But since ye say, The burden of the LORD; therefore thus saith the LORD; Because ye say this word, The burden of the LORD, and I have sent unto you, saying, Ye shall not say, The burden of the LORD;
(the) self-existent or eternal; jeho-vah, jewish national name of god
Analysis & Commentary
But since ye say, The burden of the LORD; therefore thus saith the LORD; Because ye say this word, The burden of the LORD, and I have sent unto you, saying, Ye shall not say, The burden of the LORD. The conditional 'since' (וְאִם, v'im, 'but if') introduces judgment based on continued disobedience. Despite explicit prohibition (verse 34), they persist in saying מַשָּׂא יְהוָה (massa YHWH, 'the burden of the LORD'). The phrase and I have sent unto you, saying (וָאֶשְׁלַח אֲלֵיכֶם לֵאמֹר, va'eshlach aleikhem lemor) emphasizes active divine communication—God sent messengers forbidding this language.
The verse structure emphasizes willful rebellion:
God sends prohibition
people ignore it
judgment follows.
This isn't innocent error but defiant disobedience to explicit command. The repetition of 'the burden of the LORD' (three times in one verse!) dramatizes their obstinate clinging to forbidden terminology. It's like children taunting a parent by repeating prohibited words. Such defiance transforms linguistic corruption into direct rebellion against divine authority. When God says 'Don't speak this way' and people insist on doing so, language becomes battleground for sovereignty.
Historical Context
This verse implies a historical sequence: Jeremiah delivered God's prohibition, yet people—especially prophets and priests—continued using the banned phrase. Their persistence despite warning reveals entrenched rebellion. The religious establishment's investment in existing theological language made reform impossible without catastrophic judgment. Sometimes linguistic habits become so ingrained that only exile and starting over can break them.
Questions for Reflection
What prohibited patterns of speech or thought do you cling to despite divine correction?
How does persistence in 'small' disobediences (forbidden words) reveal deeper rebellion?
What linguistic or theological habits in your faith community resist reform despite biblical challenge?
Related Resources
Explore related topics, people, and study resources to deepen your understanding of this passage.
Analysis & Commentary
But since ye say, The burden of the LORD; therefore thus saith the LORD; Because ye say this word, The burden of the LORD, and I have sent unto you, saying, Ye shall not say, The burden of the LORD. The conditional 'since' (וְאִם, v'im, 'but if') introduces judgment based on continued disobedience. Despite explicit prohibition (verse 34), they persist in saying מַשָּׂא יְהוָה (massa YHWH, 'the burden of the LORD'). The phrase and I have sent unto you, saying (וָאֶשְׁלַח אֲלֵיכֶם לֵאמֹר, va'eshlach aleikhem lemor) emphasizes active divine communication—God sent messengers forbidding this language.
The verse structure emphasizes willful rebellion:
This isn't innocent error but defiant disobedience to explicit command. The repetition of 'the burden of the LORD' (three times in one verse!) dramatizes their obstinate clinging to forbidden terminology. It's like children taunting a parent by repeating prohibited words. Such defiance transforms linguistic corruption into direct rebellion against divine authority. When God says 'Don't speak this way' and people insist on doing so, language becomes battleground for sovereignty.