translation_id: net-engnet

book_id: JER

label: NET study note

text: See 2 Kgs 24:14-16 and compare the study note on Jer 24:1 .


text: Elasah son of Shaphan may have been the brother of Ahikam, who supported Jeremiah when the priests and the prophets in Jerusalem sought to kill Jeremiah for preaching that the temple and the city would be destroyed (cf. 26:24 ).


text: This individual is not the same as the Gemariah mentioned in 36:10, 11, 12, 25 who was one of the officials who sought to have the first scroll of Jeremiah’s prophecies preserved. He may, however, have been a son or grandson of the High Priest who discovered the book of the law during the reign of Josiah (cf., e.g., 2 Kgs 22:8, 10 ) which was so instrumental in Josiah’s reforms.


text: It is unclear whether this incident preceded or followed those in the preceding chapter. It is known from 52:59 that Zedekiah himself had made a trip to Babylon in the same year mentioned in 28:1 and that Jeremiah had used that occasion to address a prophecy of disaster to Babylon. It is not impossible that Jeremiah sent two such disparate messages at the same time (see Jer 25:8-11, 12-14, 17-18, 26 ).


text: See the study notes on 27:9 for this term.


text: See the study note on Jer 25:11 for the reckoning of the seventy years.


text: Being roasted to death in the fire appears to have been a common method of execution in Babylon. See Dan 3:6, 19-21 . The famous law code of the Babylonian king Hammurabi also mandated this method of execution for various crimes a thousand years earlier. There is a satirical play on words involving their fate, “roasted them to death” ( קָלָם , qalam ), and the fact that that fate would become a common topic of curse ( קְלָלָה , qÿlalah ) pronounced on others in Babylon.


text: Jer 29:24-32 are concerned with Jeremiah’s interaction with a false prophet named Shemaiah. The narrative in this section is not in strict chronological order and is somewhat elliptical. It begins with a report of a message that Jeremiah appears to have delivered directly to Shemaiah and refers to a letter that Shemaiah sent to the priest Zephaniah encouraging him to reprimand Jeremiah for what Shemaiah considered treasonous words in his letter to the exiles (vv. 24-28 ; compare v. 28 with v. 5 ). However, Jeremiah is in Jerusalem and Shemaiah is in Babylon. The address must then be part of a second letter Jeremiah sent to Babylon. Following this the narrative refers to Zephaniah reading Shemaiah’s letter to Jeremiah and Jeremiah sending a further letter to the captives in Babylon (vv. 29-32 ). This is probably not a third letter but part of the same letter in which Jeremiah reprimands Shemaiah for sending his letter to Zephaniah (vv. 25-28 ; the same letter referred to in v. 29 ). The order of events thus is: Jeremiah sent a letter to the captives counseling them to settle down in Babylon (vv. 1-23 ). Shemaiah sent a letter to Zephaniah asking him to reprimand Jeremiah (vv. 26-28 ). After Zephaniah read that letter to Jeremiah (v. 29 ), Jeremiah wrote a further letter to Babylon reprimanding him (vv. 25-28, 31 ) and pronouncing judgment on him (v. 32 ). The elliptical nature of the narrative is reflected in the fact that vv. 25-27 are part of a long causal sentence which sets forth an accusation but has no corresponding main clause or announcement of judgment. This kind of construction involves a rhetorical figure (called aposiopesis) where what is begun is not finished for various rhetorical reasons. Here the sentence that is broken off is part of an announcement of judgment which is not picked up until v. 32 after a further (though related) accusation (v. 31 b).


text: According to Jer 52:24 and 2 Kgs 25:18 Zephaniah son of Maaseiah was second in command to the high priest. He was the high ranking priest who was sent along with a civic official to inquire of the Lord ’s will from Jeremiah by Zedekiah on two separate occasions ( Jer 21:1; 37:3 ).


text: The Hebrew term translated lunatic applies to anyone who exhibits irrational behavior. It was used for example of David who drooled and scratched on the city gate to convince Achish not to arrest him as a politically dangerous threat ( 1 Sam 21:14 ). It was often used contemptuously of the prophets by those who wanted to play down the significance of their words ( 2 Kgs 9:11 ; Hos 9:7 and here).


text: See v. 5 .


text: Compare the same charge against Hananiah in Jer 28:16 and see the note there. In this case, the false prophesy of Shemaiah is not given but it likely had the same tenor since he wants Jeremiah reprimanded for saying that the exile will be long and the people are to settle down in Babylon.