Your ShelfYour Projects

JEREMIAH XXXI, 18–40

2%

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Mar 10, 1868

FromReview and Herald, Vol. 31, No. 13.

Read the full edition

JEREMIAH XXXI, 18–40

Battle Creek Bible Class, Feb. 29, 1868.

JEREMIAH XXXI, 18–40

The subject for consideration at this session, was the remainder of Jer. xxxi, the former portion of which was examined last Sabbath, as reported in last Review.
Verse 18. I have surely heard Ephraim bemoaning himself thus; Thou hast chastised me, and I was chastised, as a bullock unaccustomed to the yoke: turn thou me, and I shall be turned; for thou art the Lord my God.
The general application of this prophecy, so far as examined, seems to belong to the time of the Babylonish captivity. The term Ephraim probably signifies Israel as a whole, and his bemoaning himself, the sorrow and humiliation of the Jews during their burdensome captivity. The prayer, “Turn thou me, and I shall be turned,” indicates a desire for a thorough and sincere repentance, that the favor of the Lord may again be bestowed upon them.
Verse 19. Surely after that I was turned, I repented; and after that I was instructed, I smote upon my thigh; I was ashamed, yea, even confounded, because I did bear the reproach of my youth.
This verse indicates the complete and thorough humiliation of the children of Israel after the Lord had opened their eyes, and given them a realizing sense of their condition. Smiting upon the thigh was a token of shame and remorse. See Eze. xxi, 12.
Verse 20. Is Ephraim my dear son? is he a pleasant child? for since I spake against him, I do earnestly remember him still: therefore my bowels are troubled for him; I will surely have mercy upon him, saith the Lord.
The Lord here indicates his affection and tender mercy for his wayward, erring people. Some versions render this: “Is not Ephraim my dear son?” &c. That is, notwithstanding, the Lord chastises, he still holds his people in merciful remembrance, and administers the punishment only for their good. They are still dear to him, and he still has a care for them.
Verse 21. Set thee up waymarks, make thee high heaps: set thine heart toward the highway, even the way which thou wentest: turn again, O virgin of Israel, turn again to these thy cities.
The children of Israel are here exhorted to take the necessary steps toward their restoration, that they may again come to their cities. To do this they must first set up waymarks, and make high heaps. What is meant by these expressions is not clearly apparent, but the opinion was advanced that it signified a duty enjoined upon them to set before their children the causes of their captivity, that they might serve as waymarks for them in the future to avoid like sins lest they suffer a like punishment.
In order to turn again to their cities they must set their hearts toward the highway: their affections must be turned into a different channel. Their steps must be retraced, and the path of duty and obedience must be traveled.
Verse 22. How long wilt thou go about, O thou backsliding daughter? for the Lord hath created a new thing in the earth, A woman shall compass a man.
The backsliding daughter, referring to Israel, is here admonished to wander no longer, as the Lord will bring about their deliverance, and that is to be accomplished in a manner represented as a woman compassing a man. By the interposition of divine aid, the weak, defenceless Jews, compared to a woman in strength, will be restored to their position among the nations, against the opposition of all their enemies, notwithstanding their power and determination to prevent it.
This idea is sustained by the verse which follows, promising the restoration.
Verses 23–25. Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel; As yet they shall use this speech in the land of Judah and in the cities thereof, when I shall bring again their captivity: The Lord bless thee, O habitation of justice, and mountain of holiness. And there shall dwell in Judah itself, and in all the cities thereof together, husbandmen, and they that go forth with flocks. For I have satiated the weary soul, and I have replenished every sorrowful soul.
The promise is here given that the land of Judah shall yet be praised as the habitation of justice, &c. In their state of captivity they were not receiving justice, but the time was coming when this would no longer be the case. They would again be restored to their own country, and prosperity and peace would again dawn upon them. Their flocks and herds would graze on the hillsides of their own land, and the labors of husbandry would again be carried on peacefully in Judah. The weary and sorrowful souls would be satisfied with the blessing which God would abundantly bestow upon them, when they again came into possession of their own country.
Verse 26. Upon this I awaked, and beheld: and my sleep was sweet unto me.
We learn from this that the prophet received this revelation in a dream, and the information imparted was of such a consolatory character that his sleep was sweet and refreshing, in pleasing contrast to that of Nebuchadnezzar whose “sleep brake from him” when the Lord gave him a dream. Dan. ii, 1.
Verse 27. Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will sow the house of Israel and the house of Judah with the seed of man, and with the seed of beast.
Indicating that the nation would multiply and the land become very populous, so much so as to be compared to the increase of seed when sown.
Verse 28. And it shall come to pass, that like as I have watched over them, to pluck up, and to break down, and to throw down, and to destroy, and to afflict; so will I watch over them, to build, and to plant, saith the Lord.
The Lord here promises to exercise the same degree of care in their restoration as in their dispersion. While he permitted them to be plucked up, broken, and thrown down and destroyed with great thoroughness, so would he exercise thoroughness in watching over their building, planting, &c.
Verses 29, 30. In those days they shall say no more, The fathers have eaten a sour grape, and the children’s teeth are set on edge. But every one shall die for his own iniquity; every man that eateth the sour grape, his teeth shall be set on edge.
This proverb seems to have been used to convey the idea of hereditary punishment, or of children suffering for the sins of the parent. This was the case in their captivity. While the parents committed the sins for which they suffered in bondage, the children also suffered although they were not guilty of the sins which brought the punishment upon them.
But the time was coming when every man must bear his own sins, and suffer himself the consequences of his disobedience.

THE NEW COVENANT.

Verse 31. Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah.
The point worthy of special notice in this verse, is the fact that the new covenant is made with the same parties as was the old, the houses of Israel and Judah. Not as some would have it, the old with the Jews and the new with the Gentiles, but both covenants are made with the same class, Israel and Judah.
Verses 32, 33. Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers, in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was a husband unto them, saith the Lord. But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel: After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts: and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
We here have a description of the new covenant. It consists, not in a new law, or rule of obedience, but in a new disposition of that law, i. e., writing it upon their hearts: The law itself is not the covenant, but the basis of the covenant. If we can find the basis of the first covenant, we have that of the second. We understand the first covenant to be the agreement between the Lord and Israel, relative to obedience to the law of God, embracing also the means by which their deviations from that law might be atoned for. In short, the whole typical service, which was of itself a carrying out of the agreement between God and Israel, the former promising to cherish the latter as a peculiar people, and they promising in turn to obey the Lord in all his requirements. The ground-work of that covenant, or that upon which it is based, is the law of God, or ten commandments, which embrace, as his word informs us, “the whole duty of man.” This law is also the basis of the new covenant, with this difference: It is now written on the hearts of all who are embraced within the provisions of the covenant. The old covenant was made with the Jews as a nation, but the new is made with individuals, those who choose to have the law of God written in their hearts, or in other words, those who yield obedience to the government of Heaven, in letter and in spirit.
The contrast between the two covenants, as presented in the word of God, is as follows:
1. The old covenant is styled as faulty. Heb. viii, 7. This fault might consist,
First, in the law which was the basis of the agreement, or the subject of the contract,
Secondly, in the terms of the agreement, or,
Thirdly, in the parties to the agreement.
That the fault was not in the law which was the basis, or the ten commandments, is evident from the teachings of Scripture. That law is called “perfect,” “holy, just, and good,” &c., which forbids the idea of its being the faulty element in the covenant. Its freedom from fault is also evident from the fact of its being taken as the basis of the new covenant.
That the parties to the agreement were at fault, is evident from Heb. viii, 8: “for finding fault with them, he saith, Behold the days come,” &c. The fault which he finds with them is that “they continued not in my covenant. . . . saith the Lord.”
2. The disposition made of the law which was the basis of both covenants. In the former covenant itwas written on tables of stone, in the latter, on the “fleshly tables of the heart.”
3. By the provisions of the first covenant, sin was taken away only in figure, while by the new, it is taken away in fact.
The first covenant embraced in its service the ministration in a worldly sanctuary, while the second has a heavenly sanctuary.
Thus are the covenants contrasted, and the new exalted over the old, but in no case do we find a change recorded in the law, which was to be a rule of obedience for those who were to be embraced in its merciful provisions, and all the talk about change of the covenants doing away with the fourth, or any other of the ten commandments, indicates a great lack of understanding in regard to the nature of the covenants.
Verse 34. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord; for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord; for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
The Lord here gives the results of the carrying out of the new covenant. This text is frequently quoted as proof of the doctrine of a temporal millennium, or perhaps we should say, frequently mis-quoted, as it is frequently garbled to read thus: “All shall know the Lord, from the least to the greatest.” But the reader will notice the difference in the form of expression. The promise reads, “from the least of them unto the greatest of them.” Least and greatest of whom? Those with whom the covenant is made. And does this embrace all the world, and therefore necessitate the world’s conversion? By no means. The very use of the expression implies the contrary.
But it may be asked, When will this be fulfilled, if not in the world’s conversion? To which we reply, There is nothing in the nature of the promise to forbid its fulfillment at any time during the gospel age. Those who are fully embraced in the condition of the covenant, having the law of God written in their hearts, need not be exhorted to seek for a knowledge of the Lord, for all (of such) shall know him from the least even unto the greatest. The distinction between the covenants should here be borne in mind. The former was made with Israel as a nation, before they had a knowledge of God; hence many who were reckoned as under that covenant were entirely destitute of that knowledge, and needed to be commanded to know the Lord. But the new covenant is made with individuals, and only with those who first consent to have God’s law written in their hearts; hence those with whom the covenant is made are those who have a knowledge of God.
The misapplication of this text arises from supposing that the first covenant belonged to the Jews as a whole, and the second to the Gentiles as a whole, and that therefore it cannot be fulfilled until the Gentiles as a whole come to the knowledge of God.
To be sure, the glory of the new covenant will not be realized in full until we reach the immortal state, for which it is expressly designed to prepare us, by placing God’s holy law upon our hearts, and thus moulding us in harmony with his government.
Verses 35–37. Thus saith the Lord, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; The Lord of hosts is his name: If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the Lord, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me forever. Thus saith the Lord; If heaven above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have done, saith the Lord.
The promise which the Lord has been making to his people, is here confirmed by the strongest possible expressions. The permanency of the sun, moon and stars, is taken to illustrate the perpetuity of Israel as a nation, and the immeasurability of space to show the impossibility of their being cast off.
On the strength of this promise some have based the idea of a final restoration of the Jews, in an age to come. But this is unnecessary. The manner in which God has preserved this promise inviolate, is by breaking off the old branches, those who refused to embrace the provisions of the new covenant, and grafting in others, thus to preserve and perpetuate the Israelitish tree, its grafted branches, “contrary to nature,” becoming a part of the main trunk. Hence, those with whom the new covenant is made are of Israel, in the sense in which the apostle speaks in Rom. ix, 4–8.
Verses 38–40. Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that the city shall be built to the Lord from the tower of Hananeel unto the gate of the corner. And the measuring line shall yet go forth over against it upon the hill Gareb, and shall compass about to Goath. And the whole valley of the dead bodies, and of the ashes, and all the fields unto the brook of Kidron, unto the corner of the horse gate toward the east, shall be holy unto the Lord; it shall not be plucked up, nor thrown down any more for ever.
This prophecy has not yet been fulfilled. The city Jerusalem is, therefore, yet to occupy a great space, and “the whole valley of dead bodies” (Gehenna), to be holy unto the Lord. It may not be unreasonable to conclude that this will be fulfilled in the establishment of the New Jerusalem on the earth made new, at a time when it may be said of it, “It shall not be plucked up nor thrown down any more forever.”

QUESTIONS.

1. Was provision made for man’s redemption before his fall?
This question was introduced at the last session of the class, and was laid over one week. After some discussion, a vote was taken, and the class decided, by a large majority, that in their opinion, no such provision was made.
2. How do you harmonize the command of the Lord in Gen. vi, 19–22, in which all “living flesh” was to go into the ark by twos, with the command in chapter vii, 2–5, in which the clean beasts and fowls were to be taken by sevens? H. G. B.
There are two purposes in view in these two commands. In the first, the design is simply to perpetuate the species by taking a pair of each variety, but in the second, the number of clean beasts was increased for the purpose of preserving enough for sacrifices, as Noah, on coming out of the ark immediately offered burnt offerings of all kinds of clean beasts and fowls.
The second command does not annul the first, as the former could be obeyed, perfectly, in carrying out the latter.
3. If our Saviour was crucified on Friday and put into the tomb at, or near sunset, how do you reconcile Jonah i, 17, and Matt. xii, 39, 40, with that fact?
By that peculiarity of expression sometimes used by the Jews, by which a part of a day was taken for the whole. As Christ was in the tomb one whole day and a part of two others, this form of expression would apply here.
Some of the class thought that the expression “in the heart of the earth,” signified, in the hands, or power of the people, but this opinion was not sustained by the majority, the former opinion having the preference. W. C. G.