ISRAEL’S DAY IN COURT - We’re in court with this Sunday’s first lesson; indeed the opening section of Jeremiah draws heavily on a "covenant lawsuit" motif (as is also the genre of Psalm 81 for this week). God is the plaintiff and Israel the respondent.

NIB ON THIS PASSAGE -

The divine accusation is that the previous generations left the Lord to find gods that would be productive and useful to them, but to no avail. In vv. 8 and 11, the point is made in another way, centering around the word "profit." In v. 5, the people go after emptiness and worthlessness. In v. 8, the prophets go after what does not profit. Verse 11 identifies the sin of the people as exchanging one God for what does not profit-that is, for a non-productive, non-effective deity. The theme that binds all these verses together is the abandonment of the Lord for what does not work, failing to recognize that in the God they worship is to be found the source of life, fertility, and good or well-being. Seeking this elsewhere is an utterly fruitless task. The search for God becomes a search for whatever enhances my (or our_ well-being, makes my land more productive, increases my wealth and my place and my status . . . [1]

This word play [between "Baal" and "profit" (in Hebrew, "ya’al")] makes the point indirectly but forcefully: "Baal" = Ya’al ("no profit").

A RHETORICAL QUESTION - Interesting question that God accuses Israel/Judah of not asking: "Where is the LORD?" (vv. 6a, 8a). Apparently, God had expected this question to be asked all through the covenantal journey-"Where are you, God, we need you NOW!" When has this question been asked?

Gideon - Judg 6:13 / Elihu - Job 35:10 / Isaiah - Is. 63:11, 15 / Elijah - 1 Kgs 18:36-39

/ Elisha - 2 Kgs 2:14

connections

Jeremiah contrasts water in a cracked cistern with "living water." Letting water be an image of your relationship with God, ask yourself, "What kind of water best represents my relationship with God at the moment?" Ask with the prophet, "Where is the Lord?" and come to God with a prayer of response.

gambits

Jeremiah may be quite accurate in stating that deity abandonment may have been virtually unheard of in his time; augmenting gods to one’s pantheon of gods was quite acceptable in the ancient Near East, but subtracting or replacing gods was unthinkable.

In what way/s are post-moderns in danger of the abandonment indictment? Where do we come perilously close to committing an action that replaces our Source with smaller-and by contrast-insignificant sources?

What an appropriate image Jeremiah leaves in the living water vis-à-vis cracked cistern image! The image reflects the idea of exchange, a lesser in place of a greater, other gods in place of the God.

Living water refreshes and nourishes, teems with life-sustaining qualities; cisterns are full of stagnant water that does not refresh nor does it last, because Jeremiah says that the water trickles away through cracks in the cistern. So at core is the choice between honoring and serving a God who, like living water, provides continuous, fresh, vital water, or to choose the stagnant and gradually disappearing water of the broken cisterns of lesser gods.

May our communities of faith and leaders make the best choice!

_______________________________________________________
[1] The New Interpreter’s Bible VI (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2001), page 598.