Part 49
Although the sermon's theme is simple, it contains a complex, artistic reperformance of Israel's history and serves as a comment upon the poetry that precedes it (Stulman 1995). The cosmic battle already underway and the weeping that marks it are, according to this sermon, the result of covenant infidelity by the insiders. Mosaic covenant language becomes another symbolic lens for interpreting the loss of the land. Other than 3:16, this is the first explicit mention of covenant in the book (Carroll 1986: 267). The absence of blessings that usually accompany covenant curses underscores the inevitability of the disaster ahead (O'Connor 1988). But why does the sermon simply announce the curse as an unalterable course of events? From the perspective of the book's exilic audience, the disaster has already happened. The sermon blames it on covenant disloyalty of their ancestors, distant and immediate. The implicit call to them as survivors is that they must hear and obey. Redactionally, the covenant sermon introduces chs. 11-20 within which the last appeals to 'turn' are made to the nation and by the end of which the curse is enacted.
(11:1—17) Covenant Curse In the book's second major prose sermon, similar in language and style to the temple sermon (7:1—8:3), Jeremiah announces a curse upon anyone 'who does not heed the words' of the Mosaic covenant (w. 3—4) (on the Deuteronomistic flavour of the sermon and for other views as to the identity of the covenant, see Stulman 1986: 63-6 and Carroll 1986: 267). If Jeremiah himself were the author of this sermon, then it would have prophesied the fall of the nation in advance of events. If the sermon is the work of later followers of Jeremiah, then it would explain the nation's fall after the fact. In either case, this sermon has one point and presents it with astonishing simplicity: possession of the land hinges entirely upon obedience to the covenant (v. 5).
w. 15-17 are corrupt (see Holladay 1986: 354-6; Carroll 1986: 272-4). As translated in the NRSV, however, their language and imagery reach both forwards and backwards. YHWH's query about the beloved in v. 15 is echoed in his challenge to the beloved in 12:7, creating a frame around the confession of Jeremiah in 11:8-12:6. YHWH's rebuke of her activity in the temple sacrifice connects these verses with ch. 7, and the tree planted by YHWH evokes the planting language of Jeremiah's call (1:10) and the tree in Jeremiah's confession (11:19). Th£ green tree that YHWH planted will be destroyed, as Jeremiah's enemies seek to destroy him. Linguistically, these difficult verses link the prophet's fate to that of the nation.
Like the temple sermon (7:1-8:3), the covenant sermon demands that the people listen' to YHWH's voice (w. 4, 78; cf 7:13, 23—6), and prohibits Jeremiah's intercession on behalf of the people (v. 14; cf. 7:16). The covenant sermon, however, describes the people's failure to listen in vague formulaic terms different from those of the temple sermon which castigates the worshipping community for specific social and religious infractions. By contrast, the covenant sermon accuses the ancestors (w. 6-8) and the present generation (w. 9-13) of walking 'in the stubbornness of an evil will' (v. 8), and going after other gods to serve them (w. 10,12— 13). Both sermons, however, undercut fundamental symbolic understandings of ancient Israel. The temple sermon proclaims the end of the royal temple ideology, and the covenant sermon announces the collapse of the Mosaic covenant because of human disloyalty. The covenant curse will fall upon them and Jeremiah is powerless to change it.
(11:18-12:25) Lament and Response The first lament or 'confession' of Jeremiah (11:18-12:4; see also 15:1-21; 17:14-18; 18:18—23; 20:7—13) gains a divine response (12:5—6). Akin to psalms of individual lament in form and style (Baumgartner 1987), these first-person prayers are more akin to psalms than to prophetic literature. In each lament an unidentified speaker addresses YHWH to complain bitterly about threats to his life, acute loneliness and isolation, and failure in his prophetic role. Only by deduction or from prose comments is it clear that the speaker is Jeremiah. Although many interpreters find in the confessions a window into the inner life of the prophet (von Rad 1984; Hubmann 1978; Ittmann 1981), the relationship of the poems to a historical person cannot be known (see Gunneweg 1970; Gerstenberger 1963; Reventlow 1963). None the less, the poems' intense portrayals of the prophet's inner life are immensely important on a number oflevels.
w. 1-5, narrated in solemn ritualistic fashion, the announcement of the curse occurs in a prose dialogue between God and Jeremiah. YHWH explains what will activate the curse. It will fall upon those who disobey the covenant made with the ancestors brought from Egypt. The covenant formula, T will be your God and you will be my people' (v. 4), encapsulates the intimacy of covenant relationship and gains expression in YHWH's oath to give them a land 'flowing with milk and honey'. At stake in YHWH's pronouncement, therefore, is the entire future of the community in the land. Jeremiah's formal response, 'Amen' (v. 5, reading the Heb. literally) makes him legal witness to the solemn statement of the curse, w. 6-13 continue the divine speech, narrated by Jeremiah, that recounts the nation's history as a failure to
The confessions defend Jeremiah against the charge of false prophecy (on which see Meyer 1977, Carroll 1981:
JEREMIAH 500
it protests the suffering of the innocent and implicates God in that suffering. What is uncertain is who the innocent are.
158-97). Like the call narrative (Jer i), the confessions portray Jeremiah as one who spoke under divine compulsion, who stood in the council of YHWH to receive the message, and who faithfully executed his role as mediator at immense cost
Surely it is Jeremiah, but for the exilic audience, it may appear that their suffering is out of proportion to their guilt. In that case, Jeremiah the rejected prophet also becomes the paradigm of the innocent sufferer (Craigie, Kelley, and Drinkard 1991; Polk 1984), struggling to be faithful, yet uncomprehending. The primary issue in these verses is divine justice. The prominence of this theme evokes the conditions of exile where theodicy became the central theological question (Carroll 1986; Raitt 1977). YHWH's reply to the prophet (12:5-6) indicates that things will become harder before they improve. Treachery, conflict, and betrayal will continue in their midst, and no satisfactory explanation of their suffering emerges.
(Diamond 1987; O'Connor 1988). In potent language that portrays an inner anguished self, the confessions also portray Jeremiah in combat both with God whose word he speaks and with the people who reject that word. Identified with both God and people, yet distinct from them, Jeremiah embodies the pain and anger of both. By revealing an inner life, by 'going behind' the character into internal struggles, the confessions help create a character whose life symbolizes his message
(Polk 1984: 125). Whatever else it is, Jeremiah's life is a metaphor of the pain of God and of the people. For the implied audience in exile, Jeremiah's life, with its anger and resistance, its suffering and captivity, is a symbol that interprets their reality.
(12:7-13) YHWH's Lament YHWH continues to speak, first in a tone of'exhausted grief (Brueggemann 1988: 115), and then of destructive rage. In love language that suggests the broken marriage of 2:1-3:25, YHWH announces that he has forsaken his heritage (nahdld, w. 7, 8; Habel 1995; Clements 1988: 84), the beloved of his heart (cf 11:14). His heritage has again gone wild like the animals. Sexual overtones are absent here, but the turn in the relationship is no less shocking than was the beloved's behaviour in the marriage. 'Therefore I hate her', says YHWH, who calls for the animals to devour her
(11:18—12:6) presents formal problems, for it is not certain whether the verses comprise one (O'Connor 1988) or two confessions (11:18—23 an(^ 12:1—6; Diamond 1987; Smith 1990). In the present text, however, the two parts of the poem form two panels of complaint (11:18-20 and 12:1-4) and response (11:21—3 an(^ 12:4—6) that interpret and nuance one another as a single composition (Hubmann 1978: 165— 78). 11:18-23 °Pens with an unidentified voice. The speaker uses yada' (to know), a covenant verb of intimate relationship
(w. 8-9). In w. 10-13 YHWH continues to speak, but the object of indictment shifts from the beloved to the many shepherds of the vineyard. Their destructiveness (w. 10—na) and fruitless actions (v. 13) frame the mourning of the personified land, desolate, uncared for, and abandoned (v. n). YHWH's sword devours (v. 12).
(O'Connor 1988: 90—1), but he does not divulge the content of what YHWH has revealed to him (11:18). The point is that the prophet speaks on the authority of relationship with YHWH. The speaker is an innocent lamb led to the slaughter'. He quotes enemies who want to cut him down like a tree (11:19); he appeals to YHWH, who 'judge[s] righteously', to judge his case (rib). A prose voice interrupts the poet to identify the enemies as people from Jeremiah's home town, to explain why they attack him, and to promise their punishment
Like Jeremiah, YHWH also voices pain and fierce anger (v. 13) but in this case provoked by the intimate betrayal of a loved one, who 'has lifted up her voice against me', and by the feckless leadership of kings. The language of betrayed love (11:15 and w7—8) surrounds Jeremiah's more cautious anger in a rhetorical battle between prophet and deity. YHWH's betrayal by the beloved, the most intimate of treacheries, is certain. Jeremiah merely asks indirectly if YHWH has betrayed him (12:1—2). Jeremiah's meek rebellion holds its ground but not without encroachment from the more justified divine fury.
(11:21-3).
The second panel (12:1-6) reuses images and themes from the first but inverts them. No longer confident that justice will be done, Jeremiah doubts his success in a legal case (rib) against YHWH (12:1). Why, Jeremiah asks, do 'the guilty prosper' and the 'treacherous thrive?' And Jeremiah answers his own question: because YHWH plants and nourishes them
(12:14-17) YHWH continues speaking, but now in prose and in a temporal shift to the exile. YHWH corrects the previous poems and looks toward the future (Craigie, Kelley, and Drinkard 1991: 183). With language from the call narrative (1:10), YHWH promises to 'pluck up' those who touch his inheritance (nahdld). From amongst those plucked nations, YHWH will 'pluck up' Israel to return them to their inheritance. For the nations, too, there is hope, if they will learn to swear by YHWH's name. If they will not listen, a major theme of the prose materials, then YHWH will 'uproot and destroy'. This prose comment, therefore, qualifies YHWH's rage, hatred, and destruction from 12:7—13.
(12:2). Jeremiah protests his innocence and claims that YHWH knows (yadcf) his innocence as well. He asks for vengeance against his enemies in terms that echo their plans for him in 11:19. Then he shifts to the cosmic consequence of their evil, 'How long will the land mourn?' (12:4), recalling the poetic uncreation of the world (4:23—8), as the land shrivels and grieves with Jeremiah. YHWH's response to Jeremiah's attack against divine justice brings neither resolution nor comfort (12:5—6). Instead, YHWH promises that things will get worse. Like 11:21—3, I2:^ personalizes the escalating difficulties for Jeremiah. Even his own family is treacherous.
This confession invites interpretation at more than one level. As a defence of the prophet, Jeremiah's resistance indicates that YHWH alone has designated him a prophet. As an indictment of the wicked, even his own kin, it shows that the people bring sword and famine upon themselves by rejecting the prophet (11:22). As an attack on the justice of God,
(13:1—27) Symbolic Acts Connections among the prose and poetry sections collected here are neither narrative nor formal but thematic; destruction must come on account of the nation's foolish pride. The certainty of destruction is expressed by Jeremiah's first 'symbolic action' (w. i—n), by a second
501 JEREMIAH
symbolic act to be performed by the people (w. 12-14), and by poetic pieces that announce the exile.
sage seems to describe Judah's punishment for its pride (13:9). It blames the national catastrophe on Judah, but it also places the fall within divine punishment of the nations by leading forward to 25:15-29 where all the nations drink of the same cup of destruction.
Symbolic acts are dramatized speech that involve more than the drama of street theatre (Carroll 1986: 293-7). Within ancient Israel symbolic prophetic acts were understood as enacted speech forms that embody the divine plan (Overholt 1989: 86—91). Many of the book's narratives portray Jeremiah engaging in symbolic acts (16:1-4; ^9-^-2; 25:15-29; 27:1-3; 32:1-15; 43:8-13: 51:59-64), but others also perform acts for Jeremiah to interpret (13:12—14; 18:1—n; 51:59—64). Competing claimants to divine authority use symbolic acts to cancel Jeremiah's message (28:10-11; 36:20-4; Lundbom 1995:191). So many narratives in Jeremiah describe events and deeds rife with symbolic meanings that the symbolic act as a specific genre of prophetic literature becomes a blurred category (cf 20:1-6; 35:1-19). What seems important to note is that the ancient world, and some contemporary cultures, ascribe to events far more revelatory significance than do Western 'scientific' cultures.
(13:15—19) Attack and Exile These verses explicate YHWH's announcement, 'I will not have pity...' (13:14). Announcements of exile and divine commands (w. 15-16, 18, 20) unify the verses, w. 15-19, Jeremiah orders the people to listen (v. 15) and announces the consequences of not listening (v. 17). By contrast with YHWH who has no compassion (13:14), Jeremiah will weep bitterly for their pride and captivity (v. 17). The king and queen mother must become lowly' for the attack is underway and the towns of the Negeb are cut off (w. 18—19). (13:20^7) Zion's Rape This poem addresses personified Jerusalem and returns to the theme of the cosmic battle, here imagined in terms of a rape. YHWH warns Jerusalem to look because the enemy from the north advances. (See Holladay 1986: 411 on gender of pronouns.) Rhetorical questions highlight Zion's plight and her guilt (w. 20—3). As in the brokenmarriage metaphor (2:19), YHWH quotes speech he imagines she might say. If she asks herself why these things have happened to her, he tells her it is because of her own sin that she is raped (v. 22). She cannot help herself (v. 23). Then in one of the most horrible lines in the book, YHWH tells her, T myself will lift up your skirts over your face' (v. 26). Her rape is punishment in kind for her animal-like adulteries (v. 27). Rape as a metaphor for military invasion is widespread (Washington and Gordon 1995) in the ancient and modern world. Here it is particularly awful because YHWH is credited with the deed (O'Connor 1992). Zion learns how truly without compassion and pity YHWH can be.
(13:1—11) The Ruined Loincloth Two major problems bedevil interpretation of this passage. The first is the difficulty in determining the event's location and historical status. Because the Euphrates is a great distance away from Jerusalem, it becomes hard to imagine Jeremiah actually performing the act. Some interpreters, therefore, emend the text to name a site near Jerusalem or understand the narrative as entirely fictional. The problems are unresolvable (Condamin 1920: 114—17; Holladay 1986: 396; Carroll 1986). The second, equally thorny problem concerns the meaning of the symbolic action. Jeremiah narrates the story in the first person and describes his obedient responses to a sequence of divine commands that result in the burial and disintegration of a loincloth (w. 1-6). Apart from portraying him as an obedient servant, the action itself is nearly opaque. Who or what is being buried and destroyed? If Euphrates is the location of the event, then the text suggests that the exiles, symbolized by the loincloth and buried in Babylon, are ruined by the experience. The symbolic act, then, might be a critique of the exilic community, ruined in their captivity. Or, since burying a cloth by a river will undoubtedly destroy it, the act could stand as a protest against YHWH's abandonment and neglect of the community by burying them in exile. But the interpretative speech that follows (w. 8—n) suppresses both these possibilities. What is being buried and destroyed is the pride of Judah and Jerusalem (v. 9). Because they would not listen and because they followed other gods, Israel and Judah have failed to realize their true identity (w. 10—n; Brueggemann 1991: 121—3). They are utterly useless.
(14:1—22) Drought and Wound Various possibilities exist for dividing the chapter on formal and thematic grounds (Carroll 1986: 307-8). Many commentators find two communal laments, one on the drought (w. i—16) and one on the wounds of war (w. 17—22), with thematic and formal links between the two (w. 9, 22; Craigie, Kelley, and Drinkard 1991: 200). Some see the drought and the war materials as referring to two separate historical catastrophes, but the two panels of poetry (w. i—10 and 17—22) interpret one another (Holladay 1986: 422) and speak of the same subject alternately imagined as meteorological and military events. Despite possible connections to an actual drought, the drought serves as a metaphor for the shattering of the nation in the cosmic battle and the uncreation of the world associated with it.
Both communal laments contain confessions of sin (w. 7, 20) and statements of loyal praise (w. 8—9, 22). The latter dramatize the voice of the implied exilic audience, children of the unfaithful wife of YHWH (3:22-5; 10:1-16; McKane 1986 also places these prayers in exile). The purpose of these liturgical pieces is to invite the audience to repent and to find in YHWH their only hope (w. 8, 22). Wedged between the two panels of poetry is prose material (w. 11-16) that explains the cause of grief and lamentation as the consequence of the prophets' false discernment of reality (Brueggemann 1988: 128). Together the laments summon the exilic community to learn from the disaster and repent, while simultaneously moving the narrative thread of the book towards the disaster.
(13:12—14) The Wine-Jars A second symbolic and equally destructive event follows, though it is not Jeremiah but YHWH and the people, presumably of Judah and Jerusalem, who will perform the future act. And it is not Jeremiah but YHWH who interprets that act in a divinely scripted conversation. Jeremiah's role is to mediate between the two parties. The filling of the wine-jars does not, as expected, symbolize feasting and joy but drunkenness. The people's forced drunkenness leads to self-destruction of all the land's inhabitants, particularly royal and religious leadership (v. 13). YHWH will neither spare nor have compassion. By its juxtaposition with 13:1-11, this pas-
JEREMIAH 502
(15:1—16:21) No Future, Yet a Future 15:1—4 parallels 14:11—12 in its expression of divine rejection of Jeremiah's intercession. In another defence of Jeremiah as a true mediator foiled in preventing disaster by divine command, the prose commentator announces that no mediation would work, not even by Moses or Samuel. The people's fate is sealed. Terms of catastrophe are less mythic than in chs. 2—10 where the foe from the north was advancing upon Jerusalem. In chs. 11-20 the foe appears only in 13:20. Instead, the modes of tragedy become more realistically precise: pestilence and sword, famine and captivity (15:2; 11:22; 14:15; 21:8), as well as unburied bodies (14:16). The destroyers are no longer a mythic army whose noise can be heard from afar, but the sword that kills and the beasts and birds that scavenge upon corpses (15:3). Nor is it the people who are held responsible here, but former King Manasseh (2 Kings 21:10-15). Clements (1988: 94-6) discusses the dislike of Manasseh shared by the book of Jeremiah and the Deuteronomistic history.
w. i-io, an undated superscription identifies the setting of the poem and chapter as a drought (v. i), but more than the absence of rain threatens the community. Israel has forsaken the 'fountain of living waters' and dug their own cisterns, broken cisterns that cannot hold water (2:13; 17:13). The drought symbolizes the consequences of Israel's infidelity (Jer 4:27—8; 12:4; 23:10; O'Connor 1988: 20). A third-person narrator describes the drought's impact (w. 2-6). Animals, humans, and the earth suffer together. Affliction binds everyone from nobles to servants (v. 3; Brueggemann 1988). In first-person plural forms, w. 7—9 introduce the voice of the people. They confess their sin and petition YHWH for help in repentant and humble terms. It is YHWH's distance and inaction that perplexes them. 'Why should you be like a stranger... like someone confused, like a mighty warrior who cannot give help?' (w. 8-9). They confess their loyalty, none the less, and beg YHWH not to forsake them.
Interpreted as a pre-exilic text, this first panel of lament implies that the community finally expresses repentance, but it is insincere or too late (McConville 1993: 68). As an exilic text however, the poem raises a theological phantom that haunted the defeated nation. Where is God in their pain? Is God absent, confused, powerless? By giving exiles dramatic voice, the poem models how the exilic community should respond to the crisis. The speakers confess their sins and turn to YHWH, their hope (v. 8). But YHWH rejects their repentance (w. 10—n), switching back from the world of the reader to the pre-exilic world. Repentance is too late; punishment will come. w. 11-16 remain in a pre-exilic time-frame, but they too address issues of exile. The first prose comment
(15:5-9) Divine Lament YHWH grieves over doomed Jerusalem with a poignant rhetorical question that brings readers into divine anguish and portrays Jerusalem's pitiful isolation (v. 5). The subject of YHWH's lament is divine reluctance to destroy the city, described after the fact. Personified Jerusalem is abandoned, but as pathetic as her condition is, she has brought it upon herself in a now familiar complaint against her. She rejected him, so he destroyed her (v. 6). YHWH and female Jerusalem cannot yet be reconciled (see Jer 2:1-3:25). He alone puts effort into the relationship and is 'weary of relenting' (v. 6). Although the poem does not comfort Jerusalem, it invites pity for her (w. 7—9). In a reversal of promises to Abraham and Sarah (v. 8), Jerusalem's widows and childless mothers augur the death of the nation, for they have no offspring to create a future.
(w. 11—12) prohibits Jeremiah's mediation on behalf of the people no matter what liturgical rite they offer. Prohibition of Jeremiah's intercession defends him against accusations of failed prophecy (Wilson 1989). His mediation did not fail; it was not even permitted, because YHWH had already decided to send the invasion. The second prose comment (w. 13-16) derides speech of prophets who invent their word, send themselves, and by contrast to Jeremiah, promise salom 'in this place' (v. 13). Two prophetic views of reality compete, but it is clear which one should be chosen—the Jeremianic interpretation of the tragedy.
(15:10—21) Jeremiah's Lament The juxtaposition of Jeremiah's second confession with YHWH's lament over Jerusalem creates subtle interactions between them. As YHWH doomed the mothers to childlessness (15:9), Jeremiah's mother doomed him to a life of suffering by giving him birth (v. 10). Prophetic anguish (v. 18) replaces divine weariness (15:6). Jeremiah's lament identifies him with grieving YHWH by defending Jeremiah's prophecy as divinely imposed. But the confession also identifies Jeremiah with the people against God (Polk 1984; McConville 1993). Jeremiah's confession is an act of protest in which he embodies the questions of the exiles even as he complains about his people (v. 15). He challenges divine governance of the universe and ultimately charges YHWH with the destruction of daughter Jerusalem (Diamond 1987: 78). He suffers unjustly, his wound is incurable, YHWH has abandoned him, and if he repents (sub, v. 19), he will be delivered from 'the hand of the wicked' (v. 21).
w. 17—22, this second lament panel also ridicules religious leadership (v. 18) and resumes the theme of weeping over destroyed daughter Zion. YHWH commands Jeremiah to express the divine 'pathos' (Seybold 1993: 134) at the destruction of virgin daughter Jerusalem who has been struck in war with a mortal wound (w. 17—18; cf. 13:20—7). The people cry out again (w. 19-22) to continue their protest against YHWH's neglect of them. The implied audience faces its catastrophe and asks if YHWH hates Zion, why YHWH has struck them, why there is no healing. For their part, they accept their sin and the sins of their ancestors and beg YHWH to remember the covenant (v. 20). Unlike YHWH the idols cannot bring rain; YHWH is their only hope (v. 22).
w. 10—14 are problematic on textual and formal grounds, and many earlier commentators excised verses (Diamond 1987; O'Connor 1988; Hubmann 1978: 245; Ittmann 1981: 44—9). These prose verses introduce the confession, however, by showing Jeremiah's resistance to a prophetic vocation imposed on him from before birth (v. 10, see 1:5). They distinguish him from false prophets from whom he did not borrow, and in YHWH's voice, they restate the certainty of exile (w. 13— 14).
Although this chapter and other communal liturgical fragments in the book have often been seen as secondary, they play a key role in bringing the audience into the Jeremianic programme for the nation's renewal. (For post-exilic dating, see Biddle 1996: 97-8.)
5°3 JEREMIAH
dence in the land ofthe north will not be permanent for the God of the exodus will return them to their land in the unspecified future. By retrieving the Exodus tradition, the text imaginatively links the audience's captivity to bondage in Egypt. God will again bring them to their land. w. 16—18 return to the theme of exile and stress its inescapability. YHWH will send fisherfolk and hunters to drag off idolaters who have polluted the land and filled YHWH's inheritance
This confession begins like the previous one (11:18). Jeremiah reminds YHWH of divine knowledge (yadcfta) and appeals for justice against persecutors (v. 15). He fears divine tolerance will result in disaster for himself. He claims to be so identified with the divine words that he ate them, and they became his joy (v. 16). By choice, he faced extreme loneliness for the sake of his vocation (v. 17). Then, trapped and betrayed, he asks, 'Why is my pain unceasing?' He answers his own question with anguished accusation of YHWH who is 'a deceitful brook.. .waters that fail' (v. 18). Jeremiah himself experiences abandonment like daughter Zion (15:5) and blames YHWH because Jeremiah is innocent. YHWH responds (w. 19-21) by inviting him to return (sub, 3:12, 14; 4:2). If he is faithful to his prophetic mission, he will remain YHWH's spokesperson, and though enemies fight against him, YHWH will deliver him (w. 20-1).
(nahdld) with abominations.
In w. 19—20, a first-person liturgical voice breaks into divine speech to address YHWH in loyalty and confidence (v. igc). 'Our ancestors have inherited (nhl) nothing but lies' (v. 19). Again the liturgical voice brings the implied audience into the text and provides them with a model of repentance. They proclaim the gathering of all nations around YHWH and the futility of idols (v. 20). YHWH's response in v. 21 ignores the people's praise and repentance to interpret suffering as pedagogy that will at last succeed despite the people's recalcitrance. The entire chapter defends YHWH from charges of injustice. (17:1-27) True Worship Many voices combine in this chapter. YHWH speaks in prose accusation (w. 1—4) and wisdom sayings (w. 5—11). The people speak in liturgical praise (w. 12-13), Jeremiah speaks in his third confession (w. 1418), and then speaks on behalf of YHWH in a prose sermon on proper sabbath decorum (w. 19—27). Most commentators view the chapter as a miscellaneous collection (Diamond 1987: 165), but recent scholarship has begun to locate unifying features. Craigie, Kelley, and Drinkard (1991) find a chiastic structure in w. 1—13, and Polk (1984: 143—50) identifies links between w. 1—13 and 14—18. Viewed synchronically, ch. 17 contains a collection of prose and poetic voices that attack false worship (w. 1-4), exemplify proper worship (w. 12—13, J4—J8), and display attitudes ofthe heart (leb, w. i, 5, 9) that underlie worship (w. 5—11). The text of w. 1—4 is corrupt (Holladay 1986: 484) and its genre uncertain (prose, NRSV; poetry, NEB), but the general import ofthe verses is clear. Israel's sin has been written (k-t-b, see v. 13) with unusually hard and precise instruments and engraved ineradicably on heart and altar (v. i). The horns of the altar, symbols of cultic protection (Carroll 1989: 349), here signify sins of idolatrous worship (v. 2). The people have provoked YHWH's fierce anger, so they will lose their heritage (nahdld) and go into exile (w. 3-4).
This many-levelled poem depicts Jeremiah as a person who suffers because of his undesired prophetic vocation. It shows him to be a true prophet of YHWH, rejected by his own people. His persecution and sense of divine abandonment, however, resemble the suffering of the exiles, and the invitation for him to repent repeats the book's frequent invitation and expression of repentance voiced by the implied audience. YHWH's promise to deliver Jeremiah from the 'ruthless'
(v. 21), therefore, implies hope for the audience. (16:1-21) Jeremiah's Celibacy Ch. 16 is divine speech related largely in prose by Jeremiah. It opens with an account of Jeremiah's celibacy and its interpretation (w. 1—9). w. 10—21 comprise four units that raise the question of theodicy (w. 1013), promise restoration (w. 14-15), reiterate promises of exile (w. 16—18), express communal repentance in poetry (w. 19— 20), and end with a divine threat (v. 21). The chapter gives the impression of a conversation among many voices debating the meaning of exile, all presented through divine speech.
w. 1—9, Smith (1990: 36) believes the superscription in v. i introduces a new unit, but the verse's purpose is merely to underscore divine origins of Jeremiah's celibacy. YHWH's command that Jeremiah neither marry nor beget children (v. 2) embellishes Jeremiah's complaint of social isolation in 15:17. The prophet's celibacy is symbolic action akin to the burying oftheloincloth (13:1-11). Jeremiah's spouseless, childless life announces Judah's fate and continues his characterization as a symbol ofthe people's plight. Life in the land is over; there is no future. In the picture that unfolds here, all remnants of communal and domestic life cease, w. 3-4 describe the fate of children and parents who die of sword, famine, and disease, unlamented and unburied. The scene resembles the aftermath of battle with corpses littered everywhere. The world has become utterly silent. There will be no mourning rituals, no feasting. There will no sound of mirth or gladness, no voice of bride or bridegroom (w. 5—9). Jeremiah's celibacy signifies the total obliteration of daily domestic life.
w. 5-8 contain a poem of two stanzas with strong resemblances to Ps i, a wisdom psalm (Holladay 1962), recast in Deuteronomistic terms of covenant blessing and curse (Polk 1984:145) and put in YHWH's mouth. In an unusual arrangement, curse precedes blessing (cf. Ps i). Those who are cursed trust what is human and turn from YHWH. Although the poem does not mention idols explicitly, the attitude of the cursed heart (leb) is idolatrous (v. 5). People with such a heart will die from lack of life-giving water. By contrast, those who trust in YHWH will flourish like a tree planted by water (w. 78). w. 9—11, YHWH adds comments in proverbial wisdom style on the mysterious and devious nature of the human heart. YHWH, Just Judge, tests and searches the heart and dispenses justice. The language of v. 10 plays upon and reinterprets Jeremiah's first confession (12:1—4) whgre hg
w. 10-13 ask me questions that lie at the heart ofthe book and belong to the experience of exile: why has God done this to us? What is our sin? In Deuteronomistically phrased prose, the answer is clear and familiar. They and their ancestors betrayed YHWH by following other gods and breaking torn. This is why they are hurled out. w. 14-15 interrupt threats of exile to announce hope to the implied audience. Their resi-
JEREMIAH 504
see the passage as a post-exiJic addition (CarroJJ 1986) because sabbath-keeping marked post-exiJic Jife, but it may aJso have characterized Jife in exiJe (von Rad 1965: 79-84). The king's triumphant entrance through the city gates and the unification of IsraeJ in common worship were sureJy an exiJic hope.
protests divine injustice and asks YHWH to test his heart (kb) and estabJish his innocence (12:3). YHWH meets Jeremiah's demand (v. 10) by announcing a reversaJ of fortunes for the unjust (v. n, cf. v. 3).
w. 12-13, ^e divine promise brings forth praise from the congregation (Craigie, KeJJey, and Drinkard 1991: 230). Text and transJation are difficuJt (O'Connor 1988; Diamond 1987), but the communaJ JiturgicaJ voice, in form and Janguage simiJar to other communaJ Jiturgies in the book, gives expression to the impJied exiJic audience. The praise casts them as the bJessed who trust in YHWH (w. 7—8), their miqweh, meaning both 'hope' (see 14:8, 22) and 'pooJ' (HoJJaday 1986: 502). Their praise (v. 13) Jinks them with the tree pJanted by the water (w. 7—8) and with the ones who seek the fountain of Jiving water (v. 13). They curse those, once among them, who have forsaken the fountain of Jiving water (see 2:13). Those enemies wiJJ be recorded (written: k-t-b) in the underworJd (v. 13; see 17:1). The cursed ones may suggest internaJ enemies or perhaps the previous generation whose infideJityJedto exiJe.
(18:1—20:18) Captivity These chapters are more closely woven than previous units in chs. 11-20 (O'Connor 1988; Diamond 1987; Smith 1990: 56-60; CarroJJ 1986: 371) and form the cJimax of the first haJf of the book (Jer 1—25). Symbolic events and their sermonic interpretations (18:1—12; 19:1—15; 20:1—6), a divine Jament (18:13/7-17), laments of Jeremiah (18:18-23; 20:7-13), and a curse of his birth (20:14-18) create a symbolic narrative with multiple meanings. Jeremiah visits the potter whose work serves as a simiJe for divine power and occasions the final invitation to repent before the catastrophe. The peopJe adamantly refuse to repent (18:12). God laments in horror and dismay (18:13—27); Jeremiah begs for fulfilment of the word (18:19—23) and breaks the potter's jug to signify the nation's imminent destruction (19:1-14). BabyJon appears by name for the first time as the mythic foe from the north, concretized as a reaJ historicaJ invader. Just as BabyJon is about to capture Jerusalem, Jeremiah is imprisoned in the tempJe and released. He utters his final confession in vindication (20:7-13) and then curses his birth (Jer 20:14-18). The covenant curse (11:1—13) ^as befallen the nation.
w. 14-18, Jeremiah's confession; next in the sequence of speakers, Jeremiah is at once distinct from, and identified with, the suffering audience. His tone changes from his earJier one where he chaJJenged YHWH's fideJity and was urged to 'turn' (15:10-21). Instead of continuing the chaJJenge here, Jeremiah begs for heaJing and saJvation (v. 14). Like the peopJe in w. 12—13, h£ trusts YHWH and exemplifies true worship: 'you are my praise' (v. 14). Like the peopJe, he is wounded and in need of heaJing, and Jike them, he has enemies (v. 15) upon whom he wishes vengeance (v. 18). But the prophet's chief compJaint aJso separates him from the peopJe and identifies him with YHWH. He has been a faithfuJ prophet whose enemies doubt his word (v. 15). He pJeads for the persecution of his persecutors. Jeremiah is a modeJ worshipper and innocent sufferer who seeks refuge and justice from YHWH (w. 17—18). Within the book's pre-exiJic narrative movement towards the faJJ of the nation, his request for vengeance wiJJ resuJt in the destruction of his peopJe. For the impJied audience aJready in exiJe, however, the confession invites whoJehearted repentance as exemplified by Jeremiah's prayerfuJ attitude.
These chapters interpret the nation's faJJ as divine justice, a deserved punishment after relentless efforts by YHWH and Jeremiah to evoke repentance. Within the horizon of the impJied exiJic audience, however, the course of events offers a gJint of hope. YHWH is not implacable. If they repent, divine building and planting are possible for their God is God of aJJ nations (18:8-9). Jeremiah's own beating and imprisonment does not end in death but in release and in the proclamation of praise for YHWH who 'delivered the Jife of the needy from the hands of evildoers' (Jer 20:13).
(18:1-12) The Potter's Hand YHWH commands Jeremiah to go to the potter's house where the potter, not Jeremiah, performs a symbolic action (w. 1—4) that Jeremiah interprets in his sermon (w. 5-11). The event itseJf is rife with metaphoricaJ connotations that vividly portray divine power. YHWH's hand and the potter's hand have symmetricaJ capabilities. Both can destroy their own creations at wiJJ (w. 4, 6b). As the potter can crush the pot, so YHWH can destroy a nation or kingdom (v. 7). But YHWH's threat of destruction is conditionaJ; repentance and obedience wiJJ induce YHWH to buiJd and pJant instead of destroying (w. 9—11). The sermon concludes with YHWH's direct appeal to the nation: 'Turn now... from your evil way' (v. n). But the peopJe repjy, 'It is no use!' (v. 12). Narratively, their emphatic refusal sets in motion further symbolic events. (18:13-17) Divine Lament YHWH's lamentation is not griefstricken but angry and appalled. Who can imagine behaviour Jike that of virgin IsraeJ? (v. 13). YHWH's peopJe, who are portrayed Jike the wife in 2:1-3:25, have forgotten him and gone after faJse gods (v. 15). As a resuJt of their behaviour the Jand wiJJ become a horrifying example to others; they wiJJ go into exiJe. YHWH wiJJ turn from them and be beyond imprecation, beyond sympathy, beyond helping. For the exiJic audience, this poem may convey their experience of God's
w. 19-27, the sabbath sermon: Jeremiah delivers this prose sermon as divine speech that appears to undermine earJier parts of the book (4:4; 7:1—8:3). Proper sabbath behaviour, rather than attitudes of heart, itseJf becomes a sign of obedience to YHWH. YHWH demands negativeJy that the peopJe refrain from carrying a burden or working on the sabbath, and positively that they sanctify the sabbath (w. 21—2, 24, 27). FaiJure to keep sabbath Jaw wiJJ cause Jerusalem's destruction (v. 27), whereas keeping it wiJJ bring Davidic ruJe and the reunification of IsraeJ as a worshipping community in JerusaJem (w. 25—6).
In contrast to the tempJe sermon (Jer 7), this passage specifies proper cuJtic behaviour, but Jike the tempJe sermon and other prose passages (11:1—14; I3:I~I4; 16:1—13; 18:1—12; 19:1— 15), the central requirement is to listen' (17:23, 24, 27; Brueggemann 1988: 160). The sabbath sermon interprets Jerusalem's faJJ as a failure to obey, evidenced by breaking the sabbath. But the sermon is more concerned about the future than about the past. Restoration of monarchy and city hinges on obedience to sabbath torn (O'Connor 1988: 141-3). Many
5°5 JEREMIAH
message (v. i) and abuses YHWH's messenger (v. 2; O'Connor 1988: 145); thus Pashur signifies the nation's total rejection of the divine word, and with great irony, he shows his disdain within the temple itself. As a consequence, he and all his allies will fall by the sword, go into captivity in Babylon, and lose their wealth (w. 4—6). It is remarkable that the text names Babylon only now: in chs. 2—10, the threat came from the mythic 'enemy from the north', advancing for cosmic battle. In chs. 11—19, me enemy was less mythic, described by metonymy as sword, famine, pestilence, and captivity, but without historical specificity. In w. 4-6 Babylon is mentioned four times. Historical identification has replaced mythic and poetic allusions.
absence, but it does not accuse God of abuse. It implies, instead, that God acted justly in scattering them before the enemy.
(18:18—23) Jeremiah's fourth confession corresponds to the spirit of YHWH's lament in the preceding poem. Like YHWH, Jeremiah has given up on the people after trying to avert divine wrath from them (v. 2ob). Like YHWH, Jeremiah has been rejected by the people (w. 20, 22, 23). And like YHWH, Jeremiah now wants war and its appalling consequences to come upon his enemies (w. 21-2). He begs YHWH not to forgive, not to blot out their sin: 'deal with them while you are angry' (v. 23). Jeremiah's fourth lament, therefore, moves the larger narrative thread of the book forwards. In the scene at the potter's house, the people decisively refuse the final invitation to listen (18:12). Then both YHWH and Jeremiah utter laments that propel the narrative towards invasion by the still unnamed but no longer mythical enemy. They are of one mind; YHWH must act now.
Whereas Pashur represents both the people in their rejection of the prophet and the religious leaders who have led the people astray by prophesying falsely (v. 6), Jeremiah also represents more than the rejected prophet. Except for Jeremiah's confessions (11:18—12:6; 15:10—21; 17:14—18; 18:18—23; 20:7-13) and the call narrative (1:3-19), this is the first passage that portrays Jeremiah as a suffering prophet. Here his fate parallels that ofhis people; he is beaten and taken captive just as they will be, and he is released as they ultimately will be. Jeremiah's suffering and release portends their own. His captivity symbolizes their captivity and offers a glimpse of survival (McConville 1993; Polk 1984).
At the same time, Jeremiah's confession marks him again as the innocent sufferer, one trapped by enemies who dug a pit to ensnare him (w. 20,22, 23). They entrap him because ofhis fidelity to the prophetic mission that he long resisted. He is a true prophet who does not send himself or speak for himself. If the implied audience is exilic, however, more is suggested in this portrayal. Jeremiah is the model of the faithful sufferer who, like his people, is entrapped by plots to destroy his life and who turns to YHWH for justice against enemies.
w. 7—18, unlike Jeremiah's previous confessions, the final one is unaccompanied by divine speech. In ch. 20, YHWH does not speak because he has spoken insistently throughout the first twenty chapters either directly or through the prophet
(19:1—15) The Broken Jug The story about the smashing of the potter's jug combines prose sermon and symbolic event to drive the book inexorably towards Jerusalem's destruction (v. 15). The chapter responds to Jeremiah's request for vengeance (18:18—23) and completes the punishment threatened in 18:13-17 and throughout the book thus far. Rather than narrate the actual invasion of the city (21:1-10; 39:1-10; 52:1—27), the text portrays it symbolically. YHWH commands Jeremiah to break the jug in front of the power structure of elders and priests (w. 1-2; Brueggemann 1988: 167) to constitute the event as a legal act. YHWH then orders the invasion to be enacted symbolically. The jug's destruction signifies and embodies the smashing of the nation (v. 10; Carroll 1986: 386-7; O'Connor 1988: 144). The community's offences are cultic (see 13:1-11 and 7:1-8:3). Leaders and people alike have forsaken YHWH, profaned 'this place' and gone after the baals. They have killed the innocent and sacrificed children
(but see von Rad 1984). In the symbolic accomplishment of the prophetic word, YHWH withdraws from the scene.
The literary limits of Jeremiah's confession are much disputed. Many interpreters include w. 14-18 in the confession as a second complaint (von Rad 1936). Formally, however, they curse the prophet's birth and create an indusio with the covenant curse (11:1-17; O'Connor 1988; Craigie, Kelley, and Drinkard 1991). Without w. 14-18, Jeremiah's confession contains all the elements of a conventional lament: complaint (w. 7—10), statement of assurance (v. n), petition (v. 12), and praise (v. 13; O'Connor 1988; Baumgartner 1987: 19-38).
Jeremiah accuses YHWH of enticing and overpowering, of seducing and raping him (v. 7; Craigie, Kelley, and Drinkard 1991; O'Connor 1988; Diamond 1987). He complains again of rejection and mockery (w. 7^-8). In anguish, he decides to stop speaking, but he cannot withhold the fire in his bones (v. 9). He quotes his enemies who call him the same name he gave Pashur, magor missabib, 'terror all around' (20:3). His enemies use the same verbs against him that he used to accuse God of trickery; they want to 'entice' him and to 'prevail' over him (v. n). But then Jeremiah remembers that YHWH is with him, a 'dread warrior'. His enemies will not 'prevail' (v. n; cf. 15:20). His petition for vengeance appeals to God who tests and sees (v. 12, cf. 12:4). The confession closes with a statement of praise in which Jeremiah confidently announces that God has 'delivered the life of the needy from the hands of evildoers' (v. 13). In the narrative context of chs. 11-20, Jeremiah's trust rests in the confidence that the divine word, 'Violence and destruction!' (v. 8) is about to be realized. The prophetic mission is accomplished, and Jeremiah is vindicated as a true prophet.
(w. 4-5). Invasion by those 'who seek their life' (w. 7, 9), therefore, will yield equally hideous results. Corpses will remain unburied; the city will be a horror (cf. 18:16); its people will become cannibals (w. 7—9). A familiar accusation of the prose material concludes the chapter; the people refused to hear YHWH's word (v. 15). The end has come.
(20:1—18) Imprisonment In w. i—6 the chief priest Pashur beats Jeremiah and imprisons him in the stocks at the temple gate. Pashur's release of Jeremiah the next morning serves as the occasion for Jeremiah's brief prose sermon (w. 4—6), his final confession (w. 7—13), and his curse of the day ofhis birth (w. 14-18).
w. 1-6, the brief story of Jeremiah's incarceration is of decisive importance for narrative developments in the book. The chief officer of YHWH's house repudiates YHWH's
JEREMIAH 506
From the perspective of the implied audience, however, Jeremiah's praise and confidence exemplify proper attitudes for captives. Just as some among the exiles begin to understand themselves as relatively innocent sufferers at the hand of Babylonian captors (Isa 40:1-2), so Jeremiah claims innocence and begs to be vindicated in face of enemies. His concluding praise voices not only confidence about his own fate but ultimately represents the trust to be evoked from the implied exilic audience who are the 'needy', seeking deliverance from the hands of evildoers.
theological, political persuasion. (See Rudolph 1947 and Craigie, Kelley, and Drinkard, 1991: 284—5 f°r different views of the contrast between chs. 20 and 21.) (21:1-10) Life King Zedekiah sends two named messengers to ask Jeremiah to 'enquire of the Lord' in the hope that Nebuchadrezzar might be turned away from Jerusalem (w. 1—2), as were the Assyrians during Hezekiah's time (Isa 36-7). (On the literary relationship of ch. 21 with chs. 24 and 37, see Pohlmann 1978: 44 and Seitz 1989/7: 253.) Jeremiah returns a terrifying message. Instead of sending the Babylonians away, YHWH will bring them into the city, thwart Judah's defence, and fight against Judah. YHWH is indeed the dread warrior of Jeremiah's prayer (20:11). YHWH heads the attack (w. 5-6,10), and Nebuchadrezzar will kill survivors without pity (v. 7). In the face of this interpretation of events, the people have to choose, in Deuteronomistic terms (Deut 30:11-20), between life and death (v. 8). To survive, their only choice is surrender to Babylon.
Jeremiah's praise evaporates into a curse upon the day of his birth (w. 14-18). This poem has long been recognized as similar to Job's curse (Job 3). Both biblical figures would prefer death in the womb to the toil, shame, and sorrow life brings them (v. 18). Jeremiah's curse makes sense in the pre-exilic temporal setting of the book's narrative thread where he faces the devastating consequences of his prophetic vindication. His nation, people, land, and way of life are destroyed. Had he never been born, he could not have delivered such a message. Because his prophetic vocation preceded his birth (i: 5), it would have been better if his mother had aborted him, or if he had been stillborn (v. 17). In a kind of reverse symbolic action, he imagines a cancellation of his ministry. He wishes to unmake his life so that he would not have to deliver such a message and see it fulfilled. He wants the deliverer of the news of his birth to be like 'the cities the Lord overthrew without pity' (v. 16), a category that must include Jerusalem, symbolically destroyed already. The prophet's curse of his birth expresses horror and despair at the consequences of his message. Its closing questions extend beyond the prophet's own life to embrace the sorrow of the nation (v. 18).
Political and theological perspectives of the narrator are absolutely clear. Only one path will lead to life: surrender and co-operation with the invaders. This alone will enable the community to gain their lives as the 'prize of war' (v. 9). Any other political or military course will bring death, 'For I have set my face against this city', says YHWH (v. 10). While appearing to report history, the narrator seeks to persuade the audience that survival hinges upon right relationship with Babylonian invaders. Not to side with them is to choose death. There can be no confusion about loyalties because Babylon is acting as YHWH's agent. This means that those who escape to Egypt or remain in the land have chosen death. The truly faithful among surviving groups are the Babylonian exiles alone. More hidden in the text is its implicit criticism of Zedekiah whose question reveals his complacency regarding divine protection (v. 2). Zedekiah is only the first of the royal establishment to come under attack in these chapters.
Aftermath (chs. 21-5)
These loosely connected chapters assume that the nation has already fallen, although to this point it has been presented only in symbolic terms. Even when the invasion is finally reported (21:1—10), the focus is upon the choice facing survivors in the siege's aftermath. Prose narratives give them advice (21:1-10; 24:1-10). Poems explain how the invasion occurred by blaming the royal establishment of kings and prophets (21:11—23:40). Prose materials point beyond exile to a future of national survival (25:1—14) and ultimately of international justice (25:15-38).
(21:11—23:40) Collapse of Royal Elites Attention to the monarchy in chs. 1-20 is sparse and general (1:1-3; 3:^J 3:I5J 4-9', 8:1; 13:18-19; 15:4; 17:19-25). This section, by contrast, gives sustained attention to the royal institution and interprets the national tragedy as the consequence of corrupt and unjust leadership by kings (21:11—22:30), as well as by prophets and priests (23:9-40; Carroll 1986: 404). Although the monarchy will be restored after exile by divine action (23:1-8), no such restoration is promised for priests and prophets.
The character of the literature changes markedly in 21:1 from that of the preceding chapters. Explicit conversation and debate by poetic and prose speakers is overtaken by a narrator's controlling voice that more obviously frames and orchestrates the speakers. And for the first time, the narrative is historically referential, although the material is no less interpretative than earlier symbolic and metaphoric passages. 21:1-10 dates to the reign of King Zedekiah during the siege of Jerusalem by Nebuchadrezzar, the first such dating since 1:1-3 and 3:6. (See Holladay 1986: 571 on the Babylonian ruler's name and Seitz 1989/7: 214 on Zedekiah's importance.) The book has moved from announcements of the cosmic battle with the mythic foe from the north, through symbolic enactments of the destruction of Judah and Jerusalem, to depictions of the historical siege and burning of the city (21:1—10). The point of 21:1-10 is not historical narration, however, but
Some of the poems in the section 21:11—23:8 appear to be associated with royalty by prose introductions and juxtaposition with material critical of the monarchy rather than by addressing kingship directly (21:12/7—14; 22:6/7—7; 22:10). 22:20—3 mentions kingship only briefly in an address to female Israel. The poems and prose pieces are short and concern the last kings of Judah. Together they charge the nation's collapse to the complete failure of the monarchy and describe its imminent demise. Only later will it be reconstituted by divine action in a new form (23:1-8; McConville 1993: 54-8). (21:11-14) Do Justice A prose introduction addresses the entire house of David (w. n—12»). The poem itself turns the oblique attack on monarchy (w. i—10) into a devouring fire (w. I2c, 14). YHWH is the speaker who describes the monarchy's primary responsibility and attacks it for complacency
5°7 JEREMIAH
East, shepherd imagery referred to leaders, particularly kings, whose task was to protect and guide their people as a shepherd cares for the flocks.) (22:24-30) combines prose and poetry to portray YHWH's attack on Coniah, also called Jehoiachin, and to announce the monarchy's end. Even if he were a precious signet ring on YHWH's hand, T would tear you off, and hurl you away', says YHWH (w. 24-6). And in a sadder poetic voice, YHWH asks if the king is a despised and broken pot to be thrown away. Both Jehoiachin and his offspring will be hurled into a foreign land. A lamenting voice invites the personified land to witness the monarchy's end (v. 29), for the house of David is finished
(21:12-13). What the king should do is expressed in positive and negative terms, 'execute justice' and prevent oppression (v. 12). If kings fail in this duty, the fire of divine wrath will devour all around it (v. 14). YHWH is the angry critic whose address to the whole house of David (v. 12) implies that the entire dynasty of kings caused the national wreckage.
(22:1—6) is a prose elaboration of monarchical duties in which YHWH continues to speak. Addressees expand from the 'house of David' to include an unnamed present king, servants, and people (w. 1—2). v. 3 adds to kingly responsibilities, prohibitions against oppression of the alien, widow, or orphan and against shedding innocent blood. The principal duty of the king that summarizes all others and joins this text with prose throughout the book is the king's responsibility to 'listen' (w. 4—5). The future of the monarchy depends upon obedience to the word, an appeal that has double meaning for the implied audience. Because the kings failed to listen, the kingdom was lost, but if kings, servants, and people listen, then kings will again sit on the throne (v. 4). The future depends upon the repentance of all.
(v. 30).
Chs. 2i—2 announce and explain the end of the monarchy and provide a theo-political explanation for the fall of the nation. The kings failed to listen, oppressed the weak and vulnerable, and sought counsel from lying prophets. In the exilic search for causes and explanations of the national tragedy, the greed, injustice, and infidelity of the monarchy loom large. Because of kingly misdeeds, the Davidic dynasty is finished and with it the nation. (23:1-8) But in the pattern of composition typical of the book of Jeremiah, here it contradicts the former picture of destruction, death, and definitive end, doing so without preparation or explanation. YHWH simply announces the future reconstitution of the dead monarchy. Both past and future continue to impinge on the exilic present. To the implied audience, divine promises of restoration and new shepherds may not have appeared to contradict Jeremiah's prophecies of doom, for the latter had already been fulfilled. Jehoiachin was being held captive (Jer 52:31—4); other kings had died ignominious deaths; people were in exile. Temporally the audience was situated after the nation's destruction and the seeming end of monarchy. The monarchy had failed them, and its re-establishment as an institution of wisdom and justice (v. 5) could occur only by divine intervention. In w. 1—4, YHWH chastises the shepherds who have scattered the sheep and promises to raise up new shepherds for the remnant (v. 4) and a 'righteous Branch', who will embody the royal ideal (w. 5—6). In that future day, all the dispersed community will return to their own land (w. 7-8). (23:9-40) Prophets This set of prose and poetic pieces attacks claimants to prophetic office who presume to have a divine word but, in the estimate of these poems, speak lies. (On false prophets, see Overholt 1970; Meyer 1977; and Osswald 1962.) That the book contains so much material about competing prophetic visions suggests great conflict in the rhetorical battle to envision the future. This chapter sets Jeremiah apart from false prophets. It belittles and demeans them in order to dismiss their interpretation of the national crisis in favour of Jeremiah's (Carroll 1981: 196). Prophets and priests are as culpable as the kings in leading the people astray and bringing the community to its tragic demise. There is no promise of a renewed prophecy in the future because that role is already played by the Jeremiah tradition. Jeremiah's word, the vision he creates with his prophecy alone, has power to create a new future.
(22:6-12) contains a loose collection of pieces associated with monarchy by prose directions to readers (w. 6, n). Like the rich forests of Gilead and Lebanon (Holladay 1986: 584), the kingship is about to be cut down. Prose verses (8—9) shift attention from monarchy to the destroyed city in an imagined conversation that blames the destruction on idolatry and abandonment of the covenant, presumably by the monarchy, w. 10—ii combine poetry and prose to comment on the double tragedies of King Josiah and his son, Jehoahaz, also known as
Shallum (Honeyman 1948). Beloved King Josiah died in battle (2 Kings 23:28—30), but more lamentable is the fate of his son, exiled forever from the land.
(22:13—19) contrasts actions of an unidentified bad king (w. 13—14, 17) with that of a good king (w. 15—16) who is the first king's father, v. 18 identifies them as Josiah and his son Jehoiakim. Jehoiakim builds his house, that is, both his monarchy and his palace, without righteousness and justice, using the forced labour of his people. YHWH uses rhetorical questions to ask Jehoiakim about the essence of monarchy: true kingship is not manifested in the display of wealth but in the doing of justice and righteousness as did Josiah (v. 15). This is what it means to 'know God' (v. 16; Brueggemann 1988:193), precisely what is absent in Jehoiakim's rule (20:13,17; cf 21:12; 22:3; 2 Kings 23:31-24:6). Thus Jehoiakim will not be mourned but buried like a beast (22:18—19; Craigie, Kelley, and Drinkard 1991: 307—13 discuss literary features of this passage).
(22:20—3) addresses a female but her identity is uncertain. Carroll (1986: 434-5) believes this poem to be an oracle originally addressed to Lebanon, but some of the language echoes poems against the bride of 2:1—3:25, who has been unfaithful from her youth, though here her specific crime is 'not listening' (v. 21; Brueggemann 1988: 195; Carroll 1986: 436). Her trysts are over because her lovers are crushed, but why she lives in Lebanon is unclear (v. 23). v. 22 links the poem to the material on kings for her shepherds will be shepherded by the wind, referring either to Israel's captivity or to punishment of the wife's lovers-turned-enemies. (In the ancient Near
(23:9—15) uses shocking and potent rhetoric to discredit priest and prophet in two poetic panels of accusation and punish-
JEREMIAH 508
baskets of figs resembles his vision in 1:11—13. m both narratives, Jeremiah relates a vision that YHWH interprets to give both accounts the double authority of deity and prophet. The figs symbolize two groups of survivors. Those in captivity in Babylon are very good and those remaining in the land or who have escaped to Egypt are rotten. To the former is promised a future in language adopted from the call narrative (1:10). The exiles will be planted and built. They will receive a new heart, know YHWH, and return (sub, w. 6—7). This chapter honours the exilic community as the elect, the special, the carriers of true Yahwism. It is they who are obedient, repentant, and possess a future. Nicholson (1970: 81) notes the absence of conditional terms in the promise. Divine preference for the exiles is absolute. The vision of the fig baskets marks a major shift in the message thus far. This vision no longer warns the people to repent in order to avoid calamity, but instead addresses a community that has experienced and survived the tragedy, and in those circumstances offers them hope.
ment (w. 9-12 and 13-15). In a dramatic lament Jeremiah describes his emotional state and claims the true prophetic message for himself. His heart is 'crushed' because of YHWH's 'dread' words (v. 9, NEB). On account of unidentified adulterers, the land mourns and dries up. v. n announces the surprising source of evil. Priest and prophet are ungodly, so disaster will come upon them (v. 12). Equally harsh language appears in the second panel (w. 13-15) where a first-person voice describes the 'disgusting' sight of prophets prophesying by Baal, but the prophets of Jerusalem are even more shocking. They are adulterers, liars, conspirators in evil, as bad as the legendary Sodom and Gomorrah (w. 13-15). They will be poisoned for they have spread 'ungodliness' throughout the land.
(23:16-22) Prose verses (16-17) urge me audience to reject the prophets. They are bad leaders who delude the people and confect their own messages of pseudo-peace and complacency. The two-stanza poem that follows reveals the depth of their deceit. In w. 18-20 Jeremiah appears to be the speaker who asks the central question that distinguishes prophets from one another: 'Who has stood in the council of the LORD so as to see and to hear his word?' Only such a one can proclaim the divine word, but YHWH's wrath goes forth, presumably upon the false prophets (w. 19-20). In the second stanza YHWH speaks to deny the prophets' claims. If they had stood in the divine council, they would have proclaimed a truthful message (w. 21-2). The 'council of the LORD' refers to a heavenly gathering of beings who surround YHWH. Prophets claim to have access to this divine council (i Kings 22:19—23; Jer 23:18—22; Dan 7:9—14, 23—7).
The chapter divides the survivors into two groups, exalting one and belittling the other. The bad figs who remain in the land or go to Egypt will be utterly destroyed (w. 8-10). The effect of this vision is to delegitimate the rule of Zedekiah and those who remained in the land (Brueggemann 1988: 211). Carroll (1986:487) places the chapter's contest for supremacy among survivors in post-exilic times, but the chapter may be an attempt to bolster the confidence and responsibility of despondent exiles by identifying them as the chosen. Since the text describes restoration in vague theological and relational terms, omitting political or institutional arrangements, it appears to be urging an exilic audience towards an open future, albeit at the cost of their compatriots elsewhere.
(23:23-40) YHWH continues to deny claims of false prophets in a prose diatribe against them. Their dreams and their words are not divinely given but self-invented. YHWH is against them (w. 23—31). These false prophets are no different from those of the pre-exilic period who prophesied by Baal, leading the people astray, w. 33-40 continue the critique of false prophets with a play on words. A prophetic term for oracle, massif, also means 'burden' (McKane 1980: 597—603). When they ask, 'What is the burden of the LORD?', meaning the prophetic message, Jeremiah is to reply, 'You are the burden', meaning that they impede the divine word (v. 33).
(25:1—38) Babylon's Fall Ch. 25 is an important but problematic chapter. It is here that divergences between the MT and LXX versions of the book are most marked, with LXX inserting the Oracles Against the Nations at v. 13 and omitting many of the references to Babylon found in the MT, to yield a shorter chapter (Craigie, Kelley, and Drinkard 1991: 363). Fischer (1991), Holladay (1986: 665), and McKane (1986: 618-23) have thorough discussions of differences between the versions. Many commentators recognize links between this chapter and ch. i and understand ch. 25 to close off the first major division of the book. Kessler (1997) calls it a 'hinge' chapter that reaches backwards and forwards across the book. Here, for instance, Jeremiah acts at last as 'prophet to the nations', a task assigned him in the call narrative (1:5,10) and completed in the Oracles Against the Nations (chs. 46-51). In its present shape ch. 25 announces punishment against Judah's invaders (w. 1—14), enacts the promise symbolically (w. 25-9), and concludes the book with a poem on the devouring anger of the lion-like God (w. 30-8).
In this section, accusation undermines professional competitors who battle for the hearts of the people. Should any in the audience doubt the veracity and divine origin of Jeremiah's message, this collection makes the case that Jeremiah alone can be trusted. It interprets the nation's fall as caused by duplicity of priests and prophets who have lied to the people. But also at stake is the fidelity of the present generation. By implication, they must avoid listening to false prophets and, instead, follow the voice, visions, and dreams of Jeremiah, the one true prophet. Their survival hinges upon listening to his message alone.
(25:1-14) A Global View A third-person narrator dates the chapter to the fourth year of Jehoiakim and the first year of Nebuchadrezzar. The year is 605 when Babylon gained hegemony in the ancient Near East. The date's significance in this passage is to show that Jeremiah prophesied the fall of Judah to Babylon well in advance of events and that his prophecy of the exile's end is equally reliable. In v. 3 Jeremiah takes over as narrator, declaring in Deuteronomistic terms (Carroll 1986: 491) how persistently he has preached
(24:1—10) Figs Jeremiah appears as first-person narrator in this prose chapter, dated to the first deportation of exiles in 597 BCE. Jerusalem has been invaded, Jehoiachin is in captivity (v. i), and Zedekiah rules in the not yet destroyed Judah (v. 8). Although the chapter is set ten years earlier than 21:1—10, it continues directions for survival begun there: co-operate with the invaders (Pohlmann 1978: 44). Jeremiah's vision of two
5°9 JEREMIAH
(25:30—8) Against the Nations Poetry replaces prose in an oracle against all the nations (v. 30). (See Carroll 1986: 497— 508 for a thorough discussion of Oracles Against Nations.) Jeremiah continues as speaker of poems that focus on divine anger and judgement against unnamed nations. The metaphor of YHWH as roaring lion out to devour all the earth's inhabitants frames the poem (w. 31, 38). No particular crimes are attributed to the nations who are merely 'guilty', or 'wicked' (v. 31 NEB). The poem attends, instead, to the certitude of their punishment. A prose comment uses language previously used for Judah to describe devastation of the entire earth (v. 33). w. 34-8 then narrowthe attack to the 'shepherds', the kings who are responsible for provoking divine anger
through out his entire career from the thirteenth year of Josiah
(v. 3, cf 1:2) to the year 605. For twenty-three years Jeremiah continued the work of prophets before him (v. 4), calling Judah to repent of its idolatry. But they did not listen, provoking YHWH's anger (w. 1-7). Many interpreters correctly understand these verses as a summary of Jeremiah's preaching in chs. 1—25 (Craigie, Kelley, and Drinkard 1991: 363), but they also serve other theological and literary purposes. They interpret the nation's fall as a refusal of Judah to listen to YHWH's prophets, and they introduce the broader global and temporal framework in which this chapter views the catastrophe.
In w. 8-14 YHWH replaces Jeremiah as speaker to provide greater authority for the prophecy that follows. Expanding motifs from earlier passages, the divine voice spells out consequences of not listening (w. 8-n). YHWH will again send the tribes of the north, but for the first time they are explicitly identified with Babylon (v. 9). As YHWH's agent of destruction, Nebuchadrezzar acquires the shocking sobriquet, 'my servant' (v. 9; 29:10; Thompson 1980: 512). Newly emphasized in this divine speech is that the invasion to come will not only be against 'this land' but against 'all these nations around' (v. 9). Remarkably, Judah's fate is not singular. Babylon will destroy domestic life, indeed, all life on an international scale (w. 9-10). Nor will Judah serve Babylon alone, for all these nations will serve Babylon for seventy years, a symbolic number for 'many years' (v. n; Thompson 1980: 515). The temporal frame extends even further into the future than previously. After seventy years, YHWH will also punish Babylon. The invader will be invaded and be repaid according to its deeds (v. 14). All the words 'written in this book' will be brought against them (v. 13).
(25:35-7). YHWH, the attacking lion, has already left his 'covert' to begin the attack.
Chs. 1-25 use mythic, metaphorical description to magnify the threat to Judah as superhuman and inexorable. They charge the people with heinous crimes and obscene infidelities. They portray Jeremiah as isolated and absolutely alone. All these facets of the text bolster its theodicy. The people were warned with dramatic visions of their foe, by constant reminders of their sins, but they rejected the prophet and his words. In effect, they forced YHWH to punish them. The complex collections of materials in chs. 1-25, therefore, attempt to explain why the tragedy happened. The second half of the book (chs. 26—52) focuses on how to survive the tragedy.
Introduction to Book Two (chs. 26-52)
Kessler (1968) views this second section of the book as a history of Israel's rejection of the prophetic message. Pohlmann (1978) finds evidence of conflict between hope and judgement upon those who went to Egypt. Seitz (1985) also sees conflict within the community after 597 in an exilic redaction. While these thematic elements are present in the second half of the book, they are subsumed into larger rhetorical purposes. Chs. 26—52 develop issues of survival and consider the place of Judah's tragedy in the divine plan for the future of the nations.
Rhetorically, this passage gives hope to the exiles. It closes the first 'book' upon a promise—vague, indefinite, but certain—that the exilic community has a future. The three voices in this narrative—unknown narrator, Jeremiah, and YHWH— do not debate. Each builds upon the previous speaker with increasing authority, for it is, perhaps, the words of hope that most need bolstering for the exiles. The text does not call for political action or rebellion; it encourages endurance (Kessler 1997) until YHWH brings about a reversal of fortunes (v. 14). Why Babylon will meet the same fate it metes out is not explained; YHWH simply asserts it. A transformed, barely imaginable future will come to pass. (25:15-29) The Cup of Wrath If readers should doubt the promises of 25:8-14, the following prose narrative enacts them symbolically, thereby setting the divine purpose in motion. Jeremiah is again cast as narrator who reports YHWH's command for him to act as wine steward. Instead of presiding over a joyous feast, Jeremiah delivers the cup of wrath to all nations beginning with Judah and Jerusalem (v. 18). They are the first to drink from the 'fiery wine' (NEB) of YHWH's anger; indeed, they have already drunk from it (13:12-14). Following Judah comes the list of Judah's enemies beginning with Egypt (v. 19) and concluding with Sheshach, a term for Babylon (v. 26; Holladay 1986: 675). All will drink ofYHWH's wrath, and should they refuse, Jeremiah must insist (w. 289). Reversal of fortunes, therefore, has already occurred in the symbolic sphere. All that remains is for events to unfold.
The prophetic message in contention in the second half of the book is no longer whether Judah will repent in time to avert collapse. The book's audience lives with Judah's failure to do so. In fits and starts, all the chapters in the second half address the community's survival. In doing so, they seek to evoke repentance from the exiles, to instruct them to endure through the unavoidable suffering they face (Kessler 1968), and to have confidence that God will bring them into a future they can barely imagine. In service of these purposes, Jeremiah appears as an iconic presence, not only as a prophet rejected, but as the model of the faithful sufferer whose behaviour exiles must emulate to gain their lives as 'the prize of war'. The chapters reveal enormous tensions within the communities of survivors over how to proceed (Seitz 1989/7).