As some of my friends/followers know, I got diagnosed with a really serious illness earlier this year. Since then, I have often been zapped of energy at a drop of a hat, been having a lot of stomach pains and cramps, etc., and other issues (e.g., those related to cirrhosis).
Anyway, beginning in July, for two days each week, I will be undergoing treatment. This will last perhaps 3 or 6 months. As a result, I will be unable to dedicate much time to bookkeeping/accountancy (how I have been making ends meet) for said 3-6 month period. If you wish to help me on the financial “hit” I will face this period (esp. as the medicine and procedures will be very costly), I would ask you to consider either donating *or at least plugging* (whether on blogs, youtube posts, discord channels, etc) my gofundme (cf. my paypal): Gofundme: https://www.gofundme.com/f/medical-expenses-liverrelated-and-other-issues Paypal: https://www.paypal.me/irishlds/ Of course, prayers and well-wishes are more than welcome, too. I will still transcribe notes of books/articles I read while I still can and share them on the blog (and there are blog posts scheduled for each day from July 1 to October 31, which I planned for in advance). Thanks!Friday, June 26, 2026
Examples of Patristic Commentaries on Jeremiah 31:15
31:15 Rachel Weeping for Her
Children
Prophecy of Rachel’s
Children. Theodoret of
Cyr: Ramah belonged to the tribe of Benjamin, and the tomb of Rachel is in the
hippodrome of Chaphratha on the way to Ephrath. While the prophecy had its
fulfillment in the time of Herod the Great, who did away with the babies in the
hope of doing away at the same time with the newborn Savior, the prophet places
it here in the context of the promise of good things so as to emphasize that
the birth of our Lord and Savior according to the flesh was the real good and
the summit of salvation, though on account of it the babies met that unjust
end. On Jeremiah 7.31.15.
The Lamentation of Rachel. Ephrem the Syrian: “Thus says the Lord: A
voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation, sobbing and weeping. Rachel is weeping
for her children.” In a historical sense this prophecy speaks about sons of
Judah and Benjamin living in Jerusalem and Bethlehem. Jeremiah later on describes
the fulfillment of this prophecy, saying that tribes of Judah and Benjamin were
sent to Ramah, the city of Benjamin’s tribe, and then they were sent to
captivity in Babylon. But in a spiritual sense, these words were fulfilled when
Herod killed infants in Ephrathah and in its suburbs. It was said that Rachel
was crying in Bethlehem and her voice was heard in Ramah because her body was
buried in Bethlehem. But the people of Bethlehem were captured and sent to
Ramah, and from there they had to go into a foreign land, to Babylon. It is why
the prophet comforts mothers of killed infants when referring to Rachel. Commentary
on Jeremiah 31.15.
Herod’s Slaughter of the
Innocents. Chrysostom:
Herod sought him after his birth. He was to kill all the children in that
place. And the prophet revealed this, too, foretelling it long beforehand when
he said, “A voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation, mourning and much weeping,
of Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they
are not.” The Scriptures also predicted that he would come to Egypt when they
said, “Out of Egypt I called my son.” Demonstration Against the Pagans 3.7.
Christ Brings the Living
Faithful with Him.
Ambrose: What need have I to study the rising and the setting of the stars, and
at their rising plough up and pierce the fallow ground with hard ploughshares
or at their setting cut the fruitful crop? One star means more to me than all
the others, “the bright morning star” at whose rising was sown not the seed of
grain but the seed of martyrs, that time when Rachel wept for her children to
offer for Christ her babies washed with her tears. The setting of that star
brought back in triumph from the tomb not the unfeeling relics of funeral piles
but bands of the living, who had been dead. Letter 50(44).
God Delivered the Infants
When Herod Killed.
Caesarius of Arles: Today we are celebrating the feast of all those infants
who, the Gospel text tells us, were killed by King Herod, and for this reason
our land, the fruitful mother of heavenly soldiers and such great virtues,
should rejoice with the greatest exultation. Behold, the wicked enemy could
never have helped the blessed infants as much by submission as he did by his
hatred. As today’s most sacred feast shows us, the grace of benediction shone
forth in the blessed infants as much as cruelty against them abounded. For we
heard a little while ago that when King Herod was pursuing Christ, thousands of
happy boys were killed. As the prophet said, “Rachel mourns her children; she
refuses to be consoled because her children are no more.” The blessed mother of
the triumphant, the land of illustrious warriors, rich in children, for a short
time seemed to the eyes of the foolish to be bereaved. But she never was in
need of consolation, nor did she bewail the sons whom she acquired with
enviable sorrows, even while she lost them. Blessed are you, Bethlehem, land of
Judah, who suffered the cruelty of King Herod in the death of your sons and at
the same time merited to offer to God a white-clad group of peaceable, sinless
infants. Sermon 222.1.
God Hates the Death of the
Faithful. Bede: According
to the oracle of Jeremiah, “A voice was heard in Ramah,” that is, “on high,”
“of lamentation and great wailing.” This clearly denotes that holy church’s
mourning, by which it grieves for the violent death of its members, does not,
as our enemies foolishly claim, pass away into a void, but it ascends right to
the throne of the heavenly judge. Homilies on the Gospels 1.10. (Jeremiah,
Lamentations, ed. Dean O. Wenthe [Ancient Christian Commentary on
Scripture; Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2009], 207-9)
31:15: Thus says the Lord: “A voice is heard on high of lamentation, wailing
and mourning, Rachel weeping for her sons; she refuses to be comforted for her
sons, because they are not.” lxx: The Lord said thus: “A voice was heard in Ramah, of lamentation,
wailing and mourning; Rachel weeping for her sons; she refuses to cease,
because they are not.”
Matthew cites this testimony neither according to the Hebrew nor
according to the lxx. For we read in Matthew after the description of the death
of the infants: “Then was fulfilled what was spoken by the prophet Jeremiah: ‘A
voice was heard in Ramah, wailing and much crying; Rachel weeping for her
children; she refused to be consoled, because they are not.’ ”110
From this it is clear that the evangelists and apostles did not follow any
particular person’s interpretation of the Hebrew, but as Hebrews born of
Hebrews they expressed in their own words what they read in Hebrew.
When Joseph’s mother, Rachel, came to Bethlehem she went into labor
suddenly, and seized with pain she gave birth to a son. Since the mother was
dying, the midwife called him Ben-oni, that is, “son of my sorrow.” But his
father, Jacob, changed the word and called his name Benjamin, that is, “son of
the right hand.” So the question is asked: How could the Evangelist Matthew
transfer the testimony of the prophet to the slaying of the infants, when this
testimony was clearly written with regard to the ten tribes (the chief of which
was Ephrathah), and the slaying of the infants was not in the tribe of Ephraim
but in the tribe of Judah? In fact, Ephrathah and Bethlehem are dyonymous;
thus, even the names of both of them are in agreement: Bethlehem means “house
of bread,” and Ephrathah means karpophoria,
which we can translate as “richness.” Since therefore Rachel was laid to rest
in Ephrathah, that is, in Bethlehem just as holy Scripture and the inscription
on her tomb even today testify—it is said that she weeps for her sons who were
killed near her and in her territory.
Certain of the Jews interpret this passage thus: when Jerusalem was
captured under Vespasian, countless thousands of captives were led through this
way by Gaza and Alexandria to Rome. But others say that in the final captivity
under Hadrian when the city of Jerusalem was overthrown, innumerable people of
diverse ages and both sexes were sold at the marketplace of Terebinthus.119
For this reason, it is an accursed thing among the Jews to visit this acclaimed
marketplace. Let these people say what they want. We say that the Evangelist
Matthew has rightly taken up this testimony because it is the place where
Rachel was buried, and she wept for the sons of those nearby in the surrounding
houses as if she were weeping for her own sons. (Jerome, Commentary
on Jeremiah [trans. Michael Graves; Ancient Christian Texts; Downers Grove,
Ill.: IVP Academic, 2011], 194-95)
The Jewish Study Bible on Jeremiah 31:15
15: The portrayal of Israel as Rachel weeping for her lost children
draws upon the tragic tradition of Rachel, Jacob’s beloved wife, who died while
giving birth to Benjamin. Although Gen. 35:16–21 places her tomb on the road to
Bethlehem, where the current structure stands, 1 Sam. 10:2 suggests that her
tomb was on the road to Ramah, near
modern Ramallah. The present text portrays Rachel weeping not for herself, but
for her lost children who have gone into exile. According to 40:1, 4, the
Babylonians assembled Judeans destined for exile to Babylon at Ramah. The
portrayal of Rachel weeping and bereft of children is reversed in Isa. ch 54,
which employs the metaphor of a mother whose children are restored. According
to Rab. Gen. 82:10, Jacob
deliberately buried Rachel by the road because he knew that his descendants
would pass by as they went into exile. She would then weep and intercede for
their return. (The Jewish Study Bible, ed. Adele
Berlin, Marc Zvi Brettler, and Michael Fishbane [New York: Oxford University
Press, 2004], 989)
Michael A. Fishbane on Jeremiah 31:15
15. Rachel weeping This verse inspired a midrash on the merit of Rachel, who intercedes
before God in connection with Manasseh’s sins. God responds mercifully, saying:
“You defended [Israel] well; there is recompense for your labor and
righteousness when you gave your [marital] tokens to your sister” (see Rashi).
In this way rabbinic tradition explained the thematic conjunction of verses 15
and 16 (and the reference in v. 16 to “your labor” with the feminine suffix).
(Michael A. Fishbane, Haftarot [The JPS Bible Commentary;
Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 2002], 382)
Strack and Billerbeck on Jeremiah 32:15 (cf. Matthew 2:18)
2:18: Rachel weeping for her children.
The Midrash Jer 31:15.
Genesis Rabba 82 (52D): What did our father Jacob see when he buried
Rachel on the road to Ephrath (cf. Gen 35:19)? He saw that the exiles would one
day pass by there; therefore, he buried Rachel there so that from there she
would pray for mercy for them. This is what Jer 31:15 says, “A voice is heard
at Ramah.” ‖ The beginning of Midr. Lam. 24 (38A–B): R. Samuel b. Nahman (ca.
260) said, (after the fathers of Israel mourn the downfall of Jerusalem in 38B)
“In that hour our mother Rachel arose before God and said, ‘Lord of the worlds,
it is clear to you that Jacob your servant loved me greatly and for my sake
served my father for seven years; and when those seven years were completed and
the time of my marriage was near, my father made a plan to exchange me for my
sister. This weighed heavily on me, for the plan had become known to me, and I
communicated it to my husband and gave him signs to distinguish me from my
sister so that he would not mistake me. But afterward I comforted myself,
endured my desires, and took pity on my sister, that she would not go away with
insults. And in the evening, they exchanged my sister for me, and I informed my
sister about all the signs that I had told to my marriage partner so that he
would think that she was Rachel. And moreover, I crept under the tent where he
was resting with my sister, and when he spoke to her she was silent, but I
answered every word he said, so that he would not recognize my sister’s voice.
In this way I showed grace to her, and did not become jealous of her, nor did I
let her go away insulted. And if I, who was flesh and blood, dust and ashes,
did not make my rivals jealous, nor let them go away in reproach and disgrace,
you who are the king of Mercy—you who lives forever, why did you get angry
about idols, in which there is nothing of substance, and let my children go
into captivity, that they might be killed by the sword, and their enemies treat
them according to their lusts?’—Immediately the mercy of God was stirred, and
he said, ‘For your sake, Rachel, I will bring Israel back to her place.’ ”
This is what Jer 31:15–17 says, “Thus says Yahweh, ‘A voice is heard at Ramah …
Rachel weeping for her children.’ … Thus says Yahweh, ‘Stop weeping …; your
work will be rewarded.…’ ” See Rashi on Jer 31:15. ‖ Pesiqta 141B: R.
Simeon b. Yohai (ca. 150) taught, “Because everything depended on Rachel (i.e.,
because the whole life story of Jacob revolved around her), her descendants
were named after her, ‘Rachel weeping for her children’ (Jer 31:15); and not
only after her name, but also after the name of her son, ‘Perhaps Yahweh, the
God of hosts, will pardon the remnant of Joseph’ (Amos 5:15); and not only
after the name of her son, but also after the name of her grandson, ‘A favorite
son is Ephraim’ (Jer 31:20).”—The same is said in Gen. Rab. 71 (46A); Midr.
Ruth 4:11 (137A). ‖ Midrash Lamentations 1:2 (50A): R. Simeon b. Yohai (ca.
150) said, “God said to Israel, ‘You weep in vain, but in the end you will
truly weep.’ ” Where did Israel weep in vain? Answer: Numbers 11:10:
“Moses heard the people weeping according to their families”; Num 14:1: “Then
all the congregation raised their voices loudly, and the people wept that
night.” And where did Israel truly weep (= where was it justified)? R. Aibo
(ca. 320) and R. Judah b. Simon (ca. 320) [discuss this]. R. Aibo said, “Once
in Rama and once in Babylon. In Rama, see Jer 31:15: ‘A voice is heard in
Rama.’ In Babylon, see Ps 137:1: ‘By the rivers of Babylon we sat and
wept.’ ” R. Judah b. Simon said, “Once in the land of Judah and once in
Babylon. In the land of Judah, see Lam 1:2: ‘She weeps bitterly in the night.’
In Babylon, see Ps 137:1.” R. Aibo said, “God said unto Israel, ‘For the reward
of weeping I will gather your exiles’; see Jer 31:16–17: ‘Thus says Yahweh, “Restrain
your voice from weeping, and there is hope for your future.” ’ ” ‖
Rashi on Jer 31:15 mentions the following legend, “The patriarchs and the
matriarchs went to appease God because Manasseh had set up an idol in the
Temple. But he could not be appeased. Then Rachel went in and said before him,
‘Lord of the world, whose love (mercy) is greater, your love or the love of
flesh and blood? Surely your love is greater! And have I not let my rival into
my house? For all that Jacob served my father, he served only for my sake, and
when I was about to enter the bridal chamber, my sister was brought in. It was
not enough that I kept silent; I also told her my sign. You also, when your
children brought your rival into your house, remain silent towards them.’ And
he said unto her, ‘You have done well in defense: there is a reward for your
deeds and your righteousness, because your informed your sister about your
sign.’ ” (Hermann L. Strack and Paul Billerbeck, A
Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Midrash, ed. Jacob N.
Cerone, 4 vols. [trans. Andrew Bowden and Joseph Longarino; Bellingham, Wash.:
Lexham Press, 2022], 1:99-100)
Taylor Halverson on 1 Nephi 13 and the "plain and precious things taken away from the book"
Commenting on 1 Nephi 13 (cf. 1 Nephi 11-14):
What Was Lost, When, From
Where
A careful reading yields three
observations.
First, the great and abominable
church is identified as a historical agent, operating after the time of the
twelve apostles. Doctrine and Covenants 86, given to Joseph Smith in December
1832, describes the parable of the wheat and tares in apostasy terms. After
identifying the apostles as the sowers of the seed, the revelation continues, “And
after they have fallen asleep the great persecutor of the church, the apostate,
the whore, even Babylon, that maketh all nations to drink of her cup, in whose
heart the enemy, even Satan, sitteth to reign” (D&C 86:3). The timing is
specific. After the apostles. After the gospel went forth from Jewish apostolic
hands in purity. After the book left the hands that wrote it.
This means the great and
abominable church is not an Old Testament problem. The Old Testament was
already in circulation, in Hebrew and in Greek (the Septuagint), centuries
before the apostles. Nephi’s vision shows the book proceeding forth from Jewish
apostolic hands in purity, which means the Old Testament reached the apostolic
generation intact. Whatever the great and abominable church did, the Old Testament’s
textual transmission to the apostles was sound.
Second, what is lost is
identified by content. The verses repeat two things: part of the gospel and the
Lamb, and covenants of the Lord. The losses are theological and covenantal,
focused on teachings and ordinances. Robert J. Matthews, the Brigham Young
University scholar who spent decades on the Joseph Smith Translatoin, suggested
two distinct processes at work in the Bible’s history: a deliberate corruption
by agents intent on perverting the right ways of the Lord, and the ordinary
gradual variants that arise from copying and translation, Matthews identified
the deliberate corruption with the great and abominable church, and the gradual
variants with the normal scribal and translational difficulties scholars
discuss. The two processes are different in kind. Nephi’s vision is about the
first.
Third, the process happens
through hands across time. The phrase in verse 28 is “through the hands of the
great and abominable church.” It describes a process, with the book moving from
one set of hands to another across the post-apostolic period. Lori
Driggs, in a Brigham Young University essay on the vision, has noted that the
phrase suggests a process unfolding over time, through many people and
influences. The vision describes a diachronic process of loss, with multiple
agents acting in turn across the centuries.
A Latter-day Saint reader who
holds these three observations together has a careful reading. The losses are
post-apostolic theological in nature, and unfold across time. The vision
focuses on what happened to the gospel of the Lamb after the apostles, with the
Old Testament Hebrew text occupying a different position in the picture. (Taylor
Halverson, The Book Jesus Trusted: Why Latter-day Saints Can Receive the Old
Testament with Confidence [Line of Sigh Publishing, 2026], 105-6)
Jacques Lefèvre d'Étaples (c. 1455-1536) on Matthew 16:19 and the "Rock" Being Christ and the Word of God
The following comes from Jacques Lefèvre d'Étaples, Commentarii initiatorii in quatuor Evangelia. In Evangelium secundun Matthaeum. In Evangelium secundum Marcum. In Evangelium secundum Lucam. In Evangelium secundum Johannem. Jacobo Fabro Stapulensi autore (Coloniae, 1541), 126-27
English translation:
"This blessedness is attributed to Peter, not
insofar as it comes from Peter himself, but insofar as he was instructed by the
heavenly Father in this matter, because the heavenly Father deigned to reveal
it to him. Nor ought that blessedness to be attributed to him in any other way
than through contemplation of Him from whom it proceeds. For from whom could it
come except from God, who alone is blessed, and who alone is the mighty King of
those who reign and the Lord of those who rule?
And from this solid confession of the truth—which comes
from God the Father and is firmer than every rock—Simon received the surname
'Peter.' Upon this rock, namely the faith of that unshaken truth, that Christ
is the Son of the living God, he founded his Church; so firmly, indeed,
that against this most steadfast confession of faith the gates of hell shall
not prevail, because they cannot overcome anyone who is fortified by this
immovable rock and this most steadfast faith.
Moreover, that 'the rock' is to be understood as Christ
and the Word of God, the Lord himself makes clear when he says in chapter seven
of this Gospel:
'Everyone therefore who hears these words of mine and
does them shall be compared to a wise man who built his house upon the rock.'
And he immediately adds:
'The rain descended, the floods came, the winds blew
and beat upon that house, and it did not fall.'"
"For it had been founded upon the firm rock.
See, then, in what manner he calls himself and his own
word the rock, indeed the firm rock, upon which the immovable
house—that is, the Church—is built.
Lest anyone should say that Peter is the rock upon
which the Church has been founded, the Lord himself afterwards made it
sufficiently clear to Paul that Peter is not the rock, and much less the firm
rock, when he said to him,
'Get behind me, Satan; you are a stumbling block to me,
because you do not savor the things that are of God, but those that are of
men.'
Paul likewise explains that Christ is the rock
when he says,
'They drank from the spiritual rock that followed them,
and the rock was Christ.'
And even if Peter is said (as some wish) to derive his
name from the rock, just as a Christian derives his name from Christ,
nevertheless a Christian is not Christ himself; therefore Peter likewise is not
the Rock.
Furthermore, the Lord promised that he would give to
Peter the keys of the kingdom of heaven, which are the keys of faith, the keys
of binding and loosing:
'Whatever Christ handed down as things to be believed
are to be believed; and whatever he commanded to be done are to be done. These
he has bound upon earth, and they are bound also in heaven. Whatever, however,
he declared not to be believed or not to be done, he loosed upon earth, and
they are likewise loosed in heaven.
But these keys of faith and unbelief, of binding and
loosing—or rather, whatever faith binds (for what is not of faith binds
nothing)—were not Peter's, but Christ's.
'I will give you,' he says, 'the keys of the kingdom of
heaven.'
Peter therefore did not bind or loose according to his
own judgment, but according to the judgment of Christ, whose will is altogether
perfect and can never err.
Nor did Peter alone receive them from the Lord; rather,
all those likewise received them who, according to the will of Christ the Lord,
built the Church upon Christ through faith.
Furthermore, we may understand that the keys of the
kingdom of heaven are to be taken as the doctrine of faith, the doctrine of
Christ, and the Word of God, from the eleventh chapter of Luke:
'Woe unto you lawyers! For you have taken away the key
of knowledge. You yourselves did not enter, and those who were entering you
hindered.'
For what is the key of knowledge except the
understanding of the Law, which they had arrogated to themselves? Yet by human
traditions they had obstructed that understanding, and they prevented and
hindered those who sincerely desired to enter into the true understanding of
the Law.
But the Lord did not then give these keys of
understanding of the New Law to Peter, for he said, 'I will give you.'
Rather, he gave them later, in spirit and in truth: partly when he said to the
apostles,
'Receive the Holy Spirit,'
and partly when he opened their understanding so that
they might understand the Scriptures; and then, more fully and abundantly,
after his ascension, when the Holy Spirit was sent from heaven.
These keys, nevertheless, are the pontifical power of
binding and loosing rightly understood.
But Christ is speaking here of this faith—that he
himself is the Son of the living God—which is one of the keys of heavenly
doctrine, and which he willed to be the foundational principle in his Church.
And what else is this, objectively considered, than
Christ himself, who is the Rock itself and the immovable foundation of the
whole Church? In us, however, it is the infusion of the eternal Father.
Indeed, we ought especially to admire that he did not
yet openly declare this revelation of the Father—which is Christ himself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)