Jeremiah 9:25

Old Testament Major Prophet ASV (1901)

What does Jeremiah 9:25 say?

The American Standard Version records this verse as: “Behold, the days come, saith Jehovah, that I will punish all them that are circumcised in [their] uncircumcision:” Read the surrounding verses and the named sources below before drawing broader conclusions.

The verse

Behold, the days come, saith Jehovah, that I will punish all them that are circumcised in [their] uncircumcision:
Jeremiah 9:25 — American Standard Version

Context — Jeremiah 9

American Standard Version (1901) — public domain. Click any verse for its study page.
25Behold, the days come, saith Jehovah, that I will punish all them that are circumcised in [their] uncircumcision:

What do historical commentaries say?

John Gill's Exposition
John Gill (1697–1771) · Exposition of the Old and New Testament · 18th-century historical commentary
“Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, etc.] Or, “are coming”f200; it seems to respect the time after the Babylonish captivity, when the punishment after threatened took place, and not before: that I will punish all them that are circumcised with the uncircumcised; Jews and Gentiles together. The circumcised. Jews trusting in their circumcision, and being, as is said in the next verse, uncircumcised in heart, were no better than the uncircumcised Gentiles; wherefore both being transgressors of the law, and despisers of the Gospel of Christ, are threatened with destruction; (see <450212>Romans 2:12,25-29).”
Read attributed excerpt →
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown · Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible · 19th-century historical commentary
“with the uncircumcised--rather, "all that are circumcised in uncircumcision" [HENDERSON]. The Hebrew is an abstract term, not a concrete, as English Version translates, and as the pious "circumcised" is. The nations specified, Egypt, Judah, &c., were outwardly "circumcised," but in heart were "uncircumcised." The heathen nations were defiled, in spite of their literal circumcision, by idolatry. The Jews, with all their glorying in their spiritual privileges, were no better (Jer 4:4; Deu 10:16; Deu 30:6; Rom 2:28-29; Col 2:11). However, Eze 31:18; Eze 32:19, may imply that the Egyptians were uncircumcised; and it is uncertain as to the other nations specified whether they were at that early…”
Read attributed excerpt →
Barnes' Notes
Albert Barnes (1798–1870) · Notes on the Whole Bible · 19th-century historical commentary
“All them which are circumcised ... - Rather, “all circumcised in uncircumcision,” i. e., all who though outwardly circumcised have no corresponding inward purity. return to 'Top of Page'”
Read attributed excerpt →
Tyndale Open Study Notes
Tyndale House Publishers · Tyndale Open Study Notes · Modern study notes
“9:25 Because arrogant sin ruled the nation, there would soon come a time when the Lord would decree a sentence of doom. • The rite of circumcision among the Hebrew people went back to Abraham (Gen 17:10-14). Through the centuries, this rite became so closely associated with being God’s covenant people that the Israelites assumed that it guaranteed their nation a lasting relationship with the Lord. Being circumcised in body is not enough, however; a person must also be circumcised . . . in spirit—radically separated from idol worship and completely committed to placing the Lord at the center of life and practice (Rom 2:25-29).”
Read attributed excerpt →
Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge
R. A. Torrey and contributors · The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge · Cross-reference reference work
“that: Eze 28:10, Eze 32:19-32; Amo 3:2; Rom 2:8, Rom 2:9, Rom 2:25, Rom 2:26; Gal 5:2-6 punish: Heb. visit upon Jeremiah 9:26”
Read attributed excerpt →
Keil & Delitzsch
C. F. Keil & F. Delitzsch · Commentary on the Old Testament · 19th-century historical commentary
“(9:24-25) Thus Jer 9:24 and Jer 9:25 are connected with what precedes. The lack of righteousness is indicated by the idea מוּל בּערלה: circumcised with foreskin, i.e., not, circumcised in the foreskin (lxx, Vulg.), but circumcised and yet possessed of the foreskin. It is incorrect to translate: circumcised together with the uncircumcised (Kimchi, de W.). This is not only contrary to the usage of the language, but inconsistent with the context, since in Jer 9:25 uncircumcisedness is predicated of the heathen and of Judah. The expression is an oxymoron, thus: uncircumcised-circumcised (Ew.), intended to gather Jews and heathen into one category. This is shown by the order of the enumeration in…”
Read attributed excerpt →

Related study paths

Sources and verification