Proclaim (so also New International Version) translates a Hebrew verb that may refer to many different kinds of speech, depending upon the context. The Revised English Bible (Revised English Bible) has “make this proclamation,” while New American Bible has “cry out this message” and Good News Translation “proclaim this message.” Luther 1984 renders “preach openly.”

In the hearing of Jerusalem (literally, as in Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, “in the ears of Jerusalem”) addresses the city as though it were a person. The inhabitants of the city are the intended object of the prophetic message, and it may be necessary to indicate this in translation: “to everyone in Jerusalem” (Good News Translation) and “to all the people in Jerusalem” (Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch).

Thus says the LORD is a totally different construction from “says the LORD” (1.8), though it also functions to emphasize the saying with which it is connected. Whereas “says the LORD” may appear at the beginning, the end, or even in the middle of a prophetic saying, Thus says the LORD always comes before the saying to which it is attached. For many readers the use of Thus says the LORD immediately before the LORD’s words, along with the use of “says the LORD” (verse 3) immediately after his words, may convey the opposite effect from what it does in Hebrew. So both Good News Translation and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch bring together the two statements into one. Good News Translation accomplishes this by placing “I, the LORD, have spoken” at the conclusion of the LORD’s words, while Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch introduces the LORD’s words with the formula “Hear what the Lord says to his people.” However, translators are referred to the discussion at 1.8 for other models to follow. Here, for example, “Listen to what the LORD says” would call attention to the importance of the utterance that was to follow, while the utterance itself could be closed at the end of verse 3 with “This is what the LORD says.” In this way the authoritative nature of the prophet’s message is retained more forcibly in most languages than is the case with the Good News Translation and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch models.

Devotion is customarily translated “steadfast love” by Revised Standard Version when used of God’s graciousness toward his people. In fact, the construction remember … devotion is translated “remembered … steadfast love” by Revised Standard Version in Psa 98.3. The noun covers a wide area of meaning, but it generally involves the notion of faithfulness, which makes it especially applicable to a marriage situation. Luther 1984 translates the devotion of your youth as “the faithfulness of your youth.” In many languages the idea would more naturally be rendered with a verb, as in “how devoted you were to me when you were young.” Similarly Good News Translation has “how faithful you were when you were young” and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch has “how faithful you were to me in your youth.” In some languages it would not be natural or possible to simply say that Israel was faithful or devoted without saying what they were faithful to, hence the examples such as “devoted to me” or “faithful to me.”

Your love as a bride is more literally “the love of your engagement period.” However, commentators and translators alike assume the reference to be to the early days of marriage, when Israel could be compared to a young bride. This noun construction may need to be restructured as a verb phrase: “how you loved me when you were a bride” (Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch). Good News Translation has “how you loved me when we were first married.”

For some languages the metaphor of marriage is not natural when speaking of the relationship between Israel and God. However, in this book and the other prophetic writings it is one of the most common images used, and translators should really retain it. It might be necessary to have an expression such as “how you loved me like a new bride loves her husband”; but after many occurrences of the expression this would seem a little heavy stylistically, and a general note about the figure in the introduction to the book would be more appropriate. But it should always be clear that this image is speaking of Israel’s love for God which is compared to the love a bride might have for her husband in the early days of a marriage.

How you followed me in the wilderness is taken by most commentators as a reference to the period from the exodus to the entry into the land of Canaan. However, some commentators limit the time period to that between the exodus and God giving the covenant on Mount Sinai. In either case the reference is not merely to “the good old days,” but rather to the earliest days of God’s working with Israel, when they first acknowledged him as their LORD. Hosea thinks of the earliest relationship between the LORD and his people in the same marital terms, and describes the final period of salvation as a return to this early condition (Hos 2.14-20).

Followed could be understood to mean “served” or “obeyed,” or it could refer literally to following after God according to where he led, possibly through the pillar of cloud by day and column of fire by night. Certainly this latter one is the interpretation seemingly followed by Good News Translation: “followed me through the desert.” But most translations have “followed me in the desert,” which makes it clear that God is speaking of how the people served and obeyed him at the time they were in the desert. This interpretation probably is better in this context.

Wilderness (so also Revised English Bible, Jerusalem Bible [Jerusalem Bible]) is translated “desert” by Good News Translation, New International Version, An American Translation, and New American Bible. According to Holladay, “[The Hebrew word is] perfectly defined by its parallel ‘a land unsown,’ the area receiving insufficient rainfall for rain-fed farming. It is not necessarily the sand desert but includes the parched area of Sinai, the Negeb, the steppes of the Transjordan that produce nothing but thorns and briars (Judg 8.7; Isa 41.18-19; 55.13).” What all these different areas have in common are (1) a scarcity of vegetation and (2) the inability to support a dense population.

Translators in areas where the desert is unknown have sometimes wanted to render wilderness as “sandy area,” but “uninhabited area” is normally better. It is a land where there can be no expectation of a harvest, and so it may be described as a land “where people do not plant seed” (Luther 1984). Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch translates the last two lines of this verse as a separate sentence: “You followed me in the desert, in a land where nothing grows.”

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Stine, Philip C. A Handbook on Jeremiah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2003. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

On your skirts is not meant to suggest that the accusation is made against women. Rather this reflects the mode of dress for both men and women of that period. In place of skirts it would seem better to use a term that may be used for the clothing of both men and women: “clothes” (Good News Translation, New International Version). Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch has “on the edge of your clothing”; Revised English Bible prefers “on the corners of your robe.” In place of “clothes,” the Septuagint has “hands” (Jerusalem Bible, Moffatt), which represents a Hebrew word of a slightly different spelling from “clothes.” The Traduction œcuménique de la Bible footnote suggests that “on your clothes” would suggest crimes done openly, in the sight of everyone, whereas the alternative possibility would suggest secret crimes.

The lifeblood of guiltless poor probably refers to the terrible oppression of the poor which often resulted in their death, though it may refer to their death by murder. The Septuagint omits poor, by which the reference is either to “murdered prophets or sacrificed children” (Jerusalem Bible footnote). However, it is quite probable that the Septuagint reading is an attempt to make this verse conform to other passages such as 7.6; 19.4; 22.3, 17; 26.15. Luther 1984 (“the blood of the poor and innocent”) may represent an attempt at compromise.

These first two lines of the verse may have to be restructured; for example, “Also, the edges of your clothing are spattered [or, stained] with the blood of the poor and innocent people [that you have killed]” or “Also, the blood of the innocent and poor people [whose deaths you are responsible for] has stained your clothing.”

You did not find them breaking in is more literally “You did not find them in the act of breaking in.” New Revised Standard Version has “you did not catch them breaking in.” The noun translated “in the act of breaking in” is found elsewhere only in Exo 22.2, which serves as the background for the understanding of this expression. According to this law, a man who kills a thief breaking into his house at night is not guilty, whereas he is guilty of murder if he kills a thief during a daylight robbery. But here the persons who have been murdered are the poor and innocent, who are guilty of no crime, not even that of a daylight burglary. This information might need to be given in a footnote, but some translators have put it in the text with “you did not kill them because you caught them breaking into your houses” or “you didn’t have the excuse to shed their blood because they were breaking into your house.” One other way is “that blood didn’t come from people you caught breaking into your houses.”

Yet in spite of all these things represents a Hebrew text that one scholar describes as “incurably corrupt.” The text is so impossible that in Bright’s translation it is left blank with a note indicating that it “cannot be translated.” Among the solutions that have been proposed are:
(1) By a slight modification of the Hebrew, the Septuagint changes all these things to “every oak tree.” This apparently is the basis for Revised English Bible: “You did not get it by housebreaking but by your sacrifices under every oak.”
(2) Another solution is that represented in An American Translation: “Not breaking into houses did you find them, but opposed to all such things.” This is also followed by Luther 1984, but it seems otherwise not to have strong support.
(3) On the assumption that a portion of the Hebrew was unintentionally omitted in the course of copying, one scholar reconstructs it to read: “All of this will come as a curse upon you.” Apparently this solution is followed by Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch: “The curse of all this will fall on you.” It is quite possible also that this is the basis for Moffatt: “and for all this I will arraign you.”
(4) The most widely accepted solution is that represented by Revised Standard Version and followed by Good News Translation, New American Bible, New International Version, and Hebrew Old Testament Text Project. All in all this would seem less problematic than any of the other proposals, though it is still not without its difficulties.

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Stine, Philip C. A Handbook on Jeremiah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2003. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The physical act of circumcision was the means by which the male child became a member of the Israelite community. But the LORD indicates that physical circumcision is insufficient to put an individual in a right relationship with him. True circumcision must be an act of the heart.

Circumcise and remove the foreskin are two ways of saying the same thing; thus Revised English Bible has “circumcise … circumcise.” In many languages it will be preferable to use only one form.

In the first line the LORD is in third person even though it is he who is speaking, and the rest of the verse uses first person. Some translators will have “… for me, the LORD.” Note Good News Translation, for example: “… me, your LORD.”

There are two slightly different ways to interpret the first two lines. One is to treat them as meaning exactly the same, in which case physical circumcision is not being referred to at all. It is only figurative. The second way is to retain the idea of physical circumcision in the first line, making it clear that it must be done to the LORD, as in “circumcise yourselves for the LORD.” As one commentator points out, some other nations also practiced circumcision, but Israel was to do it for the LORD. Then the second line would show that in fact more than the physical act was required, as Israel was to dedicate their hearts, the center of their planning and thinking, to the LORD as well. Translators would then have something such as “and dedicate your hearts to him as well” for the second line. This second interpretation seems preferable, although it is not always possible to render it naturally. Where circumcision is unknown, however, or its religious significance is likely to be misunderstood, translators will generally find it more satisfactory to follow the first interpretation.

The first interpretation is expressed by Good News Translation, which drops the figure of circumcision, though interpreting the figure twice: “Keep your covenant with me … dedicate yourselves to me.” Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch retains the figure, but interprets it: “Circumcise yourselves in the way that is pleasing to me, that is, in your hearts. Remove what separates you from me.” Revised English Bible translates circumcise yourselves to the LORD as “circumcise yourselves to the service of the LORD,” thus partially interpreting the imagery.

For O men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem, see verse 3. In some languages this form of address would more naturally occur either at the beginning of this verse, or even at the beginning of the direct speech in verse 3. In this latter case, rather than repeat the phrase, the translation could be something such as “For this is what the LORD says: ‘You people of Judah and Jerusalem, plow up your unplowed fields….’ ”

Lest means “so that not.” Good News Translation conveys that meaning with “If you don’t.” Another way to express the sense is “Otherwise.”

It may not be possible to speak of wrath (Good News Translation “anger”) that goes forth like fire … with none to quench it. Rather it may be necessary to speak of “anger that burns like a fire that no one can put out.” Or it may be necessary to shift to the LORD as subject: “I will become angry and will destroy you like a fire that no one can put out.”

Because of the evil of your doings is a typical Hebrew noun construction, which may be better stated as in Good News Translation: “because of the evil things you have done.” Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch translates the last part of the verse as “Otherwise my anger will come upon you and burn like a fire. Then there will be nothing that can extinguish it; you have done too much evil!”

The whole verse may also be restructured:

• Circumcise yourselves for me, the LORD, and dedicate your hearts to me also. For if you don’t all your evil deeds will cause me to become angry with an anger that will destroy you like a fire no one can put out.

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Stine, Philip C. A Handbook on Jeremiah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2003. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .