1. First, the translation does not make sense in the context of the verse. I have long believed that the verse, as translated, is strangely out of context. Jeremiah 17 begins with the the context that the sin of Judah has become un-erasable. (vs. 1-4). Then, the LORD speaks about the cursedness of those who trust in man (vs. 5-6) and the blessedness of those who trust in the LORD (vs. 7-8). These are two different groups of people.
Immediately after He speaks of these blessed people, He says this verse (17:9).
He then follows this verse with the following statement: "I, the LORD, search the heart; examining the affections; even to give to each one according to his ways, according to the fruit of his practices."
It seems to me that the logic of the passage is that Judah has turned away from God and is cursed. But those who trust in the LORD are blessed. And God searches the heart to determine whether one is trusting in man (including themselves), or trusting in God. Now, if this is the flow of the passage, how does verse 9 fit in? Verse 9, at least to many, is used to describe the treachery of our own heart. The heart cannot be trusted. It will always lead us astray. It is evil and corrupt. That is how this verse is usually read.
If the heart is so wicked, then what is the purpose and role of verse 10? That is, why would God be searching the heart? In 2 Chron. 16:9, the seer Hanani tells Asa that the eyes of the LORD are searching for those "whose heart is loyal to Him" to be their strong supporter. What role does a searching God have if all hearts are desperately wicked? I long struggled with how these verses fit together.
2. Second, once I learned Hebrew, I went back and looked again at this passage. Verse 9 is a simple, seven word verse in the Hebrew. The verse says: " X the heart above all, and Y it is. Who can know?" The question is the meaning of the "X" and "Y" words. The "X" word is "achov." It is found in its various grammatical forms in several places, but only in the following passages is it not clearly to be translated "heel" or "heeltrack" (foot track): Gen. 25:26; 27:36; 2 Kings 10:19; Job 37:4; Ps. 49:6; Jer. 9:4; Hosea 6:8; and Hosea 12:4. The word is related to the word "heel," and from which our name "Jacob" comes. It came to mean a "supplanter," or "overreacher" as we see in Gen. 27:36 where Esau said of Jacob: "Is he not rightly named Jacob? For he has supplanted (a form of our X word) me these two times. He took away my birthright, and now look, he has taken away my blessing!" Now, it is true that Jacob practiced deception when he took away the blessing, but the same is not true when Jacob bought the birthright. There was no deception present then.
That the word may be translated to mean "deceptive" seems to be a given. This is the modern meaning of the word. It also is the apparent meaning in 2 Kings 10:19, where Jehu is stated to have acted "achov," often translated "deceptively." It also seems to fit in Job 37:4 when Elihu says of God: "He thunders with His majestic voice, and He does not "achov" them when His voice is heard." "Deceive" would fit well with the idea that thunder and lightning go together. Thunder does not deceive you into thinking there was lightning when there was not. The word also appears in Ps. 49:6 where it also seems to fit with the idea of deception. However, the concepts of "deceit" and "deception" are not the same, as the word "deceit" always carries with it an evil connotation whereas "deception" does not. In Ps. 49:6, Hosea 6:8, and Hosea 12:4, the only other places this word in its cognate forms is found outside of the places where it plainly means "heel" or "heel tracks," i.e., footprints, it seems to include a concept relating to the foot or footprints or Jacob.
Given its Old Testament usage, it seems to me that the word may either mean "overreacher" or "deceptive." It does not necessarily have a negative implication as would the word "deceitful," nor is it generally translated as "deceitful." Why it is so translated here, I do not know.
The second word "Y" is the Hebrew word "anush." This word is what the translators translate "desperately wicked." It is found some 10 times in the Old Testament. They are: 2 Sam. 12:15; Job 34:6; Psalm 69:20; Is. 17:11; Jer 15:18; 17:9, 16; 30:12, 15; Micah 1:9. Can this word possibly mean "desperately wicked?" In 2 Sam. 12:15, it is used to describe David's baby son and is usually translated "sick." It makes little sense to translate this verse: "And the LORD struck the child that Uriah's wife bore to David, and it became 'desperately wicked.'" The idea of a life-threatening physical condition seems to be a better concept for that verse. "Very sick" or "very ill" works for the word. In Job 34:6, Job speaks of his wound as being "anush," or "very serious," sometimes translated as "incurable." The idea seems to be that it is life-threatening." In Isaiah 17:11 the word is translated as "desparate sorrow." Again, the idea is "life-threatening physical condition." In Jeremiah 15:18, Jeremiah speaks of his wound as being "anush." Here it is translated "incurable." Again, the meaning seems to be that the condition is life-threatening. In Jer. 17:16, the meaning is more obscure, as the passage reads "I have not desired the day of "anush." Our meaning of "life-threatening physical condition" would fit, but it is not demanded in this passage. In Jeremiah 30:12, the word is again translated "incurable," although it is in a couplet where the second word is "severe." The idea of "life-threatening" seems, to me, to be preferred given the parallel couplet. In Jeremiah 30:15, again the idea of "life-threatening" seems to fit well with the passage. Finally, in Micah 1:9, the idea of "incurable" or "life-threatening" seems to fit well in the passage.
In none of these passages is the word translated "desperately wicked." Only in Jeremiah 17:9 is the word so translated. In none of the other passages is there a moral meaning to the term. Rather, it always seems to be a physical condition.
There is one other passage I overlooked, on purpose. That is the Psalm 69:20 passage. The reason I have left this for last is that this is the clincher for me. In this passage, "anush" is used to describe the heart of Christ. The passage reads: "Reproach has broken my heart, and I am full of "anush." I looked for someone to take pity, but there was none; and for comforters, but I found none. They also gave me gall for my food and for my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink." To translate "anush" as "desperately wicked" here would seem to be a desperately wicked thing to do. Jesus was not full of wickedness, but full of deep and intense sorrow, to the point of death. This was a life-threatening physical condition.
Because there is no support in any of the rest of the passages for a meaning of "desperately wicked" as a proper meaning of "anush," I think it is wrong to singularly attach that meaning to the word in Jeremiah 17:9.
I would suggest a translation of the verse as "The heart is complex (from the idea of deceptively unknowable) and fragile (the concept of being extremely vulnerable to life-threatening conditions), who can know it?" From this translation, verse 10 flows now most naturally. God searches this complex and fragile thing to give to each one according to his ways. For the ways of man flow from this complex and fragile heart, as Jesus taught us.
I think this translation much better takes into account the meaning of the Hebrew words employed by Jeremiah.
3. The third argument I bring to this verse is the manner in which it was translated into the Greek before the time of Jesus Christ. Those translators did not read these words as meaning "deceitful" and "desperately wicked." The Septuagint translation of verses 9 and 10 reads: "The heart is deeper than all things, and it is human, and who can know it? I, the LORD examine hearts and I test the affections to give to each according to his way and according to the fruit of his business." The word "achov" is translated into the Greek with the word "Batheia," meaning deep. The word "anush" is translated with the word "anthropos" meaning "man." There is no hint of an idea of moral evil in either of these words. That the Septuagint translators did not think the verse was talking about moral evil is a powerful argument against the standard translation. The New Testament often quotes from the Septuagint when it quotes the Old Testament.
For these reasons, I much prefer for this verse a translation that removes the moral evil found in the standard translations and suggest a more appropriate translation along the lines of "The heart is complex and fragile, who can know it?" Such gives strength to the Septuagint translation of being deep and human, and is faithful, I believe to the Hebrew words "achov" and "anush." It also makes sense in its immediate context as well as in the greater context of Scripture.
As I said at the start, I do not often take issue with a translation. We have very good translations of the Hebrew and Greek scriptures into English and I rarely believe that the meaning of the passage is missed by the translations. In fact, this is one passage seems to me to be a singular oddity. I do not understand why the translators chose the translation they did, nor why this translation has persisted in subsequent translations. I do not know if the translators are afraid of being linked to Pelagianism, the belief that the fall of man was not complete, or that man is not depraved. I think there are ample Scriptures to support the view that fallen man is under the control of the enemy and sold under sin and is morally without hope. Scripture tells us that all have sinned. That we were all enemies of God. But one's doctrine, it seems to me, should not drive one's translation. Rather, the lexical meaning of the words, as derived from the words usage in ancient texts, and the context of the passage, should be the determiners for the proper translation.
I hope this rather lengthy explanation may help clarify the issue. We can talk about this more next week. In the meantime, I stress that this verse is an anomaly for me. I do not know of another verse in Scripture where I think the translation so misses the point of the text.
May the Lord Jesus bless you.
tim
