Lecture 1: The Man and the Book
Lecture 2: The Poet
Lecture 3: Prophet – His Youth and His Call
Lecture 4: The Prophet in the Reigh of Josiah, 627-608 B.C.
Lecture 5: Under Jehoiakim, 608-597 B.C.
Lecture 6: To the End and After, 597-B.C.?
Lecture 7: The Story of His Soul
Lecture 8: God, Man and the New Covenant
Index of Texts
Index of Names and Subjects
The purpose and the scope of this volume are set forth in the beginning of Lecture I. Lecture II. explains the various metrical forms in which I understand Jeremiah to have delivered the most of his prophecies, and which I have endeavoured, however imperfectly, to reproduce in English. Here it is necessary only to emphasise the variety of these forms, the irregularities which are found in them, and the occasional passage of the Prophet from verse to prose and from prose to verse, after the manner of some other bards or rhapsodists of his race. The reader will keep in mind that what appear as metrical irregularities on the printed page would not be felt to be so when sung or chanted; just as is the case with the folk-songs of Palestine to-day. I am well aware that metres so primitive and by our canons so irregular have been more rhythmically rendered by the stately prose of our English Versions… [Continue reading]
Alexander Stewart was a renowned Scottish preacher and the served as Moderator of the Free Church of Scotland. This introduction to and exposition of the book of Jeremiah was originally published in 1936. My thanks to Book Aid’s London bookshop for providing me a copy available for scanning. This title is in the public domain.
This volume has had its origin in an article which I contributed some years ago to The Princeton Theological Review, and which – with considerable additions here and there, and especially in its closing section – forms the Introduction to the present work. In the paragraphs which make up this Preface, I trust that the frequent occurrence of the pronoun “I” may not be set down to mere egotism, but that the reader in his charity may regard the direct form of speech as more or less inevitable in the expression of what is a kind of personal testimony.
Before the time when the task referred to was undertaken, I acknowledge frankly that the Book of Jeremiah had made no special appeal to me. I can at least understand the confession of Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch in his work On the Art of Reading, when, in the notable passage in which he commends the duty of reading the Bible, he declares that he found Jeremiah ‘ the contributor least to his mind,’ the reason assigned for this distaste being that he was “not constitutionally disposed to lamentation.” [Continue reading]
Personally I don’t have any doubts that the Bible provides an accurate historical record of the people and events it describes. Even so, it is nice when someone comes up with yet another piece of hard evidence for this. The evidence doesn’t get any “harder” than than the 2,500 clay tablet discovered recently in the collection of the British Museum. This tablet is a receipt from one of the temples of Babylon to Nabu-sharrussu-ukin “chief eunuch” of Nebuchadnezzar. According to a recent article in The Daily Telegraph It is almost certain that this is the same person as is mentioned in Jeremiah 32:3:
Then all the officials of the king of Babylon came and took seats in the Middle Gate: Nergal-Sharezer of Samgar, Nebo-Sarsekim a chief officer, Nergal-Sharezer a high official and all the other officials of the king of Babylon. [NIV]
The find is being hailed as the most important find in Biblical Archaology for 100 years, Prof. Irving Finkel of the British Museum is quoted as saying:
This is a fantastic discovery, a world-class find, … If Nebo-Sarsekim existed, which other lesser figures in the Old Testament existed? A throwaway detail in the Old Testament turns out to be accurate and true. I think that it means that the whole of the narrative [of Jeremiah] takes on a new kind of power.
A writer who set out to write about the fall of Jerusalem might be expected to know the name of the Babylonian king that captured the city, but such secondary details demonstrate that the book is, as it claims, a contemporary eyewitness account.