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

27
extent, as poetic form requires reworking, unless, as is possible,
Jeremiah was a natural poet. (Such reworking may well be seen, for
example, in the similarity of Jr 11:20 to 20:12.) It is hard to conceive
that dialogue, in particular, was originally in poetry. (The only trace of
dialogue in prose is Jr 11:5.) Of course the nature of the confessions,
whether dialogue or lament, was private, so that the only reason that
we have them is Jeremiah's choice, and he chose to release them,
because of their value to him, probably as concerning his authenticity
as a prophet, in poetic form (cf Hempel 1935:6). Such reworking does
not necessarily mean a loss of meaning, but does have obvious
implication for the freedom in exact wording, both of Jeremiah and
later arrangers or editors (cf also sections 5.4.4 and 6.4).
1.5.6.3 Jeremiah and false prophets. Brief comments on this matter
are made in a poetic oracle (Jr 5:12-14, 30-31), where although
authenticity is not questioned, their true belonging in this location has
been (Thompson 1980:243). Comments are also made in the course
of other oracles (eg Jr 2:8, 4:9 etc). Major discussion occurs in
Jeremiah 23 and 27-8 with some comments in the letters of Jeremiah
29.
Jeremiah 23 consists of five units brought together due to similar
subject matter (Thompson 1980:493). Again there has been no
question concerning the authenticity of the poetic parts, but RSV prints
some parts in prose. Thompson (1980) believes the entire section is