Jeremiah 21-36 A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary by (Anchor Yale Bible Commentaries)

Book of the Covenant (30:1-31:40) 455

the covenant prophecies regarding the seed of Israel and Judah in vv 35-37.

Here the linkage is created by "seed" (zera<), which has been identified as a

catchword between the two units (Jones). The expansion material, then, in its

final form shows itself to be a large key word chiasmus (Keown et al., 126)-

five oracle clusters prophesying on the following themes:

A Rebuilding the holy Jerusalem

B Sowing seed of Israel and Judah

C New covenant with Israel and Judah

B' Preserving seed of Israel and Judah

A' Rebuilding holy Jerusalem

haqqodes

zera'

zera'

qodes

vv 23-26

vv 27-30

vv31-34

vv 35-37

vv 38-40

From Duhm comes the idea that 31:25 once marked the end of a collection
that began with 30:4, and that the unusual v 26, "At this I awoke and looked
around, and my sleep was pleasant to me," was a remark of some later reader
incorporated into the text. A few scholars have accepted this view (Mowinckel
1914: 47; Jones; Leene 1992: 356-63), but it was rightly rejected by Hyatt. Verse
26, it is true, does conclude a column in 4QJer° (Tov 1997: 178-81, 199) and
could be secondary, as many take it (see Notes), but it is not the end of a col-
lection. Its function is simply to give a response by Jeremiah to the oracle just
received from Yahweh; thus, another dialogue.
The present unit is delimited at the top end by a petuf:iah in 4QJerc and a
setumah in ML and MP before v 23. Delimitation at the bottom end is by a
petuf:iah in 4QJer° and a setumah in ML and MP after v 26. Tov (1997: 199)
records a space in 4QJerc after v 24 but does not list it as a section, which it
probably is not.
The scholarly consensus is that the present verses do not derive from Jere-
miah. In support of this view it is said that the phrases "righteous pasture" and
"holy mountain," referring to Jerusalem and the Temple (v 23), would be
strange coming from the prophet's mouth (Cornill; Peake; Rudolph; Weiser;
Hyatt). But Jones, who believes the metaphors are embodied in a quotation,
thinks that they do not necessarily reflect a narrow priestly conception and
need not therefore be "intrinsically foreign to the Jeremiah tradition in its final
form" (pp. 396-97). We note also that the three honorific names for the
Temple in 17:12, like the honorific names for Zion here, are thought by some
to derive from a liturgy edited into the text (see Rhetoric and Composition for
17:12) and need not therefore be denied to Jeremiah. The usual argument,
that a Jeremiah so critical of Temple worship and one who prophesied destruc-
tion of Jerusalem could not have uttered such words, is rendered invalid if,
after Jerusalem and the Temple were destroyed, Jeremianic judgment gave way
to Jeremianic prophecies of reversal for the future. One should therefore take
the present verses in the same spirit as other Book of Restoration promises and
allow for the possibility that Jeremiah could have envisioned a rebuilding of
Jerusalem (and the Temple) later on. The concluding oracle in 31:38-40, in
fact, looks ahead to a rebuilt and reconsecrated Jerusalem.