Jeremiah 32:8 Kommentar

In this chapter we have, I. Jeremiah imprisoned for foretelling the destruction of Jerusalem and the captivity of king Zedekiah (Jer 32:1-5). II. We have him buying land, by divine appointment, as an assurance that in due time a happy end should be put to the present troubles (Jer 32:6-15). III. We have his prayer, which he offered up to God upon that occasion (Jer 32:16-25). IV. We have a message which God thereupon entrusted him to deliver to the people. 1. He must foretell the utter destruction of Judah and Jerusalem for their sins (Jer 32:26-35). But, 2. At the same time he must assure them that, though the destruction was total, it should not be final, but that at length their posterity should recover the peaceable possession of their own land (Jer 32:36-44). The predictions of this chapter, both threatenings and promises, are much the same with what we have already met with again and again, but here are some circumstances that are very particular and remarkable.

INTRODUCTION TO JEREMIAH 32 This chapter contains an account of Jeremiah's imprisonment, and the cause of it; of his buying a field of his uncle's son, and the design of it; of his prayer to God, and of the answer returned to him. The time of his imprisonment, the place where, and the reasons of it, are observed in Jer 32:1; that his uncle's son would come and offer the sale of a field to him was told him by the Lord, which he did accordingly, Jer 32:6; of whom he bought the field, paid the money, had the purchase confirmed in a legal way, before witnesses, Jer 32:8; and the writings of it he committed to Baruch, to put in an earthen vessel, where they were to continue some time as a pledge of houses, fields, and vineyards, being possessed again after the captivity, Jer 32:13; then follows a prayer of his to the Lord, in which he addresses him as the Maker of all things; as the Lord God omnipotent; as a God of great grace and mercy, as well as strict justice; as a God of wisdom, counsel, and might, and an omniscient and righteous Being, Jer 32:16; and recounts the wonderful things he had done for the people of Israel, Jer 32:20; and observes the ingratitude and disobedience of that people, which were the cause of the present siege of the city, which should surely be delivered into the hands of the Chaldeans, Jer 32:23; to which prayer an answer is returned, Jer 32:26; in which the Lord describes himself as the God of all flesh, and as able to do what he pleases, Jer 32:27; and confirms the delivery of the city of Jerusalem unto the Chaldeans, Jer 32:28; and assigns the causes of it, the backslidings, disobedience, and dreadful idolatry of the people, Jer 32:30; and, notwithstanding, promises a restoration of them to their own land again, Jer 32:36; when an opportunity is taken to insert the covenant of grace, and the special articles and peculiar promises of it, for the comfort of the spiritual Israel of God, whether Jews or Gentiles, Jer 32:38; and the chapter is concluded with a fresh assurance of the return of the captivity, and of the punctual performance of the promise of it; when fields should be bought in every part of the land, in like manner as Jeremiah had bought his, Jer 32:41.

And I bought the field of Hanameel mine uncle's son; that was in Anathoth,.... The prophet agreed with his cousin to take his field of him, at a certain price hereafter mentioned; which may seem strange in one that was a poor prophet, now a prisoner, and the land just going to be subject to the Chaldeans: but the design of this was to show that there would be a return from captivity, when houses and fields should be bought and sold again, of which this was a pledge: and weighed him the money; agreed upon, which was reckoned not by tale, but by weight: even seventeen shekels of silver; which, reckoning a shekel at half a crown, were no more than two pounds, two shillings, and sixpence; a small sum of money to make a purchase of a field with; though this may be accounted for by the scarcity of money, the field in the hand of the enemy, there being only his kinsman's life in it, the prophet bought the reversion, being his of right; and, besides, it might be only an orchard or garden that is so called. In the Hebrew text it is, "seven shekels and ten pieces of silver": and Kimchi and Ben Melech say, that by "shekels" are meant minas or pounds; and by "pieces of silver", selahs or shekels: and so the Targum renders it, "seven minas, and ten shekels of silver.'' Now a minah or maneh, according to Eze 45:12; was equal to sixty shekels, and so of the value of seven pounds, ten shillings; seven of these made fifty two pounds, ten shillings; and the other ten shekels being one pound, five shillings, the whole amounted to fifty three pounds, fifteen shillings, which would purchase a considerable field.

(Verse 8) And Anameel, the son of my uncle, came to me, according to the Word of the Lord, to the entrance (or courtyard) of the prison, and he said to me: Possess (or buy) my field, which is in Anathoth in the land of Benjamin, for the inheritance belongs to you, and you are a close relative to possess (or buy) it. What the word of the Lord had foretold through the prophet, immediately came to pass. Anameel came to me, by the grace of God, the son of my uncle, that is, the son of peace. But he came to the vestibule of the prison, and he said to me the things that the Lord had foretold to him. Now this priestly field, whose purchase and possession belonged to Jeremiah, is in Anathoth, in the land of Benjamin, where the obedience of the former resounds according to the Son of the Right Hand. And consequently, he desires its acquisition, in which the obedience and virtue of the Lord were evident. For this reason, the Seventy interpreted it as 'elder,' that is, 'elderly,' which does not fit in this context.

JEREMIAH, IMPRISONED FOR HIS PROPHECY AGAINST JERUSALEM, BUYS A PATRIMONIAL PROPERTY (HIS RELATIVE HANAMEEL'S), IN ORDER TO CERTIFY TO THE JEWS THEIR FUTURE RETURN FROM BABYLON. (Jer 32:1-14) tenth year--The siege of Jerusalem had already begun, in the tenth month of the ninth year of Zedekiah (Jer 39:1; Kg2 25:1).

Then I knew--Not that Jeremiah previously doubted the reality of the divine communication, but, the effect following it, and the prophet's experimentally knowing it, confirmed his faith and was the seal to the vision. The Roman historian, FLORUS (2.6), records a similar instance: During the days that Rome was being besieged by Hannibal, the very ground on which he was encamped was put up for sale at Rome, and found a purchaser; implying the calm confidence of the ultimate issue entertained by the Roman people.

What had been announced to the prophet by God took place. Hanamel came to him, and offered him his field for sale. From this Jeremiah perceived that the proposed sale was the word of the Lord, i.e., that the matter was appointed by the Lord. Jer 32:9. Jeremiah accordingly bought the field, and weighed out to Hanamel "seven shekels and ten the silver" (הכּסף is definite, as being the amount of money asked as price of purchase). But the form of expression is remarkable: "seven shekels and ten" instead of "seventeen" (שׁבעה ועשׂרת שׁקלי הכּסף). The Chaldee consequently has "seven manehs and ten shekels of silver;" and J. D. Michaelis supposes that the seven shekels which are first named, and are separated from the ten, were shekels of gold: "seven shekels of gold, and seven shekels of silver." But both assumptions are gratuitous, and perhaps only inferences, not merely from the unusual separation of the numerals, but likewise from the fact that seventeen silver shekels (less than two pounds sterling) was too small a price for an arable field. The supposition of Hitzig has more in its favour, that the mode of expression "seven shekels and ten (shekels) of silver" was a law form. Some have sought to explain the smallness of the price on the ground that the seller was compelled to part with his property through poverty, and that the land had become depreciated in consequence of the war. Both may be true; but, as Ngelsbach has already remarked, neither explains the smallness of the price. For instances have very properly been adduced from Roman history (Livy, xxvi. 11, and Florus, ii. 6) which show that occupation of a country by an enemy did not lessen the value of ground-property. It is rather to be taken into consideration, that in the first place we do not know the real value of arable land among the Hebrews; and secondly, the sale of portions of land was, correctly speaking, only the sale of the harvests up till the year of jubilee, for then the property returned to the former possessor of his heirs. In the case of a sale, then, the nearer the jubilee-year, the smaller must be the price of purchase in the alienation of the land.