A Summary Of The Political Situation At This Stage (Jeremiah 37:1-5).
The political situation at this stage can be summed up in a few words. Jerusalem was under siege because Zedekiah, Jehoiakim's uncle, who was now king and had previously been appointed by Nebuchadnezzar, had rebelled against him and withheld tribute. And he had done this contrary to YHWH's words through Jeremiah. Neither he nor his people had been willing to listen to the voice of YHWH. Nevertheless they asked for Jeremiah to pray for them and allowed him his freedom, but were meanwhile looking for deliverance by Egyptian forces.
We can therefore imagine their exuberance when, as a consequence of the advance of an Egyptian army, the siege appeared to have been lifted. They began to think that it was they who had made the right choice after all. With the defeat of the Babylonians by the Egyptians they would have peace with honour and no more be subjected to the Babylonian yoke. And surely Pharaoh Hophra with his chariots and horsemen would be too powerful for the Babylonians.
‘And Zedekiah the son of Josiah reigned as king, instead of Coniah the son of Jehoiakim, whom Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon made king in the land of Judah.'
In fulfilment of Jeremiah 36:30 Jehoiakim's son Jehoiachin was displaced by his uncle Zedekiah when Jerusalem surrendered to the Babylonians in 597 BC. Coniah was short for Jeconiah, which was another name for Jehoiachin. He was carried off to Babylon with all the leading politicians and artisans, including Ezekiel, leaving a depleted Jerusalem to carry on as best they could, bereft of their finest leaders.
It should be noted that Zedekiah was not the popular choice. He was the choice of Nebuchadnezzar. To the people Jehoiachin was still king, and we know that this was later even recognised in Babylon. But he never ‘sat on the throne of David' as ruler over Judah. He would die in exile, even though in his latter days he would be released from prison and be treated with honour.
‘ But neither he, nor his servants, nor the people of the land, listened to the words of YHWH, which he spoke by the prophet Jeremiah.'
But neither Zedekiah nor his people listened to the voice of YHWH. This is Jeremiah's equivalent of the phrase used in Kings, ‘he did what was evil in the sight of YHWH'. Jeremiah's emphasis is on their disobedience. Neither the king, nor his aristocracy, nor the people, listened to the words of YHWH spoken through the prophet Jeremiah. They were too taken up in their own ideas, and in their own way of living and worship.
‘And Zedekiah the king sent Jehucal the son of Shelemiah, and Zephaniah the son of Maaseiah, the priest, to the prophet Jeremiah, saying, “Pray now to YHWH our God for us.”
Yet even in his disobedience Zedekiah hoped that YHWH would look on the needs of His people, for he asked Jeremiah to pray to ‘YHWH OUR God for us'. It was a case of ‘any port in a storm'. It has always been man's vain hope that when it comes down to the wire God will not take his sin too seriously. But as Jeremiah had already made clear, and will continue to make clear, God takes sin very seriously. That is why such a prayer would have been in vain. The time had come for final judgment. It had been long in coming, but now it was here.
It is clear that Zedekiah was putting feelers out to Jeremiah because in his own heart he had great respect for him and his message. Note indeed how he sent high officials to consult with him rather than simply summoning him to court. But his problem was that the majority of his advisers were pressing him to rebellion, and had no time for Jeremiah whom they saw as a traitor, and he did not feel strong enough to resist them. He was overall a weak king. Both the men sent by the king to Jeremiah had elsewhere had dealings with him, Jehucal in Jeremiah 38:1 and Zephaniah (not the prophet) in Jeremiah 21:1; Jeremiah 29:25. Jehucal was his enemy, but Zephaniah appears to have been more neutral, and possibly even sympathetic.
‘Now Jeremiah came in and went out among the people, for they had not put him in prison.'
Meanwhile it is emphasised that at this stage Jeremiah was not in prison. He was still free to go about among the people. In fact it is his imprisonments that will be the theme of this passage. For the king and the people still pinned their hopes in the power of Egypt and in the promises of the Pharaoh. Thus they were willing for a time to tolerate what they saw as Jeremiah's pessimism.
But Jeremiah would not have been alone in supporting the idea of yielding to Babylon. Even among the nobility there were many who sympathised with his message as we have already seen. The Lachish letters also tell us of ‘nobles who weaken the hands of the people', presumably by calling for surrender to Babylon. The king's advisers were thus torn between those who advised submission to Babylon, and those who called for resistance and trust in Egypt. But it was the Egyptian party who were winning. And after all, Egypt was local.
‘And Pharaoh's army had come forth out of Egypt, and when the Chaldeans who were besieging Jerusalem heard news of them, they decamped from Jerusalem.'
And for a while the Egyptian party appeared to have been right. News came that Pharaoh Hophra had come out of Egypt at the head of a large army, in order to relieve Jerusalem, in response to Zedekiah's previous negotiations with him (Ezekiel 17:15-18). It must have appeared to them as though Jerusalem had been saved. Who could stand against the might of the Egyptians with their powerful chariots and horsemen?
Indeed to all outward appearances that was the case, for on hearing the news of the Egyptian advance the Chaldean army raised the siege, departed from Jerusalem and went out to face the Egyptians. The people were jubilant. Once more Jerusalem had been delivered! It was, however, to prove a false dawn.