Zedekiah was twenty-one years old when he began to reign; and he reigned eleven years in Jerusalem; and his mother's name was Hamutal, daughter of Jeremiah of Libnah.
Jeremiah's prophecy has already ended, and yet a final chapter follows with a plain royal record: a king's age, his years on the throne, his mother's name. Why does the Spirit of God close a book of burning prophecy this way?
Commentators do not read chapter 52 as part of Jeremiah's own preaching.
The last chapter seems to be an inspired appendix to the prophecy of Jeremiah rather than his own composition. It is much like the last chapter of 2 Kings, but with some striking differences in dates and numbers. I suppose these come from a different way of looking at the facts.
One writer sees the whole human race on trial in the collapse of Judah.
The Holy Spirit of God has a special reason for giving us such a comprehensive summary in this added conclusion. It is to show us the complete failure of man when he is put under responsibility, and to show it in the most favoured nation of all — the nation God gave special privileges and a special place of nearness to Himself. This matters, because it shows plainly that man cannot be trusted to direct a nation. If the most favoured nation fails, we can expect nothing better from the others — we can expect worse.
"Zedekiah" was not the name he was born with. The king who conquered Judah gave it to him.
Zedekiah was Josiah's youngest son, and the full brother of Jehoahaz. Nebuchadnezzar changed his name, as a sign that Zedekiah was now his subject. But he did not give him the name of some false god, as he did with Daniel and his three Hebrew friends. Nebuchadnezzar "had made him swear by God," and he may have given him the new name, Righteousness of Jehovah, to remind him of that oath. Or the name may have had some connection, even in the pagan king's mind, with Jehovah's righteousness in taking the political independence of this wicked people (called by His name) away from them, and putting them under his rule.
One writer sees in those names a promise pointing past Zedekiah.
Judah and Jerusalem went down in judgment, in ruin and shame beyond words. Yet in the very names of the last king God showed that One would still come from David's line. He is God's own precious gift, and in Him righteousness will be given and established.
The verse ends by naming the king's mother. By this point in Judah's story that mention has turned sad.
From now on, mothers who come from among the people of God have no influence. Either there is no longer an ear to hear them, or they take part in the ruin themselves. Hamutal, the wife of Josiah and mother of Jehoahaz, was the daughter of Jeremiah of Libnah, and it seems she came from the priestly line.
Zedekiah took the throne young, and Judah still had every outward advantage.
At the age of twenty-one Zedekiah had his chance to show that he had learned from the hard, striking lessons God had taught the nation. God taught them through the mouth of the prophet and by the hand of Nebuchadnezzar. But "he did what was evil in the sight of the LORD, according to all that Jehoiakim had done" (v. 2). He also rebelled against the king of Babylon, whom God had used to set him on the throne at Jerusalem. Judah still had the city of government and a king of David's line on the throne. The house of the Lord still stood before them and spoke to them of the preserving mercy of God. The chief priest and others still carried on the ministry. But they not only failed to do the good; they did what was positively evil in God's sight.
For the faithful, submitting to Babylon was not politics. It was a matter of bowing to God.
The faithful were bound to bow to God's sovereignty in this. They were bound to it all the more because the idolatrous sin of the people of Judah, and of the king of David's house, was what finally brought about this solemn change in the government of the world.
Zedekiah did the opposite.
Now Zedekiah rebelled against Babylon. That was in truth a rebellion against the sentence of Jehovah, who was then, so to speak, morally compelled to cast the Jews out from His presence.
- Privilege. Judah still had its city, a king of David's line, the house of the Lord, and a working priesthood.
- Person. Into that privilege steps a king of twenty-one, renamed by a foreign ruler. The new name spoke of God's righteousness, and he had sworn an oath by God.
- Pattern. He did the same evil as Jehoiakim. His mother is named in the record, but a mother's influence in Judah now counted for nothing.
- Presumption. Judah's own sin handed world rule to Babylon. So Zedekiah's revolt struck at God's sentence, not just at an empire.
- Proof. The Spirit added this record to show that man under responsibility fails. If the most favoured nation failed, no other can be trusted. Hope rests on One still to come from David's line.
And he did evil in the sight of Jehovah, according to all that Jehoiakim had done.
Jeremiah 52 is an added conclusion to the book. It opens by summing up the reign of Zedekiah, Judah's last king, in a single line. Why give a verdict on him once Jeremiah's prophecies have ended? And why measure his evil against that of Jehoiakim, a king before him?
One writer explains the reason behind this closing summary:
The Holy Spirit of God has a special reason for giving us such a complete summary in this added conclusion. It is to picture for us the total failure of man on the ground of responsibility. And it shows that failure in the most favoured nation of all — the nation to which God gave special privileges and a special place of nearness to Himself. This matters, because it shows that man cannot be trusted with national direction. If the most favoured nation fails, we can expect nothing better from the others, but worse.
Zedekiah became king young, and the verse records what he did with his opportunity:
At the age of twenty-one Zedekiah had an opportunity to show that he had benefited from the stern and striking lessons God had taught the nation. Those lessons came through the lips of the prophet and by the hand of Nebuchadnezzar. But "he did what was evil in the sight of the LORD, according to all that Jehoiakim had done" (v. 2). He also rebelled against the king of Babylon, whom God had used to set him on the throne at Jerusalem.
When Zedekiah did this evil, Judah still had its city, its king and its temple:
At that time Judah stood for the whole nation of Israel. It still had the city of government and a king of David's line on the throne. The House of the Lord still stood before them, and spoke to them of the preserving mercy of God. The chief priest and others still carried on the ministry. But they not only failed to do the good — they did outright evil in God's sight.
By human reckoning Zedekiah was not the worst of the kings. This verse gives God's verdict on him, not man's:
He was perhaps not as wicked in public as the three kings before him, and he was not eager to persecute. Josephus judged by the standards of men, and that is probably why he speaks of "his gentle and righteous disposition." But the Lord does not see as man sees. His thoughts are not man's thoughts. The Lord says of him, "He stiffened his neck and hardened his heart against turning to the LORD, the God of Israel." So God took him away in His anger.
Zedekiah also rebelled against Babylon, the power that had put him on the throne. One writer weighs what that revolt meant:
One thing above all provoked the anger of the LORD: he rebelled against the king of Babylon. When Judah turned away from God, God had handed the empire of the world to that king. The faithful were bound to bow to God's sovereignty in this. They were bound all the more because it was the idolatrous sin of the people of Judah and of the king of David's house that was the final occasion of this solemn change in the government of the world.
Zedekiah's birth name was Mattaniah. Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon, gave him the new name, and one writer finds a promise in both names:
His name means "the gift of Jehovah" and Nebuchadnezzar changed it to Zedekiah, "the righteousness of Jehovah." There is no doubt a prophetic hint here. Judah and Jerusalem went down in judgment, in unspeakable ruin and shame. Yet in the very names of the last king God showed that One would still come from David's line. He is God's own precious gift, and in Him God will give and establish righteousness. Zedekiah filled up the measure of wickedness and in the end rebelled against the king of Babylon.
Another writer adds that the new name recalled an oath Nebuchadnezzar made him swear by God — an oath he broke (C Knapp).
- Opportunity. At twenty-one Zedekiah inherited a throne, a city and a temple. God had already taught the nation hard lessons.
- Refusal. He copied the evil of Jehoiakim, the king before him, instead of learning from it.
- God's eyes, not man's. Human observers called him gentle; God called him stiff-necked and hard-hearted. The standard in this verse is the LORD's sight.
- Rebellion. His revolt against Babylon refused to bow to the sentence God had passed on His own people.
- Failure and gift. The most favoured nation failed under responsibility. Yet his two names, Mattaniah and Zedekiah, still pointed to the Gift from David's line, in whom God establishes righteousness.
For, because the anger of Jehovah was against Jerusalem and Judah, until he had cast them out from his presence, Zedekiah rebelled against the king of Babylon.
Jeremiah 52 is an added conclusion to the book. Verse 3 traces Zedekiah's revolt back to the anger of the Lord against His own people. Two questions follow. How can one man's rebellion belong to God's anger? And why did breaking a treaty with a pagan empire offend the Lord so deeply?
This closing chapter sums up the whole story, and it was given for a reason.
The Holy Spirit of God has a special reason for giving us such a full summary in this added conclusion. It is to picture for us the complete failure of man on the ground of responsibility. And it is shown in the most favoured nation of all — the nation God gave special privileges and a unique place of nearness to Himself. This matters because it shows plainly that man cannot be trusted with national leadership. If the most favoured nation fails, nothing better can be expected from the rest — only worse.
God Himself had given world empire to the king of Babylon. That is what made Zedekiah's revolt so serious.
What especially provoked the anger of Jehovah was this: he rebelled against the king of Babylon — the king to whom the empire of the world had been given when Judah turned away from God. The faithful were bound to bow to God's sovereignty in this. All the more so, because it was the idolatrous sin of the people of Judah and of the king of David's house that finally brought about this solemn change in the government of the world.
Zedekiah's revolt was part of a judgment already falling on Judah, and it broke more than a political deal.
Zedekiah rebelled against his lord, and the rebellion was through the anger of the Lord. It was a part of the judgment upon Judah and Jerusalem, and it brought special judgment upon himself. He made a covenant with the king of Babylon, and took an oath in the name of Jehovah to obey Nebuchadnezzar — so much so that Jehovah called it "my oath," and "my covenant." Afterwards he rebelled against the king that Jehovah had set over him, and sent to Egypt for horses and men. He despised the covenant and oath he had so solemnly taken. So he made the name of the Holy One of Israel look like nothing in front of the pagan king. This brought things to a climax: there was "no remedy."
Zedekiah was not his birth name. Nebuchadnezzar gave it to him, and its meaning pointed back to the oath.
Nebuchadnezzar changed his name, as a sign that he was now a subject king. But he did not give him the name of some pagan god, as he did with Daniel and the three young Hebrews. Nebuchadnezzar "had made him swear by God," and his new name, Righteousness of Jehovah, may have been given to remind him of his oath.
One thing was missing behind that oath.
He had no real faith in Jehovah, Israel's covenant-keeping God. So he had no hesitation about breaking his covenant with Nebuchadnezzar.
Zedekiah, of all people, owed God submission.
Zedekiah ought to have been a pattern of submission, owning the just judgment of God. And now he rebelled against Babylon. That was really rebellion against the sentence of Jehovah, who was then, as it were, morally compelled to cast out the Jews from His presence.
The fall did more than end one reign.
At last the end came. Zedekiah was the last to wear the crown, though perhaps he wore it only in name. He added treachery to his many sins, and dishonoured the name of his God. Scripture records what followed no less than three times — 2 Kings 25; 2 Chronicles 36; Jeremiah 52. Jerusalem fell before the Babylonians, and the rule passed into the hands of Nebuchadnezzar. So "the times of the Gentiles" set in.
The same story appears again later in Scripture.
We see the story repeated in another setting in Revelation 2 and 3. The assemblies, set up by God, soon sink so low that we read of Satan living among them. Finally the faithful and true Witness, our Lord Jesus Christ, says to the angel of the assembly in Laodicea, "I will spit you out of My mouth." This tells us of the failure of Christendom on the ground of responsibility; Jeremiah 52 tells us of the failure of Judaism. May we learn the lesson and cling to the Lord Himself, abiding in Christ so that our joy may be full despite the failure.
- Privilege — the most favoured nation failed where it had every advantage. Man cannot be trusted with responsibility.
- Oath — Zedekiah swore loyalty to Nebuchadnezzar in the Lord's name. God called it "my oath." Breaking it made His name look worthless to a pagan king.
- Rebellion — God had given world empire to Babylon. So revolt against Babylon was revolt against His own sentence, and submission was the duty of faith.
- Removal — his rebellion left God, as it were, morally compelled to cast the people out from His presence. The throne fell and the times of the Gentiles began.
- Warning — the same collapse of privilege returns in Revelation 2–3. Cling to Christ Himself, not to inherited position.
And it came to pass in the ninth year of his reign, in the tenth month, on the tenth of the month, [that] Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon came, he and all his army, against Jerusalem; and they encamped against it, and built turrets against it round about.
The last chapter of Jeremiah opens with a date and an army at the gates. Two questions follow: why did the siege come, and why does Scripture keep the day it began with such care?
Zedekiah's revolt was more than a political mistake. One writer shows who the king was really defying.
Zedekiah should have been a pattern of submission, owning the just judgment of God. It was their evil above all that had blocked the blessing of all the nations of the earth as independent powers. That same evil had thrown not only themselves but all the others with them under the empire of the golden head, the king of Babylon. And now Zedekiah rebelled against Babylon. That was really to rebel against the sentence of Jehovah, who was then, as it were, morally bound to cast the Jews out of His presence.
The revolt carried a further weight. Zedekiah had sworn loyalty to Nebuchadnezzar in God's name, and the watching nations saw him break that oath.
"Zedekiah rebelled against the king of Babylon." This act was infamous and sacrilegious in the eyes of the Lord, and this is why: Nebuchadnezzar "had made him take oath by God." So to all his other sins this king was adding the breaking of an oath made in the name of the Lord. He did it in front of the idol-worshipping nations, and so showed them that he had no regard for the God he pretended to belong to. Chronicles gives four reasons for the judgment of this king. He did what was evil in the sight of Jehovah. He did not humble himself before Jeremiah the prophet, who spoke to him on behalf of Jehovah; this was rebellion against the word of the Spirit of God. He revolted against Nebuchadnezzar, who had made him swear by God. He stiffened his neck and hardened his heart against returning to Jehovah.
The same day appears in another prophet's book. God told Ezekiel to write it down as the siege began.
The prophet gives the exact date. It was the tenth day of the tenth month in the ninth year… How did Ezekiel know about all this? It was the Lord who gave him this information and led him to record the date. This is what the second verse says: "Son of man, write down the name of this day, this very day. The king of Babylon has laid siege to Jerusalem this very day."
The verse fixes the start; the verses that follow trace its long, grinding end. One writer sums up how long it lasted, and how it ended.
The crisis was now at hand. Jerusalem was going through its last siege. The king of Babylon had begun it before the ninth year of Zedekiah closed. He took the city early in the eleventh year, after besieging it some eighteen months — though not without a break.
This month later became one of Israel's four fast days. A later word from the Lord names it, and promises something better.
Besides the two fasts mentioned in the previous chapter, we now have the one in the fourth month. In that month famine took hold and Jerusalem was broken up, as Jeremiah 52:6 says. And it was in the tenth month that Nebuchadnezzar's army surrounded the city, as verse 4 of that same chapter records. It is now revealed that the day would come when these four fasts would be turned into feasts of rejoicing.
The final chapter reads as an added conclusion to the book. One writer asks why God gave it, and answers with something larger than one city's fall.
The Holy Spirit of God has a special reason for giving us such a full summary in this added conclusion. It is to picture for us the complete failure of man on the ground of responsibility. And it shows that failure in the most favoured nation of all — the nation to which God gave special privileges and a place of nearness to Himself unlike any other. This matters, because it shows plainly that man cannot be trusted to direct a nation. If the most favoured nation fails, nothing better can be expected from the others, but worse.
- One day, four turns. Follow this one day through Scripture. A rebellion becomes a siege, the siege becomes a national fast, and the fast becomes a feast.
- Rebellion. Zedekiah's revolt against Babylon was a revolt against the sentence God had already passed. He also broke an oath he had sworn in God's own name.
- Siege. The army camped and built its works, and the city held out some eighteen months before it fell.
- Record. Ezekiel did not learn the date later. God told him to write it down on the day itself.
- Reversal. The month the siege began became one of four fast days. God later promised those very days would turn into feasts of gladness.
And the city was besieged until the eleventh year of king Zedekiah.
Nebuchadnezzar's army sat outside Jerusalem from Zedekiah's ninth year until his eleventh. Two questions press on it: why did God let the end come so slowly, and what was still on offer to the city while the walls held?
The book of Jeremiah closes with a chapter that repeats material already found in 2 Kings. One writer explains what the repeat is for:
Why is it added here once more? Clearly to show how literally the judgment predictions and divine warnings given through Jeremiah were fulfilled. For a time the false prophets had their way; people listened to their lying messages, their words of delusion and false hope, and believed them. The prophet of God had a lonely life; people rejected him and he suffered. But the time came when he stood vindicated, and God's Word with him, while the false prophets turned out to be liars and deceivers.
Zedekiah brought the siege on himself by rebelling against Babylon. His rebellion reached further than politics:
Zedekiah should therefore have been a pattern of submission, by owning the just judgment of God. Their evil above all had hindered the blessing of all the nations of the earth as independent powers. It had also plunged not only themselves but all others with them under the empire of the golden head, the king of Babylon. And now Zedekiah rebelled against Babylon, which was really against the sentence of the Lord.
Another prophet, Ezekiel, wrote down the same date in his own book. He had no ordinary way of knowing it:
The prophet gives the exact date. It was the tenth day of the tenth month in the ninth year. How did Ezekiel know about all this? It was the Lord who gave him this information and led him to record the date. This is the statement of the second verse: "Son of man, write down the name of this day, this very day. The king of Babylon has laid siege to Jerusalem this very day."
God did not fall silent during those long months:
To have the complete history you must read the prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel. They give the inner history of the spirit of the people and of the king. They show the condition that drew down the judgment, and they show the patience of God. Even until the very taking of the city He kept sending them the most moving calls to repentance — alas, in vain. And the times of the Gentiles began.
The city did not have to burn. A real offer stood open to the king:
In the ninth year of Zedekiah's reign Nebuchadnezzar came and besieged Jerusalem, building a wall around it. Jeremiah told Zedekiah, by the word of the Lord, that if he surrendered to the king of Babylon he would live and the city would not be burned with fire. If he would not surrender, the city would be burned and he would not escape (Jer. 38:17-18). But Zedekiah feared the Jews, and so he would not surrender.
Why does the book end with this long summary of the fall? One writer sees a test of what man can be trusted with, run on the best possible case:
The Holy Spirit of God has a special reason for giving us such a comprehensive summary in this added conclusion. It is to picture for us the complete failure of man when placed under responsibility. And it shows that failure in the most favoured nation of all — the nation to which God gave special privileges and a place of unique nearness to Himself. This matters because it shows plainly that man cannot be trusted with national direction. If the most favoured nation fails, we can expect nothing better from the others — rather worse.
- Warned — The chapter shows that the warnings God gave through Jeremiah came true to the letter. The false prophets turned out to be liars.
- Dated — The Lord gave Ezekiel the very day the siege began and led him to write it down.
- Deserved — Zedekiah's revolt against Babylon was really revolt against the sentence of the Lord. He should have submitted and owned God's judgment as just.
- Delayed — God kept sending moving calls to repentance right up to the taking of the city. The long siege measured out His patience.
- Declined — Zedekiah could have kept his life and his city by surrendering. He refused because he feared the people, and the most favoured nation of all failed completely.
In the fourth month, on the ninth of the month, the famine prevailed in the city, and there was no bread for the people of the land.
This verse puts a date on a disaster. The siege of Jerusalem had emptied the city of food. Behind that dated line lie two questions. Why did God let His own city come to this? And was the collapse an accident of war, or the exact keeping of a word spoken long before?
Jeremiah 52 tells the same story as the end of 2 Kings. One writer set the two accounts side by side.
So far the account agrees exactly with 2 Kings 25:1-7, dates and all. Jeremiah 52 only gives a little more detail. It also credits the king of Babylon himself with what the history in Kings gives to his servants acting under his orders.
The same writer accounts for the small differences in figures elsewhere in the chapter without treating them as errors:
The last chapter appears to be an inspired appendix to the prophecy of Jeremiah rather than his own composition. It is substantially similar to the last chapter of 2 Kings, but with some remarkable points of difference in dates and numbers, owing, I presume, to a difference in the way of looking at the facts.
So why did God let this happen to His own city? One writer points to the nation's evil, and to a rebellion that struck higher than the king knew.
Their evil above all had hindered the blessing of all the nations of the earth as independent powers. It had also thrown not only themselves but all others with them under the empire of the golden head, the king of Babylon. And now Zedekiah rebelled against Babylon. That was really a rebellion against the sentence of the Lord, who was in this way, as it were, morally compelled to cast out the Jews from His presence.
The starvation was not a chance outcome of a long siege. Jeremiah had described it in advance, in terms far worse than an empty bread basket. The writer below gives his own rendering of Jeremiah 19:9.
Nebuchadnezzar builds ramparts all around Jerusalem and begins a siege that lasts about eight months. Famine grows worse in the city, according to the word of Jeremiah: "And I will cause them to eat the flesh of their sons and the flesh of their daughters... in the siege and in the distress with which their enemies press them" (Jer. 19:9).
after_note: DELETE
Nothing dramatic marked Jeremiah's words as true at the time he spoke them, and that delay is part of the point.
At the moment God did not step in with startling or miraculous acts to publicly justify the words of Jeremiah. Yet the exact fulfilment of his words, delayed as it seemed, was all the more striking afterwards. There was nothing immediate or sudden. Jeremiah spoke the word of the Lord and suffered for it. God in patient mercy waited on the people, patiently looking for their repentance. That did not take place... Then the hearts of the people, the princes, the priests, the prophets and the pastors hardened completely. And the fulfilments of Jeremiah's words came swiftly.
Jeremiah's Lamentations supply what this verse leaves as a bare statement. The writer below is giving his own rendering of Lamentations 4:4-5, where the ESV reads that the infants "ask for bread, but no one gives to them."
"The tongue of the nursing infant sticks to its palate for thirst; infants ask bread — no one breaks it for them." Such was the pitiful state of children from their earliest days upward. Was it any better with their elders? "Those who fed on delicacies perish in the streets; those who were brought up on scarlet embrace rubbish heaps." Parents and other adults were starving and dying of hunger. They died gladly, as it were, on the rubbish heap, instead of on the splendid couches where they used to recline when they grew weary of pleasure itself.
The same shortage appears in the prophet's own story. One writer notes what Jeremiah received while the city starved.
Zedekiah, however, answers Jeremiah's plea. He does not send him back to the vaults, but puts him in the court of the guard: "and they gave him daily a loaf of bread... until all the bread in the city was spent."
Israel later kept this date as a fast. God announced what He would do with it.
A further word from the Lord now comes, and verse 19 mentions four fasts. Two of them appear in the previous chapter. Now we have the one in the fourth month. In that month famine prevailed and Jerusalem was broken up, as Jeremiah 52:6 records... It is now revealed that the day would come when these four fasts would be turned into feasts of rejoicing. Therefore they were to love truth and peace.
- Rebellion — Zedekiah's revolt against Babylon was really a revolt against God's own sentence.
- Word — The famine came "according to the word of Jeremiah." He spoke it long before, while God waited for repentance.
- Hunger — Lamentations fills in the detail. Infants ask bread and no one breaks it. Those raised in luxury die in the streets.
- Bread — Jeremiah received a daily loaf until the city's bread ran out. He ate while the city starved.
- Feast — Israel kept this day as a fast. God promised that the fast would become a feast of rejoicing.
And the city was broken into and all the men of war fled, and went forth out of the city by night, by the way of the gate between the two walls, which was by the king's garden (now the Chaldeans were near the city round about); and they went the way toward the plain.
This is the moment the siege of Jerusalem ended: the wall gave way, and the city's soldiers slipped out in the dark, with the Babylonian army all around. Two questions press on the reader — why did God let the enemy break open His own city, and what did the fleeing men hope to save?
This closing chapter is an added summary of the fall of Jerusalem. One writer explains its purpose — and the most favoured nation in view is Israel:
The Holy Spirit of God has a special reason for giving us such a full summary in this added ending. It is to picture for us the complete failure of man when he is tested on his own responsibility. And it shows that failure in the most favoured nation of all — the nation God gave special privileges, and a special place of nearness to Himself.
The wall did not fall by accident. Zedekiah had rebelled against Babylon, and one writer reads that rebellion as an act against God's own verdict:
So Zedekiah should have been a model of submission, owning the just judgment of God. Their evil above all had kept all the nations of the earth from blessing as independent powers. It had also thrown not only themselves but all the others with them under the empire of the golden head, the king of Babylon. And now Zedekiah rebelled against Babylon. That was really rebellion against the sentence of the Lord, so the Lord was, as it were, morally compelled to cast out the Jews from His presence.
The gate near the king's garden was a back way out. But the verse also says where the enemy was, and that makes the escape look hopeless:
Their food had run out, and at that time the enemy broke into the city. But instead of surrendering to the king of Babylon, all the men of war and Zedekiah tried to escape at night through a gate between two walls. How did they expect to escape when the army of the Chaldeans surrounded the city?
There had been a way out, and it was not this gate. Jeremiah had told the king that surrender meant life for himself, his household, and the city:
That spirit had given in to man's thoughts against God's word. It is solemn to see how little it remembers, in the moment of greatest need, what might even then have saved city and people and prince. Had not the prophet assured Zedekiah that if he went out to the king of Babylon's princes, he and his house would live, and the city would not be burned with fire? Sadly, this is one of the effects of the evil heart that departs from the living God. It always seems to forget the word when it is most wanted. It feels the force of that word only after it has once again taken up some new plan of its own, as disappointing as all the ones before it.
The flight and capture also settled something that looked like a contradiction in Scripture. Jeremiah had said Zedekiah would look the king of Babylon in the eyes; Ezekiel had said he would be brought to Babylon and yet not see it:
Both prophets implied that he would be taken, even if he tried to escape. Both said he must go to Babylon. But Ezekiel foretold, "Yet he shall not see it, though he shall die there" — the land of the Chaldeans. Jeremiah foretold, "Your eyes shall see the eyes of the king of Babylon, and he shall speak with you mouth to mouth."... The Chaldeans chased the fleeing king and caught him before he crossed the Jordan. At Riblah the king of Babylon had Zedekiah's sons killed in front of their guilty father, then put out Zedekiah's eyes, bound him with chains and carried him to Babylon. So he did not see Babylon, though he went there. Yet he did see the angry conqueror's eyes, and that conqueror spoke with him mouth to mouth. No word of the Lord falls to the ground.
(ESV renders Jeremiah 34:3 "speak with you face to face"; older versions read "mouth to mouth.")
The collapse is not just ancient history. One writer sets this failure beside the failure of Christendom, the professing Christian world:
This tells us of the failure of Christendom when it was tested on its responsibility; Jeremiah 52 tells us of the failure of Judaism. May we learn the lesson and cling to the Lord Himself, abiding in Christ so that our joy may be full despite the failure, and so that we may be to God's glory in these "difficult times."
- Breach — The wall did not fail by accident. Zedekiah rebelled against the rule God had given to Babylon, so he rebelled against God's own sentence.
- Flight — The enemy ringed the city. The night escape through the garden gate had no chance, and nowhere to lead them.
- Forgotten word — The one real escape was offered and refused: go out and live. A heart that turns from God forgets His word just when it is needed most.
- Fulfilment — Two prophecies that looked contradictory both came true down to the detail. No word of the Lord falls to the ground.
- Failure — The chapter shows man's complete failure where he was most favoured. Cling to Christ, not to any place of privilege.
And the army of the Chaldeans pursued after the king, and overtook Zedekiah in the plains of Jericho; and all his army was scattered from him.
Zedekiah ran from a broken city by night, heading for the Jordan, and this verse records how fast that flight ended. The commentators ask a sharper question: why did a king who already knew what would happen still try to run?
One writer weighs a king's forgetfulness at the worst possible moment:
It is solemn to see this. A spirit that has given in to man's thoughts against God's word forgets, at the moment of greatest need, what might even then have helped city, people, and prince. Had the prophet not promised him that going out to the king of Babylon's princes meant life for him and his house, and that the city would not burn? This is one effect of the evil heart that turns away from the living God: it always seems to forget the word at the very moment it needs the word most. It only feels the force of that word after it has taken up some new plan of its own, as disappointing as every plan before it.
Another writer puts the obvious question to the men who tried this escape:
Zedekiah and all the men of war did not surrender to the king of Babylon. Instead they tried to escape at night through a gate between two walls. How did they expect to escape when the army of the Chaldeans surrounded the city? At least Zedekiah and his sons were caught, though others of his men were scattered from him.
Some did the opposite of running, and lived:
Only a small remnant kept their lives. They were the ones who had received the Lord's message and handed themselves over to the Chaldeans.
Two prophets had spoken about this king, and their words looked as if they clashed. The capture near Jericho is the hinge on which both came true:
quote now carries the two prophecies itself; splits two very-hard sentences; passive removed Zedekiah's sons killed before their guilty father's eyes, then put out Zedekiah's eyes, bound him with chains and carried him to Babylon. So he did not see Babylon, though he went there; yet he did see the angry conqueror's eyes, who spoke with him face to face. No word of the Lord falls to the ground.
Behind the chase lay a broken oath:
"Zedekiah rebelled against the king of Babylon." He had no real faith in Jehovah, Israel's covenant-keeping God, and so he thought nothing of breaking his covenant with Nebuchadnezzar. But how dearly he paid for this violation of his oath!
Judgment fell, but it was not all that God had to say about this king:
God told this king, "You shall not die by the sword. You shall die in peace." He would have a funeral suited to his dignity as a king. Why? Because God, even in His judgment, carefully remembers whatever good there may have been. The Lord says, as it were, I will repay; and He never fails. Zedekiah had acted wickedly. Still, his heart was towards the prophet, and he would have gladly spared him. Others more wicked than himself pushed him on. So when the decisive moment came, God extended mercy towards him.
One writer reads this whole chapter as a picture of something wider than one king's fall:
This summary of the chapter is meant to picture for us the complete failure of man on the ground of responsibility. That failure is shown in the most favoured nation of all — the nation to which God gave special privileges and a special place of nearness to Himself. This matters, because it shows clearly that man cannot be trusted with national direction. If the most favoured nation fails, we can expect nothing better from the others — rather worse.
- Word ignored. Zedekiah had a promise of life if he surrendered, and forgot it at the one moment it could have saved him.
- Word tested. Running with an army did not help. The troops scattered, and the Chaldeans caught the king before he reached the Jordan.
- Word fulfilled. Two predictions looked opposite: he would see the king of Babylon, yet never see Babylon. His capture and blinding made both true.
- Word remembered. Even in judgment God kept His promise that this king would die in peace, repaying the little good in him.
- Word for us. This chapter records the failure of the most privileged nation. If they failed, man cannot be trusted with national direction.
And they took the king, and brought him up to the king of Babylon, unto Riblah in the land of Hamath, and he pronounced judgment upon him.
reason: "200 miles" is an invented fact; passive, hard opening
Zedekiah had a way out. One commentator notes how far God's word slipped from the king's mind at the one hour it could have saved him.
It is solemn to see how little a spirit remembers in the moment of great need, once it has given in to man's thoughts against God's word. It forgets what might even then have helped city, people and prince alike. Had the prophet not assured Zedekiah of this? If he went out to the king of Babylon's princes, he and his house would live, and the city would not be burned with fire. Sadly, this is one effect of the evil heart that turns away from the living God. It always seems to forget the word when the word is most needed. It only feels the force of that word after it has taken up some new plan of its own — a plan as disappointing as all the ones before it.
Another writer follows what happened between the escape and the sentence.
But their flight did not go unnoticed. Their pursuers caught them in the plains of Jericho. The soldiers scattered in various directions. But they captured the king himself and his household. They carried them to the headquarters at Riblah, where Nebuchadnezzar himself was at the time. Here Zedekiah stood a formal trial, and sentence was passed against him.
The king of Babylon passed the verdict. But one writer asks who Zedekiah's rebellion was really against.
Zedekiah should therefore have been a pattern of submission, owning the just judgment of God. Their evil above all had blocked the blessing of all the nations of the earth as independent powers. It had also plunged them, and all others with them, under the empire of the golden head, the king of Babylon. And now Zedekiah rebelled against Babylon. That was really rebellion against the sentence of Jehovah. So Jehovah was, as it were, morally compelled to cast the Jews out from His presence.
The severity of what followed at Riblah traces back to an oath sworn in God's name.
Nebuchadnezzar took terrible vengeance on his helpless captive. The cause was perhaps not so much the rebellion of a vassal king. It was the guilt, the enormity, of breaking the oath he had taken in the name of Jehovah to obey Nebuchadnezzar. This sin filled up his cup. He made a covenant with the king of Babylon. He took an oath in the name of Jehovah to obey him — so much so that Jehovah called it "my oath" and "my covenant." Afterwards he rebelled against the king whom Jehovah had set over him, and sent to Egypt for horses and men. He despised the covenant and the oath he had taken so solemnly. So he made the name of the Holy One of Israel count for nothing in front of the heathen king.
Two predictions about Zedekiah looked like they contradicted each other. Standing before Nebuchadnezzar in person made both of them true.
Jeremiah warned Zedekiah many times against his course and advised him to submit to Babylon. For this the princes of Judah persecuted Jeremiah. Two prophecies about him are remarkable: one that he would speak with the king of Babylon, and "his eyes shall see his eyes" (Jer. 32:4); and the other that "he shall be brought to Babylon, yet he shall not see it, though he shall die there" (Ezek. 12:13). And so it happened. They carried him before Nebuchadnezzar at Riblah. There his sons were killed in front of him, his eyes were put out, and he was taken to Babylon.
The sentence at Riblah was not only personal. It closed a throne that God called His own.
The downfall of Judah suspended the Creator's gracious purpose for all nations for ages… While David's throne stood, it was still "the throne of Jehovah" — however feeble and contemptible its occupants might be. The last king, Zedekiah, brought on the ruin by his treachery… Ever since that day David's throne has lain in the dust, and the crown of rule over the nations has been taken away.
- Oath — Zedekiah swore loyalty to Nebuchadnezzar in Jehovah's name, then broke it. Commentators see that broken oath, more than the revolt, as what filled up his cup.
- Flight — The prophet told him he would live if he surrendered. He ran instead. A heart turned from God's word forgets it just when it is needed most.
- Sentence — A foreign king passed the verdict. But the rebellion was really against the sentence of Jehovah, who had handed world rule to Babylon.
- Word — Two predictions sounded contradictory. Both came true at Riblah: he saw the king of Babylon's eyes, yet never saw Babylon.
- Throne — David's throne, once called Jehovah's throne, has lain in the dust ever since. That fall suspended God's gracious purpose for all nations for ages.
And the king of Babylon slaughtered the sons of Zedekiah before his eyes; and he slaughtered also all the princes of Judah in Riblah.
At Riblah the last king of Judah watched his sons die. That moment closed the long history of David's throne in Jerusalem, and it raises a hard question: how could such a ruin stand beside God's promises to David's line?
Zedekiah rebelled against Babylon. Commentators see more in that act than politics.
Zedekiah ought to have been a pattern of submission, owning the just judgment of God... And now Zedekiah rebelled against Babylon. That was really a rebellion against the sentence of the Lord. So the Lord was, as it were, morally compelled to cast the Jews out from His presence.
For years the threatened judgment did not come.
God had long delayed His judgments on the guilty nation and its rulers. But in the end He made a short and speedy end of the wickedness. That wickedness had for so long despised His patience and ignored His pleadings and solemn warnings by His prophets.
Two prophets seemed to say opposite things about what Zedekiah's eyes would see.
Both prophets said he would be taken even if he tried to escape, and that he must go to Babylon. But Ezekiel predicted that he would not see Babylon, though he would die there. Jeremiah predicted that his eyes would see the eyes of the king of Babylon, who would speak with him face to face. To a shallow reader this might seem hard to reconcile, if not a contradiction. But such a thought would be only ignorance, not to speak of irreverence. Each of them gave out from God beforehand what the events then fulfilled. The king fled, but his pursuers caught him before he crossed the Jordan. At Riblah the king of Babylon judged the matter. He had Zedekiah's sons killed before their guilty father's eyes, then put out Zedekiah's eyes, bound him with chains and carried him to Babylon. So he did not see Babylon, though he went there; yet he did see the eyes of the angry conqueror who spoke with him face to face. No word of the Lord falls to the ground.
With his sons killed, David's royal line lost its throne. Yet the word spoken over that ruin left a door open. The words quoted below come from an older translation.
While David's throne stood, however feeble and contemptible its occupants might be, it was still "the throne of the Lord." The last king, Zedekiah, brought on the ruin by his treachery... Now note the words of the Lord to him: "Remove the diadem, and take off the crown... I will overturn, overturn, overturn it: and it shall be no more, until He come whose right it is, and I will give it Him." Ever since that day David's throne has lain in the dust, and the crown of rule over the nations has been removed.
Writers see in the blinded king a picture of the whole nation.
How solemn a judgment for a king of Judah! But it is typical of Israel's eyes being blinded at the present time because of unbelief (Rom. 11:7-8), a spiritual blindness that has continued through history from the time of their dispersal among the nations.
The same picture points to a remedy. The two things Zedekiah lost — sight and freedom — are the two things the coming One restores.
Israel is blind, and darkness covers the people. They must await the coming again of the One who opens the eyes of the blind. He also opens the prison doors for those who, like Zedekiah, are bound in chains. They must now learn to hope in the Lord, who will yet be exalted in their coming salvation.
Writers also read the blinding as a warning for believers who drift into the world.
The first thing the enemy — the devil — tries to do, when he has captured one of the Lord's people and brought him to Babylon, is to put out his eyes. Samson found this. He had gone down to the world, and there his enemies captured him and put out his eyes. He had to "grind in the prison house of Gaza." One who would have been mighty in the power of the Spirit of God is only seen as a poor blind prisoner, making sport for the Philistines. And what a sad picture we also have in Zedekiah, a prisoner in Babylon, and blind.
- Sight ignored. Zedekiah despised God's patience and ignored His warnings for years. Delayed judgment is not cancelled judgment.
- Sight confirmed. Jeremiah said he would see the king of Babylon's eyes. Ezekiel said he would never see Babylon. This verse fulfils both, for no word of the Lord falls to the ground.
- Sight lost. The king watched his sons die, and then lost his own sight. His treachery ended in chains and darkness.
- Sight in the nation. The blinded king pictures Israel's blindness. David's throne stays overturned "until He come whose right it is."
- Sight restored. The enemy's first aim is to blind his captive. The answer is the One who opens blind eyes and prison doors.
And he put out the eyes of Zedekiah, and bound him with chains of brass; and the king of Babylon carried him to Babylon, and put him in prison till the day of his death.
The king of Babylon made the last king of Judah watch his sons die. Then he blinded him, put him in chains, and left him in prison in Babylon until he died. Two questions rise out of this scene. Why did God let it end this way for the man on David's throne? And what becomes of His promise that David's line would rule?
God had put world rule into Babylon's hands as judgment on His people. So Zedekiah's revolt was not just politics.
Zedekiah ought to have been a pattern of subjection therefore, in owning the just judgment of God. Their evil above all had blocked the blessing of all the nations of the earth as independent powers. It had also thrown not only themselves but all the others with them under the empire of the golden head, the king of Babylon. And now Zedekiah rebelled against Babylon. That was really a rebellion against the sentence of Jehovah, who was then, so to speak, morally compelled to cast the Jews out of His presence.
His name itself pointed to what overtook him.
Zedekiah refused "the words of the LORD" (Jeremiah 36:2). His two sons were killed before his eyes, his own eyes were put out, and he was carried away to Babylon. His name means "The justice of Jehovah". That justice fell on him because he refused the word spoken by the prophet.
Two earlier prophecies about Zedekiah look like they clash.
Both prophets implied that he would be taken, even if he tried to escape. Both affirmed that he must go to Babylon. But Ezekiel predicted "yet he shall not see it (Babylon, the land of the Chaldeans), though he shall die there"; Jeremiah predicted "your eyes shall behold the eyes of the king of Babylon, and he shall speak with you face to face." To a shallow reader this might seem hard to reconcile, if not a contradiction… But the king of Babylon put out Zedekiah's eyes, bound him with chains and carried him to Babylon. So he did not see Babylon, though he went there; yet he did see the angry conqueror's eyes, who spoke with him face to face. No word of the Lord falls to the ground.
Zedekiah had shown the prophet Jeremiah some kindness, and God did not forget it.
There were worse kings than he, and he showed some willingness to listen to the prophet. Still, Zedekiah brought on the crisis of judgment for Jerusalem and his people. It is not the most daring man who does the worst deed. Weakness may be guilty where there is no looking to God for strength… But the Lord showed him mercy. I think it was because of what he had done to His servant Jeremiah. "You shall not die by the sword, but you shall die in peace." How gracious is Jehovah! The kindly act is not forgotten by God.
God had also said He would deal with him "until I visit him." That sits oddly beside a sentence that ran to his death. One writer reads the visit as inward.
At Babylon he was thrown into prison "till the day of his death" (Jer. 52:11). "Until I visit him" (Jer. 32:5) might imply that he was finally set free, but "till the day of his death" rules out any such reading. It is better to take the expression to mean this. God in mercy would visit him with repentance and a true knowledge of Himself, as He did with Manasseh before him… So his soul would be set free, though his body stayed in prison.
With a blind king in a Babylonian cell, David's dynasty looked finished.
Nebuchadnezzar destroyed Jerusalem, and God allowed it in the way He governs the world. Zedekiah was the last of David's house to sit on his throne, and he was blinded. It appeared as if the lamp of David had been put out for good.
But God still had someone in mind for that throne.
God has One in His mind, once born in grace of David's royal line. World-wide rule is purposed for Him. Upheaval must follow upheaval until He appears… David's Heir — He who suffered for our salvation — will yet take up the crown that many have wanted but could not get.
One writer turns the blind captive into a warning for us.
When the enemy — the devil — has captured one of the Lord's people and brought him to Babylon, the first thing he seeks to do is to put out his eyes… Someone who would have been mighty in the power of the Spirit of God is seen only as a poor blind prisoner. And what a sad picture we have also in Zedekiah, a prisoner in Babylon, and blind.
- Cause: Zedekiah's revolt went against the sentence God had already passed. His name means "The justice of Jehovah", and that justice fell on him for refusing the prophet's word.
- Precision: The blinding made both prophecies come true. He saw the conqueror's face. He never saw Babylon. No word of the Lord falls to the ground.
- Mercy: God remembered the king's kindness to Jeremiah and spared him the sword. One writer reads "until I visit him" not as release, but as repentance given in prison.
- Reach: David's lamp only looked put out. The throne waits for the Heir who suffered for our salvation and will yet take the crown.
- Warning: Babylon's first work on a captive is to take away his sight — and Zedekiah stayed blind to the day of his death.
And in the fifth month, on the tenth of the month, which was in the nineteenth year of Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon, Nebuzar-adan, captain of the body-guard, who stood before the king of Babylon, came unto Jerusalem;
The verse fixes a date: in the fifth month of Nebuchadnezzar's nineteenth year, the captain of his bodyguard walked into the fallen city. The temple burns in the verses that follow, so this quiet note of a day and a name marks the turning point of Judah's history.
The number in this verse does not match the parallel account in 2 Kings 25:8, which gives the seventh day. One commentator traces the difference to the wording of the original text.
Verse 12 is the first place where this account seems to clash with 2 Kings 25. Verse 8 there seems at first glance to set Nebuzaradan's arrival on the seventh day of the fifth month. The prophecy connects it with the tenth. But there is a real difference in the original wording... In fact the first passage has no preposition at all. So the natural reading is that the servant of the king of Babylon had only come as far as Jerusalem on the seventh day, not that he entered it then. The prophecy, on the other hand, tells us he was in Jerusalem on the tenth day of the month, and the particle states this plainly.
The chapter has already explained how the siege started. Zedekiah broke with Babylon, and that was not just a political move.
Zedekiah should have been a model of submission, owning the just judgment of God. Above all, it was their evil that blocked the blessing of all the nations of the earth as independent powers. It also threw them, and all the other nations with them, under the empire of the golden head, the king of Babylon. And now Zedekiah rebelled against Babylon. That was really rebellion against the sentence of the LORD. So the LORD was, as it were, morally compelled to cast the Jews out of His presence.
The verse calls Nebuzaradan a servant of the king of Babylon. The book has already given that king a title of his own.
The book mentions Nebuchadnezzar, whom the LORD calls "My Servant," about forty times. God raises him up to carry out His judgment on Israel, and on other nations too. The LORD says, "I have given all these lands into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon, my servant... and all the nations shall serve him." God gives him dominion; He takes it away from Israel.
The next verse lists what he burned: the house of the LORD, the palace and the great houses. One writer sees a purpose behind the choice, and then turns it on the church today.
Nebuchadnezzar seems to have had no more hope that Judah would be subject to him. So he sent his servant Nebuzaradan to Jerusalem to burn the house of the LORD, the king's house and all the houses of the officials. He realised the Jews must have no centre of gathering. So the temple, built with such splendour in Solomon's day, went up in flames. What is there in Christendom that would answer to this? God's true Centre in the Church is Christ Himself. But is this realised today in the professing church?
The loss went further than a building. Enemies had carried Israel off before, but one writer marks this fall as a break of a different kind.
When Israel was carried away captive, it was Lo-ruhamah, but there was not yet an absolute cutting off as a people. When Nebuchadnezzar takes Jerusalem, the people become Lo-ammi. God rejects Israel. He no longer owns His people. He watches over them still for their final restoration to their land, but "the times of the Gentiles" begin.
Lo-ammi means "not my people." Lo-ruhamah means "not pitied."
Long after the city fell, people were still keeping this month as a fast. Men later came with a question about it, and God answered with a question of His own.
The question these men raised concerned a fast in the fifth month that people had kept for many years. Jeremiah 52:12 tells us that in this month the Babylonian army burned Solomon's magnificent temple and wrecked Jerusalem. Now the house of the LORD was going up once more, if not entirely finished. So was it right to keep the fast still? A very natural question! As far as we can tell, God gave no direct answer. Instead He raised another question with them. Did they have the LORD before their minds in what they did, or only themselves? Did they really fast, He asked, "to Me, even to Me?"
- Cause. Zedekiah rebelled against Babylon. Underneath, he was rebelling against the sentence God had already passed.
- Instrument. The man who lit the fire served Nebuchadnezzar. God calls Nebuchadnezzar "My Servant."
- Target. Fire took the temple to leave the people with no centre of gathering. The church's true centre is Christ Himself — but is that realised today?
- Result. With Jerusalem taken, Israel becomes Lo-ammi, "not my people," and the times of the Gentiles begin.
- Memory. People kept this month as a fast for generations. Then God asked whether the mourning had ever been for Him.
and he burned the house of Jehovah, and the king's house, and all the houses of Jerusalem; and every great [man's] house he burned with fire.
Jeremiah's closing chapter records the unthinkable: Babylon's army burned the temple Solomon built, the king's palace, and every great house in Jerusalem. Why would God let His own house burn, and what did that fire settle for the nation, for the world, and for us?
The house of the LORD is named first, before the palace and before the homes. Commentators ask what its burning proved that the ruin of the city alone did not.
God calls His house at Jerusalem the place of His sanctuary, the sanctuary of Christ. He was and is always the God of the Jews. This is not a simple treading down of the people by God's permission, as punishment for their sins. For it to go that far, God lets the temple itself be thrown down, as He did at the time of the captivity in Babylon. It had to be so, in order that God might show He has completely handed His people over to the fruit of their ways. While He upholds His honour in that house, He must stand up to defend them, even while He disciplines them. But if that house is destroyed and their city laid flat, then He truly leaves them to the ripened fruit of their sins. Even then, He may still intend to bring them back.
Could God ever give up His own sanctuary? Jeremiah had already answered that with Shiloh.
Shiloh was the place where God's tent of worship first stood in the land. What was Shiloh now? God had profaned it. He would do exactly the same where the ark now stood, in the sanctuary at Jerusalem. It is impossible for God to bind Himself to maintain an empty form. The temple was a beautiful picture of His truth. He would sustain it no longer, for the state of the people and of the priests was the most offensive evil under the sun in His eyes. God had given the Jewish people and their priests great truth and blessing, or at least great privileges. The greater the gift, the greater the wickedness of their insults to His holiness in His own temple.
Babylon's soldiers lit the fire. One writer looks past them to the One who gave the order.
Their civil disgrace and ruin were dreadful, because their outward standing and blessings came from God in a way unique to Israel. But what was that next to His degrading His own dwelling on earth among them! … It was no use thinking about the Chaldeans. It was God who brought Zion and the temple, and their feasts and fasts and sacrifices, with king and priest, to nothing.
Chapter 52 is an added conclusion to the book. Why does it end with this list of ruin?
The Holy Spirit of God has a special reason for giving us such a complete summary in this added conclusion. It is to picture for us the total failure of man on the ground of responsibility. We see it in the most privileged nation of all — the nation God gave special privileges and a unique place of nearness to Himself. This matters, because it proves that man cannot be trusted to direct a nation. If the most privileged nation fails, we can expect nothing better from the others — only worse.
The fire did more than ruin a city. Its date marks a change that has not ended yet.
In 588 B.C. Jerusalem fell in complete ruin, along with the temple Solomon had built. God took power and authority out of the hands of His own people and put it into Gentile hands. Nebuchadnezzar was the first head of the line of Gentile kingdoms (Dan. 2:38). It is still the "times of the Gentiles," and these will last until the kingdom comes into the hands of Christ.
Why burn the temple at all? One writer gives the reason, then turns it on the church today.
Nebuchadnezzar realised the Jews must have no centre of gathering. So fire destroyed the temple that Solomon had built in such splendour. What is there in the Christian world that answers to this? God's true Centre in the Church is Christ Himself. But does the church that bears His name recognise this today? No — Satan has succeeded in blotting out the clear recognition of Christ as God's one Centre. The result is confusion, with many sects and denominations struggling against each other.
- Privilege — Judah held the greatest privileges God ever gave a nation. It used them to insult Him in His own house.
- Patience spent — God will not keep a building going as an empty form. What happened to Shiloh happened to Jerusalem.
- Handed over — the burning sanctuary was God's sign that He had stopped shielding His people. He left them to the fruit of their own ways.
- Power transferred — with the temple in ashes, rule over the earth passed to Gentile hands. It has not returned yet.
- Centre kept — fire took Israel's one gathering place. For believers today the Centre is Christ Himself, and no fire can touch Him.
And all the army of the Chaldeans, that were with the captain of the body-guard, broke down all the walls of Jerusalem round about.
Verse 14 records the last stroke of the siege: the temple had burned, and now the whole Chaldean army pulled down every wall around Jerusalem. God had chosen this city as His dwelling place, and now it lay open ground — so who really did this, and why?
Zedekiah's rebellion was more than a political gamble. Commentators trace the ruin to a refusal to accept a sentence God had already passed.
Zedekiah should have been a pattern of submission, acknowledging the just judgment of God. Above all, it was their evil that had blocked the blessing of all the nations of the earth as independent powers. It had also thrown down not only themselves but all the others with them, under the empire of the golden head, the king of Babylon. And now Zedekiah rebelled against Babylon. That rebellion was really against the sentence of the Lord. So, in a sense, He was morally compelled to cast the Jews out of His presence.
Judah still had every outward advantage when the end came.
At that time Judah stood for the whole nation of Israel. It still had the city of government and a king of David's line on the throne. The House of the Lord still stood before them, and spoke to them of the preserving mercy of God. The chief priest and others still carried on the ministry. But they not only failed to do the good, they did what was downright evil in God's sight.
The verse names the Chaldean army. One commentator, writing on the book of Lamentations, looks past that visible cause.
Their loss of standing and their ruin were dreadful. Their outward place and blessings came from God in a way that belonged to Israel alone. But what was that next to His bringing down His own earthly dwelling among them! … It was no use thinking about the Chaldeans. It was God who brought it all to nothing: Zion and the temple, their feasts and fasts and sacrifices, with king and priest.
A wall does two things: it keeps danger out and it marks off what is inside. Breaking down all the walls destroyed both at once. One commentator reads that loss as a picture for God's people in any age.
Besides this, the army of the Chaldeans broke down the walls of Jerusalem all around, so the city would have no protection from raiders. So today, in the professing church, the wall of separation has been broken down, and unbelievers have easily come in to do damage.
Jeremiah's own words end at chapter 51; this chapter was added afterwards. Commentators ask why the same history found in 2 Kings needed repeating here.
Clearly, it was added to show how exactly the judgments and warnings God gave through Jeremiah came true. For a time the false prophets had their way; their lying messages, their words of delusion and false hope were listened to and believed. The prophet of God walked a lonely road; people rejected him and he suffered. But the time came when God vindicated him and His own Word, while the false prophets were found out to be liars and deceivers.
Another writer notes how complete the ruin was.
Jeremiah did not write chapter 52, yet it closes the book well. It links the Chaldean with the king, the capital, and the temple. The plundering of the city and sanctuary was complete, and so was the captivity of the people. God had not failed in anything He had predicted about Babylon's supremacy, nor about the value of submission to Babylon, the scourge of Judah's sin.
These same walls were rebuilt in Nehemiah's day, and Scripture looks on to a time when Jerusalem will need no stonework at all.
Walls will be unnecessary. The Lord Himself will be a wall of fire around the city, and He will also be "the glory in her midst." … Their walls, gates and bars will go (Ezek. 38:10-11): the Lord alone will defend them. This should be a clear, ringing testimony to the Church of God today. We have too often turned to people and to organizations for our protection, and for help in bearing witness for Christ before the world.
- Cause — A king rebelled against a sentence God had already passed. The army that broke the walls only carried out what that rebellion invited.
- Hand — Behind the army stood God Himself. He brought Zion, the temple, king and priest to nothing.
- Loss — A broken wall means two losses: defence and separation. What is left has no guard against what should have stayed outside.
- Vindication — The ruins proved the rejected prophet right, and the popular voices of false hope wrong.
- Hope — One day the Lord Himself will be the wall. He is where His people are meant to look for safety now.
And Nebuzar-adan the captain of the body-guard carried away captive of the poorest sort of the people, and the rest of the people that were left in the city, and the deserters that had deserted to the king of Babylon, and the rest of the multitude.
Jerusalem has fallen. At the very end of Jeremiah's book, this verse records how Nebuzaradan, the commander of Babylon's royal guard, sorted the survivors. Why close the book with a record of defeat, and why do the poor appear on both sides of his list?
This last chapter is an addition to the book. One writer reads it as the vindication of a man whose message nobody wanted:
It was clearly added to show how literally the judgment predictions and divine warnings given through Jeremiah were fulfilled. For a time the false prophets had their way. People listened to their lying messages, their words of delusion and false hope, and believed them. The prophet of God had a lonely lot. People rejected him, and he suffered. Yes, often the weeping prophet was discouraged and filled with gloom. But the time came when God proved him right, and proved His own Word right, while the false prophets turned out to be liars and deceivers.
Judah's last king, Zedekiah, rebelled against Babylon. One writer names what that revolt really was:
Zedekiah ought to have been a pattern of submission, owning the just judgment of God. It was their evil above all that had hindered the blessing of all the nations of the earth as independent powers. That same evil had thrown not only themselves but all others with them under the empire of the golden head, the king of Babylon. And now Zedekiah rebelled against Babylon. That was really a rebellion against the sentence of the Lord. So the Lord was, as it were, morally compelled to cast out the Jews from His presence.
Older translations end this verse with "the rest of the multitude" where the ESV has "the rest of the artisans," and the writers quoted here follow that older wording. The verse lists three groups of people, and one writer draws a single conclusion about them all:
Nebuzaradan carried away the rest of the people left in the city, those who had already gone over to the enemy, and the remnant of the multitude. We are surely right to see these captives as the main part of the non-fighting population of Jerusalem and Judah.
Note the detail: deserting to Babylon saved no one. Those who abandoned the city ended up in the same march as those who stayed in it.
Some of the poorest went into exile. Others stayed. One writer reads God's hand in that, and even guesses who these people were:
The poorest were allowed to remain, and they were treated with mercy. God remembers the poor and spares them. For all we know, these poor people, who had nothing, were the godly ones, those who wept over the conditions and who cried to God for help. God answered their prayer, the prayer of the needy.
Babylon meant to empty the land. Writing on the same scene told earlier in the book, one writer looks at who was left and sees a promise:
Yet the clearance was not complete. The poor did not fail in the land; some were left in it. That was a pledge, little as the foreigner realised it, of the return of a poor remnant. It was a pledge too of a nation yet to be poor in spirit, when God will bring back the captivity of His people, and Jacob shall rejoice and Israel shall be glad.
The exile is more than a national tragedy. One writer reads it as a test case, run on the people who had every advantage:
It is there to picture for us the complete failure of man on the ground of responsibility. That failure is shown in the most favoured nation of all — the nation to which God gave special privileges and a unique place of nearness to Himself. This matters, because it shows clearly that man cannot be trusted with national direction. If the most favoured nation fails, we can expect nothing better from the others, and rather worse.
- Cause — Zedekiah rebelled against Babylon. In truth he was rebelling against a sentence God had already passed, and the exile followed.
- Proof — This closing chapter shows that every warning Jeremiah gave came true. The voices that promised comfort proved false.
- Reach — Those carried off were the ordinary, non-fighting people. The list even names the deserters, so changing sides saved nobody.
- Mercy — Some of the poor went into exile and some stayed. One writer sees God sparing the needy as an answer to the prayers of people who had nothing.
- Result — The few left in the land were a pledge of a remnant returning, and of a nation one day poor in spirit. The record of failure ends by pointing forward.
But Nebuzar-adan the captain of the body-guard left of the poor of the land for vinedressers and for husbandmen.
Babylon's army burned Jerusalem, pulled down its walls and marched its people away. The one exception was the poorest people, who stayed to tend vines and fields — which raises a question: does God still care about what is left of a ruined nation?
The same detail appears at the end of 2 Kings. One writer marks what this moment began for the Jewish nation:
The end of 2 Kings tells how Nebuchadnezzar's captain of the guard destroyed Solomon's temple and razed Jerusalem to the ground. He broke down its walls, burned its palaces and houses, and deported all the Jews. He left only a few of "the poorest of the land to work the vineyards and fields" (2 Kings 25:12).
reader: DELETE It was then that the Times of the Gentiles began — the time when the Jewish nation came under Gentile domination.
Another writer reads the whole chapter as the record of a collapse, and draws a lesson from it:
Jeremiah 52 tells us of the failure of Judaism. May we learn the lesson and cling to the Lord Himself, abiding in Christ so that our joy may be full in spite of the failure.
The officer's plan was practical. Vinedressers tended vines and plowmen worked fields, so the conquered land would still produce food. One writer sees more in it than farm policy:
Still, the clearance was not complete. The poor did not fail in the land; some were left in it. Little as the foreign officer thought it, they were a pledge of the return of a poor remnant. They were a pledge, too, of a nation yet to be poor in spirit, when God will bring back the captivity of His people. Then Jacob shall rejoice and Israel shall be glad.
The captain of the guard decided who stayed. One writer looks past him to God:
The poorest were allowed to stay, and they were treated with mercy. God remembers the poor and spares them. For all we know, these poor people, who had nothing, were the godly, those who wept over the conditions and who cried to God for help. Their prayer, the prayer of the needy, was answered.
Jeremiah could have gone to Babylon. He stayed instead with the poor of the land — the people this verse describes. One writer weighs the two futures he faced:
He faces two choices. He may go to Babylon and enjoy the king's favours. There he will find his friends Daniel and Ezekiel, and other captives taken away earlier. There he can spend the rest of his life in relative quiet. On the other hand, he may remain with the poor of the land in Palestine and carry on a ministry among them. They will probably accept it no better than his earlier prophesying. Still, on God's part, it will bring a last encouragement to these desolate remains of Israel.
Decades later, when the returned exiles finished rebuilding the temple and kept the Passover, the guests included people who had separated themselves from the corruption around them. One writer traces where they came from:
When the house of God was finished, there was a season of much joy. The people offered sacrifices and kept the Passover. We learn from Jeremiah 52:16 that when the great captivity took place, "some of the poorest of the land" were left where they were, so that they might be farmers and work the soil. Some of these, or their descendants, cleansed themselves from evils they had become involved in. They joined in this time of revival and blessing, and so could take part in the feast of unleavened bread.
- Poor — The only people still standing in the wreckage owned nothing. The verse calls them the poorest, and that word carries the whole point.
- Kept — The conqueror saw cheap farm labour. God kept a foothold in the land: the poor "did not fail" there.
- Remembered — Kings and priests died, yet these poor received mercy. One writer sees God remembering the needy and answering their prayer.
- Joined — Jeremiah turned down comfort in Babylon and stayed with these poor people, to bring them a last encouragement from God.
- Restored — Some of these farmers, or their children, cleansed themselves and shared in the rebuilding. The pledge of return was already there in the vineyards.