[3:1]  ¹ tn Heb “May he go back to her again?” The question is rhetorical and expects a negative answer.

[3:1]  ² tn Heb “Would the land not be utterly defiled?” The stative is here rendered actively to connect better with the preceding. The question is rhetorical and expects a positive answer.

[3:1]  ³ tn Heb “But you have played the prostitute with many lovers.”

[3:1]  ⁴ tn Heb “Returning to me.” The form is the bare infinitive which the KJV and ASV have interpreted as an imperative “Yet, return to me!” However, it is more likely that a question is intended, expressing surprise in the light of the law alluded to and the facts cited. For the use of the infinitive absolute in the place of a finite verb, cf. GKC 346 §113.ee. For the introduction of a question without a question marker, cf. GKC 473 §150.a.

[3:2]  ⁵ tn Heb “and see.”

[3:2]  ⁶ tn Heb “Where have you not been ravished?” The rhetorical question expects the answer “nowhere,” which suggests she has engaged in the worship of pagan gods on every one of the hilltops.

[3:2]  ⁷ tn Heb “You sat for them [the lovers, i.e., the foreign gods] beside the road like an Arab in the desert.”

[3:2]  ⁸ tn Heb “by your prostitution and your wickedness.” This is probably an example of hendiadys where, when two nouns are joined by “and,” one expresses the main idea and the other qualifies it.

[3:3]  ⁹ tn Heb “you have the forehead of a prostitute.”

[3:4]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “Have you not just now called out to me, ‘[you are] my father!’?” The rhetorical question expects a positive answer.

[3:5]  ¹¹ tn Heb “Will he keep angry forever? Will he maintain [it] to the end?” The questions are rhetorical and expect a negative answer. The change to direct address in the English translation is intended to ease the problem of the rapid transition, common in Hebrew style (but not in English), from second person direct address in the preceding lines to third person indirect address in these two lines. See GKC 462 §144.p.

[3:5]  ¹² tn Heb “You do the evil and you are able.” This is an example of hendiadys, meaning “You do all the evil that you are able to do.”

[3:6]  ¹³ tn “Have you seen…” The question is rhetorical and expects a positive answer.

[3:6]  ¹⁴ tn Heb “she played the prostitute there.” This is a metaphor for Israel’s worship; she gave herself to the worship of other gods like a prostitute gives herself to her lovers. There seems no clear way to completely spell out the metaphor in the translation.

[3:7]  ¹⁵ tn Or “I said to her, ‘Come back to me!’” The verb אָמַר (’amar) usually means “to say,” but here it means “to think,” of an assumption that turns out to be wrong (so HALOT 66.4 s.v. אמר); cf. Gen 44:28; Jer 3:19; Pss 82:6; 139:11; Job 29:18; Ruth 4:4; Lam 3:18.

[3:7]  ¹⁶ tn The words “what she did” are not in the text but are implicit from the context and are supplied in the translation for clarification.

[3:8]  ¹⁷ tc Heb “she [‘her sister, unfaithful Judah’ from the preceding verse] saw” with one Hebrew ms, some Greek mss, and the Syriac version. The MT reads “I saw” which may be a case of attraction to the verb at the beginning of the previous verse.

[3:8]  ¹⁸ tn Heb “because she committed adultery.” The translation is intended to spell out the significance of the metaphor.

[3:8]  ¹⁹ tn The words “Even after her unfaithful sister, Judah, had seen this” are not in the Hebrew text but are implicit in the connection and are supplied for clarification.

[3:8]  ²⁰ tn Heb “she played the prostitute there.” This is a metaphor for Israel’s worship; she gave herself to the worship of other gods like a prostitute gives herself to her lovers. There seems no clear way to completely spell out the metaphor in the translation.

[3:9]  ²¹ tc The translation reads the form as a causative (Hiphil, תַּהֲנֵף, tahanef) with some of the versions in place of the simple stative (Qal, תֶּחֱנַף, tekhenaf) in the MT.

[3:9]  ²² tn Heb “because of the lightness of her prostitution, she defiled the land and committed adultery with stone and wood.”

[3:10]  ²³ tn Heb “And even in all this.”

[3:10]  ²⁴ tn Heb “ has not turned back to me with all her heart but only in falsehood.”

[3:11]  ²⁵ tn Heb “Wayward Israel has proven herself to be more righteous than unfaithful Judah.”

[3:12]  ²⁶ tn Heb “Go and proclaim these words to the north.” The translation assumes that the message is directed toward the exiles of northern Israel who have been scattered in the provinces of Assyria to the north.

[3:12]  ²⁷ tn Heb “I will not cause my face to fall on you.”

[3:13]  ²⁸ tn Heb “Only acknowledge your iniquity.”

[3:13]  ²⁹ tn The words “You must confess” are repeated to convey the connection. The Hebrew text has an introductory “that” in front of the second line and a coordinative “and” in front of the next two lines.

[3:13]  ³⁰ tc MT reads דְּרָכַיִךְ (dÿrakhayikh, “your ways”), but the BHS editors suggest דּוֹדַיִךְ (dodayikh, “your breasts”) as an example of orthographic confusion. While the proposal makes sense, it remains a conjectural emendation since it is not supported by any actual manuscripts or ancient versions.

[3:14]  ³¹ tn Or “I am your true husband.”

[3:14]  ³² tn The words, “If you do” are not in the text but are implicit in the connection of the Hebrew verb with the preceding.

[3:15]  ³³ tn Heb “shepherds.”

[3:15]  ³⁴ tn Heb “after/according to my [own] heart.”

[3:16]  ³⁵ tn Heb “you will become numerous and fruitful.”

[3:16]  ³⁶ tn Or “chest.”

[3:16]  ³⁷ tn Heb “the ark of the covenant.” It is called this because it contained the tables of the law which in abbreviated form constituted their covenant obligations to the Lord, cf. Exod 31:18; 32:15; 34:29.

[3:16]  ³⁸ tn Or “Nor will another one be made”; Heb “one will not do/make [it?] again.”

[3:17]  ³⁹ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[3:17]  ⁴⁰ tn Heb “will gather to the name of the Lord.”

[3:17]  ⁴¹ tn Heb “the stubbornness of their evil hearts.”

[3:18]  ⁴² tn Heb “In those days.”

[3:18]  ⁴³ tn Heb “the house of Judah will walk together with the house of Israel.”

[3:18]  ⁴⁴ tn Heb “the land that I gave your [fore]fathers as an inheritance.”

[3:19]  ⁴⁵ tn Heb “I, myself, said.” See note on “I thought that she might come back to me” in 3:7.

[3:19]  ⁴⁶ tn Heb “How I would place you among the sons.” Israel appears to be addressed here contextually as the Lord’s wife (see the next verse). The pronouns of address in the first two lines are second feminine singular as are the readings of the two verbs preferred by the Masoretes (the Qere readings) in the third and fourth lines. The verbs that are written in the text in the third and fourth lines (the Kethib readings) are second masculine plural as is the verb describing Israel’s treachery in the next verse.

[3:19]  ⁴⁷ tn The words “What a joy it would be for me to” are not in the Hebrew text but are implied in the parallel structure.

[3:19]  ⁴⁸ tn Heb “the most beautiful heritage among the nations.”

[3:19]  ⁴⁹ tn Heb “my father.”

[3:19]  ⁵⁰ tn Heb “turn back from [following] after me.”

[3:20]  ⁵¹ tn Heb “house of Israel.”

[3:20]  ⁵² tn Heb “a wife unfaithful from her husband.”

[3:21]  ⁵³ tn Heb “A sound is heard on the hilltops, the weeping of the supplication of the children of Israel because [or indeed] they have perverted their way.” At issue here is whether the supplication is made to Yahweh in repentance because of what they have done or whether it is supplication to the pagan gods which is evidence of their perverted ways. The reference in this verse to the hilltops where idolatry was practiced according to 3:2 and the reference to Israel’s unfaithfulness in the preceding verse make the latter more likely. For the asseverative use of the Hebrew particle (here rendered “indeed”) where the particle retains some of the explicative nuance; cf. BDB 472-73 s.v. כִּי 1.e and 3.c.

[3:21]  ⁵⁴ tn Heb “have forgotten the Lord their God,” but in the view of the parallelism and the context, the word “forget” (like “know” and “remember”) involves more than mere intellectual activity.

[3:22]  ⁵⁵ tn Or “I will forgive your apostasies.” Heb “I will [or want to] heal your apostasies.” For the use of the verb “heal” (רָפָא, rafa’) to refer to spiritual healing and forgiveness see Hos 14:4.

[3:22]  ⁵⁶ tn Or “They say.” There is an obvious ellipsis of a verb of saying here since the preceding words are those of the Lord and the following are those of the people. However, there is debate about whether these are the response of the people to the Lord’s invitation, a response which is said to be inadequate according to the continuation in 4:1-4, or whether these are the Lord’s model for Israel’s confession of repentance to which he adds further instructions about the proper heart attitude that should accompany it in 4:1-4. The former implies a dialogue with an unmarked twofold shift in speaker between 3:22b-25 and 4:1-4:4 while the latter assumes the same main speaker throughout with an unmarked instruction only in 3:22b-25. This disrupts the flow of the passage less and appears more likely.

[3:23]  ⁵⁷ tn Heb “Truly in vain from the hills the noise/commotion [and from] the mountains.” The syntax of the Hebrew sentence is very elliptical here.

[3:23]  ⁵⁸ tn Heb “Truly in the Lord our God is deliverance for Israel.”

[3:24]  ⁵⁹ tn Heb “From our youth the shameful thing has eaten up…” The shameful thing is specifically identified as Baal in Jer 11:13. Compare also the shift in certain names such as Ishbaal (“man of Baal”) to Ishbosheth (“man of shame”).

[3:24]  ⁶⁰ tn Heb “fathers” (also in v. 25).

[3:25]  ⁶¹ tn Heb “Let us lie down in….”

[3:25]  ⁶² tn Heb “Let us be covered with disgrace.”

[4:1]  ⁶³ tn Or “If you, Israel, want to turn [away from your shameful ways (those described in 3:23-25)]…then you must turn back to me.” Or perhaps, “Israel, you must turn back…Yes, you must turn back to me.”

[4:1]  ⁶⁴ tn Heb “disgusting things.”

[4:1]  ⁶⁵ tn Or possibly, “If you get those disgusting idols out of my sight, you will not need to flee.” This is less probable because the normal meaning of the last verb is “to wander,” “ to stray.”

[4:2]  ⁶⁶ tn Heb “If you [= you must, see the translator’s note on the word “do” later in this verse] swear/take an oath, ‘As the Lord lives,’ in truth, justice, and righteousness…”

[4:2]  ⁶⁷ tn 4:1-2a consists of a number of “if” clauses, two of which are formally introduced by the Hebrew particle אִם (’im) while the others are introduced by the conjunction “and,” followed by a conjunction (“and” = “then”) with a perfect in 4:2b which introduces the consequence. The translation “You must…. If you do,” was chosen to avoid a long and complicated sentence.

[4:2]  ⁶⁸ tn Heb “bless themselves in him and make their boasts in him.”

[4:3]  ⁶⁹ tn The Hebrew particle is obviously asseverative here since a causal connection appears to make little sense.

[4:3]  ⁷⁰ tn Heb “Plow up your unplowed ground and do not sow among the thorns.” The translation is an attempt to bring out the force of a metaphor. The idea seems to be that they are to plow over the thorns and make the ground ready for the seeds which will produce a new crop where none had been produced before.

[4:4]  ⁷¹ tn Heb “Circumcise yourselves to the Lord and remove the foreskin of your heart.” The translation is again an attempt to bring out the meaning of a metaphor. The mention of the “foreskin of the heart” shows that the passage is obviously metaphorical and involves heart attitude, not an external rite.

[4:4]  ⁷² tn Heb “lest.”

[4:5]  ⁷³ tn The words “The Lord said” are not in the text, but it is obvious from v. 6 and v. 9 that he is the speaker. These words are supplied in the translation for clarity.

[4:5]  ⁷⁴ tn It is unclear who the addressees of the masculine plural imperatives are here. They may be the citizens of Jerusalem and Judah who are sounding the alarm to others. However, the first person reference to the Lord in v. 6 and Jeremiah’s response in v. 10 suggest that this is a word from the Lord that he is commanded to pass on to the citizens of Jerusalem and Judah. If the imperatives are not merely rhetorical plurals they may reflect the practice referred to in Jer 23:18, 22; Amos 3:7. A similar phenomenon also occurs in Jer 5:1 and also in Isa 40:1-2. This may also be the explanation for the plural imperatives in Jer 31:6. For further discussion see the translator’s note on Jer 5:1.

[4:5]  ⁷⁵ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[4:5]  ⁷⁶ tn Heb “ram’s horn,” but the modern equivalent is “trumpet” and is more readily understandable.

[4:6]  ⁷⁷ tn Heb “Raise up a signal toward Zion.”

[4:6]  ⁷⁸ tn Heb “out of the north, even great destruction.”

[4:7]  ⁷⁹ tn Heb “A lion has left its lair.” The metaphor is turned into a simile for clarification. The word translated “lair” has also been understood to refer to a hiding place. However, it appears to be cognate in meaning to the word translated “lair” in Ps 10:9; Jer 25:38, a word which also refers to the abode of the Lord in Ps 76:3.

[4:7]  ⁸⁰ tn Heb “his place.”

[4:8]  ⁸¹ tn Or “wail because the fierce anger of the Lord has not turned away from us.” The translation does not need to assume a shift in speaker as the alternate reading does.

[4:9]  ⁸² tn Heb “In that day.”

[4:10]  ⁸³ tn The words “In response to all this” are not in the text but are supplied in the translation to clarify the connection.

[4:10]  ⁸⁴ tn Heb “Lord Yahweh.” The translation follows the ancient Jewish tradition of substituting the Hebrew word for God for the proper name Yahweh.

[4:10]  ⁸⁵ tn Or “You have deceived.” The Hiphil of נָשָׁא (nasha’, “to deceive”) is understood in a tolerative sense here: “to allow [someone] to be deceived.” IBHS 446 §27.5c notes that this function of the hiphil describes caused activity that is welcome to the undersubject, but unacceptable or disagreeable to a third party. Jerusalem and Judah welcomed the assurances of false prophets who deceived them. Although this was detestable to God, he allowed it.

[4:10]  ⁸⁶ tn Heb “this people and Jerusalem.”

[4:10]  ⁸⁷ tn Heb “Jerusalem, saying, ‘You will have peace’”; or “You have deceived the people of Judah and Jerusalem, saying, ‘You will have peace.’” The words “you will be safe” are, of course, those of the false prophets (cf., Jer 6:14; 8:11; 14:13; 23:16-17). It is difficult to tell whether the charge here is meant literally as the emotional outburst of the prophet (compare for example, Jer 15:18) or whether it is to be understood as a figure of speech in which a verb of direct causation is to be understood as permissive or tolerative, i.e., God did not command the prophets to say this but allowed them to do so. While it is not beyond God to use false prophets to accomplish his will (cf., e.g., 1 Kgs 22:19-23), he elsewhere in the book of Jeremiah directly denies having sent the false prophets to say such things as this (cf., e.g., Jer 14:14-15; 23:21, 32). For examples of the use of this figure of speech, see E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 571, 823 and compare Ezek 20:25. The translation given attempts to resolve the issue.

[4:10]  ⁸⁸ tn Heb “touches the throat/soul.” For this use of the word usually translated “soul” or “life” cf. HALOT 672 s.v. נֶפֶשׁ 1, 2 and compare the use in Ps 105:18.

[4:11]  ⁸⁹ tn Heb “this people and Jerusalem.”

[4:11]  ⁹⁰ tn Heb “A scorching wind from the hilltops in the desert toward…”

[4:11]  ⁹¹ tn Heb “daughter of my people.” The term “daughter of” is appositional to “my people” and is supplied in the translation as a term of sympathy and endearment. Compare the common expression “daughter of Zion.”

[4:11]  ⁹² tn Heb “not for winnowing and not for cleansing.” The words “It will not be a gentle breeze” are not in the text but are implicit in the connection. They are supplied in the translation here for clarification.

[4:12]  ⁹³ tn The word “No” is not in the text but is carried over from the connection with the preceding line “not for…”

[4:12]  ⁹⁴ tn Heb “will speak judgments against them.”

[4:13]  ⁹⁵ tn Heb “he is coming up like clouds.” The words “The enemy” are supplied in the translation to identify the referent and the word “gathering” is supplied to try to convey the significance of the simile, i.e., that of quantity and of an approaching storm.

[4:13]  ⁹⁶ tn Heb “his chariots [are] like a whirlwind.” The words “roar” and “sound” are supplied in the translation to clarify the significance of the simile.

[4:13]  ⁹⁷ tn The words “I cry out” are not in the text, but the words that follow are obviously not the Lord’s. They are either those of the people or of Jeremiah. Taking them as Jeremiah’s parallels the interjection of Jeremiah’s response in 4:10 which is formally introduced.

[4:13]  ⁹⁸ tn Heb “Woe to us!” The words “woe to” are common in funeral laments and at the beginning of oracles of judgment. In many contexts they carry the connotation of hopelessness or apprehensiveness of inevitable doom.

[4:14]  ⁹⁹ tn Heb “Oh, Jerusalem, wash your heart from evil.”

[4:15]  ¹⁰⁰ tn Heb “For a voice declaring from Dan and making heard disaster from the hills of Ephraim.”

[4:16]  ¹⁰¹ tn The words “They are saying” are not in the text but are implicit in the connection and are supplied in the translation for clarification.

[4:16]  ¹⁰² tn The word “surrounding” is not in the text but is implicit and is supplied in the translation for clarification.

[4:16]  ¹⁰³ tc Or “Here they come!” Heb “Look!” or “Behold!” Or “Announce to the surrounding nations, indeed [or yes] proclaim to Jerusalem, ‘Besiegers…’” The text is very elliptical here. Some of the modern English versions appear to be emending the text from הִנֵּה (hinneh, “behold”) to either הֵנָּה (hennah, “these things”; so NEB), or הַזֶּה (hazzeh, “this”; so NIV). The solution proposed here is as old as the LXX which reads, “Behold, they have come.”

[4:16]  ¹⁰⁴ tn The words, “this message,” are not in the text but are supplied in the translation to make the introduction of the quote easier.

[4:16]  ¹⁰⁵ tn Heb “Besiegers.” For the use of this verb to refer to besieging a city compare Isa 1:8.

[4:16]  ¹⁰⁶ tn Heb “They have raised their voices against.” The verb here, a vav (ו) consecutive with an imperfect, continues the nuance of the preceding participle “are coming.”

[4:17]  ¹⁰⁷ tn Heb “will surround her.” The antecedent is Jerusalem in the preceding verse. The referent is again made explicit in the translation to avoid any possible lack of clarity. The verb form here is a form of the verb that emphasizes the fact as being as good as done (i.e., it is a prophetic perfect).

[4:17]  ¹⁰⁸ sn There is some irony involved in the choice of the simile since the men guarding a field were there to keep thieves from getting in and stealing the crops. Here the besiegers are guarding the city to keep people from getting out.

[4:18]  ¹⁰⁹ tn Heb “Your way and your deeds.”

[4:18]  ¹¹⁰ tn Heb “How bitter!”

[4:18]  ¹¹¹ tn Heb “Indeed, it reaches to your heart.” The subject must be the pain alluded to in the last half of the preceding line; the verb is masculine, agreeing with the adjective translated “painful.” The only other possible antecedent “punishment” is feminine.

[4:19]  ¹¹² tn The words “I said” are not in the text. They are used to mark the shift from the Lord’s promise of judgment to Jeremiah’s lament concerning it.

[4:19]  ¹¹³ tn Heb “My bowels! My bowels!”

[4:19]  ¹¹⁴ tn Heb “the walls of my heart!”

[4:19]  ¹¹⁵ tn Heb “ram’s horn,” but the modern equivalent is “trumpet” and is more readily understandable.

[4:19]  ¹¹⁶ tc The translation reflects a different division of the last two lines than that suggested by the Masoretes. The written text (the Kethib) reads “for the sound of the ram’s horn I have heard [or “you have heard,” if the form is understood as the old second feminine singular perfect] my soul” followed by “the battle cry” in the last line. The translation is based on taking “my soul” with the last line and understanding an elliptical expression “the battle cry [to] my soul.” Such an elliptical expression is in keeping with the elliptical nature of the exclamations at the beginning of the verse (cf. the literal translations of the first two lines of the verse in the notes on the words “stomach” and “heart”).

[4:20]  ¹¹⁷ tn The words, “I see” are not in the text here or at the beginning of the third line. They are supplied in the translation to show that this is Jeremiah’s vision of what will happen as a result of the invasion announced in 4:5-9, 11-17a.

[4:20]  ¹¹⁸ tn Heb “my.” This is probably not a reference to Jeremiah’s own tents since he foresees the destruction of the whole land. Jeremiah so identifies with the plight of his people that he sees the destruction of their tents as though they were his very own. It would probably lead to confusion to translate literally and it is not uncommon in Hebrew laments for the community or its representative to speak of the community as an “I.” See for example the interchange between first singular and first plural pronouns in Ps 44:4-8.

[4:20]  ¹¹⁹ tn Heb “my.”

[4:20]  ¹²⁰ tn It is not altogether clear what Jeremiah intends by the use of this metaphor. In all likelihood he means that the defenses of Israel’s cities and towns have offered no more resistance than nomads’ tents. However, in light of the fact that the word “tent” came to be used generically for a person’s home (cf. 1 Kgs 8:66; 12:16), it is possible that Jeremiah is here referring to the destruction of their homes and the resultant feeling of homelessness and loss of even elementary protection. Given the lack of certainty the present translation is rather literal here.

[4:21]  ¹²¹ tn Heb “the sound of ram’s horns,” but the modern equivalent is “bugles” and is more readily understandable.

[4:22]  ¹²² tn These words are not in the text but are supplied in the translation to show clearly the shift in speaker. Jeremiah has been speaking; now the Lord answers, giving the reason for the devastation Jeremiah foresees.

[4:22]  ¹²³ tn Heb “For….” This gives the explanation for the destruction envisaged in 4:20 to which Jeremiah responds in 4:19, 21.

[4:22]  ¹²⁴ tn Heb “They are senseless children.”

[4:23]  ¹²⁵ tn Heb “I looked at the land and behold...” This indicates the visionary character of Jeremiah’s description of the future condition of the land of Israel.

[4:23]  ¹²⁶ tn Heb “formless and empty.” This is a case of hendiadys (two nouns joined by “and” both describe the same thing): one noun retains its full nominal force, the other functions as an adjective. The words תֹהוּ וָבֹהוּ (tohu vavohu) allude to Gen 1:2, hyperbolically picturing a reversal of creation and return to the original precreation chaos.

[4:25]  ¹²⁷ tn Heb “there was no man/human being.”

[4:26]  ¹²⁸ tn Heb “because of the Lord, because of his blazing anger.”

[4:27]  ¹²⁹ tn Heb “For this is what the Lord said,”

[4:28]  ¹³⁰ sn The earth and the heavens are personified here and depicted in the act of mourning and wearing black clothes because of the destruction of the land of Israel.

[4:28]  ¹³¹ tn Heb “has spoken and purposed.” This is an example of hendiadys where two verbs are joined by “and” but one is meant to serve as a modifier of the other.

[4:28]  ¹³² tn Heb “will not turn back from it.”

[4:30]  ¹³³ tn Heb “And you that are doomed to destruction.” The referent is supplied from the following context and the fact that Zion/Jerusalem represents the leadership which was continually making overtures to foreign nations for help.

[4:30]  ¹³⁴ tn Heb “What are you accomplishing…?” The rhetorical question assumes a negative answer, made clear by the translation in the indicative.

[4:30]  ¹³⁵ tn Heb “clothing yourself in scarlet.”

[4:30]  ¹³⁶ tn Heb “enlarging your eyes with antimony.” Antimony was a black powder used by women as eyeliner to make their eyes look larger.

[4:30]  ¹³⁷ tn Heb “they seek your life.”

[4:31]  ¹³⁸ tn The particle כִּי (ki) is more likely asseverative here than causal.

[4:31]  ¹³⁹ sn Jerusalem is personified as a helpless maiden.

[4:31]  ¹⁴⁰ tn Heb “spreading out her hands.” The idea of asking or pleading for help is implicit in the figure.

[4:31]  ¹⁴¹ tn Heb “Woe, now to me!” See the translator’s note on 4:13 for the usage of “Woe to…”

[5:1]  ¹⁴² tn These words are not in the text, but since the words at the end are obviously those of the Lord, they are supplied in the translation here to mark the shift in speaker from 4:29-31 where Jeremiah is the obvious speaker.

[5:1]  ¹⁴³ tn It is not clear who is being addressed here. The verbs are plural so they are not addressed to Jeremiah per se. Since the passage is talking about the people of Jerusalem, it is unlikely they are addressed here except perhaps rhetorically. Some have suggested that the heavenly court is being addressed here as in Job 1:6-8; 2:1-3. It is clear from Jer 23:18, 22; Amos 3:7 that the prophets had access to this heavenly counsel through visions (cf. 1 Kgs 22:19-23), so Jeremiah could have been privy to this speech through that means. Though these are the most likely addressee, it is too presumptuous to supply such an explicit addressee without clearer indication in the text. The translation will just have to run the risk of the probable erroneous assumption by most English readers that the addressee is Jeremiah.

[5:1]  ¹⁴⁴ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[5:1]  ¹⁴⁵ tn Heb “who does justice and seeks faithfulness.”

[5:1]  ¹⁴⁶ tn Heb “squares. If you can find…if there is one person…then I will…”

[5:1]  ¹⁴⁷ tn Heb “forgive [or pardon] it.”

[5:2]  ¹⁴⁸ tn Heb “Though they say, ‘As surely as the Lord lives.” The idea of “swear on oath” comes from the second line.

[5:2]  ¹⁴⁹ tc The translation follows many Hebrew mss and the Syriac version in reading “surely” (אָכֵן, ’akhen) instead of “therefore” (לָכֵן, lakhen) in the MT.

[5:2]  ¹⁵⁰ tn Heb “they swear falsely.”

[5:3]  ¹⁵¹ tn Heb “O Lord, are your eyes not to faithfulness?” The question is rhetorical and expects a positive answer.

[5:3]  ¹⁵² tn Commentaries and lexicons debate the meaning of the verb here. The MT is pointed as though from a verb meaning “to writhe in anguish or contrition” (חוּל [khul]; see, e.g., BDB 297 s.v. חוּל 2.c), but some commentaries and lexicons repoint the text as though from a verb meaning “to be sick,” thus “to feel pain” (חָלָה [khalah]; see, e.g., HALOT 304 s.v. חָלָה 3). The former appears more appropriate to the context.

[5:3]  ¹⁵³ tn Heb “They made their faces as hard as a rock.”

[5:3]  ¹⁵⁴ tn Or “to repent”; Heb “to turn back.”

[5:4]  ¹⁵⁵ tn Heb “Surely they are poor.” The translation is intended to make clear the explicit contrasts and qualifications drawn in this verse and the next.

[5:4]  ¹⁵⁶ tn Heb “the way of the Lord.”

[5:4]  ¹⁵⁷ tn Heb “the judgment [or ordinance] of their God.”

[5:5]  ¹⁵⁸ tn Or “people in power”; Heb “the great ones.”

[5:5]  ¹⁵⁹ tn Heb “the way of the Lord.”

[5:5]  ¹⁶⁰ tn Heb “the judgment [or ordinance] of their God.”

[5:5]  ¹⁶¹ tn Heb “have broken the yoke and torn off the yoke ropes.” Compare Jer 2:20 and the note there.

[5:6]  ¹⁶² tn Heb “So a lion from the thicket will kill them. A wolf from the desert will destroy them. A leopard will watch outside their cities. Anyone who goes out from them will be torn in pieces.” However, it is unlikely that, in the context of judgment that Jeremiah has previously been describing, literal lions are meant. The animals are metaphorical for their enemies. Compare Jer 4:7.

[5:6]  ¹⁶³ tn Heb “their rebellions are so many and their unfaithful acts so numerous.”

[5:7]  ¹⁶⁴ tn These words are not in the text, but are supplied in the translation to make clear who is speaking.

[5:7]  ¹⁶⁵ tn Heb “How can I forgive [or pardon] you.” The pronoun “you” is second feminine singular, referring to the city. See v. 1.

[5:7]  ¹⁶⁶ tn Heb “your children.”

[5:7]  ¹⁶⁷ tn Heb “and they have sworn [oaths] by not-gods.”

[5:7]  ¹⁶⁸ tn Heb “I satisfied them to the full.”

[5:7]  ¹⁶⁹ tn Heb “they committed adultery.” It is difficult to decide whether literal adultery with other women or spiritual adultery with other gods is meant. The word for adultery is used for both in the book of Jeremiah. For examples of its use for spiritual adultery see 3:8, 9; 9:2. For examples of its use for literal adultery see 7:9; 23:14. The context here could argue for either. The swearing by other gods and the implicit contradiction in their actions in contrast to the expected gratitude for supplying their needs argues for spiritual adultery. However, the reference to prostitution in the next line and the reference to chasing after their neighbor’s wives argues for literal adultery. The translation opts for spiritual adultery because of the contrast implicit in the concessive clause.

[5:7]  ¹⁷⁰ tn There is a great deal of debate about the meaning of this word. Most of the modern English versions follow the lead of lexicographers who relate this word to a noun meaning “troop” and understand it to mean “they trooped together” (cf. BDB 151 s.v. גָּדַד Hithpo.2 and compare the usage in Mic 5:1 [4:14 HT]). A few of the modern English versions and commentaries follow the reading of the Greek and read a word meaning “they lodged” (reading ִיתְגּוֹרְרוּ [yitggorÿru] from I גּוּר [gur; cf. HALOT 177 s.v. Hithpo. and compare the usage in 1 Kgs 17:20] instead of יִתְגֹּדָדוּ [yitggodadu]). W. L. Holladay (Jeremiah [Hermeneia], 1:180) sees a reference here to the cultic practice of cutting oneself in supplication to pagan gods (cf. BDB 151 s.v. גָּדַד Hithpo.1 and compare the usage in 1 Kgs 18:28). The houses of prostitutes would then be a reference to ritual prostitutes at the pagan shrines. The translation follows BDB and the majority of modern English versions.

[5:7]  ¹⁷¹ tn Heb “to a house of a prostitute.”

[5:8]  ¹⁷² tn The meanings of these two adjectives are uncertain. The translation of the first adjective is based on assuming that the word is a defectively written participle related to the noun “testicle” (a Hiphil participle מַאֲשִׁכִים [ma’ashikhim] from a verb related to אֶשֶׁךְ [’eshekh, “testicle”]; cf. Lev 21:20) and hence “having testicles” (cf. HALOT 1379 s.v. שָׁכָה) instead of the Masoretic form מַשְׁכִּים (mashkim) from a root שָׁכָה (shakhah), which is otherwise unattested in either verbal or nominal forms. The second adjective is best derived from a verb root meaning “to feed” (a Hophal participle מוּזָנִים [muzanim, the Kethib] from a root זוּן [zun; cf. BDB 266 s.v. זוּן] for which there is the cognate noun מָזוֹן [mazon; cf. 2 Chr 11:23]). This is more likely than the derivation from a root יָזַן ([yazan]reading מְיֻזָּנִים [mÿyuzzanim], a Pual participle with the Qere) which is otherwise unattested in verbal or nominal forms and whose meaning is dependent only on a supposed Arabic cognate (cf. HALOT 387 s.v. יָזַן).

[5:8]  ¹⁷³ tn Heb “neighs after.”

[5:9]  ¹⁷⁴ tn Heb “Should I not punish them…? Should I not bring retribution…?” The rhetorical questions have the force of strong declarations.

[5:10]  ¹⁷⁵ tn These words to not appear in the Hebrew text but have been added in the translation for the sake of clarity to identify the implied addressee.

[5:10]  ¹⁷⁶ tn Heb “through her vine rows and destroy.” No object is given but “vines” must be implicit. The word for “vineyards” (or “vine rows”) is a hapax legomenon and its derivation is debated. BDB 1004 s.v. שּׁוּרָה repoints שָׁרוֹתֶיהָ (sharoteha) to שֻׁרוֹתֶיהָ (shuroteha) and relates it to a Mishnaic Hebrew and Palestinian Aramaic word meaning “row.” HALOT 1348 s.v. שּׁוּרָה also repoints to שֻׁרוֹתֶיהָ and relates it to a noun meaning “wall,” preferring to see the reference here to the walled terraces on which the vineyards were planted. The difference in meaning is minimal.

[5:10]  ¹⁷⁷ tn Heb “for they do not belong to the Lord.” In the light of the context and Jeremiah’s identification of Israel as a vine (cf., e.g., 2:21) and a vineyard (cf., e.g., 12:10), it is likely that this verse has a totally metaphorical significance. The enemy is to go through the vineyard that is Israel and Judah and destroy all those who have been unfaithful to the Lord. It is not impossible, however, that the verse has a double meaning, a literal one and a figurative one: the enemy is not only to destroy Israel and Judah’s vines but to destroy Israel and Judah, lopping off the wicked Israelites who, because of their covenant unfaithfulness, the Lord has disowned. If the verse is totally metaphorical one might translate: “Pass through my vineyard, Israel and Judah, wreaking destruction. But do not destroy all of the people. Cut down like branches those unfaithful people because they no longer belong to the Lord.”

[5:11]  ¹⁷⁸ tn Heb “the house of Israel and the house of Judah.”

[5:12]  ¹⁷⁹ tn Heb “have denied the Lord.” The words “What…says” are implicit in what follows.

[5:12]  ¹⁸⁰ tn Or “he will do nothing”; Heb “Not he [or it]!”

[5:12]  ¹⁸¹ tn Heb “we will not see the sword and famine.”

[5:13]  ¹⁸² tn Heb “will be wind.”

[5:13]  ¹⁸³ tc Heb “the word is not in them.” The MT has a highly unusual form here, the Piel perfect with the definite article (הַדִּבֵּר, haddibber). It is undoubtedly best to read with the LXX (Greek version) and one Hebrew ms the article on the noun (הַדָּבָר, haddavar).

[5:14]  ¹⁸⁴ tn Heb “Therefore.”

[5:14]  ¹⁸⁵ tn Heb “The Lord God of armies.” See the translator’s note at 2:19.

[5:14]  ¹⁸⁶ tn The words, “to me” are not in the text but are implicit in the connection. They are supplied in the translation for clarification.

[5:14]  ¹⁸⁷ tn Heb “you have spoken.” The text here דַּבֶּרְכֶם (dabberkhem, “you have spoken”) is either a case of a scribal error for דַּבֶּרָם (dabberam, “they have spoken”) or an example of the rapid shift in addressee which is common in Jeremiah.

[5:14]  ¹⁸⁸ tn Heb “this word.”

[5:14]  ¹⁸⁹ tn Heb “like wood and it [i.e., the fire I put in your mouth] will consume them.”

[5:15]  ¹⁹⁰ tn Heb “oracle of the Lord.”

[5:15]  ¹⁹¹ tn Heb “Behold!”

[5:15]  ¹⁹² tn Heb “house of Israel.”

[5:16]  ¹⁹³ tn Heb “All of them are mighty warriors.”

[5:16]  ¹⁹⁴ tn Heb “his quiver [is] an open grave.” The order of the lines has been reversed to make the transition from “nation” to “their arrows” easier.

[5:17]  ¹⁹⁵ tn Heb “eat up.”

[5:17]  ¹⁹⁶ tn Or “eat up your grapes and figs”; Heb “eat up your vines and your fig trees.”

[5:17]  ¹⁹⁷ tn Heb “They will beat down with the sword.” The term “sword” is a figure of speech (synecdoche) for military weapons in general. Siege ramps, not swords, beat down city walls; swords kill people, not city walls.

[5:18]  ¹⁹⁸ tn Heb “in those days.”

[5:19]  ¹⁹⁹ tn The word, “Jeremiah,” is not in the text but the second person address in the second half of the verse is obviously to him. The word is supplied in the translation here for clarity.

[5:19]  ²⁰⁰ tn The MT reads the second masculine plural; this is probably a case of attraction to the second masculine plural pronoun in the preceding line. An alternative would be to understand a shift from speaking first to the people in the first half of the verse and then speaking to Jeremiah in the second half where the verb is second masculine singular. E.g., “When you [people] say, “Why…?” then you, Jeremiah, tell them…”

[5:19]  ²⁰¹ tn Heb “As you left me and…, so you will….” The translation was chosen so as to break up a rather long and complex sentence.

[5:19]  ²⁰² sn This is probably a case of deliberate ambiguity (double entendre). The adjective “foreigners” is used for both foreign people (so Jer 30:8; 51:51) and foreign gods (so Jer 2:25; 3:13). See also Jer 16:13 for the idea of having to serve other gods in the lands of exile.

[5:20]  ²⁰³ sn The verbs are second plural here. Jeremiah, speaking for the Lord, addresses his people, calling on them to make the message further known.

[5:20]  ²⁰⁴ tn Heb “in the house of Jacob.”

[5:21]  ²⁰⁵ tn Heb “they have eyes but they do not see, they have ears but they do not hear.”

[5:22]  ²⁰⁶ tn Heb “Should you not fear me? Should you not tremble in awe before me?” The rhetorical questions expect the answer explicit in the translation.

[5:22]  ²⁰⁷ tn Heb “it.” The referent is made explicit to avoid any possible confusion.

[5:23]  ²⁰⁸ tn The words, “their own way” are not in the text but are implicit and are supplied in the translation for clarity.

[5:24]  ²⁰⁹ tn Heb “say in their hearts.”

[5:24]  ²¹⁰ tn Heb “who keeps for us the weeks appointed for harvest.”

[5:25]  ²¹¹ tn Heb “have turned these things away.”

[5:25]  ²¹² tn Heb “have withheld the good from you.”

[5:26]  ²¹³ tn The meaning of the last three words is uncertain. The pointing and meaning of the Hebrew word rendered “hiding in ambush” is debated. BDB relates the form (כְּשַׁךְ, kÿshakh) to a root שָׁכַךְ (shakhakh), which elsewhere means “decrease, abate” (cf. BDB 1013 s.v. שָׁכַךְ), and notes that this is usually understood as “like the crouching of fowlers,” but they say this meaning is dubious. HALOT 1345 s.v. I שׁוֹר questions the validity of the text and offers three proposals; the second appears to create the least textual modification, i.e., reading כְּשַׂךְ (kesakh, “as in the hiding place of (bird catchers)”; for the word שַׂךְ (sakh) see HALOT 1236 s.v. שׂךְ 4 and compare Lam 2:6 for usage. The versions do not help. The Greek does not translate the first two words of the line. The proposal given in HALOT is accepted with some hesitancy.

[5:26]  ²¹⁴ tn Heb “a destroying thing.”

[5:27]  ²¹⁵ tn The words, “that have been caught” are not in the text but are implicit in the comparison.

[5:27]  ²¹⁶ tn Heb “are filled with deceit.” The translation assumes a figure of speech of cause for effect (metonymy). Compare the same word in the same figure in Zeph 1:9.

[5:27]  ²¹⁷ tn Heb “therefore they have gotten great and rich.”

[5:28]  ²¹⁸ tn These words are not in the text but are supplied in the translation to show that this line is parallel with the preceding.

[5:28]  ²¹⁹ tn The meaning of this word is uncertain. This verb occurs only here. The lexicons generally relate it to the word translated “plate” in Song 5:14 and understand it to mean “smooth, shiny” (so BDB 799 s.v. I עֶשֶׁת) or “fat” (so HALOT 850 s.v. II עֶשֶׁת). The word in Song 5:14 more likely means “smooth” than “plate” (so TEV). So “sleek” is most likely here.

[5:28]  ²²⁰ tn Heb “they cross over/transgress with respect to matters of evil.”

[5:29]  ²²¹ tn Heb “Should I not punish…? Should I not bring retribution…?” The rhetorical questions function as emphatic declarations.

[5:31]  ²²² tn Heb “they shall rule at their hands.” Since the word “hand” can be used figuratively for authority or mean “side” and the pronoun “them” can refer to the priests themselves or the prophets, the following translations have also been suggested: “the priests rule under their [the prophets’] directions,” or “the priests rule in league with them [the prophets].” From the rest of the book it would appear that the prophets did not exercise authority over the priests nor did they exercise the same authority over the people that the priests did. Hence it probably mean “by their own hand/power/authority.”

[5:31]  ²²³ tn Heb “But what will you do at its end?” The rhetorical question implies a negative answer: “Nothing!”