Fluent Essays

. I Sat Alone Jeremiah Among the Prophets MICHAEL AVIOZ T i g) r i $ 2009 First Gorgias Press Edition, 2009 Copyright © 2009 by Gorgias Press LLC All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a re­ trieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechani­ cal, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise without the prior written permission of Gorgias Press LLC. Published in the United States of America by Gorgias Press LLC, New Jersey ISBN: 978-1-59333-854-1 T i 6) r i s An Imprint of GORGIAS PRESS 180 Centennial Ave., Piscataway, NJ 08854 USA Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Avioz, Michael, 1967- [Nevuato shel Yirmeyahu. English] I sat alone : Jeremiah among the prophets / Michael Av­ ioz. -- 1st Gorgias Press ed. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-59333-854-1 (alk. paper) 1. Jeremiah (Biblical prophet) 2. Bible. O.T. Jeremiah- -Criticism, interpretation, etc. I. Title. BS580.J4A9513 2009 224 . 206--dc22 2009001234 The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of the American National Standards. 9 THE END OF THE KINGDOM OF JUDAH According to the book of Kings, the kings of Judah were to blame for the destruction of Jerusalem and the exile of the people from their land to Babylon. The kings did not heed the advice of the prophets. They did not maintain the social orders and the fulfillment of the commandments. The Covenant between the people and their God was violated. For all these God punished the people with exile and destruction. Yet the Lord warned Israel and Judah by every prophet and every seer, saying, Turn from your evil ways and keep my commandments and my statutes, in accordance with all the law that I commanded your ancestors and that I sent to you by mv servants the prophets. They would not listen but were stubborn, as their ancestors had been, who did not believe in the Lord their God. They despised his statutes, and his covenant that he made with their ancestors, and the warnings that he gave them. They went after false idols and became false; they followed the nations that were around them, concerning whom the Lord had commanded them that they should not do as they did. They rejected all the commandments of the Lord their God and made for themselves cast images of two calves; they made a sa­ cred pole, worshipped all the host of heaven, and served Baal. They made their sons and their daughters pass through fire; they used divination and augury; and they sold themselves to do evil in the sight of the Lord, pro­ voking him to anger. Therefore the Lord was very angry with Israel and removed them out of his sight; none was left but the tribe of Judah alone. Judah also did not keep the commandments of the Lord their God but walked in the customs that Israel had introduced (2 Kings 17: 13-19). The person blamed the most was Manasseh King of Judah. However, he was only the straw that broke the camels back, or die hammer blow, since he was preceded by a long history of the peoples sins from the days of the exodus from Egypt (2 Kings 21). Judahs exile to Babylon was the last stage in a deterioration which began with the division of the monarchy into two kingdoms and continued with the exile of the Kingdom of Israel to Assyria and its destruction. The threat mentioned in the Reproaches of the Pentateuch was thus realized. For example: 61 62 I Sat Alone The Lord will bring a nation from far away, from the end of the earth, to swoop down on you like an eagle, a nation whose language you do not understand, a grim-faced nation showing no respect to the old or favor to the young. It shall consume the fruit of your livestock and the fruit of your ground until you are destroyed, leaving you neither grain, wine, and oil, nor the increase of your cattle and the issue of your flock, until it has made you perish. It shall besiege you in all your towns until your high and fortified walls, in which you trusted, come down throughout your land; it shall be­ siege you in all your towns throughout the land that the Lord your God has given you. In the desperate straits to which the enemy siege reduces you, you will eat die fruit of your womb, the flesh of your own sons and daugh­ ters whom the Lord your God has given you (Deuteronomy 28: 49-53). The book of Jeremiah, like the book of Kings, comprises a bill of in­ dictment against the people and their leaders. Had they heeded Jeremiahs advice to mend their ways and especially to surrender to Babylon, the de­ struction and the exile would have been prevented. The unique aspect of the book of Jeremiah is that the essence of the story of the destruction is told by way of a dramatic plot. The prophets biography is integrated in the history of the Kingdom of Judah. Jeremiahs prophecy that the Babylonians will come to Jerusalem was realized in full. Jeremiah tried until the final hours to persuade Zedekiah, the last remaining king, to surrender to Babylon and not try to collaborate with Egypt against Babvlon. However, he did not succeed, although the relations between Jeremiah and Zedekiah were different from his relations with other kings. Zedekiah respected the prophet and believed him. The tragedy was that he was not courageous enough to employ his authority as king and refuse the advice of the ministers who instructed him to act in a way completely contrary to Jeremiahs advice. The contribution of the false prophets should also be mentioned. They cultivated the belief in Jerusalems immunity. As mentioned, the Babylonians appointed Zedekiah as King of Judah in 597 BCK. They made a vassal pact with him, within whose framework they were obligated to protect him from external threats, and in return he was committed to be loyal to them and support them at all times. However, the Babylonians soon understood that Zedekiah was not loyal to them as agreed in the pact made betw-een them. During this period Egypt began to recover and offered active aid to the Kingdom of Judah in getting rid of the Babylonians. The Babylonians, who until then gave their subjects great freedom of movement, decided that from then on they would be more in­ volved in the kingdoms under their domination. 9 The End of the Kingdom ofjudah 63 The Babylonians decided to abolish the rule of the House of David in Judah and destroy Jerusalem which resisted the rule of Babylon. They de­ cided to carm out a siege. The date is given to us in the book of Kings: the tenth of Tevet, the year 588 BCE. This siege lasted for almost two years. The historian and biblical scholar Israel Ephal describes the reasons for using the technique of the siege in antiquity in a comprehensive research on siege in the ancient near East. The decision to find protection behind the city walls was made by the inhabitants of Jerusalem. They understood that they had no chance in face to face battle against the Babylonians and therefore preferred a prolonged static battle. It was assumed that the enemy would become exhausted in a prolonged siege. This would obligate the en­ emy to constant supply of equipment, and life opposite the walls would cause the enemy to withdraw and abandon. A plastic illustration of the siege techniques was preserved in the murals which were painted in the palace of Sennacherib King of Assyria in Nineveh, not far from the city of Mosul in todays Iraq. Copies of these paintings are also found in Israeli museums. However, in the end the siege acted mainly to the detriment of the be­ sieged in Jerusalem. They were in quarantine. They could not leave the city or ask others to enter it. Food supplies ran out, and according to Lamenta­ tions, which describes the sights of the destruction, it appears that there was cannibalism in Jerusalem: women ate the meat of their children. The siege also led to the plague and outbreaks of disease because of impaired sanitary conditions. The description of the campaign of Sennacherib in the books of Kings and Isaiah indicate that the attackers sometimes used psychological warfare techniques. They tried to frighten the people, to create divides be­ tween the people and the government, to create despair among the warri­ ors. In parallel, they attempted to breach the wall using battering rams, and sometimes even penetrated under the walls by digging tunnels. During the first stage of the siege Zedekiah sent a royal delegation to Jeremiah because he wanted to find out whether Jerusalem was destined to be saved by a miracle. This is told in chapter 21. Zedekiah assumed that God will perform a miracle for those besieged in Jerusalem just like he did during the days of the campaign of Sennacherib. However, the answer that Jeremiah gives to the kings messengers is disappointing. God wall not fight for Jerusalem, but against it. He will enable the Babylonians to conquer the city. The only way out is to surrender to the Babylonians voluntarily and thus save the lives of those remaining in Jerusalem. Chapters 32 and 34 describe more stages of the siege. Here too Jeremiah continues to preach to voluntary surrender to the Babylonians. For this he is arrested and placed in prison, in a kind of detention house 64 I Sat Alone adjacent to the palace. He personally informs Zedekiah that he will be caught by the Babylonians and will not be able to escape them. The final stage of the siege is described in chapters 37-39. After over a year of enduring the siege, Zedekiah sends a second delegation to Jeremiah with the aim of receiving a Redempdon prophecy or a prophecy of salva­ tion for Jerusalem. This time the circumstances seemingly changed in favor of Judah. The King of Egypt did indeed appear in the Judah region and his arrival caused a withdrawal of the Babylonians. However, Jeremiahs answer was negative this time too. Jeremiah adds that all of Judahs reliance on Egypt is fundamentally mistaken, because the fate of Jerusalem has been decided. Nothing can save it, and there is no point in continuing to fight. The continued fighting will only make matters worse, because the with­ drawal is onlv temporary and tactical, and in the end the Babylonians will return. In the last chapter of the book, which lists the names of the exiled and the loot taken by the Babylonians, it appears that a group of about eight hundred people listened to Jeremiah and passed over to the Babylonian side after they declared their surrender (Jeremiah 32: 29). However, Zedekiah did not act in this manner. After these events Jeremiah was arrested on a charge of treason. First he was placed in an especially crowded detention house and after he re­ peated his prophecy he was thrown into the pit, just like Joseph in the book of Genesis (Jeremiah 38). Jeremiah was beginning to drown, but nobody dared save him, except for one non-Jew named Ebed-melech the Ethio­ pian. He turns toward Jeremiah and Jeremiah is pulled out of the pit and returned to the prison, because the ministers refused to let him go. He re­ mained there until the Babylonians broke into the citv. At the end of chapter 38 Zedekiah tries for the last time to ask Jeremiah What will be, but nothing has changed. Jeremiah advises Zede­ kiah to surrender voluntarily in order to spare a Babylonian revenge on him and his people for forcing them to maintain a siege for such a long time. Zedekiah says that he is afraid of his ministers and is especially afraid of those who have already deserted to the Babylonian side, because he thinks that the Babylonians will hand him over to these people, and they will casti­ gate him. The description ends: Zedekiah is not courageous enough to strongly object to the ministers. On the other hand Jeremiah has not changed his position. The Babylonians breach the walls on the ninth of Tamuz and en­ ter Jerusalem. Until the 10th of Av, the date on which the First Temple was burned, they apparendy hold trials at the city gate (as prophesied by 9 The End of the Kingdom of Judah 65 Jeremiah in chapter 1) and decide who will remain in the city and who will be taken to Babylon. We will now take a break in order to clarify a problematic point in the stories. When was the First Temple burned by the Babylonians? According to the book of Kings the Temple was burned by the Baby­ lonians on the seventh of Ab, whereas the book of Jeremiah records that it took place on the tenth of Ab. And if this confusion is not enough, the Rabbis set the ninth of Ab as the fast day. How can these contradictions be reconciled? The Rabbis took a harmonistic view according to which the Babylonians reached the Temple on the seventh of Ab and the entire proc­ ess ended on the tenth of Ab. However, a scientific approach to the biblical text cannot accept harmonistic solutions. It therefore appears that the original date was preserved in the book of Jeremiah and that it is the tenth of Ab. A precise comparison of the two versions, in the book of Kings and in the book of Jeremiah, indicates that the book of Jeremiah contains a more complete version. The Rabbis set the ninth of Ab as a day of remembrance for the de­ struction of both Temples. However, the ninth of Ab was actually the date on which the Second Temple was destroyed by the Romans in the year 70 CE. Setting the day of remembrance according to the date of the Second Temple apparently stemmed from the fact that this event was closer to their time than the destruction of the First Temple. In any case, they did not want to set two consecutive dates of fasting, one for remembering the de­ struction of the First Temple and one for the Second Temple, according to the rule that one does not make an edict for the public, unless most of the public can uphold it (Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah 36a). We will now return to the description in the biblical text. Zedekiah tries to escape from the Babylonians at night, because he knows what he can expect. He escapes until he reaches Jericho and there is caught. He ap- parendy tried to reach Ammon and Moab, which were among the nations that came to Jerusalem in the fourdi year of his reign, and which planned the rebellion against Babylon (Jeremiah 27). However, Zedekiah does not manage to reach a safe haven. He was caught and taken to the Babylonian headquarters in lliblah in northern Syria, where he was tried and accused of rebelling against the Babylonians. The Babylonians killed Zedekiahs sons before his eyes and then gouged out his eyes. This is how they also acted towards other nations and vassals that violated the conditions of the pact. Zedekiahs fate after this is not known. Did he die in Babylon or was he returned to Jerusalem? 66 I Sat Alone The Babylonians burned the Temple and looted its treasures. The priests, functionaries and military leaders who remained in the city were killed, and others were exiled to Babylon. The Babylonians chose those who would go to Babylon carefully. They wanted to ensure that those exiled to Babylon would not disrupt arrangements that were already achieved with those exiled during the days of Jehoiachin in the year 597 BCK. The kingship of the Mouse of David ceased, and has not been renewed to this day. There is no doubt that this action led to a very great crisis among the people, who believed that the Temple would exist forever, that the kingship of the House of David would exist forever, and that the people of Israel would inhabit the Land of Israel forever. Reality proved them wrong. Indeed, an argument between the people and their God on this mat­ ter can be found in several texts in the prophetical books and in Psalms. The prophets are convinced that the people and their leaders are to blame, whereas the people claim that there was no fault in their actions and point an accusing finger towards God himself. God is the one who violated his Covenant with them. A strong formulation is found in Lamentations 5: 7: Our ancestors sinned; they are no more, and we bear their iniquities; in Psalm 89: 39-40: But now you have spurned and rejected him; you are full of wrath against your anointed. You have renounced the covenant with your sen-ant; you have defiled his crown in the dust; and in Psalm 44: 18: All this has come upon us, vet we have not forgotten you, or been false to your covenant. The Babylonians find the prophet Jeremiah among the inhabitants of Judah (Jeremiah 39: 11). It turns out that they had received information about J eremiahs preaching to surrender to Babylon and therefore give him two alternatives: he can stay in Israel or go into exile (Jeremiah 40: 1-6). In the end Jeremiah remains in Israel, but his prophecy has not yet ended, be­ cause the entire people have not gone to Babylon. In the next chapter we will discuss the reality in Judah after the de­ struction and Jeremiahs prophecies to those who remained. I Sat Alone Jeremiah Among the Prophets MICHAEL AYIOZ T 1 6) r i s 2009 First Gorgias Press Edition, 2009 Copyright © 2009 by Gorgias Press LLC All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a re­ trieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechani­ cal, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise without the prior written permission of Gorgias Press LLC. Published in the United States of America by Gorgias Press LLC, New Jersey ISBN: 978-1-59333-854-1 T i (j) r \ s An Imprint of GORGIAS PRESS 180 Centennial Ave., Piscataway, NJ 08854 USA Library- of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Avioz, Michael, 1967- [Nevuato shel Yirmeyahu. English] I sat alone : Jeremiah among the prophets / Michael Av­ ioz. -- 1st Gorgias Press ed. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-59333-854-1 (alk. paper) 1. Jeremiah (Biblical prophet) 2. Bible. O.T. Jeremiah- -Criticism, interpretation, etc. I. Title. BS580.J4A9513 2009 224.206--dc22 2009001234 The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of the American National Standards. 4 JEREMIAHS TEMPLE SERMON Jeremiahs speech in the Temple (Jeremiah 7:1-15) is one of the most im­ pressive in the 1 Iebrew Bible. In his book, Zeev Weisman writes the follow­ ing. The canonical prophets charismatic test lay not so much in whether they succeeded in predicting the future, but in whether they possessed the proficiency and power with which to persuade their audience of the truth of their messages. In the same vein as Weisman, I will attempt to show that research written on the subject of rhetoric can make a significant contribution to understanding Jeremiahs speech in the Temple. What were the historical and societal conditions leading to Jeremiahs Temple speech? What is the message of the speech? By what means does Jeremiah transmit his message, with the aim of persuading his audience? It seems that two specific groups were of special interest in Jeremiahs speech: a. The reference to the Ten Commandments and to Shiloh implies the priests, whose job it is to teach the people how to observe the Ten Commandments (sec, for example Deut. 17:9-12; 33:10; Jer. 2:8; 18:18; Ezek. 7:26; IIos. 5:1; Mai. 2:7; 2 Chr. 15:3). Since they failed in their duties, they deserved to be censured, a task that the true prophets take upon them­ selves. According to the description in 1 Sam. 2, Elis sons, the priests, were responsible for the destruction of Shiloh. The priests abuse of their posi­ tion in Jeremiahs time likewise threatens to cause the destruction of Jerusa­ lem. Jeremiah is particularly entitled to prophecy this, as according to the first verse of the book (Jer. 1:1), he himself was from a priestly family. He knows very well how a priest is supposed to behave, and is therefore in a position to judge. b. Jeremiah appears to be addressing a second group—the false prophets—in his speech. ITiey are indicated by the expression we are saved and by use of the word falsehood. The use of slogans implies the false prophets. The fact that the prophets and the priests were Jeremiahs 21 22 I Sat Alone leading accusers in the story of his trial in chapter 26 is also an indication that they understood Jeremiahs words perfectly. If Jeremiahs speech was indeed made in 609/8 BCE, as many scholars suppose, then it goes without saying that the effect created thereby was fear. It was a particularly difficult year for the people of Judah, a year of turmoil: the death of josiah, followed by his replacement by two more kings, Jehoa- haz and jehoiakim. judah came under Egyptian rule and the people sought comfort and security in the Temple. Jeremiahs role, then, was to under­ mine the peoples sense of calm and security. This period was a fertile one for the false prophets to espouse their ideologies and to gain popularity among the masses. It is in this troubled period that Jeremiah had to stand strong and go out against these prophets. The Arrangement of the Material In contrast to Isaiah 1, wherein grave accusations are brought against the people in the introduction, Jeremiah opens the body of his speech on a positive note: Amend your ways and your doings, and let me dwell with you in this place (v. 3). This positive attitude is part of Jeremiahs ethos: He is genuinely concerned with the destinv of Israel, and he makes efforts to save them from error. Jeremiah 7 is a classic call for repentance, a change of direction. In­ deed, the Land of Israel belongs to the people of Israel according to the promise made to their forefathers, yet their dwelling therein is conditional: In every generation, the people have to prove that they are worthy of the Land, and should therefore take care that the Temple does not become a source of illusion, or a stumbling block for Israel. Later on, Jeremiah states that society has a moral obligation toward its members, and is therefore required to make improvements. From a rhetorical point of view, Jeremiah begins by moving from the general to the particular, and then returns to the general in his speechs conclusion. When Jeremiah sees no positive response from the audience, he ratch­ ets up his tone. He abandons all pretenses and expresses the full severity of his words. While he begins his speech in a positive tone, when this tack re­ ceives no response, he moves on to a description of his peoples terrifying position. Evidence for this can be found in his speech (v. 13): When I spoke to you persistently, you did not listen. Jeremiah is now wearing the hat of the prosecution in court. He pre­ sents the charges to the people followed by the consequences should they be found guilty. Jeremiah pleads that the peoples negative behavior consti- 4 Jeremiahs Temple Sermon 23 tutes a violation of the binding legal document that lays down the terms of the relationship between the people of Israel and God: the Ten Com­ mandments. The Ten Commandments are defined as a covenant, a contract between Israel and God on Mount Sinai (Exodus 19-20), which obligates both sides. If the people break their part of the agreement, then God will commensuratelv break His. Jeremiah refers to the Ten Commandments in a different order from diat in the Hebrew Bible. In Exodus 20, die religious commandments come first, and the social commandments come afterwards. Jeremiah, however, starts by presenting the social commandments. Martin Buber explains the significance of this: the sins against religion come at the end (as in v. 6), because the prophet has to proclaim just this, that God seeks something other than religion. Out of a human community He wills to make his king­ dom; communitv there must be in order that 1 lis kingdom shall come; therefore here, where he blames a people for not having become a commu­ nity, mans claim upon man takes precedence of Gods claim. According to Buber, the moral commandments occupy a more impor­ tant position within the prophets value system. I lowever, Bubcrs opinion seems not to fit the Book of Jeremiah, which names idolatry as the main cause of the destruction of the Temple. Thus reads Jer. 9:12-14, for exam­ ple: Who is wise enough to understand this? To whom has the mouth of the LORD spoken, so that they may declare it? Why is the land mined and laid waste like a wilderness, so that no one passes through? And the LORD says: Because they have forsaken My law that I set before them, and have not obeyed My voice, or walked in accordance with it, but have stubbornly followed their own hearts and have gone after the Baals, as their ancestors taught them (see also Jer. 5:10-11, 16, 18). What is special about Jeremiahs words is that he raises the position of social ethics to the level of an additional basic condition for the existence of the nation in its land, in contrast to the viewpoint that sees the Temple sac­ rifices as the essence. Apart from that, the distinction between mans claim and Gods claim is a problem. The Hebrew Bible makes a connec­ tion between sins against man and sins against God. Thou shalt not com­ mit adulter} is not only a sin against man, but also a sin against God. The same is the case with Thou shalt not murder. We see from here that pro­ gression is incorporated within Jeremiahs words. In v. 3-5, we follow Jeremiahs move from the general to the particu­ lar. Now we see the progression from the (relatively) light to the serious. 24 I Sat Alone Jeremiah wishes to tell his audience: Not only have you sinned in a moral context, but you have also dared to commit the greatest sin of all—idolatry. Citations and Refutation Jeremiah quotes his antagonists, the false prophets: The Temple of the LORD, The Temple of the LORD, The Temple of the LORD, (v. 4) and again, we are saved (v. 10). Presendng the false prophets words as mere slogans enables Jeremiahs audience to discern the untruths, as they ask themselves, What is the basis for this persons statements? Moreover, one definition of falsehood is: words spoken with the inten­ tion of creating an erroneous belief or understanding among the audience, by using half-truths and/or delivering partial information. From the words •3*7 pi^Cto vour own harm, v. 6), it can be understood that Jeremiah believes that words are being spoken by the false prophets, who are aware of their being partially or completely incorrect. Although it is quite likely that Jeremiah is referring to beliefs regarding Jerusalems immunity, which developed during Sennacheribs campaign to Judah (2 Kings 18-20 / Isaiah 36-39), Jeremiah only hints at this belief by using 1 Iebrew words with the roots TOU (trust) and (save; rescue). An explicit mention of the story of Jerusalems deliverance is likely to con­ ceal Jeremiahs intenuon of presenting Jerusalem as vulnerable to the en­ emy. The use of first person plural (We are delivered, JPS; We are safe, NRSV) is also deliberate. Jeremiah does not say, God has saved us, but rather, we are delivered. In other words, he disconnects God from the slogans created by his antagonists. The word was apparently a slogan regularly used by the false prophets. Various scholars who have dealt with the subject of falsehood have noted that the aspiration to popularity must be included in the motives for lying. Belief in falsehood stems from the false prophets authority in the eyes of the people, and from the comfort the latter derive from the optimis­ tic message. In chapter 7, Jeremiah speaks out against such beliefs, and in doing so must contend with prophecies that were particularly popular. Such prophe­ cies were given by prophets claiming to be Gods messengers, representing the Zion Tradition. This ideology seeks to highlight Gods unconditional commitment to Jerusalem and to the Temple, thus releasing the people from their commitment to God. According to Jeremiah, there is no guaran- 4 Jeremiahs Temple Sermon 25 tee that the Temple will be saved, as it is not independent of earlier prom­ ises, but rather conditioned on the behavior of the people. Will Jeremiah succeed in achieving the impossible and persuading the people that his cause is just? Jeremiah needs to persuade those gathered at die Temple that it is indeed an important place, and before coming to pray diere, or to offer sacrifices, they must make sure that their hands are clean and must mend their ways. Otherwise, they have no business there, and no sacrifice will serve as insurance against enemies who try to conquer the city. It appears that Jeremiah did not intend to speak against the legitimacy of the Temple as such; rather, his intention was to shock the people and spur them into action. Other prophets worked in a similar way. Neither did they speak out against the Temple or religious rituals as such, but radier against the peoples flouting of the covenant between them and their God. The Rhetorical Questions Jeremiah presents die violation of the Ten Commandments as a rhetorical question: Will you steal, murder, commit adulter}...? (v. 9). This is a con­ firmed rhetorical medium, i.e., the rhetorical question forces an answer on the part of the listener, and in this case, it is negative. Jeremiah uses rhetori­ cal questions to speak out against accepted opinions, or to rephrase the an­ swers to his questions. His rhetorical questions are designed to cause the audience to utter such responses as, What are you talking about? Of course we wont violate all Ten Commandments and then come to the Temple to pray. Jeremiah continues with a more forceful rhetorical question: Has this house, which is called by My name, become a den of robbers? (v. 11 ). This is very strong language, and there is no doubt that it outraged his audi­ ence. Its significance is that the Temple has become a hiding place for criminals, thieves, and murderers, a city of refuge for those who are not entided to flee thereto. Jeremiahs audience would consider such a pro­ nouncement to be a desecration of holiness. Jeremiah is playing on the emotions here, and his words befit the pa­ thos of Aristodes rhetoric. The purpose of playing on the emotions in a speech is to influence the audiences judgment, to cause it to identify with the orators content. 26 I Sat Alone Analogies Like even, successful rhetorician, Jeremiah has to back up his words. It is not enough to reject widespread conceptions. He must prove his arguments with examples from history. Jeremiah needs to suggest opposing precedents to those presented by the false prophets. I Ie therefore notes two such his­ torical precedents. The first example is the destruction of Shiloh (v. 12-14). Before Jeremiah reaches the description of the Jerusalem Temples fate, he uses a series of relative clauses instead of stating directly that the Temple will be destroyed. The Temple, indicating Jerusalem, is placed at the beginning of the sentence, and Shiloh, which constitutes the negative precedent, is placed at the end. Between them are placed the descriptions of the Temple in Jerusalem: therefore I will do to the house that is called by My name, in which you trust, and to the place that I gave to you and to your ancestors, just what I did to Shiloh (v. 14). Jeremiah combines past, present, and future in one sentence, i.e., the Temple belongs to God: He gave it to the people and to their forefathers. The people currently trust in Him. God will do to the Temple what He has already done to another temple, Shiloh. This negative slant contradicts Jeremiahs demands in the first part of the speech, i.e., if you truly act justly ( v. 5 ), yet it is apparent from verses 10 and 13 that the peoples actions arc mainly negative. What is the significance of the analogy to Shiloh? Jeremiah is saying that just as the Ark of the Coyenant was to no avail in the days of Samuel and Eli because the priests had greatly sinned, so the Temple in Jerusalem will be to no avail and will not protect the people, because they have not seen the error of their ways. Linking Shiloh and Jerusalem also appears in Psalm 78, although Jeremiah presents an opposing viewpoint to that of the psalm. Instead of presenting the difference between Jerusalem, which was chosen bv God, and Shiloh, which was rejected by Him, Jeremiah presents a parallel between the two towns: The citizens of both have sinned, and therefore a similar fate will befall them. Jeremiahs words are considered to be innovative compared to those of other prophets. Isaiah, for example, never once mentioned the possibility of the Temples destruction. He spoke about exile, but not about the de­ struction of the Temple. The second precedent, with which Jeremiah ends his speech (v. 15), relates to the destruction of the Northern Kingdom, when the ten tribes were exiled. Why? Because they committed the sins against which the 4 Jeremiahs Temple Sermon 27 prophet warned, and did not pay heed to their contemporary prophets ad­ vice (see 2 Kings 17:13-14). 1hat being the case, the people have no insur­ ance—no Temple, and no Divine promise—that they will dwell in the Land of Israel to eternity. Jeremiah concludes his speech in a severe tone, i.e., threat of the de­ struction of the Temple and exile. Throughout all of Israels history, ex­ ile—the loss of property and independence, and life in a foreign land—was a substantive threat. In the eyes of the people, the destruction of the Temple meant losing their intimate connection with God, and living in an impure land. What Was Not Mentioned in the Speech? A comparison of the speech in Jeremiah 7 with other speeches reveals that the prophet omitted an important element in his speech: the kings of the House of David. While Jeremiah discusses the question of Jerusalems pro­ tection of her citizens, he does not specifically mention the kings of the House of David. This omission is despite the fact that the treatment of the orphaned, the poor, and the widowed is the kings responsibility (see for example Ezek. 22:6-7; cf. 25, 29; Ps. 72:4; Prov. 23:10-11). Two possible reasons can be suggested for why Jeremiah did not men­ tion the kings of the House of David in his prophecy: First, because they are referred to in various prophecies, (particularly in Jer. 21-24). Secondly, specific mention of the kings of the House of David would have been likely to shift the focus from the discussion of the Temple and its functions, to the fate of the promise made to the House of David that it will be an ever­ lasting kingdom. The promise could have been used by the false prophets, claiming that not only is the Temple protected, but so is Jerusalem, not only because of the Divine presence therein, but also because of the promise made to David in 2 Samuel 7. By excluding specific mention of the kings of the House of David, Jeremiah can extend the legal demand for protection of the weak to society as a whole, as is done in the Pentateuch. litis is also the apparent reason for why Jeremiah deviates from the line presented in Psalm 78: Instead of ending with the choice of David for the monarchy, he concludes with threats about the destruction of the Temple and the exile of the people from their land. The prosecution has now finished its argument. The ball is now in the hands of the people and their leaders, who must decide whether to embrace Jeremiah or to throttle him, whether to stone him or to applaud him. It is important to emphasize that in the days of Jeremiah, a means that had ex- 28 I Sat Alone isted in the days of the prophets who preceded him no longer existed, i.e., performing miracles in order to prove ones message. This is how it had been in the days of Elijah on Mount Carmel when he brought down fire from the skies (1 Kings 18). In contrast, the only power that could be used in Jeremiahs days was the power of speech. What was the peoples reaction to Jeremiahs harsh words? The answer is presented in chapter 26 of Jeremiah, the focus of the next chapter. 1. My thinking about this Module Quiz was shaped by our reading of William Blake and in particular his poem The Marriage of Heaven and Hell in which he imagined himself having dinner with Isaiah and Ezekiel. I want you to show me what you learned about the prophets we covered in this module by engaging in a similar imaginative exercise.  I want you to imagine yourself having two separate meals with two separate prophets (one for this essay question and the other for the next). -each essay must be at least 200 words --not unlike Blake, ask questions (and imagine how the prophet responds) that address major themes or issues we addressed when covering that prophet --its good to cite verses from the book attributed to that prophet but no additional research is necessary --dont choose the prophet who was the subject of your paper 2 (Elijah) --the prophets we covered in Module 3 you can choose:  Amos, Elijah, Elisha, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel , Nahum, Habakkuk, and Jonah --have fun with it 2. See question above, this will be the second prophet you pick 3. Please list five things you found interesting in Module 3 that you enjoyed learning about (4 points each).  Please number them.  Each item should be one detailed sentence.  The items listed here should not overlap with your answers elsewhere in the quiz.  It will make sense to know what prophets you write on elsewhere BEFORE you answer this question. 4. Based on our class in Module 3 that covered female prophets, in at least 150 words write what you enjoyed learning about specific female prophets in the Hebrew Bible.  Also reflect on why it is important to acknowledge that some prophets in the Bible are women and how that changes or improves your understanding of prophecy in ancient Israel.  Be sure also  to address how the assigned secondary reading for this topic contributed to your understanding of the issue of female prophets in the Hebrew Bible.