On Proper Exegesis and God’s Promises, Part 1

Exegesis is defined as “the careful, systematic study of the Scripture to discover the original, intended meaning; in other words, an attempt to hear the words of the Bible as the original recipients were to have heard them.” (Fee & Stuart) A “basic rule” of exegesis is that the text “cannot mean what it never could have meant to its author or his readers.” Makes sense to me.

Well then, I have an issue with the apostle Matthew. He seems to have violated this “basic rule” when he interpreted Jeremiah 31:15 as prophetic of Herod’s slaughter of the innocent children in Matthew 2:16-19:

When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi. Then what was said through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled:

“A voice is heard in Ramah,weeping and great mourning,Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more.”

When we look at the entire passage of Jeremiah 31, we see that it begins with, “’At that time,’ declares the LORD,” which refers to the beginning of the previous chapter, Jeremiah 30, verse 3:

“The days are coming,” declares the LORD, “when I will bring
my people Israel and Judah back from captivity and restore them to the land I gave their forefathers to possess,” says the LORD.

So in context, Jeremiah 31 is about God’s plans to bring the people of Israel out of captivity and restore them to the land. Meanwhile, Rachael is “weeping for her children” and “refusing to be comforted” because she looks over the land of Israel and sees that her children are “no more” in the land they once possessed. In verse 16-17, God responds to her sorrow:

This is what the LORD says:
“Restrain your voice from weeping
and your eyes from tears,
for your work will be rewarded,”
declares the LORD.
“They will return from the land of the enemy.
So there is hope for your future,”
declares the LORD.
“Your children will return to their own land.”

God is reassuring Rachel that, in spite of the fact that her children “are no more,” he will return her children to their own land. This is what the author meant, and this is how his readers understood it. When taken in context, it’s clear that Jeremiah was not talking about innocent children being slaughtered by an evil king several hundred years hence.

Someone should let God know that he broke a “basic rule” of exegesis.