THE CALL OF JEREMIAH by DAVID TUDOR ... - David T Williams

17
the events or had first hand knowledge of them?
Any apparent incompatibility with the latter portion is surely explicable
on the ground of differing circumstance, and in any case indicates by
its very diversity that redactive action which would tend to uniformity is
minimal. The latter portion (Jr 37:11-43:7) Wanke assesses as a
conscious literary work, originating at Mizpah, although the evidence is
based on the details of Gedaliah's administration and can only be
circumstantial. More importantly:
The cycle has one overriding purpose: to highlight the
reality of what it is for Jeremiah to be a prophet... the
details are told with an astonishing sobriety, and there is
no attempt to claim a black-white dichotomy between
Jeremiah's opponents and the prophet himself
(Holladay 1975:398).
If this is true it heightens the value of B for this investigation.
It is source C which has usually been questioned, regarded as a later
Deuteronomic composition. Mowinckel himself latterly did not treat it
as a "source", but as a circle of tradition in the Deuteronomic style
(Bright 1951:398n). So although many may believe that C material is a
record of the words of Jeremiah, but probably written down after a
period of oral transmission (as Bright 1965:lxii), but essentially with the
intention of recalling the original words, Nicholson (1970) sees the C