JEREMIAH's BOOK of CONSOLATION I. Introduction

CHAPTER TWO

JEREMIAH’S BOOK OF CONSOLATION

I. Introduction

The poetic cycle of Jer 30–31 is commonly called the Book of Consola- tion for its vigorous promises of restoration.1 These promises are ren- dered all the more compelling by being juxtaposed against persistent warnings of imminent destruction and the inevitability of exile. The language used to describe exile is vivid and varied; exile and destruction are described through a variety of literary means, including the terrifying rhetoric of judgment, the metaphor of a spurned lover, and allusions to the bereavement of Rachel and Israel’s wilderness experience. Through these images, exile is depicted as an experience that includes, but is not limited to, geographic, political, scriptural, and emotional dimensions. Like much of the book of Jeremiah, the Book of Consolation has provided fertile ground for scholars interested in the development and redaction of biblical literature. Within the chronology of the canonical book of Jeremiah, the Book of Consolation proclaims, on the very eve of the razing of Jerusalem, Yhwh’s promise to restore Israel. While the canonical framework of the Book of Consolation thus establishes a preexilic time frame and audience for the cycle, its text reflects several layers of redaction that may predate or postdate the destruction of

1 The Book of Consolation ( Jer 30–33), also referred to as the “Book of Comfort,” “Book of Restoration,” or Trostbüchlein (Little Book of Consolation), is composed of a poetic cycle (chs. 30–31), which developed first, and a series of later prose additions (chs. 32–33). All four chapters have in common the hope for the future restoration of Israel. This chapter focuses on the poetic cycle in Jer 30–31. For recent scholar- ship on these chapters, see Bob Becking, Between Fear and Freedom: Essays on the Interpretation of Jeremiah 30–31 (OtSt 51; Leiden: Brill, 2004); Jack R. Lundbom, Jer- emiah 21–36 (AB 21b; New York: Doubleday, 2004), 368–495; William McKane, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Jeremiah (2 vols.; ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1986–1996), 2:749–835; Barbara A. Bozak, Life ‘Anew’: A Literary-Theological Study of Jer. 30–31 (AnBib 122; Rome: Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 1991); William L. Holladay, Jeremiah: A Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Jeremiah (2 vols.; Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986–1989), esp. 2:148–201; and Robert P. Carroll, Jeremiah: A Commentary (OTL; London: SCM Press, 1986), 568–618. 44 chapter two

Jerusalem. This stratification, combined with the notable shift in tone from the preceding chapters, has led some scholars to treat Jer 30–31 in its entirety as a set of postexilic expansions not attributable to the historical Jeremiah.2 Other scholars, adopting a biographical solution to the literary problem, argue that portions of those chapters come from an early phase in the prophet’s life and were later supplemented and reedited for a different audience by Jeremiah himself.3 Because it is a composite work that includes earlier and later layers of redaction, Jer 30–31 provides a window on the depiction of exile over time. Its contents postdate and may even predate the career of the historical Jeremiah. Early material in the Book of Consolation—which includes Jer 30:5–7, 12–15; 31:2–6; and 31:15–20—may have arisen before the events that led to the Babylonian exile; indeed, the early material may not have been related to exile at all. The Book also con- tains postexilic strands from the late sixth century b.c.e., substantially later than the date asserted by the canonical book of Jeremiah. These additions revalorize older oracles and frame them as predictions of exile in order to present a new interpretation of exile and restoration to the Judeans. Thus the variety of images used to depict exile reflects, in part, the Book of Consolation’s long compositional history, during which older strands of the tradition were reactualized for new audiences. The Book’s complex growth reveals the changing modes of depicting exile. As a whole, the composition reflects a complex understanding of exile that both engages earlier attempts to grasp its meaning and formulates new understandings of the concept. The redeployment of older strands of tradition and the composite rendering of exile that results provide the roots for an extension of the meaning of exile beyond the mun- dane particulars of physical dislocation.

2 See, for example, ibid., 568–70. 3 See Paul Volz, Der Prophet Jeremia (2d ed.; Leipzig: Deichertsche Verlagsbuch- handlung Scholl, 1928), 277–302; Wilhelm Rudolph, Jeremia (3d ed.; Tübingen: Mohr [Siebeck], 1968), 172–88; John Bright, Jeremiah (AB 21; Garden City, N.Y.: Double- day, 1965), 269–87; Norbert Lohfink, “Der junge Jeremia als Propagandist und Poet: Zum Grundstock von Jer 30–31,” in Le Livre de Jérémie: Le prophète et son milieu, les oracles et leur transmission (ed. P.-M. Bogaert; Leuven: Peeters, 1981), 351–68; idem, “Die Gotteswortverschachtelung in Jer. 30–31,” in Künder des Wortes: Beiträge zur Theologie der Propheten (ed. L. Ruppert et al.; Würzburg: Echter, 1982), 105–19; and Holladay, Jeremiah, 1:1–10, 2:148–201.