Jeremiah 36

This chapter belongs to the fourth and fifth years of Jehoiakim (verses 1, 9). The Lord directs Jeremiah to write all his prophecies into one roll or volume. The prophet employs Baruch as his amanuensis; then sends him to read these prophecies before all the people who might convene in the Temple on a day of public fasting. Micaiah heard this public reading, and reported what he heard to the princes. They sent for Baruch to bring the volume and read to them. He did so. They thought the king ought to hear this book, and notified him accordingly. The king sent Jehudi for the book. He brought it, and read a few leaves; whereupon the king took the book from him, cut it up with his penknife and burned it all in the fire. The Lord directs Jeremiah to write out all those prophecies again, which he did, “adding also many like words;” and also announced from the Lord the fearful doom of this impious king. H. C.

The victory of Carchemish (606 or 605 B.C.) was gained by the Babylonian army in the fourth year of Jehoiakim (Jer. 46:2), and it was in the same fourth year of his reign that Jeremiah made Baruch write in a book his prophetic denunciations of judgment (Jer. 36:1). The conjunction of these two events is deeply significant. What followed can be easily understood. As Nebuchadnezzar advanced toward Palestine (2 K. 24:1), in the fifth year of the reign of Jehoiakim, the Jewish king, in abject fear, proclaimed a national fast (Jer. 36:9). Whether this was done from superstition, or for the sake of popular effect, or else in hope of conciliating the prophet and his adherents, certain it is that the professed repentance was hypocritical. The Book of Jeremiah’s prophecies, which Baruch had publicly read on that occasion, was cut in pieces by the king himself, and thrown on the fire (Jer. 36:22, 23). Jeremiah and Baruch only escaped imprisonment, if not death, by timely concealment. Nevertheless, Nebuchadnezzar appeared in Jerusalem. Jehoiakim, who would be regarded as a vassal of Egypt, was bound in fetters, with the intention of being carried to Babylon. This, however, was not done—perhaps because of the summons which rapidly recalled Nebuchadnezzar to Babylon. But the vessels of the Temple were sent to Babylon, and placed, first in the victor’s palace, and then in the temple of his god—probably Belmerodach or Belus. A. E.

3. It may be that the house of Judah will hear.** In many places God is represented as speaking after the manner of men, and using such methods as in human probability may be most likely to prevail. These and such-like expressions likewise import that God’s foreknowledge of future events doth not put any force upon men’s will, nor take away the liberty of human actions, as Origen hath acutely observed. W. Lowth.—The writing of the Scripture is by Divine appointment. And observe the reason here given for the writing of this roll—it may be the house of Judah will hear. Not that the Divine prescience was at any uncertainty concerning the event; with that there is no peradventure. And though God foresaw that they would not hear, He did not tell the prophet so, but prescribed this method to him as a probable one to be used, in the hopes that they would hear—that is, heed and regard what they heard. H.

The preparation of the roll and its reading was the act of Divine love, which plainly tells of evil in order that it may not be forced to inflict evil. That is strongly put in verse 3, which represents God as declaring that the purpose of the roll is that Judah, hearing the evil which He purposes to do to them, may turn from the evil which they have done toward

Him, and that so it may be possible for God to forgive them. No greater proof of God’s love can be given than the plainest warning of the certain fall of His judgments. Jehoiakim and his modern successors made a fatal mistake when they fancy that the roll, which tells of punishment, is anything else than a token of love. The retribution is predicted that it may never be experienced; and none would have been so glad as Jeremiah would have been if all his prophecies had remained unfulfilled because they had done their work. None on earth would have been so glad, but there would have been greater gladness in the presence of the angels of heaven, if God’s word had returned so blessedly void, having, notwithstanding, accomplished that whereto He had sent it. A. M.

5. It is not said that he was shut up in prison, but barely that he was “shut up,” or confined; or, taken in connection with the following context, under some such restraint as precluded him from going to the house of the Lord. This might have been in a variety of ways without being shut up in prison, a species of persecution which does not appear to have befallen him about this time. Blayney.

6,7. The same reason for reading the book before the people appears here as above (verse 3) for writing it. It may be that they will hear, consider, turn to prayer and penitence, and so find mercy.

9,10. The special occasion of this fast is not stated. It was not the annual Jewish fast, for this was on the tenth day of the seventh month (Lev. 23:27 and 16:29-31). It was therefore an extraordinary fast, and was probably called by the princes at the instance of the people, for the king does not appear in it at all. The occasion which prompted it was the danger from the Chaldeans, who had utterly broken the Egyptian power a few months before at the great battle of Carchemish on the upper Euphrates (46:2). Hence naturally, as the Jews had been in substantial alliance with the Egyptians, they had reason to fear the Chaldeans. Be this as it may, it was an admirable opportunity for this public reading of the Book of Jeremiah before the assembled people.

11-13. The object of Micaiah seems to have been good. He thought the princes ought to be acquainted with the contents of this volume. He was at this time a young man, his grandfather, Shaphan, having been a very active scribe in the great reformation under Josiah.

17-19. They were inquisitive to know how the book came into existence, and what part

Baruch had in its production. They knew the king so well that they anticipated danger to Jeremiah and Baruch when he should hear the book read; hence their advice of concealment.

20,21. It is plain they did not think the book altogether safe in the king’s hands, so they laid it away carefully in the scribe’s chamber. Their plan was first to report its contents to the king, and then await further developments. The king was not content with merely hearing the book reported, but ordered it brought and read before him. The princes were present.

22-26. The ninth month would include part of our December. This fire, as the original word indicates, was burning in a small pot or portable furnace. The “penknife” of those times must be thought of as large enough to sharpen the wooden style used for writing on parchment. The reader will notice the mingled fear and horror of the author, tacitly implied in his surprise that neither the king nor his servants were afraid, nor expressed any indignation at this horrid impiety of the king. He had openly insulted and condemned the Infinite God! Why did not all the princes stand aghast, as if afraid of some sudden outburst of Jehovah’s wrath! The king’s guilt was the more flagrant because at least three of his princes had besought him not to burn this roll. In every aspect of this king’s character we see only consummate hardihood and sin—consummate meanness and guilt. In his indignation against Jeremiah and Baruch, he orders them to be arrested. The Lord had caused them to be secreted from his search. Probably he would then have taken their lives if he could. H. C.

He had not patience to hear it read through, as the princes had, but when he had heard three or four leaves read, in a rage he cut it with his penknife and threw it piece by piece into the fire, that he might be sure to see it all consumed (verses 22, 23). This was a piece of as daring impiety as a man could lightly be guilty of, and a most impudent affront to the God of heaven, whose message this was. Thus he showed his impatience of reproof; being resolved to persist in sin, he would by no means bear to be told of his faults. Thus he showed his indignation at Baruch and Jeremiah; he would have cut them in pieces and burned them, if he had had them in his reach when he was in this passion. Thus he expressed an obstinate resolution never to comply with the designs and intentions of the warnings given him; he will do what he will, whatever God by His prophets says to the contrary. Thus he foolishly hoped to defeat the threatenings denounced against him; as if God knew not how to execute the sentence when the roll was gone in which it was written. H.

Jehoiakim with his penknife and brazier has no lack of imitators to-day. There are plenty of people who try to cut out of Scripture all the bits that pinch them, or threaten evil consequences to sinful men. What is the modern craving for a revelation which has no word about the “wrath of God,” but this foolish king’s act in modern guise? Here is some stern saying which warns sinners that sin is death. Out with the penknife, and into the brazier with the “narrow-minded, ferocious” words! Cut out every verse that speaks of punishment, and leave us only the teachings that God is very good natured, and that everybody is on the right road. If we strike out retributive justice from the character of God, the love that is left is only weak indulgence, and His whole character is weakened and lowered. A. M.

From our later standpoint it is easy to see that Jehoiakim might have known better. God never leaves a sinner without warning; only the sinner himself never sees that he is a fool. The northern kingdom of Israel had fallen a century before from causes similar to those which were now undermining Israel. The history of Judah itself, even during the reigns of good Hezekiah and Josiah, might have warned him against the worthlessness of heathen alliances. Even Jehoiakim’s own experience ought to have been enough. Had he not been a creature of Pharaoh-Necho? Is he not still a sort of vassal of Nebuchadnezzar? But sin is such an infatuation that he only made a mock at it. Originally selfish, as all men are, he had allowed his heart to become hard. Habit had acquired weight in the wrong scale, and had here so crystallized into bad character that he could neither see the truth nor choose the right. The love of consistency and the inertia of character of course compelled him to moral suicide at last. As the Spanish proverb has it: “Sow an act, reap a habit; sow a habit, reap character;” sow character, reap destiny. The only salvation for Jehoiakim would have been by listening to the prophet, to transfer the pivot of his life from his own depraved will to the holy will of God—conversion. But that he would not do. Consequently he domineered over his princes and his servants. He tried to capture God’s messengers, probably to kill them. Worst of all, he raised a fatal controversy with God Himself.

Is it not strange that sinners cannot foresee the inevitable end of such a conflict? In this decisive particular, Jehoiakim is not exceptional, but representative. Every sinner does the same thing, in his own way, and with the same result. Jehoiakim was against the roll, and against God and His prophet, because they were all against him. They rebuked his sin and folly. How foolish sinners are, and how futile sin! They hack God’s word to bits, as though Baruch could write no more, nor Jeremiah dictate what the Holy Spirit breathed, nor Jeho-vah remember His own will! Sinners thus reject what is meant for their good, and they find eventually that the revelation is renewed and made more full and specific, and that its predicted decrees shall be enforced. Jeremiah and Jehoiakim alike found that the word of the Lord is indestructible, and abideth forever; the one to his glory and joy, the other to his shame and everlasting contempt. We are still under the same sovereign and gracious government; and one or the other of their opposite destinies foretells our own. M’Pherson.

32. Another roll . . . wrote therein all the words . . . added many besides.** And this was all that Jehoiakim got by burning the prophecy of Jeremiah. When Jeremiah and Baruch wrote the second roll, they were directed by God to add to it several things which were not in the former—aggravations, no doubt, of Jehoiakim’s punishment for his impious burning of the first roll. And very just it was that his doom should be aggravated. For if every abuse of temporal blessings shall be imputed, as certainly it shall, to wicked men to augment their reckoning at the last day, much less shall spiritual wantonness and intemperance be overlooked and escape such imputation. Reading.—So is it always. God’s word is indestructible. You may burn it and its present preachers, but it and they will be followed by a larger roll and mightier successors. As John Huss said, “You may burn a goose [“Huss” means “goose”], but from his ashes will come a swan.” Martin Luther fulfilled that prophecy. “It is John, whom I beheaded: he is risen from the dead,” said Herod; and his forebodings were right in substance. Every word of God is indestructible, and the attempt to destroy any fragment of its threatenings only ensures a resurrection of these with added weight and power. A. M.