Now in the fifth month, in the tenth day of the month, which was the nineteenth year of Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon, came Nebuzaradan, captain of the guard, which served the king of Babylon, into Jerusalem,

Now in the fifth month, in the tenth day of the month, which was the nineteenth year of king Nebuchadrezzar, king of Babylon, came Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard, who stood before the king of Babylon, into Jerusalem:

And in the fifth month, the tenth day of the month, the same is the nineteenth year of Nabuchodonosor, king of Babylon, came Nabuzardan the general of the army, who stood before the king of Babylon in Jerusalem.

And in the fifth month, on the tenth of the month, which was in the nineteenth year of Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon, Nebuzar-adan, captain of the body-guard, who stood before the king of Babylon, came unto Jerusalem;

Now in the fifth month, in the tenth day of the month, which was the nineteenth year of Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon, came Nebuzar-adan, captain of the guard, who served the king of Babylon, into Jerusalem,

And in the fifth month, in the tenth of the month, it is the nineteenth year of king Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon, come hath Nebuzar-Adan, chief of the executioners; he hath stood before the king of Babylon in Jerusalem,

Now in the fifth month, on the tenth day of the month, in the nineteenth year of King Nebuchadrezzar, king of Babylon, Nebuzaradan, the captain of the armed men, a servant of the king of Babylon, came into Jerusalem.

Then, in the fifth month, on the tenth of the month, which is the nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon, Nebuzaradan, the leader of the military, arrived. And he was standing before the king of Babylon at Jerusalem.

Mense autem quinto, decima mensis [117] (is annus erat decimus nonus annus regis Nabuchadrezer regis Babylonis) venit Nebuzaradan princeps militum, qui stabat [118] coram rege Babylonis, in Jerusalem,

Served - The word implies high office.

Now in the fifth month - Answering nearly to our August.

Now in the fifth month, in the (d) tenth [day] of the month, which [was] the nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, came Nebuzaradan, captain of the guard, [who] (e) served the king of Babylon, into Jerusalem,
(d) In (2-Kings 25:8) is it called the seventh day, because the fire began then and so continued to the tenth.
(e) That is, who was his servant, as in (2-Kings 25:8).

Now in the fifth month, in the tenth day of the month,.... Hence the fast of the fifth month, for the burning of the city, which was the month Ab, and answers to part of July and part of August, Zac 8:19;
which was the nineteenth year of Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon; that is, the nineteenth year of his reign; who reigned in all forty three years, according to Ptolemy's canon:
came Nebuzaradan captain of the guard, which served the king of Babylon, into Jerusalem; or "stood before the king of Babylon" (s); ministered to him, was a servant of his, the provost marshal, or chief marshal; he was sent, and came from Riblah to Jerusalem, with a commission to burn the city. In 2-Kings 25:8; it is said to be on the "seventh" day of the fifth month that he came thither; here, on the "tenth" day; which difficulty may be solved, without supposing different copies, or any error: he might set out from Riblah on the seventh day, and come to Jerusalem on the tenth; or he might come thither on the seventh, and not set fire to the city till the tenth; or, if he set fire to it on the seventh, it might be burning to the tenth, before it was wholly consumed. The Jews (t) account for it thus,
"strangers entered into the temple, and ate in it, and defiled it, the seventh and eighth days; and on the ninth, towards dark, they set fire to it; and it burned and continued all that whole day, as it is said, Jeremiah 6:4;''
R. Johanan was saying, if I had been in that generation, I should have fixed on that day, for the greatest part of the temple was burnt on that day. The authors of the Universal History say (u) it was on Wednesday the eleventh of the fourth month, answering to our twenty seventh of July; but, according to the express words of the text, the city was broke up on the ninth of the fourth month, and burnt on the tenth day of the fifth month; and which was, according to Bishop Usher (w), the twenty seventh of August, on a sabbath day, and in the year of the world 3416, and before Christ 588; and is placed by them in the same years; and by Mr. Whiston (x) in 589; and by Mr. Bedford (y) in the year 587. This was a month after the taking of the city.
(s) "qui setit coram rege", Schmidt. (t) T. Bab. Taanith, fol. 29. 1. (u) Vol 4. p. 189. & vol. 21. p. 61. (w) Annales Vet. Test. p. 131. (x) Chronological Tables, cent. 10. (y) Scripture Chronology, p 684.

The Chaldean army made woful havoc. But nothing is so particularly related here, as the carrying away of the articles in the temple. The remembrance of their beauty and value shows us the more the evil of sin.

tenth day--But in 2-Kings 25:8, it is said "the seventh day." Nebuzara-dan started from Riblah on the "seventh" day and arrived in Jerusalem on the "tenth" day. Seeming discrepancies, when cleared up, confirm the genuineness of Scripture; for they show there was no collusion between the writers; as in all God's works there is latent harmony under outward varieties.

The destruction of Jerusalem and of the temple, and the carrying away of the people, which are only very summarily stated in Jeremiah 39:8-10, are here related in complete accordance with the account given in 2-Kings 25:8-17. The deviations for the most part originated through the freedom exercised by the epitomizer in his work, or only when mistakes were made by later copyists. The text before us has some amplifications (especially the notices regarding the ornaments of the brazen pillars, Jeremiah 52:23) which are found nowhere else in the Old Testament. The difference in date between Jeremiah 52:12 ("on the tenth of the month") and the passage in Kings ("on the seventh of the month") has arisen through one number having been mistaken for another in copying; it cannot now be decided which is correct; see on 2-Kings 25:18. As to Nebuzaradan, see on Jeremiah 39:13. Instead of עמד , is found עבד in 2-Kings 25:8, which certainly is a simpler reading, but one having less appearance of being the original. The only strange point is the want of the relative אשׁר in plain prose before עמד, which is probably to be pointed עמד. בּירוּשׁלים, instead of ירוּשׁלים (Kings), is a pregnant expression for "he came into Jerusalem." - Jeremiah 52:14. From the expression את־כּל־חומות, as given in Jeremiah 52:14, "all" is omitted in Kings, as being not indispensable for the meaning.