the Soudan, an eunuch in the household of Zedekiah, King of Judah, is by the side of the great Jeremiah, a humble servant yet an efficient protector. The slave and the prophet in our thought abide together.
I. the circumstances which brought the two together and caused the strange conjunction. The prophet is cast into a dungeon, deep and loathsome. Into the slime of its unfloored depths he sinks, and there he lies. Left to die and rot in the dungeons mud! No. One mans voice is raised, one mans hand works. But no son of Israel is he; only a slave of the royal household, a heathen from a far-off land, with a black skin but a pure heart.
II. The deliverer. What his own name was we know not, for among the royal servants he was known only as Ebed-melech, the kings slave. Whether he was of the original Hamitic or of the invading Semitic stock we cannot conjecture, save that, from his position, there is an inherent probability that he was of the former. We are at liberty, then, to conceive of him as a black, though probably not a negro, torn from his home, either as a boy or youth, to meet the demands of the market at Meroe; and then, in the way of traffic, passed on through Egypt, till at last he passed into the palace of the King of Judah. We can next conceive of him, by the exercise of the qualities of intelligence, fidelity, and prudence, promoted to the important post of superintendent of the royal harem. He would thus come into contact with Jeremiah, who, as the last of the prophet statesmen of Judah (as he has been called), had for many years compelled for himself a place in the councils of the nation The simple nature of the Ethiopian, uncorrupted by the vices of palace life, would recognise the moral and spiritual elevation of the prophet, and would yield a homage and a love of which the heartless courtiers Who despised him were incapable. His position brought him into frequent intercourse with the king; perhaps gave him a free access to his presence. None could know better than he his weaknesses and his vices; hut he would also know, as most could not, that in his debased mind were certain possibilities of justice and generosity to which an appeal might be made. Hopeful or hopeless, the brave heathen resolves that appeal there shall he. And after a right honest and straightforward fashion he sets him to his task. Well done, slave! Bravely spoken, Soudanee! Was there another man in all Jerusalem man enough to have done thy work! I trow not. But it is an ill turn thou hast done for thyself! Where is thy prudence, man? Who is this Jeremiah for whom thou art pleading? The lost and almost the last advocate of a lost cause. Who are these men whom thou art arraigning? The magnates of the realm, in whose hands the king is but a feeble, though it may be a well-meaning puppet. What supports canst thou expect to secure? None, unless it be the secret friendship of a few frightened men, whose favour is nought. What enemies canst thou not fail to make? The princes of Judah, whose frown may be death. But fear not, thou kings slave! Chariots and horsemen are upon the hills round about thee. There is an unseen Friend whose favour is life; and there is an immortal Church to call thee blessed. The kings better nature is roused by the appeal. Rising for the moment above the unkingly fear of his nobles, he exercises his royal prerogative, and commissions Ebed-melech, to take a sufficient force and release the prophet from the dungeon. Speedily, tenderly, and joyfully it is done. The forethought displayed, the various precautions to secure the exhausted victim from further danger or discomfort, are minutely and gratefully detailed.
III. Thoughts which such an incident arouses in the mind. It would be easy to descant upon the moral lessons which the incident teaches, to make Ebed-melech the peg on which to hang edifying reflections. He might easily be made into a lay figure to do duty for the showing off of such thoughts as these: that God uses instruments selected from among the lowly as well as the lofty; that the faithful discharge of the offices of commonest humanity is noted, approved of, and will finally be owned by the God of providence; that in most unlikely places, among most unlikely classes, Gods servants, His because servants of righteousness and humanity, are to be found; that He has His hidden ones where the eye of man suspects not; and that the faith that God desires to see in men is that trust in Him and that supreme homage to the claims of charity and truth which will cause them to do right, and leave the issues to work themselves out as they may in subjection to His will. But I do not desire the man to he lost in the meditations. I want us to see men under the influence of motives that may he ours, to enter into the human feeling, to sympathise with the human surrender, and to behold in these that which God loves to behold in His creature-children. Jehovah says, Thy life shall be for a prey unto thee, because thou hast put thy trust in Me. A thought of comfort, quickening, and strength is here suggested; those who do right, follow charity, work humanely--not because these things will pay, but because they are what they are, leaving consequences to come as come they may--these are trusting God, these are His worshippers, even though they have never learned His name. (G. M. Grant, B. D.)
Deliverance from an unwonted quarter
Strange, too, was the quarter from which deliverance came to the prophet. Not from the company of priests to which he belonged; not from that of the prophets of which he was the greatest member of that age; not even from his brethren according to the flesh, but from an alien to the commonwealth of Israel--an Ethiopian, a son of the despised Ham. It is very curious and beautiful to find these Scriptures--Jewish though they be--studded over with bright examples of goodness from the nations around. One of its noblest prophecies is from the mouth of Balaam the Midianite. Deliverance came to its greatest prophet (so far as action goes) from Zarephath, which belongeth to Sidon, from a woman that was a widow. What Thomas Carlyle called the grandest thing in all literature is from Job, who probably was not of the seed of Abraham. And when we come to the New Testament, in a Roman soldier Christ found faith nobler than that of any in Israel, and in a Samaritan woman He found His first missionary. The Jew might stand aloof in proud isolation, but the Book he reverenced called nothing common or unclean. (The Quiver.)
Ebed-melech, the model of kindness
I. It is easy to show kindness. Some things are very hard to do. We know for how many years the Government of England, of our own country, and of other nations, have been trying to find the way to the North Pole. How much money has been spent, and how many valuable lives have been test in these attempts! And vet they have never succeeded. Getting to the North Pole is a very hard thing to do. Some things can only be done by those who have plenty of money. But it is very different with the work of showing kindness. There is nothing hard about this. We do not need much money to do it. The poor can show kindness, as well as the rich. Ebed-melech was a poor coloured man--the slave of King Zedekiah; yet he managed to show real kindness to the prophet Jeremiah. He wag the means of saving his life.
II. Kindness is useful. Ebed-melechs kindness was useful to Jeremiah, because it saved his life. He lived for years after this, and was the means of doing a great deal of good to the people of Israel who were living then. Jeremiah has been useful to the Church of God, ever since that day, by the prophecies which he wrote. And a large portion of those prophecies was written after the day in which Ebed-melech saved his life. And this shows us how great the usefulness was of Ebed-melechs kindness. And in learning to show kindness to others, there is no telling how much good we may do.
III. Kindness is profitable. God sent word to Ebed-melech, by Jeremiah, that when Jerusalem should be taken by the Assyrians, He would put it into their hearts to show kindness to him by sparing his life. And so it came to pass. (R. Newton, D. D.)
Put now these old cast clouts and rotten rags under thine arm-holes under the cords.
Gentleness in doing good
I. The example of Ebed-melech should be followed by those who wish to show real kindness to the poor. When poverty cometh as an armed man (Pro_6:11), blighting hope, and bringing wretchedness in his train, a heart must be harder than stone, which is not moved with compassion. To show kindness to the needy, at the right time, and in the best way, should be the study of those who would be followers of Jesus. Experience has shown that it is generally far better to put people in the way of getting employment, than to make them feel their dependence by directly relieving their wants.
II. A lesson for those who are anxious to rescue perishing sinners from going down to the pit. Harsh words are quite out of place, even to the most depraved; and we can hardly claim to be disciples of Him who will not break the bruised reed, nor quench the smoking flax (Isa_42:3), if we venture to speak them. It is far better to lower the silken cords of Divine love, and the soft cushions of the promises, and to address words of encouragement to those who are groping in darkness. He that winneth souls is wise (Pro_11:30). The word winneth is the important one. It suggests something besides labour and painstaking. Winning implies gentleness, and a sincere interest in the souls of others. No one will be made better by scolding, or sarcasm; but he who will imitate Ebed-melech, in his thoughtful tenderness, will be successful in his work.
III. The example of Ebed-melech deserves to be remembered by those who would bring others into the fold of Christs Church. Very little is ever accomplished for the Master by harsh and uncharitable controversy. (J. N. Norton, D. D.)
The captive rescued
Here we see tenderness and compassion. There is much in doing a kind action in a kind way. A charity may be so given as to wound the recipient; and a good deed, accompanied by kind words, is like a gem set in pure gold. Let us ever be careful that when we try to help others, we do our task with tenderness to the feelings and prejudices of those we would aid. But the events of old times were full of foreshadowings of the great central fact of the worlds redemption.
1. In Ebed-melech, therefore, we may behold a type of One who comes forth from the palace of the Great King to loose the captives chains. Our Saviour stoops down to help us. The cords of His love and compassion lift us up, and restore us to that service which is perfect liberty.
2. But again, in this narrative there is a very good illustration of the too often forgotten truth that in mans redemption he has his own part to do. If it was Ebed-melech who let down the cords, yet Jeremiah had to fix them under his arms to such a position that he might safely be drawn up. Work out your own salvation is the plain direction of the apostle.
3. Again, there seems to be a lesson of instruction in this point--that the rags and castaway fragments of garments were made useful in the way of making easier the deliverance of Jeremiah, things which were worthless in themselves used for a good and excellent purpose. So many things, at which men scoff, saying, How can they save souls? are, by Gods blessing, made of use.
4. Lastly, let us take Ebed-melech for an example. Can we not strive to rescue some soul! Cannot we, like the thirty servants of the king, aid in letting down the cords, or protect those who are doing so? We may at least lower down the cords of prayer and entreaty. (W. Hardman, LL. D.)
Ropes and rags
The story is an illustration of the way God saves men. Jeremiahs danger and deliverance were very real. In that dungeon he is, indeed, in an horrible pit. No hope of escape. No light, no firm standing, every prospect of death, and in no long time either. Would to God that we preachers could see the real danger to which sinners are exposed! Jeremiah was delivered, brought up out of the miry clay. But the prophets salvation was only a feeble picture of what Gods grace does for those who take hold on Jesus. He remained in the courts of the prison. Whom the Son makes free are free indeed. We who rest in Jesus may walk about the courts of the Kings palace.
I. Mark you, help always comes from above. Jeremiah found it so. It was useless to try to climb out of the dungeon, it was only to fall deeper into the mire. Salvation is of the Lord. You cannot save yourself. The effort will only exhaust you. Cry unto the Lord. Say, O Lord, deliver my soul. He is sure to hear your cry. Ebed-melech is only a very poor picture of Jesus. The Saviour does more than send down a rope. He comes Himself and lifts us up. Although Ebed-melech may be a very poor type of Jesus Christ, he is a very good picture of the style in which one man may help another.
II. He had sympathy. Now, sympathy is the mother of help.
III. Ebed-melech did not allow difficulty to deter him. Some men can work hard so long as there are no difficulties; opposition to them is like a hill on a jibbing horse; they must stop now: they did not look for this sort of thing, you know. Just so, the eunuch found it was not easy--it never is--to undo wrong. A stout heart to a stiff brae, is common sense as well as right. If you mean to help others, you will have to pull hard against the stream.
IV. Ebed-melech teaches us to spare the feelings of those we help. He lowered down the old rags and clouts he had gathered, and bade the prophet put them under his armpits, so as not to have them cut by the ropes. The rope of deliverance should not cut the flesh of those we save. This is not always thought of. We may wound men in helping them, and they may like the remedy less than the disease. We should think of the feelings, as well as the wants of those we help. Shall we not imitate Him of whom it is said, He will not break the bruised reed? When we take the rope, let us not forget the old rags as well.
V. Among the practical lessons of this story, there is the great truth that one man may set others going. Ebed-melech went to the king for help, and he gave him thirty helpers. In the thirteenth verse, we read, So they drew up Jeremiah. How many times this happen! Robert Raikes had no idea how many wheels his would set in motion. Muller of Bristol has many imitators, and thousands of orphans are fed and clothed that he will never know of. If you will only begin, others will follow you. Do not wait for others to start with you; be content to go alone. It was David Livingstone that set Stanley and Cameron to work, and the end of that lonely travellers work will be seen when a highway shall be there, and the ransomed of the Lord shall return with songs and everlasting joy upon their heads, and sorrow and sighing shall nee away; but if Livingstone had waited for others, he would have died, in comfort, it may be, but could not have had a grave in Westminster Abbey, nor have set in motion the plans which are sure to issue in Africas deliverance.
VI. Let, us learn the value of despised and cast-off things. The prudent chamberlain had seen under the treasury the old cast clouts, and old rotten rags. No one else saw any value in them, but he put them to a good use. What a number of things are cast aside, like these old rags! Do you see yonder woman in such dismay? She has been upstairs looking at some old dresses, and finds that the moth has been there before her, and they are useless. Would it not have been better to have given them to her poor relations, or to that widow who has such difficulty to find clothes for her little ones? Have you not old magazines that would gladden the heart of some of those intelligent paupers who never get any lively reading, or save from ennui some convalescent in the hospital? Look and see what you have under the treasury. (T. Champness.)
The tenderness of Ebed-melech
Negro though he was, Ebed-melech was a gentleman. He is not so bent on delivering the prophet that he cares not how it is done. He will not bruise the prophets skin in saving the prophets life. These old cast clouts and rotten rags do not present a very savoury picture; but the feeling that prompted their use is both pleasant and thoughtful. Many a good deed is spoilt by the manner of its doing. Some people pride themselves upon their roughness; they think it a sign of manliness. Their idea of manliness wants revision. Do such ever think of the meaning of the very name they claim--gentleman? Do such realise that it is not only manlike, but Godlike, to be gentle! Did not one of the psalmists exclaim, Thy gentleness hath made me great? Ebed-melechs deliverance of the prophet from the mire was a great deed, but the tenderness with which it was done makes it many times greater. (The Quiver.)
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain On v14 Jeremiah’s Advice to the King
Jeremiah’s Advice to the King
v. 14. Then Zedekiah, the king, sent and took Jeremiah, the prophet, unto him into the third entry that is in the house of the Lord, very likely the vaulted north gate of the Temple court, which faced the palace; and the king said unto Jeremiah, I will ask thee a thing; hide nothing from me. The very attitude of the prophet, together with the definiteness of his message, filled the king with apprehension and a foreboding of evil for himself.
Read full note →
v. 15. Then Jeremiah said unto Zedekiah, If I declare it unto thee, telling him the plain truth as it had been revealed by the Lord, wilt thou not surely put me to death? And if I give thee counsel, namely, concerning the manner in which he was to proceed in this emergency, wilt thou not hearken unto me? It is plain that Jeremiah trusted the king neither with regard to the safety of his own person nor concerning the acceptance of any advice which he might give.
v. 16. So Zedekiah, the king, sware secretly unto Jeremiah, saying, As the Lord liveth, that made us this soul, a most solemn oath by the God of life and by his own life, I will not put thee to death, neither will I give thee into the hand of these men that seek thy life. It was a most emphatic assurance that he would safeguard the prophet’s life.
v. 17. Then said Jeremiah unto Zedekiah, in reliance upon the king’s promise. Thus saith the Lord, the God of hosts, the God of Israel: If thou wilt assuredly go forth unto the king of Babylon’s princes, voluntarily surrendering to the Chaldean generals in charge of the siege, then thy soul shall live, and this city shall not be burned with fire; and thou shalt live and thine house, their lives would be spared;
v. 18. but if thou wilt not go forth to the king of Babylon’s princes, then shall this city be given into the hand of the Chaldeans, and they shall burn it with fire, and thou shalt not escape out of their hand, an emphatic way of saying that he would be taken captive. Cf. Jer 34:2-5; Jer 32:4; Jer 21:4-10.
v. 19. And Zedekiah, the king, whose weakness of character appears here once more, said unto Jeremiah, I am afraid of the Jews that are fallen to the Chaldeans, he dreaded the insults of his fugitive subjects, lest they deliver me into their hand and they mock me. It was not merely ridicule that he feared, but actual physical abuse as well.
v. 20. But Jeremiah said, They shall not deliver thee. Obey, I beseech thee, the voice of the Lord, which I speak unto thee; so it shall be well unto thee, and thy soul shall live.
v. 21. But if thou refuse to go forth, this is the word that the Lord hath showed me, the alternative to the mockery of the fugitive Jews:
v. 22. and, behold, all the women that are left in the king of Judah’s house, all the members of his harem, including also the wives of former kings who remained in his care, shall be brought forth to the king of Babylon’s princes, as captives of the Chaldean generals, and those women shall say, in a satirical song of mockery upon Zedekiah, Thy friends have set thee on, the king’s ministers and his false prophets had misled him, and have prevailed against thee, getting the better of him with their evil counsel; thy feet are sunk in the mire, and they are turned away back, slipping in the uncertain footing of the mud into which he had been led by his alleged advisers.
v. 23. So they shall bring out all thy wives and thy children to the Chaldeans; and thou shalt not escape out of their hand, but shalt be taken by the hand of the king of Babylon, and thou shall cause this city to be burned with fire, that is, Zedekiah’s weakness, vacillation, and disobedience would bring the guilt of its destruction upon his head.
v. 24. Then said Zedekiah unto Jeremiah, still with the same lack of firmness and decision which was characteristic of him throughout, Let no man know of these words, and thou shalt not die, he should feel sure of the king’s protection.
v. 25. But if the princes hear that I have talked with thee, and they come unto thee and say unto thee, Declare unto us now what thou hast said unto the king, hide it not from us, and we will not put thee to death, the words which the princes would probably use in threatening him, also what the king said unto thee,
v. 26. then thou shalt say unto them, I presented my supplication before the king that he would not cause me to return to Jonathan’s house, 37:15, to die there.
v. 27. Then came all the princes unto Jeremiah, just as the king had expected that they would, and asked him; and he told them according to all these words that the king had commanded. So they left off speaking with him, literally, "they kept their silence away from him," that is, they went away in silence and ceased to bother him; for the matter was not perceived, the explanation given by Jeremiah seemed altogether plausible.
v. 28. So Jeremiah abode in the court of the prison until the day that Jerusalem was taken; and he was there when Jerusalem was taken. The Lord has ways and means of protecting and delivering His children from all evil, even when there seems to be no way of escape.
Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv7, 10, 12, 14, 17, 19, 20, 22, 24, 27 Now Ebed-Melek
Now Ebed-Melek
The word "now" is used here to mark a break in the main story line. Here the narrator starts to tell a new part of the story.
Read full note →
Ebed-Melek the Cushite
This is the name of a man from Cush. (See: How to Translate Names)
Now the king
Here the word "now" marks a break in the main story line where the narrator tells background information about what the king was doing. (See: Background Information)
sitting at the Benjamin Gate
King Zedekiah was probably hearing and judging legal cases. (See: Idiom)
Benjamin Gate
This is an entrance into the city of Jerusalem that people named after Benjamin, Jacob's son.
translationWords
Cush
eunuch
house
Benjamin
gate
lord
evil
prophet
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv7, 10, 11, 14, 17, 19, 20, 24 38:7-8 the Ethiopian (cp. Luke 17:18; Acts 28:28): Jeremiah’s…
38:7-8 the Ethiopian (cp. Luke 17:18; Acts 28:28): Jeremiah’s rescuer was not from Judah; he was a foreigner who dared to defy the other officials. He ran to the Benjamin Gate, where Jeremiah was first arrested (Jer 37:11-13), and rushed into the king’s presence without ceremony.
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.