The important part played by Baruch as Jeremiah's secretary and representative must have invested him with full authority to speak for his master and expound his views; such authority points to Baruch as the natural editor of our present book, which is virtually the "Life and Writings" of the prophet. The last words of our chapter are ambiguous, perhaps intentionally. They simply state that many like words were added, and do not say by whom; they might even include additions made later on by Baruch from his own reminiscences. In conclusion, we may notice that both the first and second copies of the roll were written by the direct Divine command, just as in the Hexateuch and the Book of Samuel we read of Moses, Joshua, and Samuel committing certain matters to writing at the bidding of Jehovah. We have here the recognition of the inspiration of the scribe, as ancillary to that of the prophet. Jehovah not only gives His word to His servants, but watches over its preservation and transmission.[47] But there is no inspiration to _write_ any new revelation: the spoken word, the consecrated life, are inspired; the book is only a record of inspired speech and action. FOOTNOTES: [26] See Cheyne, Giesebrecht, Orelli, etc. [27] R.V. "against." The Hebrew is ambiguous. [28] So Septuagint. The Hebrew text has Israel, which is a less accurate description of the prophecies, and is less relevant to this particular occasion. [29] _Jeremiah_ (Men of the Bible), p. 132. [30] Cf. Chap. V. on "Baruch." [31] Verses 5-8 seem to be a brief alternative account to 9-26. [32] 1 Chron. xx. i. [33] _'ĀCÛR_: A.V., R.V., "shut up"; R.V. margin, "restrained." The term is used in xxxiii. 1, xxxix. 15, in the sense of "imprisoned," but here Jeremiah appears to be at liberty. The phrase _'ĀC̦ÛR W ĀZÛBH_, A.V. "shut up or left" (Deut. xxxii. 36, etc.), has been understood, those under the restraints imposed upon ceremonial uncleanness and those free from these restraints, _i.e._ everybody; the same meaning has been given to _'ĀC̦ÛR_ here. [34] xxvi. 2. [35] So Cheyne; the Hebrew does not make it clear whether the title "scribe" refers to the father or the son. Giesebrecht understands it of Shaphan, who appears as scribe in 2 Kings xxii. 8. He points out that in verse 20 Elishama is called the scribe, but we cannot assume that the title was limited to a single officer of state. [36] Cf. xxvi. 10. [37] Isa. lviii. 3-8. [38] Micah vi. 6-8. [39] So Orelli, _in loco_. [40] Hebrew text "to Baruch," which LXX. omits. [41] In verse 18 the word "with ink" is not in the LXX., and may be an accidental repetition of the similar word for "his mouth." [42] The A.V. and R.V. "all the words" is misleading: it should rather be "everything"; the princes did not recite all the contents of the roll. [43] The English tenses "cut," "cast," are ambiguous, but the Hebrew implies that the "cutting" and "casting on the fire" were repeated again and again.