Jeremias 3:1

III.

(1) The parable of the guilty wife who is condemned in spite of all her denials is carried out to its logical results.

They say. — Better, So to speak, as introducing a new application of the figure. The direct reference is to Deuteronômio 24:4, which forbade the return to the past husband as an abomination, a law which the recent discovery of the Book of the Law (2 Reis 22:10) had probably brought into prominence. But there is also an obvious allusion to the like imagery in Hosea. There the prophet had done, literally or in parable, what the law had forbidden (Oséias 2:16; Oséias 3:3), and so had held out the possibility of return and the hope of pardon. Jeremiah has to play a sterner part. and to make the apostate adulteress at least feel that she had sinned too deeply to have any claims to forgiveness. It might seem as if Jehovah could not now return to the love of His espousals, and make her what she once had been.

Yet return again to me, saith the Lord. — The words sound in the English like a gracious invitation, and — in spite of the authority of many interpreters who take it as an indignant exclamation, and return to me! an invitation given in irony, and so equivalent to rejection, as though that return were out of the question — it must, I think, be so taken. The prophet has, as we have seen, the history of Hosea in his mind, where there had been such a call to return (Oséias 2:19; Oséias 3:3), and actually refers to it and repeats it in Jeremias 3:7; Jeremias 3:12; Jeremias 3:14. It surely implies a want of insight into the character of Jeremiah to suppose that he ever came before men as proclaiming an irrevocable condemnation, excluding the possibility of repentance.