Commentary on Jeremiah Volume 1 John Calvin
COMMENTARY ON JEREMIAH
and Jeremiah has before said,
vain have I chastised my children; they have not received correction.''
(Jeremiah 2:30)
So also it is said by Isaiah,
vengeance must I take on my enemies,'' (Isaiah 1:24) but to what purpose? He afterwards adds, that it was without any benefit, because their wickedness was incurable.
The first meaning, however, is not to be rejected, for it was not unsuitable to say, that the tongue of the Prophet was worn out with constant crying, that his throat was nearly dried up. But I approve more of what I have just stated. Let each make his own choice. If we consider prophetic teaching to be here intended, we may also draw another meaning, --- that the Prophet's mouth was consumed by God's terrors; for it was like burning, whenever God threatened the people with final destruction.
The Prophet then does not without reason say, that his throat was burnt by fire, even the threatenings of God.
He afterwards adds, that the lead was entire This sentence rather favors the view, that Jeremiah is speaking of the judgments by which God sought to humble the people and to lead them to repentance; for it cannot be suitably applied to doctrine or teaching, that the lead was unmixt. By lead I understand dross. Some consider it to be silver, and say that lead was mixed with silver, in order that the silver might more easily be melted. As I am not skillful in that art, I cannot say whether this is done or not. But the Prophet says that the lead was unmixt; that is, that nothing was found but dross and filth.
He then adds, In vain has the melter melted, for evils have not been purged away; that is, the dross had not been removed so as to leave behind the pure metal. He means, in short, that there was nothing but dross and filth in the people, and not a particle of pure silver. It hence followed, that they had been as it were in vain melted. Now, this applies more fitly to punishment than to teaching, as all must see.
I hence do not doubt but that the Prophet shews here, that the Jews were not only wicked and apostates and despisers of God, but were also so obstinate that God had often tried in vain to purify them. And it is a kind of speaking, we know, which occurs often in the prophets and throughout Scripture, that God is said to melt, to purge, to refine men, when he chastises them. But the Prophet says that there was only filth in that people, that lead was found, and that they were not melted. And hence we learn how great was their hardness: though they were tried by fire, they yet melted not, but continued in their perverseness. 187 He afterwards adds ---
Jeremiah 6:30
30. Reprobate silver shall men call them, because the LORD hath rejected them.
30. Argentum reprobatum (contemptibile) vocarunt 188 ipsos (hoc est, vocabunt:)
187The true reading of the third word in this verse is {{}תם{, מאשaccording to the Keri, many MSS., the Septuagint and the Vulgate; and sometimes{}תםmeans ``consumed.'' Pliny says that they formerly used lead to separate the dross from the silver, as they use quicksilver now. Then the verse is to be thus rendered, --- Burnt has been the bellows by the fire, Consumed has been the lead; In vain has been the melting of the melted, For their evils have not been separated. They had been in the furnace, but the lead intended to separate the dross from the silver, was consumed, and the melting did not succeed, for their evils, or their vices, were not separated from them. Hence in the next verse they are called reprobate silver. --- Ed.
188The ancient versions, except the Syriac, render this in the imperative mood, "vocate —
JOHN CALVIN
quia sprevit (vel, reprobavit) ipsos Jehova.
Jeremiah concludes his subject by saying, --- that if the Jews had been cast a hundred times into the furnace, they would not be improved, as they would never become softened on account of their hopeless obstinacy. He uses the word silver, by way of concession; for they were not worthy of that name, and we have already seen that there was nothing soft or tender in them.
But the prophets often conceded some things to hypocrites; yet not without some appearance of a taunt, as the case seems to be here. The Jews wished to be regarded as silver, and to appear as such: ``Let them then be silver, ``that is, ``Let them claim the name, by boasting themselves as the holy seed of Abraham; but they are a reprobate silver;'' according to what we say, Faux or faux argent; which yet is neither silver nor gold; but the words are used not in their strict meaning, and we afterwards shew that what we have so called is not silver. Even so does the Prophet say, ``They are silver in their own esteem, and take pride in the title: but they are a reprobate silver.'' How so? For Jehovah has rejected them He shews that it belongs to God to pronounce sentence on men, and that they gain nothing by their vain flatteries, and by securing some esteem in the world: for God alone is the true judge. The Prophet then shews that the Jews were a reprobate silver, in order that they might know that they in vain gloried, while they boasted themselves to be God's people and heritage.
Now follows --- call ye them." So also the Targum, and Blayney has adopted the same, — Reprobate silver call ye them, For reprobated (or, rejected) them has Jehovah. — Ed.