Wednesday, January 12, 2022

Is Jeremiah Opposed to the Priestly Source?

  

As proof that Jeremiah was opposed to P, Friedman cites Jer. 3:16:

 

“Then it shall come to pass, when you will multiply and be fruitful in the land in those days,” says Yahweh, “that they will say no more, ‘The ark of the covenant of Yahweh.’ It shall not come to mind, nor shall they remember it, nor shall they visit it, nor shall it be made anymore” (AT).

 

The ark is important in P and the phrase, “Be fruitful and multiply,” appears several times in P. Here, Jeremiah seems to be attacking the ark while reversing P’s phrase (Wrote, 148-149). But if reversing P’s phrase means that he is attacking P, what are we to conclude when we see Ezekiel also reversing it in 36:11, even though he agrees with P everywhere else?

 

What Friedman neglects to mention is that Jeremiah uses the phrase again, this time in the correct order:

 

“But I will gather the remnant of My flock out of all countries where I have driven them, and bring them back to their folds; and they shall be fruitful and multiply” (Jer. 23:3, AT).

 

If using the phrase in reverse order in attacking P, then using it in the correct order and must be agreeing with it.

 

Quoting a passage out of context usually distorts the meaning of the passage. Reading Jer. 3:16 in context (Jer. 3:11-18), we find that Jeremiah is not attacking P at all. HE sees Yahweh calling the northern kingdom of Israel to repentance and if they repent, he will bring them back to Zion and appoint shepherds, who, like the shepherds in Jer. 23:3, will care for them and help them to multiply and be fruitful (the reversal being merely an exercise in poetic license). The ark, which represents Yahweh’s throne, will no longer be needed because Jerusalem itself will become Yahweh’s throne and even the other nations will be gathered to it and sin no more. This bold vision is not an attack on P but rather an expansion on it. (Clayton Howard Ford, The Logical Fallacies of the Documentary Hypothesis [2021], 77)