The Quest for the Structure of the Book of Jeremiah

By S. Jonathan Murphy

[S. Jonathan Murphy is Senior Pastor of Newcastle Baptist Church, Newcastle, County Down, Northern Ireland, and a writer for Sacra Script Ministries.]

Jeremiah is known as the “Weeping Prophet.” Michelangelo’s portrait of him in Rome’s Sistine Chapel has portrayed this gloomy depiction for centuries. The man sits in despair—tormented in thought, troubled, with face lost in hand. The Book of Jeremiah leaves most readers no different, tormented in thought—at least initially.

Particularly baffling is the question of how to understand the structure of the book. This area is so plagued with difficulties that many who approach the subject become “weeping scholars”—academicians tormented in thought, troubled, with faces lost in hands. Carroll states, “Whatever the more sanguine commentators on Jeremiah may say and think, I am still of the opinion that the book of Jeremiah is a very difficult, confused and confusing text. . . . Writing the commentary on Jeremiah was for me a Dantean experience: a journey through a wood darker than I had ever imagined it would or could be.”[1]

This article examines the major pitfalls in the quest for the book’s structure and proposes some potential ways forward. The article contends that the difficulties in understanding the structure of Jeremiah can be reduced by respecting the text as it stands in its final form and interpreting it through a theological principle of arrangement.

Pitfalls in the Quest for the Structure of Jeremiah

A glance at the introductory paragraphs to many works on Jeremiah confirms the fact that determining the structure of the Book of Jeremiah is troubling. It is described as “enigmatic,”[2] “puzzling,”[3] “an intractable riddle,”[4] “a hopeless hodgepodge,”[5] “complicated,”[6] and an issue that leaves the reader “baffled.”[7] The list goes on. The cause of such consternation is the mysterious arrangement of the chapters in Jeremiah.

“Several factors contribute to this difficulty, including the less than obvious development of thought, the lack of consistent chronological ordering, the references to various scrolls and other writings, and the differences between the Hebrew Bible and the LXX.”[8] One could add the problem of continual switching between literary genres and the different theories about the work’s composition and compilation.

A Less Than Obvious Development Of Thought

A major obstacle in seeking to ascertain the structure of the Book of Jeremiah is the belief that it contains no distinct and unifying development of thought. At the micro level there is evidence that some segments have been grouped together as topics. Fretheim notes the following examples of themes in particular sections: sin and repentance (2:1-4:4); cultic matters (7:1-8:3); drought and war (14:1-15:4); potter and clay (18:1-19:15); royal house and city (21:11-23:6); prophets (23:9-40); prophets and Babylon (chaps. 27-29); Jeremiah and Zedekiah (chaps. 37-38); and community without Jeremiah (40:7-41:18).[9] These and other scattered topics are believed to have no overarching thought on the macro level.

Although attempts have been made to structure the material topically, this approach seems to break down. Thompson is skeptical about the work’s cohesion.

Chs. 1-25 seem to gather together oracles of warning and judgment, but there are segments here which are concerned with hope (e.g., 3:11-18; 16:14-15; 23:1-8). And even in the Book of Consolation, chs, 30-33, which is mostly concerned with hope, there are words of doom (32:28-35). Principles of arrangement are not much easier to follow even when a topical arrangement is clearly intended, e.g., in the oracles against the nations (chs. 46-51). The order in which they are presented in the Hebrew Bible. . . . is roughly in geographical progression from south to north and west to east, but this is not exact. Nor could it be argued that they are presented in the order of their importance.[10]

Lack Of Consistent Chronological Ordering

The best-known difficulty relating to the structure of Jeremiah concerns chronological issues. No consistently linear time frame dictates what goes where.

For example in 21:1 the Lord sent word to Jeremiah when Zedekiah was king over Jerusalem. According to Thiele’s chronological system Zedekiah reigned for eleven years from 597 to 586 B.C., following the deportation of his predecessor and nephew Jehoiachin at the hands of Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon.[11] Then between 588 and 586 B.C. Nebuchadnezzar was attacking Jerusalem.[12] Jeremiah 21:1, therefore, transpired some time between 588 and 586 B.C. However, three chapters later, 24:1 mentions the deportation of Jehoiachin, Zedekiah’s predecessor, an event that occurred about ten years earlier in 597 B.C. Then 25:1 records the word of the Lord that came to Jeremiah in the fourth year of Jehoiakim (which was also the first year of Nebuchadnezzar), that is, 605 B.C., several years before the event in 24:1.

The oracles against the nations recorded in chapters 46-51 are a second example. If chronological progress determined the arrangement of the work, these chapters would correspond to a late period in the life of Jeremiah. But the prophecies came from the Lord to Jeremiah in 605 B.C., a period certainly not at the end of his career.

A third example of the fact that the contents of the book are not arranged chronologically is this: Chapter 1 begins with the call of Jeremiah (presumably in 627 B.C., the thirteenth year of King Josiah).[13] Chapter 25 took place in 605 B.C. One could think that all the events between those chapters occurred between 627 and 605. But that is not the case. The event recorded in 21:1-10 transpired in 588-586 B.C.; 22:24-23:8 was addressed to Jehoiachin, who ruled from 598 to 597 B.C.; and chapter 24 is set in 597 B.C. Obviously then chronology is not the basis of the book’s structure.

References To Various Scrolls And Other Writings

A third pitfall in the search for structure results from the variety of scrolls and writings mentioned in the work. Jeremiah contains sections within it that at one point were independent, stand-alone units.[14] In chapter 36 two scrolls are mentioned. The first was burned by Jehoiakim (36:23), and the second was produced to replace the first but it includes some additions (v. 32). Moreover, 30:2 describes the Lord’s command to Jeremiah to write in a book the message he was about to hear. This message is found in what is called the Book of Comfort or the Book of Consolation (chaps. 30-33). The oracles to the nations (chaps. 46-51) also stand as a distinct unit that was later incorporated into the larger work. They are mentioned much earlier in the text in chapter 25:13 but are not presented until the end of the work. Chapters 1-25 are also believed to have been an independent literary unit at some point. Various formerly independent literary units are present within the final form of Jeremiah. This adds to the complexity of the search for a structure.

Differences Between The Hebrew Bible And The Septuagint

There are two main extant versions of Jeremiah. The one in Hebrew is represented in the Masoretic text, from which English Bible versions are translated, and the other is in Greek (the Septuagint). The two editions are different.[15] Fragments of both versions, moreover, have been discovered at Qumran, which means that the versions were different even in the second century B.C.[16] No other book among the Law and the Prophets displays as many differences as are evident between these two versions of the same book.[17]

The four major differences are these: (a) the Septagint is much shorter, lacking about one-eighth of the Masoretic text. Petersen estimates that the Septuagint is approximately three thousand words (about 15 percent) shorter than the Masoretic text;[18] (b) the Septuagint has about one hundred words not found in the Masoretic text; (c) the oracles to the foreign nations in the Masoretic text are in chapters 46-51, but in the Septuagint these chapters follow 25:13 as chapters 26-31, and 25:14 is omitted in the Septuagint; and (d) the Babylonians are addressed at the end of the foreign-nations section in the Masoretic text in chapters 50-51, whereas they are mentioned in the Septuagint in chapters 27-28 as the second in the list of the nations.[19]

Switching Between Literary Genres

The fact that Jeremiah has several literary genres adds another obstacle to the search for a valid structure. Stulman observes that changes of genre in the book are “intrusive, extremely disjointed, randomly placed in their present literary settings, haphazardly located, and scattered irregularly throughout the book.”[20]

Bright says that genre shifts “do not furnish any key to its arrangement, but rather add to its chaotic appearance, for the book is certainly not arranged according to its literary types. On the contrary, these are found commingled through its various parts in what can only be called a grand disarray.”[21] Different genres appear side by side throughout many parts of the work. Although poetry is prevalent in the first half of the book, it is interspersed with prose sermons. And the second half of the book, though predominantly biographical prose, is marked repeatedly with poetry.

Differing Theories Concerning Composition And Compilation

Another major difficulty relates to the composition and compilation of the work. How one understands the way in which the book was written and collected affects conclusions about its structure.

During the last century critical scholars believed the book contains three identifiable layers of literature—the poetic utterances of Jeremiah, the narrative accounts of Baruch, and the theological overlay of deuteronomic theologians. These reflected three layers of redactional activity.[22] However, the process of composition and compilation is much more complex than suggested by this three-document proposal.[23]

Three major approaches are presented by critical scholars. All three agree that the book has material from Jeremiah as well as subsequent editorial work. Beyond this there is no consensus. The first approach focuses on the historicity of the work. It attempts to determine a precise date and setting for each literary unit. Because this approach focuses on the historicity of the work, the role of the prophet Jeremiah in the composition and compilation of the work is maximized. The approach is sensitive to accepting the work’s origin from the prophet Jeremiah.[24]

The second approach focuses on deuteronomic editing of the work in the exilic period in Babylon after Jeremiah’s lifetime. The work is considered a recasting and transformation of older material by exilic editors for the benefit of the exiled community. The need to recover the actual words of Jeremiah is downplayed. Historical pursuit is extraneous. The focus is on the agenda of the exiled community whose needs shaped the current arrangement of the work.[25]

The third approach proposes that historical questions be subordinated to the final canonical shape of the work––a canonical-critical approach. This view proposes that the historical Jeremiah has been recast by the deuteronomic Jeremiah. Historical speculation, however, gets in the way of the theological intention of the final form of the text. This canonical theological agenda shapes the final form of the work.[26] Even within the three approaches to composition and compilation there is no consensus on the matter of the book’s structure.[27]

Progress in the Quest for a Structure of Jeremiah

Three areas present possibilities for making headway in understanding the structure of the Book of Jeremiah.

An Anthological Approach

A major step is to recognize that this is not a book in the normal sense of the term. To understand Jeremiah as a book like, for example, Judges or Romans, is to misunderstand it.[28]

To expect the traits of a normal book—such as forward chronological movement, smooth transitions, linear rather than cyclical logic—will frustrate and disappoint the reader. As Craigie writes, “What we are dealing with, then, in reading the Book of Jeremiah, is a work that is essentially an anthology, or more precisely an anthology of anthologies. But whereas a modern anthology provides guidance to its readers by extensive use of titles, notes, and headings, only a few such aids to reading have survived in Jeremiah.”[29]

This is not to say, however, that the work is a “hodgepodge.” Nor is this approach suggesting that the prophet Jeremiah did not write it. Whether the final compiler was Jeremiah, Baruch, Jeremiah and Baruch, or Jeremiah, Baruch, and an unknown editor, the work is not a book in the modern sense. Viewing Jeremiah as an anthology helps diffuse some of the structural difficulties discussed.

A Literary-Rhetorical Approach

Literary criticism has become a dominant factor in Old Testament studies.[30] Rhetorical criticism, a subset of literary criticism, was championed by Muilenburg in 1968.[31] His was not a call to move away from historical criticism but to begin to give attention to the stylistic and aesthetic features of the text in order to uncover the “texture and fabric of the writer’s thought.”[32] Sometimes it is referred to as structural criticism, “the type of literary criticism that involves understanding the progression of thought in a literary piece, coupled with a close analysis of the language in which the argument is expressed.”[33] Rhetorical criticism pays close attention to literary features in a work—distinct units, the repetition of key words, phrases and motifs, wordplays, and structural features such as inclusios and chiasms.

This approach has helped scholars work on distinct sections in the anthology. Many scholars agree that Jeremiah 1:1-25:14; 26-29; 30-33; 34-45; 46-51; and 52 once stood as six separate units. The first fourteen verses of chapter 25 conclude the first major unit. Verbal similarities between 1:15-19 and 25:3-9 form an inclusio. The first two verses in chapter 30 introduce the Book of Comfort/Consolation in chapters 30-33. The first verse of chapter 46 introduces a new section—the prophecies to the foreign nations—which clearly concludes at the end of chapter 51. Within these major sections smaller literary units can be identified. This literary-critical approach can contribute to the search for how the author/editor combined the distinct sections of the anthology rhetorically.

The application of rhetorical criticism to the study of Jeremiah—though in developmental stages—shows signs of furthering the quest for a valid structure.[34]

A Theological Approach

A theological organizing principle is present in Jeremiah, as noted by several scholars. Stulman, for example, proposes to bring “order amidst chaos” by examining the book as an intentional literary organization with a purposeful theological design—a work with “theological coherence amidst the chaos.”[35] Childs says the final form of Jeremiah follows a twofold theological proclamation—God’s judgment against disobedient Jerusalem (judgment) and promissory acts of newness (promise).[36] Clements contends that the fulfillment of the tragedies Jeremiah had predicted demonstrates both God’s trustworthiness and His involvement in the events.[37] The message of hope about the future of God’s people was as certain as the once foretold—but now realized—tragedies of their past. The theological organizing principle is one of hope following judgment.

The focus and application of a theological organizing principle provides an avenue for the progress of Jeremianic studies as it relates to structure. Taking the parts of the work as they stand in their final canonical shape is the basis to understanding how the parts relate theologically to the whole. This respects the current shape of the work—both in content and order—as Scripture.[38]

A Proposal for Jeremiah’s Structure and Message

The Book of Jeremiah is a carefully compiled anthology of the prophet’s sermons and of incidents in his life. This suggests that the original audience of these constituent parts varies from that of the final form of the work. The individual units were addressed to the people to whom Jeremiah ministered at different stages throughout his ministry. At times he addressed all the people of Judah or Jerusalem. On other occasions he spoke to individuals such as kings or priests. The final form of the work could not have been compiled until after Jehoiachin’s release in 561 B.C., for that is the last section in the work (52:31-34). The book is therefore a compilation of Jeremiah’s ministry message to the exiles in Babylon following their deportation. The promises of restoration provided hope for the exiles because those promises were made by the same God who had brought about the judgments. Thus the canonical form of Jeremiah was addressed to the Babylonian exiles.

The purpose of the work as a whole in its final canonical form differs from that of its individual sermons and biographical narratives delivered or transpiring over a span of many years. Jeremiah had repeatedly warned the people of Judah about coming judgment. These messages were delivered throughout his ministry. As a canonical whole, however, the purpose of the Book of Jeremiah was to encourage the exiles to hope in God’s promises of restoration for the nation. Since the judgment Jeremiah warned about was fulfilled—as they were then experiencing—they could be confident that restoration would also come.

The anthology, therefore, has been carefully structured to present a recurring theological message of judgment and hope for God’s exiled people. The Mosaic Covenant between Yahweh and Israel stands as the backdrop to the theology of the work. The consequences were clear: obedience led to blessing and disobedience to curses (Lev. 26; Deut. 28). Covenant infidelity left Yahweh no alternative but to bring judgment on His people. This is a major aspect of the theology of the book. Judgment would also fall on foreign nations (Jer. 46-51), because Yahweh is the Sovereign of the entire world. While the nations were not under the Mosaic Covenant, they were responsible to respect life (Gen. 9:6). The Abrahamic Covenant, moreover, invoked a curse on those who mistreated Abraham’s seed (12:3). The Book of Jeremiah, however, is not only about judgment; it is also about restoration and hope. Throughout the work the promise of future restoration resonates. Yahweh promised to deliver His people following the Exile and to rebuild them as a nation. An ideal Davidic king would govern them, a purified priesthood would represent them, and Yahweh would grant them a New Covenant that would enable them to be faithful to Him (30:1-33:26). Theologically, therefore, the Book of Jeremiah concerns Yahweh’s judgment and promised hope, destruction and restoration, cursing and blessing.

The entry and exit points to the anthology––chapters 1 and 52––are crucial to understanding the work as it now stands. These “bookends” hold the work together as an anthology. They provide an interpretive lens through which to read and understand the work.

Chapter 1 starts with an introductory heading (1:1-3), intentionally placed at the outset of the work to provide a biographical and historical setting. The second part of this chapter describes the call and confirmation of Jeremiah as Yahweh’s messenger to the nations in general but particularly to Judah/Jerusalem (vv. 4-19). The purpose and message of Jeremiah’s ministry is stated in verses 9-10. Thus the message he was to declare throughout his ministry is stated at the beginning of the book. This succinct message is the interpretive grid that brings order to the work. Yahweh called Jeremiah to be a prophet to the nations “to pluck up and break down, to destroy and to overthrow, to build and to plant” (v. 10). The entire work must be seen through this lens. Jeremiah was called to proclaim Yahweh’s judgment over all the nations—particularly His covenant people—as well as to promise future restoration for those He wished to rebuild and replant. Verse 10 captures in succinct form the agenda of the book. Chapter 1 contains in seed form the elements—oncoming judgment and restoration—that make up the remainder of the work.

The final chapter is strategically placed in order to form an inclusio with chapter 1. The same themes of judgment and hope or destruction and restoration end the work. Chapter 52 declares this same message of destruction and restoration through several narratives. The fulfillment of Jeremiah’s prophecies by the hand of Yahweh vindicated the message and ministry of the prophet (52:1-16). Jeremiah was proven to be a true prophet of God. His message of destruction and restoration was to be heeded. Chapter 52 displays the fulfillment of the destruction and judgment aspect of his message in the looting of the treasures of the temple by the Babylonians (vv. 17-23). The execution of specific leaders of the community and the transport of others into exile (vv. 24-30) continues this judgment theme. However, the message of destruction does not end the book. Restoration and hope conclude the book. The release from prison of Jehoiachin, an evil and captive king of Judah, in fulfillment of Jeremiah’s prophecy, anticipated the hope of future restoration of the sinful and captive people of Judah (vv. 31-34). Restoration and new hope would come to them as it had to him. Chapter 52 declares through two incidents the message of Jeremiah’s ministry calling (1:10).

The following structural outline of the final form of Jeremiah is proposed.

I.	Introduction: The ministry and message of the prophet Jeremiah are sourced in Yahweh and deal with the declaration of judgment and restoration (chap. 1).
II.	The recurring declarations of certain judgment on Judah/Jerusalem for her covenant infidelity against Yahweh contain glimpses of future restoration following the Exile (chaps. 2-25).
III.	The recurring declarations of certain restoration for Judah/Jerusalem, based on Yahweh’s covenant fidelity, include reminders of the reality of oncoming judgment (chaps. 26-35).
IV.	The realization of the judgment on Judah/Jerusalem in the siege and fall of the city and deliverance of a remnant anticipates future restoration (chaps. 36-45).
V.	The declarations of judgment against foreign nations for their wickedness against Yahweh include glimpses of future restoration (chaps. 46-51).
VI.	Conclusion: The ministry and message of Jeremiah are vindicated through the description of the judgment of Jerusalem and the anticipation of restoration in the release of Jehoiachin (chap. 52).

The message of the book may be stated this way: The declared and realized judgment of Yahweh on His covenant people Judah and the nations because of sin encourages the exiles to hope, amid their misery, in the fulfillment of His promises of restoration.

Conclusion

Though there are problems in the quest to find a structure for Jeremiah, the book need not be viewed as baffling, enigmatic, confusing, and troubling, as some suggest.

Several points may be noted in summary. First, though the book does not have a single unifying theme, one should recognize that a linear-logical development is not intended. The Book of Jeremiah reiterates cyclically the message of judgment and restoration that characterized the prophet’s ministry. Jeremiah’s message was expressed throughout the prophet’s life.

Second, Jeremiah is not a book in the usual sense of the term. It is an anthology of the prophet’s ministry, loosely held together by bookends (chaps. 1 and 52).

Third, problems appear when scholars attempt to reconstruct the history of composition and compilation according to the historical-critical method. Instead the text should be viewed in its final form as a unit. This eliminates the problem of trying to reconstruct what it looked like before the editor completed his work.

Fourth, differences between the Masoretic text and the Septuagint text of the book pose problems that are difficult to surmount. Further research into this aspect of the book is needed.

Fifth, the juxtaposition of various literary types within the work is not surprising, when one recognizes that the book is an anthology of incidents and sermons. Variation in oral rhetoric helps maintain the readers’ interest. The juxtaposition is intentional, for they reiterate the desired message. For example the Book of Consolation (chaps. 30-33) begins with a long poetic section declaring the message of future hope for Yahweh’s people in their restoration from exile and as recipients of the New Covenant (30:4-31:40). The text then turns to the confinement of Jeremiah by Zedekiah and God’s instruction that Jeremiah purchase a field (chap. 32). Rather than viewing this as an illogical literary leap, the text is arranged as it is to present the same message from another angle. Jeremiah’s purchase of real estate at a time of captivity declares emphatically the prospects of future restoration for the nation—the land will be repossessed.

The difficulties in understanding the structure of the Book of Jeremiah can be deflated by respecting the text as it stands in its final form and interpreting it through a theological principle of arrangement. The message of hope amidst chaos continues to encourage God’s people to trust in His promises even in difficult times.

Notes

1. Robert P. Carroll, “Halfway through a Dark Wood: Reflections on Jeremiah 25,” in Troubling Jeremiah, ed. A. R. Peter Diamond, Louis Stulman, and Kathleen M. O’Connor, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1999), 73.
2. Robert P. Carroll, Jeremiah (Sheffield: JSOT, 1989), 9.
3. Terence E. Fretheim, Jeremiah (Macon, GA: Smith & Helwys, 2002), 17.
4. A. R. Peter Diamond, “Introduction,” in Troubling Jeremiah, 15.
5. John Bright, Jeremiah (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1965), lvi.
6. Walter Brueggemann, A Commentary on Jeremiah: Exile and Homecoming (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 7.
7. Louis Stulman, Jeremiah (Nashville: Abingdon, 2005), 11.
8. Fretheim, Jeremiah, 17.
9. Ibid., 18.
10. J. A. Thompson, The Book of Jeremiah (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980), 31. This problem is also noted by Bright, Jeremiah, lix.
11. Edwin R. Thiele, The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings, rev. ed. (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1994), 190. All dates used in this work follow those of Thiele.
12. Ibid.
13. Ibid., 180.
14. This is recognized by even the most conservative scholars. J. Barton Payne’s defense of evangelicalism’s understanding of the arrangement of Jeremiah recognizes four editions in the process of compilation. Part of his classification involves the recognition that some units within the final form of the book were stand-alone pieces at one time (“The Arrangement of Jeremiah’s Prophecies,” Bulletin of the Evangelical Theological Society 7 [1964]: 120-30).
15. See John Gerald Janzen, Studies in the Text of Jeremiah, Harvard Semitic Monographs (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1973), 1.
16. Emmanuel Tov, “The Jeremiah Scrolls from Qumran,” Revue de Qumran 14 (1989): 189.
17. Emmanuel Tov provides an excellent summary of Jeremiah’s life work in “The Book of Jeremiah: A Work in Progress,” Bible Review 16 (2000): 32.
18. David L. Petersen, The Prophetic Literature: An Introduction (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 2002), 99.
19. Ibid. See also Louis Stulman, “Some Theological and Lexical Differences between the Old Greek and the MT of the Jeremiah Prose Discourses,” Hebrew Studies 25 (1984): 18-23; and Sven Soderlund, The Greek Text of Jeremiah: A Revised Hypothesis, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement (Sheffield: JSOT, 1985). Soderlund discusses the history of the investigation into these variances, particularly outlining the four major proposed theories.
20. Louis Stulman, “The Prose Sermons as Hermeneutical Guide to Jeremiah 1-25: The Deconstruction of Judah’s Symbolic World,” in Troubling Jeremiah, 35.
21. Bright, Jeremiah, lx.
22. See, for example, Bernhard Duhm, Das Buch Jeremia (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1901); Sigmund Mowinckel, Zur Komposition des Buches Jeremia (Kristiania: Dybwad, 1914).
23. Brevard S. Childs, Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979), 342-44.
24. See Bright, Jeremiah; William L. Holladay, Jeremiah: A Fresh Reading (New York: Pilgrim, 1990); and William L. Holladay and Paul D. Hanson, Jeremiah: A Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Jeremiah (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986).
25. See Peter R. Ackroyd, “The Book of Jeremiah––Some Recent Studies,” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 28 (1984): 47-59; and Robert P. Carroll, Jeremiah: A Commentary (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1986).
26. See Childs, Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture, 345-54; and R. E. Clements, Jeremiah (Atlanta: John Knox, 1988).
27. Brueggemann, Jeremiah, 11.
28. John Bright, “Book of Jeremiah: Its Structure, Its Problems and Their Significance for the Interpreter,” Interpretation 9 (1955): 263.
29. Peter C. Craigie, Page H. Kelley, and Joel F. Drinkard, Jeremiah 1-25 (Dallas: Word, 1991), xxxi-xxxii.
30. Paul R. House, “The Rise and Current Status of Literary Criticism of the Old Testament,” in Beyond Form Criticism: Essays in Old Testament Literary Criticism, Sources for Biblical and Theological Study 2 (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1992), 3.
31. James Muilenburg, “Form Criticism and Beyond,” in Beyond Form Criticism: Essays in Old Testament Literary Criticism, 49; and idem, “Form Criticism and Beyond,” Journal of Biblical Literature 88 (1969): 1-18.
32. Muilenburg, “Form Criticism and Beyond,” 56.
33. Alice Ogden Bellis, “The Structure and Composition of Jeremiah 50:2-51:58” (Ph.D. diss., Catholic University of America, 1986), 11.
34. See, for example, Martin Kessler, Reading the Book of Jeremiah: A Search for Coherence (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2004); Jack R. Lundbom, Jeremiah: A Study in Ancient Hebrew Rhetoric (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1997); and Geoffrey H. Parke-Taylor, The Formation of the Book of Jeremiah: Doublets and Recurring Phrases (Atlanta: SBL, 2000). For literary clues to Jeremiah’s arrangement see Richard Patterson, “Of Bookends, Hinges, and Hooks: Literary Clues to the Arrangement of Jeremiah’s Prophecies,” Westminster Theological Journal 51 (1989): 109-31.
35. Stulman, Jeremiah, 13. See also idem, Order amid Chaos: Jeremiah as Symbolic Tapestry (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1998).
36. Childs, Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture, 345-54.
37. Clements, Jeremiah, 9.
38. To accommodate their approach scholars rearrange the order of material in the Book of Jeremiah as it has been passed down over the centuries. Bright, for example, rearranges verses and chapters to suit his proposed historical plan (Jeremiah, vii–ix). Carroll rearranges the macrostructure of the work (e.g., he inserts the oracles to the foreign nations much earlier in the work) to suit his understanding of the deuteronomic editing of Jeremiah (Carroll, Jeremiah: A Commentary, 86-88). However, rearranging the order of the book challenges the meaning that was intended by its composer. Childs is correct to note that “the witness of the book for the community of faith, Jewish and Christian, lies in the form which it received by the tradition in order to mediate the prophetic word for every future generation” (Childs, Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture, 354).