Yhwh’s Unique Speaker: Jeremiah

Abstract

In Jer 15:19, Yhwh calls the prophet Jeremiah “my mouth”. This unique designation highlights his importance and finds support in several other features: Jeremiah is portrayed as the promised successor to Moses (Jer 1:7, 9), opposes all other contemporary prophets (e.g., Jer 20; 23; 26–29), and has many additional roles and activities. Furthermore, he shares traits with Yhwh’s servant from Isa 49 and 53. His ‘biography’ is extraordinary and is shown at length, unusual for the Latter Prophets, ranging from before his birth (Jer 1:5) to his disappearance in Egypt (Jer 43–44). His ‘confessions’ in Jer 11–20 testify to immense suffering and have become models for personal prayer. Like the prophet, his scroll is unique, too. No other biblical writing deals so extensively with trauma, exemplified at the downfall of Jerusalem in 587 BC, its roots, and its impact. This even leads to an uncommon structure of the scroll, ending with disaster in Jer 52, whereas all other scrolls of prophets contain hope as conclusions. Jer stands out with the analysis of guilt as cause for the catastrophe, yet it conveys also consolation, especially in Jer 29–33. In these chapters, elements for a renewed society emerge, corresponding to the name of the prophet, which signifies “Yhwh will raise up”. The real source for this change lies in the way Jer conceives the biblical God. No other writing in the Bible tells about his weeping, as a sign of helplessness vis-à-vis the continuing resistance of his people. Many prayers in the scroll, including the confessions, focus on the importance of an intimate, personal relationship with him, going beyond traditional piety in several aspects; Moshe Weinfeld has called them “spiritual metamorphosis”. The singularity of Jer applies also to its literary features. Its mixtures of poetry and prose, of divine and human speaking, of narratives about the prophet in first and third person are a challenge for every reader, as well as the ‘unordered’ chronology and retarded information. Jer excels in the use of other scrolls; the degree of intertextuality and the way of combining motifs from ‘foreign’ sources in a synthetic way are outstanding. To grasp fully its message requires familiarity with more than half of what later became the Hebrew Bible.

1. Introduction

Prophecy “is a genuinely cross-cultural phenomenon within the Ancient Near Eastern context” (Nissinen 2010, p. 467). There are shared features among prophets outside the Bible in former times and those we know from the Hebrew Scriptures. However, the prophets in the Old Testament show specific characteristics not found to that extent with prophets in the Ancient Near East (Zenger 2012, p. 518). This applies especially to the “Latter” ones (the fifteen scrolls from Isaiah to Malachi). Their typical distinctive traits include conflicts with the political establishment, sharp criticism of grievances in the society and in moral behavior, announcements of harsh punishments, and concern for the people. All the “Latter Prophets” also have a scroll of their own, passed on under their name, for which there is no equivalent in the Ancient Near East.

Within the prophets of the Old Testament, the Jeremiah scroll (henceforth “Jer” for it) is very special. Several marks and elements set it apart from the other prophetic writings. Similarly, Jeremiah as a prophet is distinguished from his “colleagues”. In the following, I try to show some of the major features of Jer, in order to make visible what makes it and its prophet outstanding.

2. The Portrayal of the Prophet Jeremiah

The title of this contribution is due to Jer 15:19. Therein, Yhwh offers the prophet Jeremiah to become כפי “like my mouth”, provided he converts and utters valuable words instead of worthless ones. Yhwh thereby reacts to the second “confession” of Jeremiah, in particular to the reproach in v18, that God has become to him a deceitful brook, similarly unreliable. “My mouth” referring to Yhwh and applied to a human occurs nowhere else and indicates that Jeremiah is invited to become God’s official speaker. As it is a unique designation and Jeremiah continues to perform further his role as prophet, this means that he is factually the special representative of Yhwh, and it highlights his importance. Others, like Hosea, Isaiah, etc., may also be legitimate prophets, but only for Jeremiah there is the claim that God offered him this role of being his authorized spokesperson.

Jer 15:19 signifies an intensification to a singular gesture in the call narrative. There, in Jer 1:9, Yhwh touches the prophet’s mouth and declares: “Behold, I have laid/lay my words in your mouth.” To grasp the importance of this statement, one has to connect it with Deut 18:18 “And I will lay my words in his mouth” (Brandscheidt 1995), where God promises a successor to Moses, equal to him, with the same phrase. Deut 18:18 has a second link with Jeremiah’s call by “say everything I command” (again in Jer 1:7). As no other text in the Hebrew Bible picks up this divine promise, Jer, right at the outset of the scroll, declares it uniquely realized in the prophet Jeremiah—he is the waited-for follower of the “arch-prophet” Moses.

These two motifs, being Yhwh’s privileged speaker and Moses’ successor, may partly explain a theme that marks in its dominance Jer more than any other biblical writing, namely the “false prophets”. It is particularly prominent in Jer 26–29 (Osuji 2010), where Jeremiah stays in opposition to all other prophets in his time, but can be found in many places throughout his scroll, e.g., in Jer 2:8; 4:10; 5:31; 6:13; 14:13–18; 20:1–6; and 23:9–40. With this topic, Jer continues the criticism found in Ezekiel and still emphasizes it (Leene 2001). Jer distinguishes clearly between colleagues in earlier times and contemporary ones. The former receive esteem because God talks of his continually having sent them as “all my servants, the prophets” (Jer 7:25; 35:15; 44:4), whereas the latter ones are guilty of misleading the people and thus being a main reason for the catastrophe of 587 BC.

Already Jer 1 conveys many additional roles and activities to Jeremiah. By descent, he is a priest (v1). The list of verbs in v10, “to pluck up and to tear down … to build and to plant” has God as the subject in all other instances (e.g., in 18:7, 9; 24:6; 31:28); only here it is the prophet who sets them in practice, which also shows his divine power over nations, even more than that of a king. Jer 1:11–15 depict him as a visionary, very close to the prophet Amos. The singular attributes of v18, “fortified city, iron column, and bronze walls”, present Jeremiah from the start as the better replacement for Jerusalem, its temple and its fortifications. Later, in 6:27, he still becomes a “tester” for his people. Already in 1:5, Yhwh had singled him out by knowing him before his conception and giving him the unique task of a prophet “for the nations”. All these aspects and the international mission make Jeremiah exceptional; there is nobody like him.

Finally, there are exclusive links between Jeremiah’s confessions and the Servant Songs in Isaiah, especially the last one in Isa 53. Jer 11:19, in the first confession, seems to emphasize the cruelty by adding “tame” to the lamb led to the slaughter and by an active plan to cut away this person “from the land of the living”—both motifs are mentioned in Isa 53:7–8, there in passive voice. The second confession, in Jer 15:11, 15 shows further connections with Isa 53:6, 8 with the topics of “let encounter” (פגע hi + ב) and “take away” (לקח). Again, Jer uses active voice and even an imperative addressed to God. These unique parallels portray Jeremiah as a representative or identification of Yhwh’s servant. Taking together all these elements, Jeremiah appears as outstanding among all his colleagues.

3. An Extraordinary ‘Life’

The exceptional traits seen above continue when looking at what Jeremiah experienced. In the title here, life is set in apostrophes, because attempts to present a biography based on the information from prophetic scrolls are always reconstructions (Konkel 2010, p. 217). This is also valid for Jer, although it offers a much richer picture than all other Latter Prophets. Doing so, Jeremiah comes close to figures like Elijah or Elisha described in the Former Prophets. Jer thus appears to combine characteristics from both text corpora, on the one hand giving many details from the prophet’s ‘life’, on the other transmitting divine messages in a separate scroll. Therein, Jer excels by a huge number of introductory or legitimizing formulas for divine speech—more than 360 times—and by the length of his scroll with 21,819 words (Jenni and Westermann 1979, II, p. 540), unsurpassed by any other single scroll of the Bible.

God’s relationship with Jeremiah goes back to the very first moment of his existence. Jer 1:5 emphasizes with the repeated “before” referring to his mother’s womb an intimate bond already before his birth, and most probably even antedating his conception by “before I formed you” in her. Their closeness is further highlighted by “I have sanctified you,” which is exceptional in call narratives. Being “holy”, like Yhwh, encompasses thus Jeremiah from the beginning of his life.

Such proximity and divine support (see the recurring “I am with you” in 1:8, 19; 15:20) help the prophet to fulfill his mission despite the harsh resistance he encounters often. Jeremiah is the most persecuted prophet: People in his home village Anathoth threaten to kill him (11:21). Enemies occur frequently (e.g., in 15:15; 18:18, 23; 20:10–11). When he announces Jerusalem’s doom for the first time, he is imprisoned, tortured, and publicly exposed in the temple (20:1–3). Jer 26 relates how priests and prophets want to put him to death, yet in the following trial he courageously defends himself and is acquitted (v10–19). During the siege of Jerusalem, Jeremiah’s ordeal continues: He is imprisoned again and even in danger of dying in the pit (37:11–21; 38:1–13). Before, still under King Jehoiakim, his scroll was burnt, and the king tried to capture him (Jer 36). He finally disappears in Egypt (Jer 43–44) where to he was taken against his advice and involuntarily (pace Stipp 2021, pp. 102–3). Jeremiah leaves no material traces and dies outside the promised land, like Moses, but in contrast to the latter, without any attention. He simply vanishes.

Such a pitiful fate during his entire lifetime leaves traces in the prophet’s inner sensation and emotional struggles. Many texts show his immense suffering, and Jeremiah is outstanding also in this regard; with the exception of Job, who, however, is no prophet, nobody in the Hebrew Bible comes close to him. Expressions of lament are found several times (e.g., 1:6; 4:10; 8:21–23 …) and find their culmination in the so-called “confessions” in Jer 11–20 which reveal the personal conflicts he faces in his mission and in his relationship with Yhwh. They expose darknesses of the soul, combined with an intense longing for God, and have become models for personal prayer in the Psalms (Bonnard 1960). Jer 25:3 shows futility in the prophet’s mission: He proclaimed the divine messages for 23 years, and the result was nil. In the confrontation with the prophet Hananiah, Jeremiah appears as the loser and has to bear that his opponent breaks the yoke with which he performed a sign-act, thus ridiculing him in public. The triple prohibition to intercede for his people (7:16; 11:14; 14:11) will have been another source of pain for Jeremiah (Rossi 2013).

There are still other passages that let us suppose his inner suffering or testify to it; overall, Jeremiah is the figure in the Old Testament whose passion, both externally and interiorly, is described with the greatest intensity. This may also explain the disciples’ answer for Jesus’s question about his identity in Matt 16:14, mentioning only him from the Latter Prophets. The persecution and immense personal grief of Jeremiah has also a function. It serves to authenticate his mission and his proclamation: Who suffered so much for prophesying, his word can be supposed to be true.

4. Different Texts

Like the prophet, his scroll is unique, too, because of the enormous differences between the Hebrew text and its Greek translation. No other biblical book shows such a great discrepancy between both, in quantity, in many details, and even in the order, as the Oracles against the Foreign Nations occupy Jer 46–51 in MT, whereas the LXX has them in Jer 25:14–32:24. Consequently, the entire book structure changes. The Greek translation of Jer deviates in concept and numerous expressions strongly and partly even in its theology from the Hebrew of Jer. These variances make Jer outstanding within the entire Bible.

In the past, most exegetes, starting with Saint Jerome, have considered the Hebrew text as “original”, in the sense of deserving priority, and the Greek translation as being secondary, dependent on it. This has significantly changed in recent times (due mainly to Janzen 1973), and the majority opinion has switched to assuming that the Vorlage of the Greek text of Jer represents an earlier text stage than MT whom many regard as having been redactionally reworked and augmented (e.g., Weis 2017).

Reckoning with a different Vorlage without having it presents a major problem. However, the discovery of the Qumran manuscript 4Q71 (also known as 4QJer^b, with words from 9:22 to 10:21) seemed to provide evidence for an earlier form of the text of Jer than the version preserved in MT. The key argument, besides some minor details, is the suggested correspondence in the verse order with the LXX. As a decision regarding this issue is crucial for any dealing with Jer, therefore it is obligatory to address it.

4Q71 is a small fragment (maximum 9.5 × 4 cm) presenting the left margin of a manuscript from the second century BC. Emanuel Tov has curated its editio princeps (Tov 1997) in DJD XV. He assumes average line lengths of 115 letter spaces and reconstructs on this basis the text with a retroversion of the Greek translation, attributing to line 6 verses 5a and 9 and to line 7 verses 5b and 11. Tov arrives thus at line lengths of 115 and 128 letter spaces for them, respectively. He supposes that the LXX has the “real sequence” of the verses, whereas MT has been rearranged. Similarly, Richard J. Saley, taking entirely the Greek text as source for his reconstruction, proposed the same distribution of the verses 5a, 9 and 5b, 11 for lines 6 and 7 (Saley 2010).

There are serious problems with this interpretation. On the fragment in line 6, nothing is visible of 10:5, but only the two words תכלת וארגמן from v9. In line 7, there is not the slightest trace of 10:5b, it renders only יאבדו מן ארעא from v11. The sequence shown in the fragment as it is extant is v4, v9, and v11. The reconstructions offered by Tov and Saley presuppose the Greek order based solely on filling in what they think to have been written in the much longer rest (85–90%) of the line, without having any evidence for it. They reason with regular line lengths, but when taking the Greek text as base, the differences are still greater than with MT. Tov gives 106 and 141 letter spaces for lines 2 and 3, respectively, reconstructed according to the LXX; assuming the Hebrew text, the range is between 111 and 143 letter spaces for line 2 and 7. This means that even a reconstruction according to the Greek text results in a more irregular text than with MT.

In any case, 4Q71 is a fragment of an extraordinary manuscript. Line lengths of 128 or more than 140 letter spaces go far beyond the known Qumran scrolls (Tov 1997, p. 176). To use it as support for the different arrangement of Jer 10 in the LXX and the omissions in the Greek text is based on debatable assumptions about the lacunae of 4Q71. Methodologically, it is flawed to draw conclusions from what is missing, and even more, to build an entire theory on it.

There are further objections against giving general priority to the LXX:

(a)

The reasoning with a different Vorlage which is not extant slips any argumentation into an area where it can neither be proved nor falsified; it becomes thus unassailable. This is not fruitful for solid research.

(b)

In the discussion of the different text forms of Jer, many apply the same criteria used for textual criticism, which are only suited to compare texts within one language, to the differences between MT and the Greek text of Jer. Doing so, they do not take seriously the translational character of the LXX.

(c)

Regarding the text of Jer 10, so important for the interpretation of 4Q71, James Seth Adcock has adduced accurate observations for the originality of MT (Adcock 2017). He can show in detail that the Greek translation is secondary.

(d)

More generally, Oliver Glanz analyzed the shifts in person, number, and gender in the various text forms of MT, LXX, and in the Qumran manuscripts (Glanz 2013). MT and Q correspond to 96%, whereas the LXX shows only 67% agreement with the Hebrew traditions. The Greek version tends to more coherent and simpler expression, which is a typical sign of secondary editing, as it is unusual to make an easily understandable text more complicated and introduce tensions into it.

(e)

Miika Tucker has provided the up to now most detailed study on the Septuagint of Jeremiah (Tucker 2022). His results clearly show its ambiguous character. The Greek translation is not consistent, in neither of the two parts (Jer 1–28; 29–52). It may render very precisely as well as freely, without one being able to discover why it is in one way or the other. It deviates in many instances even from the supposed Vorlage. The assumed revision for Jer 29–52 also acts twofold: On the one hand, it corrects; on the other, it leaves the text as it is—and the reasons for these differences remain unclear.

There are many other observations by several scholars that question the priority given to the Greek text of Jer and plead for caution in this regard. This is also suggested by the description of Jerusalem’s fall in 587 BC in 2 Kings 24:18–25:30 which is a source for Jer 52, indirectly also for Jer 39:1–10, and for 2 Chron 36:11–21. When comparing all these texts in their Hebrew and Greek forms, the LXX version of Jer 52 is by far the most deviant one (pace de Waard 2020; Frohlich 2022). Overall, it seems preferable to regard the MT of Jer as the more original text form.

To sum up, to suppose Jer LXX as providing the ‘better’ text, closer to the ‘original’, is based on weak assumptions, leads to contradicting results, and has many arguments against it. Instead, Jer MT displays many features speaking in favor of it as being the older and more reliable text form. The longest and well preserved Jer manuscripts from Qumran, 4Q70 and 4Q72, also support this position.

5. Dealing with the Trauma

Probably the most decisive event in Judean history was the fall of Jerusalem in 587 BC. Already the years before had brought a capitulation (in 597), with King Jehoiachin and many people of Jerusalem led into the Babylonian exile (2 Kings 24:8–17). This, however, was only a prelude to the final disaster when Nebuchadnezzar’s army besieged the city for 18 months, conquered it, burnt down the temple and most of the city’s houses, tore down the walls, and exiled large parts of its population. For around 150 years, Jerusalem would not recover from this blow, and Judea would not regain independence for more than four centuries.

Jer focuses nearly exclusively on this trauma, on the reasons leading to it, and on the outcome in the few years afterwards. Especially O’Connor (2012) has focused on this aspect, also Stulman (2005) in his commentary. No other biblical writing deals so extensively and explicitly with it. Jerusalem’s downfall in 587 BC serves as the example to show the depravity of the community, with its roots and its impact. Jer excels in the analysis of guilt as a cause for it and stands out with the concentration on and dominance of the portrayal of the catastrophe, and it presents this directly, from a viewpoint sur place and by an immediately affected, suffering person, namely the prophet. In comparison, Ezekiel, too, is situated in the same time and deals with this disaster, but he stays afar, in exile, and can only indirectly refer to it. Jer’s description is much more elaborate and shocking (see, e.g., 4:7–9; 5:15–17; 9:20–21, or the repeated triad “sword, hunger, pestilence”, many times from Jer 14:12 onward).

Other factors buttress Jer’s insistence on this terrifying event. Some sign-acts visualize the end coming near (Beyer 2024). Jer 13 shows it with the waist-cloth becoming rotten at the river Euphrates. The smashing of the flask in Jer 19 symbolizes Jerusalem’s destruction. The “bad figs” of Jer 24 indicate that those who remained in the city after 597 BC are worse than those who were then exiled, and that they are awaiting extinction. The uncommon structure of the scroll, ending with this disaster in Jer 52, is another signal for the scroll’s accent on the event of 587 BC. Whereas all other scrolls of prophets contain in their final chapters hope as conclusions, Jer dares to finish with a long account of killings, planned destroying, and the emptying of the temple.

However, this aspect of dealing with the trauma is only one side. Faithful to the program of Jer 1:10 “to tear down and to pluck up, … to build and to plant”, Jer conveys also consolation, especially in Jer 29–33. In these chapters, elements for a renewed society emerge. This also corresponds to the name of the prophet which signifies “Yhwh will raise up” and indicates symbolically the divine intention to lead the people through this disaster to a more sincere, profound relationship with him and to a better life. Jer, as a whole, does not concentrate on the disaster of 587 ‘for fun’, but to urgently press and emphasize another message, namely, that conversion is necessary and that God wants to restore the community still more and closer to him.

6. A New Theology

The real source for this change lies in the way Jer conceives the biblical God. Certainly, it shares many features of Yhwh with other writings of the Bible. He is the creator, as in Genesis (Jer 10:12), who sets boundaries on earth and enables life on it (Jer 5:22, 24). He is like a husband for Israel, similarly as in Hosea (Jer 2–3). He brought the people out of Egypt and established a covenant with them, as the Book of Exodus showed (Jer 2:6; 31:32). A key concept for Jer is “to restore the fortunes” (the phrase שׁוב שׁבות with variations), found in it eleven times from 29:14 onward, from 26 attestations in the Tanak. It takes up Moses’ promise from Deut 30:3 and signifies that God fulfills it abundantly. Several further motifs are in common with the way how other biblical scrolls describe God.

However, Jer is different in its theology. It holds some unique aspects and highlights certain facets more than other scrolls; I mention a few of them. No other writing in the Bible tells about God’s weeping, as Jer does in 9:9; 14:17; and 48:32, in the latter passage even about Moab, a foreign nation. In the first two instances it is a sign of helplessness vis-à-vis the continuing resistance of his people. The idea and the concept of the “new covenant” (Jer 31:31–34) is challenging and not found elsewhere in the Old Testament. It means that Yhwh improves and surpasses what he concluded on Mount Sinai in Exod 19–24. Not giving up, incessantly trying to win his people is expressed by the combination of שׁכם in the hiphil with action verbs like “speak, send, teach” (Bartelmus 1991). Jer 7:13 is the first of ten occurrences; outside Jer, only 2 Chron 36:15 uses it, a passage dependent on Jer. “King of the nations” and “prophet for the nations” are unique designations, for Yhwh in 10:7 and for Jeremiah in 1:5. Correspondingly, God is sovereign above all realms, also the Babylonian empire, and can even call its king Nebuchadnezzar “my servant” (Jer 25:9; 27:6; 43:10, only in MT), the sole passages to apply this label to him.

Jer shows a decisive interest in an intimate, personal relationship with Yhwh. Many prayers in the scroll testify to it, especially the confessions in Jer 11–20. They are signs of an interior struggle of a person having to suffer because of a divine mission that causes pain, rejection, and even persecution. How the new covenant is conceived, as everybody having inscribed God’s torah on their hearts and “knowing” him interiorly, underlines further this desire of a deeper bonding with Yhwh which goes beyond traditional piety in several aspects; Moshe Weinfeld has aptly called them “spiritual metamorphosis” (Weinfeld 1976). Its first instance is Jer 3:16–17 where the role of the Ark of the Covenant as divine throne is replaced by the city of Jerusalem, as a center of Yhwh’s presence attracting people from all countries. Other texts are Jer 7:21–23; 16:14–15; and 31:29–30, 31–34. Jer seems to wish to transform classical expressions of faith in the direction of a more authentic, inwardly filled, deep connection with Yhwh, motivated by a new sensitivity for his character and fascination.

7. A Unique Scroll

The singularity of Jer applies also to its literary features. The scroll shows various mixtures: It starts with talking about the prophet in third person (Jer 1:1) and switches to first person in 1:4; such changes occur throughout Jer which presents itself thus as a combination of proper words of Jeremiah and narration about him. Still more dominant, especially in the first half of Jer, is God’s voice. He is the main speaker, and occasionally, as in Jer 25:3–6, the “I” of the prophet glides over to the “I” of Yhwh in a continuous speech, without interruption. Already the beginning had brought the identification of Jeremiah’s words with those of God (1:1–2; only in MT, whereas LXX harmonizes, pace Finsterbusch 2016).

The interchange of poetry and prose poses another challenge for readers. Jer 2–20; 30–31; and 46–51 are mainly poetic. Stulman (1998) could show that prose chapters in between, like Jer 7; 11; and 18, have a structuring function and help to clarify the references of the images used in the poetry. The overall composition of Jer defies usual arrangements, as it does not follow the pattern “judgment for Israel—judgment upon the nations—salvation”. Messages of hope are not found at the end, but mostly in Jer 29–33. And the oracles against the foreign nations form the latest large block in Jer 46–51, before the doom of Jerusalem’s fall in Jer 52. It is hard to detect why Jer has been arranged this way, in detail as well as a whole.

One key, at least for the latter part of the scroll, might have been the desire to show different dealings and positions with regard to the trauma of 587 BC. This decisive event is reported twice, in Jer 39:1–10 chronologically in the ‘right’ place, and again in Jer 52, seemingly out of order. The repetition allows Jer to offer various perspectives on the catastrophe: Up to Jer 38, it can expose broadly reasons and developments leading to it. In Jer 40–44, it succeeds to reveal the continued resistance against God’s advice even after the downfall (Bodner 2015; Caruso 2020); Judah is unwilling to ‘learn the lesson’ from its collapse.

The ‘unordered’ chronology presents a further problem. Whereas books like Ezekiel, Haggai, or Zechariah follow the sequence of time, Jer deviates strikingly from it: Jer 21 deals with 588 BC, Jer 24 with those exiled with King Jehoiachin in 597, and Jer 25 is dated to the fourth year of King Jehoiakim, that is 605. Similarly, Jer 32–34 allude several times to 588, whereas Jer 35–36 retrocede afterwards into the time of King Jehoiakim (608–598). Jer deliberately ignores the ‘normal’ way of presentation and thus creates a ‘chaotic’ impression, corresponding partly to the described tumultuous period in Judah’s history.

Another reason for this strange ordering lies in arousing curiosity by suspense. Several times Jer uses retarded information. Jer 1:3 announces the fifth month of King Zedekiah as final date (=July 587). The description of the burning of the city in 39:8 would correspond to it, but readers have to wait until the very last chapter, where “the fifth month” occurs again in 52:12 and solves the tension. The “fourth year of King Jehoiakim” occurs four times in Jer, in 25:1; 36:1; 45:1 and 46:2, and serves as a structuring device. But it is only in the last instance that its meaning is revealed, as the date of the battle at Carchemish, a decisive turn in the history of the Ancient Near East. Readers of Jer 25 could not grasp the significance of this date for the divine judgment; more than 20 chapters later they can connect it with this important event and obtain a deeper understanding of this setting in time. In Jer 32:2, Jeremiah’s imprisonment in the “courtyard of the guard” is mentioned, never alluded to before. Solely in Jer 37:21, the information is given that the prophet is brought there. A last case for withholding information is the motif of the destruction of the temple. It should have come in Jer 39, yet there is no word about it. The Babylon oracles mention twice (50:28; 51:11) that Yhwh punishes her for (the demolition of) the temple, but it is reported only later, in 52:13.

Another indication for Jer’s ‘playing’ with its readers is the use of the cryptogram שׁשׁך in 25:26; the riddle of this ‘name’ is finally revealed in 51:41, as a mocking designation of Babylon. “All the kings of Zimri” in 25:25 also presents an enigma, as such a country is unknown; the mystery is resolved when “Zimri” is understood on the background of 1 Kings 16:9–20, as referring to the usurper with the same name who came to power by treason and murder. Other symbolic titles occur in Jer 46:17 for the Pharaoh and in 51:1 for Babylon. They require to discover their meaning and allow seeing their fragility and deficiencies. The elements presented here make Jer unparalleled. Its mixtures and unconformity in several aspects often challenge those who try to understand it.

8. Textual Networking

A further reason for the difficulty of reading Jer is the high degree of intertextuality. In this regard, Jer surpasses all other scrolls of the Hebrew Bible. It is close to Deuteronomy and deuteronomistic literature (Thiel 1973, 1981), picking up expressions and motifs from these writings. However, it also stays in dialogue with many other biblical scrolls. Jer 1 may serve as a first example for this, to be supplemented with other cases.

“Anathoth” in Jer 1:1 alludes to King Solomon’s ban on the priest Abiathar in 1 Kings 2:26–27. In v1, “The Words of” connected with the name of a prophet occurs also in Amos 1:1, whereas “Yhwh’s word came to …” in Jer 1:2 is similarly found in Hos 1:1; Joel 1:1; and Mic 1:1. Jer 1:1–2 thus combines both introductory formulas for prophetic scrolls. Jer 1:2–3 presuppose data from 2 Kings 23–25. “Forming in the mother’s womb” in Jer 1:5 evokes Isa 49:1. God’s promise in Deut 18:18 is the source for phrases in Jer 1:7 and especially for “lay my words in your mouth” in v9 (Brandscheidt 1995). The two visions in Jer 1:11–16 have Amos’ visions in Amos 7–8 as closest parallels. Overall, Jer 1 seems to borrow from several other texts and follows in v4–10 the scheme of call narratives, as they are extant also in e.g., Exod 3–4 and Judg 6.

To summarize shortly the research of Holladay (1989) and others: Jer draws most probably on nearly the entire Torah, with Deuteronomy being quoted most, specifically its frame and Deut 28. All Former Prophets serve as sources, with a focus on the final chapters of 2 Kings. From the scrolls of the Latter Prophets, the use of “First Isaiah” by Jer is undisputed; for Henk Leene (2014), Isaiah as a whole and even Ezekiel predate Jer and their motifs are developed by it. Jer received inspiration from the Twelve, too, in particular from Amos, Hosea, and Micah, but also from Obadiah (1–5, for Jer 49:9, 14–16), Nahum (3,19, for Jer 30:12), and Habakkuk (2:13, for Jer 51:58), maybe also from other ‘Small’ Prophets; this means that more than half of what later would form the Hebrew Bible was accessible when Jer was written. To grasp fully its message requires familiarity with these scrolls and ability to detect Jer’s various ways of dealing with them, sometimes emphasizing what they proclaimed, sometimes going beyond or even against them.

Jer’s use of these sources displays several literary techniques. It chooses important chapters, e.g., Gen 1 (for Jer 4:23–26), Exod 20 (for Jer 7:9), Lev 26 (for Jer 14:19), Deut 32 (very often, see Lundbom 1999, pp. 110–14), Josh 23 (for Jer 32:42), 2 Sam 7 (for Jer 31:9), 2 Kings 17 (for Jer 11:9; 31:37), Isa 53 (for Jer 11:19), and Ezekiel’s vocation (for Jer 15:16). This testifies to an extraordinary sensitivity for the significance of these chapters and to a broad literary horizon.

In picking up former texts, Jer likes to select key phrases, rare expressions, and problems. Examples are the wordplay “to go after the Nothing and become nothing” (uniquely in 2 Kings 17:15 and Jer 2:5), “the iron furnace” (only Deut 4:20; 1 Kings 8:51; Jer 11:4), and the fate of an idolatrous city, becoming a tell, not to be rebuilt (Deut 13:17, exclusively linked with Jer 30:18 which reverts it).

These two techniques, the choice of significant chapters and marked expressions of other biblical books, are pervasive throughout Jer and make it a kind of “meta-text”. It reflects on and elaborates important texts and motifs from at least 15 scrolls accessible at the time of its composition. Jer presents prophecy on a higher level, as reaction on the Torah and on several other prophets and their messages.

Jer obviously creates a kind of “web”, spanning connections to many other scrolls, by this participating at their authority, but also using it as a chance to respond, as in the cases of Jer 30:18 and 31:37. Similar techniques can be observed within the scroll, by several devices of repetition and variation. There are many “doublets”, e.g., 6:12–15//8:10–12; 6:22–24//50:41–43; the latter passages play with the former and thus generate an impression of liveliness, besides establishing links within Jer. The list of verbs of destruction and rebuilding (several times from 1:10 to 45:4) is another example of “textual networking”, also within the scroll. A third type consists in offering solutions; the question about missing healing (8:22) is answered in 30:17, and imperatives like those in 14:21 to remember and not to break the covenant, addressed to God, find a fulfilment in 31:20, 31–34. Often Jer combines its own motifs with ‘foreign’ sources and incorporates them in its fabric in a synthetic way. It arrives thus, especially in poetry, at a kind of “mosaic-style”. In this regard, too, Jer is outstanding.

9. An Apex of Prophecy

The aspects dealt with above indicate that the scroll of Jer is incomparable. It is far from anything what the Ancient Near East offers on prophecy. And Jer, although being close to the other prophetical writings of the Old Testament, is also markedly distinct from them. It is extreme in various directions. Its sheer extent, with 21,819 words forming the longest single book of the Bible, exceeds the other major prophets Isaiah and Ezekiel noticeably (16,930 respectively 18,731 words) and defies all readers and attempts to grasp its message. One main reason for this is also its complexity and its interaction with many other biblical scrolls, partly shown above in 7 and 8. Jer tries to bring together key issues of the Torah and earlier prophets and to present a kind of synthesis to all of them. It thus arrives at a higher level, distinguished by deeper reflection and distance towards ‘normal’ attitudes and assessments. Signs for this are the “spiritual metamorphosis”, the opposition to all other contemporary prophets (Jer 23:9–40; 26–29; and more often), and Jeremiah’s pleading to defect to the Babylonians during the siege of Jerusalem (Jer 21:9; 38:2) and to remain in the country after the catastrophe (Jer 42).

Jer is extraordinary also in other regards. The portrayal of Jeremiah combines features of the “arch-prophet” Moses, remarks on the life, like with Former Prophets, and a huge amount of divine messages, much more than with any of the Latter Prophets. It mentions several times rejection, persecution, and danger of death and reveals enormous suffering, in this point coming close to Job who, however, did not have the burden of being sent by God. The “international” orientation of Jer, corresponding to the prophet’s call (1:5) and Yhwh’s character (10:7), is another outstanding feature and becomes visible in King Nebuchadnezzar’s function as “my servant” and in announcements of restoration also for foreign peoples (e.g., 12:15–16; 46:26; 48:47). Perceiving history in such a perspective, allows one to deal with personal trauma, as it appears as a part within larger developments, and Jer dares to do it more than any other scroll.

The main key for Jer’s distinctiveness probably lies in a different perception of Yhwh. To conceive him as weeping goes even beyond Hosea’s emotional divine turmoil (Hos 11:8). The inner monologue in Jer 31:20 displays God’s indissoluble affection to Ephraim as a “beloved child”, despite its previous waywardness. This reveals that he overcomes the tension within him between justice which would require punishment and mercy, motivated by his character and love. Accompanying his people in this terrible phase of being attacked and subdued, being helpless to change them, although having tried it incessantly, triggers a process in God to become interiorly reconciled with their inability and deficiencies and leads him to offer undeserved salvation, in the midst of exile, siege, and losses (Jer 29–33). The placement of these most intense “hope texts” within Jer, close to its center and between chapters dealing with the downfall, conveys the message that divine help does not start “afterwards”, at the end, but right in midst of misery and suffering. In its composition, too, Jer is special.

Jer represents a high point of the literary genre of prophetic writing. The reception later also confirms this. Jeremiah becomes a key figure for 2 Chron (35:25; 36:12, 22) and Ezra (1:1). His confessions serve as a model for prayer, and several Psalms pick up motifs from Jer (e.g., Psa 1:1–4 from Jer 17:5–8; Psa 31:14 from Jer 20:10; Psa 79:6–7 from Jer 10:25). The disciples answer to Jesus’ question about his identity in Matt 16:14 mentions Jeremiah as the only one from the Latter Prophets. The Austrian poet Franz Werfel chose Jer as subject for his famous novel “Höret die Stimme” (Werfel 1937) because he regarded it as most fruitful in the time of increasing Nazi repression and terror; a year later, his book was forbidden by them. This is a sign that Jer is actual, even after more than 2000 years, and for today, too.

10. Conclusions

My aim was to show the peculiar features of the scroll of Jeremiah and of this prophet. It has become clear that Jer is singular in many regards. The figure of Jeremiah, the main messages of his scroll, its theology, and its literary characteristics are very different from what is usual. Nevertheless, Jer belongs to Old Testament prophecy and represents a culmination for this type of literature within the Bible. The title chosen above, derived from Jer 15:19, expresses the scroll’s conviction about its prophet’s role among his peers. It proposes him for his time as the only official spokesperson for Yhwh. Maybe some of the observations above can explain and substantiate this claim. Independently from such a claim, Jer is an outstanding example for what it means to be sent by God to proclaim his word.