The interpretation timeline
Jeremiah 26:20 Douay-Rheims

There was also a man that prophesied in the name of the Lord, Urias the son of Semei of Cariathiarim: and he prophesied against this city, and against this land, according to all the words of Jeremias.

1105 – 1875 5 witnesses

Scholastic

c. 1100 – 1500
1105
A.D.
Rashi Jewish
1040–1105
“Also a man was prophesying The one who said this did not say this. I.e., those who related the incident of Micah did not relate the incident concerning Uriah. Up to here are the words of the righteous. Now the wicked who were there arose and said, “Also a man was prophesying, etc.” Just as Uriah was killed, so shall Jeremiah be killed. In this way it is explained in Sifrei (Num. 11:7).”
Source
1252
A.D.
Thomas Aquinas Catholic
1225–1274
“Here is set down the repression of the people's fury against Jeremiah, through the words of the elders. And first they set forth the example of a just man to be imitated, concerning the deed of Micah, setting down his preaching; Micah; one of the twelve minor prophets, of Morasthi, to distinguish him from Micah the son of Yela, of whom 3 Kings, last: Zion, Micah 3: hear, O princes of Jacob, and rulers of the house of Israel. Above 9: and I will make Jerusalem into heaps of sand, and dens of dragons, and I will make the cities of Judah a desolation, because there is no inhabitant. And the people's turning: did he condemn him to death? As if to say, No. Above 6: ask about the ancient paths, which is the good way, and walk in it; and you will find rest for your souls. And they draw the conclusion: therefore let us not do so. Psalm 7: his sorrow shall be turned back upon his own head, and his iniquity shall come down upon his own crown. Second, they set forth an example of injustice to be avoided, lest they add evils to evils; there was also a man prophesying. And first his preaching is set down; and he prophesied. 1 Corinthians 14: for God is not a God of dissension, but of peace. And therefore all were saying the same thing. Second, the persecution is set down, and the flight; and he heard (...) and fled. Matthew 10: if they persecute you in one city, flee into another. Third, his killing; and the king sent; because he was allied with the Egyptians. But this one was killed, and Jeremiah was set free, for this reason: because God permits some of the saints to be killed, for the condemnation of the wicked, and as an example of patience for the good, James, last: take, brothers, as an example of suffering evil, and of longsuffering, and of labor, and of patience, the prophets who spoke in the name of the Lord. Similarly, Acts 12, James is killed, Peter is set free. Third, the execution of the sentence concerning the deliverance of Jeremiah is set down: therefore the hand of Ahikam, son of Shaphan, was with Jeremiah. And it is plain.”
Source

Post-Reformation

c. 1650 – 1900
1771
A.D.
John Gill Reformed
1697–1771
“And there was also a man that prophesied in the name of the Lord,.... These are not the words of the same persons continued; because the following instance is against them; but of some other persons in the sanhedrim, who were on the side of the priests and prophets; who in effect said, why tell you us of an instance in Hezekiah's time, when there is so recent an one in the present reign, of a man that prophesied just as Jeremiah has done, and was put to death, and so ought he? after this manner Kimchi interprets it; and so Jarchi, who adds, that it is so explained in an ancient book of theirs, called Siphri; though some think they are the words of the same persons that espoused the prophet's cause; and observe the following instance with this view; that whereas there had been one prophet of the Lord lately put to death for the same thing, should they take away the life of another, it would be adding sin to sin, and bring great evil upon their souls; and it might be observed, that Hezekiah prevented much evil by the steps he took; whereas, should they proceed as they had begun in the present reign, they might expect nothing but ruin, which they might easily see with their own eyes was coming upon them: others are of opinion that this instance is added by the penman of this book, either the prophet himself or Baruch, to show the wonderful preservation of him; that though there had been very lately a person put to death for the very same thing, yet he was preserved through the good offices of a person mentioned at the close of the chapter; and which seems to make this account probable. The name of the prophet was Urijah the son of Shemaiah of Kirjathjearim; which was a city of Judah, Jos 18:14; but who he was is not known, there being no account of him elsewhere: who prophesied against this city, and against this land, according to all the words of Jeremiah; just as he had done, in much the same words, if not altogether; so that their case was similar.”
Source
1871
A.D.
1871
“As the flight and capture of Urijah must have occupied some time, "the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim" (Jer 26:1) must not mean the very beginning, but the second or third year of his eleven years' reign. And . . . also--perhaps connected with Jer 26:24, as the comment of the writer, not the continuation of the speech of the elders: "And although also a man that prophesied . . . Urijah . . . (proving how great was the danger in which Jeremiah stood, and how wonderful the providence of God in preserving him), nevertheless the hand of Ahikam," &c. [GLASSIUS]. The context, however, implies rather that the words are the continuation of the previous speech of the elders. They adduce another instance besides that of Micah, though of a different kind, namely, that of Urijah: he suffered for his prophecies, but they imply, though they do not venture to express it, that thereby sin has been added to sin, and that it has done no good to Jehoiakim, for that the notorious condition of the state at this time shows that a heavier vengeance is impending if they persevere in such acts of violence [CALVIN].”
Source
1875
A.D.
Keil & Delitzsch Lutheran
1861–1875
“The prophet Urijah put to death. - While the history we have just been considering gives testimony to the hostility of the priests and false prophets towards the true prophets of the Lord, the story of the prophet Urijah shows the hostility of King Jehoiakim against the proclaimers of divine truth. For this purpose, and not merely to show in how great peril Jeremiah then stood (Gr., Nהg.), this history is introduced into our book. It is not stated that the occurrence took place at the beginning of Jehoiakim's reign, nor can we infer so much from its being placed directly after the events of that time. The time is not specified, because it was irrelevant for the case in hand. Jer 26:20. A man, Urijah the son of Shemaiah - both unknown - from Kirjath-Jearim, now called Kuriyet el 'Enab, about three hours to the north-west of Jerusalem, on the frontiers of the tribe of Benjamin (see on Jos 9:17), prophesied in the name of Jahveh against Jerusalem and Judah very much in the same terms as Jeremiah had done. When King Jehoiakim and his great men heard this, discourse, he sought after the prophet to kill him. Urijah, when he heard of it, fled to Egypt; but the king sent men after him, Elnathan the son of Achbor with some followers, and had him brought back thence, caused him to be put to death, and his body to be thrown into the graves of the common people. Hitz. takes objection to "all his mighty men," Jer 26:21, because it is not found in the lxx, and is nowhere else used by Jeremiah. But these facts do not prove that the words are not genuine; the latter of the two, indeed, tells rather in favour of their genuineness, since a glossator would not readily have interpolated an expression foreign to the rest of the book. The "mighty men" are the distinguished soldiers who were about the king, the military commanders, as the "princes" are the supreme civil authorities. Elnathan the son of Achbor, according to Jer 36:12, Jer 36:25, one of Jehoiakim's princes, was a son of Achbor who is mentioned in Kg2 22:12-14 as amongst the princes of Josiah. Whether this Elnathan was the same as the Elnathan whose daughter Nehushta was Jehoiachin's mother (Kg2 24:8), and who was therefore the king's father-in-law, must remain an undecided point, since the name Elnathan is of not unfrequent occurrence; of Levites, Ezr 8:16. בּני העם (see on Jer 17:19) means the common people here, as in Kg2 22:6. The place of burial for the common people was in the valley of the Kidron; see on Kg2 22:6.”
Source
Modern · 1953 →

The in-app commentary runs from the Fathers to the early-modern record, then stops — that's where the public-domain sources end, not where the reading does. For the modern reading, follow the sources directly.