Jeremiah 35:11

Jer 35:11 But it came to pass, when Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon came up into the land, that we said, Come, and let us go to Jerusalem for fear of the army of the Chaldeans, and for fear of the army of the Syrians: so we dwell at Jerusalem.

Ver. 11. Come, and let us go to Jerusalem.] So then it was lawful for them to dispense with those their observances, in that inevitable necessity; like as also they might have drunk wine rather than have perished. But what can be reasonably pleaded for that man of sin, who taketh upon him to dispense with God’s holy law, and de iniustitia facere iustitiam, ex nihilo aliquid, ex virtute vitium, {a} to make righteousness of unrighteousness, vice of virtue, something of nothing?

So we dwell at Jerusalem.] But better they had kept out, and held to their old course; for so they might have escaped some way.

{a} Bellarm., De Pontif. Rom, lib. iv.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Which declareth that they were not so bound to their vow, that it could not be broken for any necessity: for where they were commanded to dwell in tents, they dwell now at Jerusalem for fear of the wars.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

Chaldeans . . . Syrians--when Jehoiakim revolted from Nebuchadnezzar (Kg2 24:1-2). Necessity sets aside all other laws. This is the Rechabites' excuse for their seeming disobedience to Jonadab in temporarily settling in a city. Herein was seen the prescient wisdom of Jonadab's commands; they could at a moment's notice migrate, having no land possessions to tie them.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 11. But - when Nebuchadnezzar - came up] If at present we appear to be acting contrary in any respect to our institutions, in being found in the city, necessity alone has induced us to take this temporary step. We have sought the shelter of the city for the preservation of our lives; so now we dwell at Jerusalem.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

It hence appears that it proved advantageous to the Rechabites to observe what their father had commanded them: for had they been fixed to their possessions, they must have been driven into exile with the rest when the kingdom of Israel was destroyed; what happened to the ten tribes nmst have happened to the Rechabites. But as they had nothing as their own, they were freer to move elsewhere; nor had they the trial of leaving possessions, for they had none. We know that many are so tied to their own houses, fields, vineyards, and meadows, that they would rather be killed a hundred times than to be torn away from them. Then Jenadab consulted well the benefit of his posterity, when he ordered them to dwell in tents; for thus they could collect together in one day all that they had, according to the known saying of Bias. Hence poverty was a great advantage to them: their austerity of life was also a benefit to them; they could without difficulty dwell at Jerusalem, for they had no need of many luxuries. Had they been accustomed to wine and to other delicacies, they might have discussed the point, whether it would have been better for them at once to die than to suffer want in a besieged city. Moreover, as they had lived frugally and had also been accustomed to an austere life, no anxiety prevented them to come with confidence to Jerusalem; for they thought that they could gain a sparing and sordid subsistence by their own labor.

It hence then appears what Jenadab had in view, when he forbade his posterity the use of wine as well as the possession of fields and vineyards; for he could then foresee what dreadful revolutions were at hand. It was therefore his purpose thus to train up his posterity, that when difficulties came they might not succumb under the burden, but patiently bear want or any other inconvenience, which to others would be intolerable, whenever their former delicacies came to mind. We they said, Come, and let us enter into Jerusalem from the face of both armies. When therefore the Israelites were detained by their fields and domestic possessions, the Rechabites went to Jerusalem, and thus were freed from danger. It now follows, —

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(11) When Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon came up into the land . . .—The statement has the character of an apologetic explanation. They had been driven, as the peasants of Judaea had been (Jer_4:6; Jer_8:14), to take refuge from the invading armies, probably in the invasion of Nebuchadnezzar in the eighth year of Jehoiakim (2Ki_24:1-2), bringing their flocks and their herds, as far as they could, with them, but this was only a temporary casualty, and they intended, when the danger was over, to return to their former mode of life. The Syrians are joined with the Chaldees in the invasion, as in 2Ki_24:2.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

11. Syrians] allies of the Chaldaeans at this period. See 2Ki_24:2.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

But it came to pass, when Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon came up into the land,.... Into the land of Judea to invade it, which was in the reign of Jehoiakim, in the fourth year of it, after he had served him three years, and rebelled against him; See Gill on Jer 35:1;

that we said, come, and let us go to Jerusalem; they said one to another, let us not stay here to be destroyed by a foreign enemy; but let us go to Jerusalem, a fortified city, where we may be safe:

for fear of the army of the Chaldeans, and for fear of the army of the Syrians; for Nebuchadnezzar's army in this expedition consisted of Chaldeans and Syrians, and of other nations, Kg2 24:2;

so we dwell at Jerusalem; for the present. It seems as though this was quickly after Nebuchadnezzar's incursion, and when he was but just departed; so that their fears had not wholly subsided; and they, as yet, had not returned to their tents, and former manner of living: hence it appears that the Rechabites did not look upon this command of their father as equal to a divine precept, which must be always obeyed; but that in case of necessity it might be dispensed with, and especially when in danger of life, and when human prudence required it; and in which case the lawgiver himself would have dispensed with it, had he been on the spot.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

The Syrians - The Septuagint substitutes Assyrians for Syrians, but marauding bands of the Aramaeans are probably meant.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Syria. 4 Kings xxiv. 2. The mention of these shews that this was the second siege, when Joakim was slain, and many led into captivity, (chap. lii. 28.) with these Rechabites. (Calmet) --- They lived under tents, but in case of necessity entered the city, ver. 10. If they observe works of supererogation, all must surely keep God’s law. (Worthington)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

When the Chaldean army came into the land, they saw there would be no quiet abode for them any where but in some fortified place. The Syrians joined with the Chaldeans in this war, as we read, 2Ki 24:2. This they tell the prophet was the reason why they, who never used to dwell in cities nor fixed houses, came to dwell at Jerusalem, to prevent being destroyed by the foragers for these armies.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

11. Army of the Syrians — In the earlier times the Syrians were their great danger; and even now the greater army of the Chaldeans included the lesser of the Syrians.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And for fear of the army of the Syrians. We are expressly told in 2Ki_24:2 that, after the rebellion of Jehoiakim, "bands of Syrians" made incursions into Judah.

Vers. 11-17. Filal obedience.

The filial obedience of the Rechabites is here adduced as a rebuke to the people of Israel for their disobedience to their Father in heaven.

I WE OWE A DUTY OF FILIAL OBEDIENCE TO GOD. Obligation corresponds to privilege; peculiar relationship involves peculiar duties. If God is our Father, we owe special obedience to God on account of our relationship with him. The doctrine of the fatherhood of God is no excuse for the relaxation of the fidelity which we felt to be obligatory so long as he was regarded only as our supreme Ruler. Instead of making us more careless, this doctrine should increase the assiduity of our devotion. Strict religionists who dread the moral effects of the modern broad enunciation of this great truth, and lax self-indulgent people who fancy it will allow them to defy the Law of God at pleasure, both fall into a grievous mistake. The father has rights over his children possessed by no one else, and they owe obedience to him as to no other person. This was recognized and carried out much further in the ancient world than it is among us.

1. It is based on nature; the child naturally belongs to the parent.

2. It is increased by experience. For years the child is wholly dependent on his parents. Helpless, and needing constant attention, he finds in them sustenance, protection, and happiness. Parental anxiety, labour, and sacrifice should bind the children by ties of deepest gratitude. Repayment is impossible, nor is it expected; but the least that can be done is to offer, obedience.

3. It is recognized by law. The old Roman law gave the father absolute power over the life of his child. Modem law, though it interferes more with the relations of the family, sanctions wide parental fights. Now, if God is our Father, similar obligations bind us to filial obedience to him over and above the obligation we may feel to his Law, his holiness, and his supremacy. (Mal_1:6)

II THE NEGLECT OF FILIAL OBEDIENCE TO GOD IS REBUKED BY THE NEGLECT OF FILIAL OBEDIENCE TO MEN. The Rechabites were a rebuke to the Israelites. Yet the Israelites had less excuse for disobeying their heavenly Father than the Rechabites would have had for neglecting the ordinances of their ancestor. Matthew Henry clearly indicates the points of contrast somewhat as follows. I give his thoughts with abridgment:

1. The Rechabites were obedient to one who was but a man; but the Jews were disobedient to an infinite and eternal God.

2. Jonadab was long since dead, and could neither take cognizance of their disobedience nor give correction for it; but God lives forever to see how his laws are observed, and to punish disobedience.

3. The Rechabites were never put in mind of their obligations to their father; but God often sent his prophets to his people, "rising early and speaking," etc.

4. Jonadab never did that for his seed which God had done for his people; he left them a charge, out left them no estate to bear the charge; but God had given his people a good land, etc.

5. God did not tie up his people to so much hardship as Jonadab required of his descendants; and yet Jonadab"s orders were obeyed, and God"s were not.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And it came to pass when Nebuchadrezzar...came up Perforce we came to the city. Therefore, we are now dwelling in houses.

Rashi on the Tanakh — English translations: “The Judaica Press complete Tanach with Rashi, translated by A. J. Rosenberg” (CC BY 4.0); “Pentateuch with Rashi's commentary by M. Rosenbaum and A.M. Silbermann, 1929-1934” (public domain); “The Metsudah Tanach series, Lakewood, N.J” (CC BY 4.0); and “The Book of Joshua, Metsudah Publications, 1997” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.