24 et seq., which proclaims God's punishment upon the uncircumcised—the heathen who are uncircumcised in the flesh, and the Israelites who are uncircumcised in heart—can not be so easily decided, since the Biblical conception of being uncircumcised in heart is found elsewhere in Jeremiah. In xi.-xx., besides various additions to Jeremiah's sayings which can not be by the prophet himself, there are two passages which till now have generally, and probably rightly, been held to be genuine, although they do not belong to the time of Jehoiakim. 1-8 is earlier, and belongs to the time of Josiah, has been explained above (§ I.). xiii., however, must have been written later than Jehoiakim's time; after a symbolic narrative of a girdle buried beside the Euphrates, and which, in that it is soiled and unfit for use, represents Israel and Judah, the passage treats of the king and "queen"—that is, the queen mother—to whom it is announced that they must descend from their throne; and the deportation of the whole of Judah is similarly foretold. 2) the youthful Jehoiachin, and the time is shortly before his deportation to Babylon. The one non-authentic passage incorporated in group 2 is that concerning the Sabbath, xvii. The reason why the prophet can not be credited with the authorship of this passage, though in form and content it is not unlike Jeremiah, is the high value put upon the observance of holy days, which is wholly foreign to the prophet. is doubtful (see below, § IV., in connection with the prophecy against foreign peoples in xlvi.-li.). et seq., xxxii., and xxxiii., the middle one may, however, be accepted without reserve. 9) with a relation of Jeremiah's purchase of a field in Anathoth in accordance with ancient usage, at the time when the Babylonians were already besieging Jerusalem (comp. verse 15), which, upon a question of the prophet's, is explained thus (ib. et seq., foretells another day of terror for Jacob, but also promises liberation from foreign rule, punishment of the enemy, the rebuilding of the destroyed cities by the people (who will have begun to increase again and whose numbers will have been swelled by the return of Ephraim), and the making of a new covenant. Such a writer would have had more interest in the hope that the Judeans, only a part of whom had come back, would all return home, whereas for a prophet who wrote immediately before the downfall of Judah it was more natural to recall the overthrow of the Northern Kingdom, and to express the hope that with the return of Ephraim Judah also would return, although its present downfall seemed certain to him. The passage must consequently have been written by one of the exiles in Babylon and not by Jeremiah, in whose time such a taunt could not have been uttered either in Palestine or later in Egypt.§ III. But this does not at all exclude the possibility of the insertion, shortly after the passages had been written and put together, of various details and episodes. It is really no oracle at all, but a description in oracle form, dating from after the Exile, and originally written so as to appear as a production by Jeremiah, for which purpose the author assumes the standpoint of an older time. The Book of Jeremiah at a comparatively early date became subject to additions and revisions, which were made especially in the schools and from the material of Deutero-Isaiah; and the only question which suggests itself is whether this critical activity in reality must have continued until the end of the second century or even later.
The king in this case, however, with whom his mother is mentioned on equal terms, is certainly (comp. The author of the passage not only recommends the keeping of the Sabbath day holy as a day of rest ordained by God, but he even goes so far as to make the possibility of future salvation, and even directly the destruction of Jerusalem, depend upon the observance or non-observance of this day. In group 4 (of the time of Zedekiah) certain parts of the promises in xxx.-xxxiii. verses 26 et seq.): Jerusalem will be burned by the Chaldeans on account of its sins, but afterward will collect His people, scattered in all lands. Inthis section the following passages are doubtful as regards a Jeremianic origin: the passage in which the servant of God, Jacob, is comforted in his exile with words of Deutero-Isaiah (xxx. This theory is supported by Jeremiah's admonition to Baruch (in xlv.), which, although addressed to him by the prophet on the occasion of Jeremiah dictating the prophecies in the time of Jehoiakim, yet stands at the end of the section containing prophecies against Judah. This working over of the material explains the lack of perspicuity and the non-adherence to the historical situation which frequently characterize these prophecies. The book as a whole was first terminated by the addition of the oracle concerning Babylon, and again later by the addition of the account taken from the Book of Kings.
He will make an everlasting covenant with them, and will cause them with rejoicing to settle again in this land (ib. The fact that this admonition occurs at the end of the original Book of Jeremiah (concerning xlvi. see § IV.) can only mean that Baruch placed it at the end of the book edited by him as a legitimation of his labor.§ IV. speaks of the direction received by Jeremiah from God to proclaim His anger to foreign peoples. The following oracles are contained in this section: (a) the oracle against Egypt, in two parts, xlvi.
The Prophecies in Part I.: —Critical View: In he first part no consistent plan of arrangement, either chronological or material, can be traced. When Kuenen and other commentators object that in certain passages the single episodes are not properly arranged and that details necessary for a complete understanding of the situation are lacking, it must be remembered that it is just an eye-witness who would easily pass over what seemed to him as matter of course and likewise displace certain details. The book, dictated by Jeremiah himself under Jehoiakim, was first worked over by a pupil, probably Baruch, who added later utterances, which he wrote perhaps partly at the dictation of the prophet, but in the main independently, and to which he furthermore added narrative passages (at least for the time preceding the conquest of Jerusalem).
The speeches not being separated by superscriptions, and data generally (though not always as to time and occasion) being absent, it is very difficult to fix the date of composition. is certainly not genuine; it is a warning against self-glorification and an appeal to those who would boast to glory in the knowledge of God instead. 15); and various other passages which have many points of contact with Deutero-Isaiah. Moreover, a comparison with the text of the Septuagint shows that in the historical as in the prophetical passages many changes were made after composition. 7-22, which has much in common with that of Obadiah; (f) that against Damascus and other Aramaic cities, xlix. Whereas the other nations named all lay within Jeremiah's horizon, this was not the case with Elam, since Judah had no direct dealings with this country until after the Exile. 12-16, which is also taken from Deutero-Isaiah, and apparently furnishes the direct basis for the passage in question), and describes the upheaval in Babylon and the destruction of the city—making use of the exilic oracle in Isa. This "Book of Baruch," the composition of which Kuenen without sufficient reason (see above, § III.) places first in the second half of the Babylonian exile, concludes with the passage addressed to that scribe.
In this first part, however, may be distinguished different groups which, with a single exception, reflect substantially the successive phases of the development of Jeremiah's prophetic activity. Displaced, Disputed, and Non-Authentic Passages of Part I.: Relations with Deutero-Isaiah. As its sententious style indicates, it was probably taken from a collection of wise sayings. 4), and of Jeremiah's prophecy to Zedekiah of the conquest of the city and of the deportation to Babylon. 19 et seq., where this threat occurs again, likewise in an inappropriate place); the description of 's power on the sea (xxxi. A considerable portion of this section is shown to be secondary matter by the fact that it is lacking in the text of the Septuagint. It is missing in the Septuagint, although no plausible reason for the omission is apparent. It is therefore neither necessary nor advisable to set, with Kuenen, 550 as the date of the first edition of the book; but even if that late date be accepted one must still suppose that the notes of a pupil and eye-witness had been used as material. If, however, the former and generally prevalent opinion is maintained (which has been readopted also by Duhm), namely, that the historical passages were written by a pupil of Jeremiah, there can be no doubt that this pupil was Baruch. 23-27; (g) that against Kedar and other Arabic tribes, xlix. This alone would not, however, be a sufficient reason for denying that Jeremiah wrote the oracle, especially since as early as Isa. 6 the Elamites were known as vassals of the kings of Assyria, and hence an interest in the history of Elam could not have been so far removed from a prophet of Israel as may now appear. 58, which follows the section xlvi.-xlix., and to which a historical addition is appended (li. It contains oracles concerning foreign nations, which, however, stood immediately after the section referring to the cup of wrath for the nations, and had little to do with the group of oracles, now contained in xlvi.-li., concerning the nations conquered by Nebuchadnezzar.
The question as to the genuineness of the second short utterance, ix. Here, in a style wholly like that of Deutero-Isaiah, the speaker mocks at the unreality of idols, which exist only as images and hence are not to be feared; this recalls the time of Deutero-Isaiah and the idols of Babylon rather than the period of Jeremiah and the tendency of his contemporaries to worship other gods than . 11) is held by Duhm to be a magic formula with which the later Jews, who did not know much Hebrew, used to exorcise the various evil spirits in the air, shooting stars, meteors, and comets. The divine promise is appended to this narration: "Houses and fields and vineyards shall be possessed again" (ib. et seq.); the threat inserted among the words of promise (xxx. At any rate, examination leads to the conclusion that this section, like so much else in the Book of Jeremiah, was worked over afterward, although it is not justifiable to deny to Jeremiah the authorship of the whole of the section, nor to assume that it was written by a post-exilic author. Not to speak of smaller matters, the fact that the people among whom (according to verse 24) the prophet was sojourning, and who were wholly opposed to the compatriots of the prophet, can only have been Babylonians—who indeed might have said insultingly of Israel that "it was no more a nation before them" (ib.)—does not seem to accord with Jeremiah's authorship. Since it is known that it was Baruch and not Jeremiah who first wrote down the prophecies, and since in all cases the speeches in the historical portions can not be taken out of their setting, it seems the most natural thing to suppose that Baruch was also directly concerned in the composition of the historical passages. 10 et seq.] with the consolations of Deutero-Isaiah); (b) that against the Philistines, xlvii.; (c) that against Moab, xlviii., which in parts recalls Isa. By whom and at what time the supposed revision of Jeremiah's original stock of material was made, it is impossible to determine; but the large number of similar expressions connecting the separate oracles makes it probable that there was only one redaction. 59-64), is very clearly seen to be non-Jeremianic in spite of the fact that individual passages recall very vividly Jeremiah's style. Besides the oracle concerning Babylon, which is without doubt not genuine, the one concerning Elam must also have been added later, since, according to its dating, it did not belong to the oracles of the fourth year of Jehoiakim.
—Biblical Data: Contents: At the beginning of the book is a superscription (i. On the other hand, headings in the Hebrew text are only comparatively rare.
1-3) which, after giving the parentage of Jeremiah, fixes the period of his prophetical activity as extending from the thirteenth year of Josiah to the eleventh of Zedekiah (i.e., the year of the second deportation, 586 ). 28a, containing prophecies concerning the kingdom of Judah and incidents from the life of the prophet up to the destruction of Jerusalem and the second deportation. 30, contains prophecies and narrations from the period following the destruction of Jerusalem. xlv., is a short warning to Baruch on the occasion of his writing down the words of Jeremiah. Even if the text of the Septuagint is proved to be the older, it does not necessarily follow that all these variations first arose after the Greek translation had been made, because two different editions of the same text might have been in process of development side by side.
This period certainly does not cover the whole contents of the book; hence probably the superscription was originally that of an older book of smaller compass. Only one passage treats of a different subject, viz., ch. 13 et seq., containing 's command to Jeremiah, according to which the prophet was to proclaim God's judgment to foreign peoples. A third part, xlvi.-li., comprises prophecies against foreign peoples. Furthermore, the correspondence between the Septuagint and the Hebrew is too great, and their relationship too close, for one to be able to speak of two redactions.
At the end are given, by way of appendix, historical data (lii.) concerning Zedekiah, the deportation of the captives to Babylon, and the change in the fortunes of King Jehoiachin.§ I. display such an exact knowledge of the events described in the life of Jeremiah, and contain so many interesting details, that as a matter of course they were formerly considered to have been written by a pupil of Jeremiah in close touch with him. They are rather two editions of the same redaction.§ VII. The different stages in the history of the growth of the book as they are shown in the two theories of its origin, that of Duhm and that of Ryssel, practically coincide.
In connection with this, Jeremiah is further told to pass the wine-cup of divine wrath to all the nations to whom he is sent, and all the nations who must drink of the cup are enumerated. 5), and however much the expression "cup of wrath" may sound like one of Jeremiah's, since this illustration occurs often after him and accordingly probably goes back to him, yet this prophecy as it now stands (in xxv.) can not have been written by him. verses 12-14) interrupts the connection of the threatening of the nations by Babylon.