"Thus says YAHWEH of hosts, the God of Israel: "Add your burnt offerings to your sacrifices, and eat the flesh yourselves. For in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, I did not speak to your ancestors or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices ... How can you say, ?we are wise, for we have the law of Yahweh, when, actually, the lying pen of the scribes has worked falsely?" (Jeremiah 7:21, 8:8)
Did Jeremiah deny the Torah as inspired?
by peacefulpete 5 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Euphemism
Very interesting, PeacefulPete!
As regards the first part, I do believe it needs to be viewed in context.
Jer 7:21-23
Thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, "Add your burnt offerings to your sacrifices and eat flesh. For I did not speak to your fathers, or command them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices. But this is what I commanded them, saying, 'Obey My voice, and I will be your God, and you will be My people; and you will walk in all the way which I command you, that it may be well with you.' "So I don't think he's denying the historicity of the sacrificial requirements. I think he's pointing out that they weren't the prime command, the one that was first given when Israel was freed. The prime command was the covenant of unconditional obedience to YHWH.
As to the second point, the lying pens of false scribes, I'm not really sure what that meant. It would be very interesting to find out!
-
Leolaia
Jeremiah 7:21: This is a very interesting statement, that God gave no orders or commands mandating sacrifice. But I don't think this means a rejection of the Torah. For instance, Jeremiah 34:13-14 says: "Yahweh, the God of Israel, says this: I made a covenant with your ancestors when I brought them out of Egypt, out of the house of slavery; it said: At the end of seven years each one of you is to free his brother Hebrew who has sold himself to you; he may be your slave for six years, then you must send him away free. But your ancestors did not listen to me and would not pay attention." This is, of course, a reference to the law in Exodus 21:2-4. So clearly Jeremiah did not reject the Torah as such.
Considering Jeremiah's wholesale rejection of sacrifices as part of pagan worship (cf. 6:20; 7:18), it is noteworthy that Leviticus 1-3 allows for sacrifice and holocausts but doesn't mandate them -- it just explains how to sacrifice correctly. It doesn't say when sacrifices are required or why one should prepare a sacrifice. It also limits sacrifices to the tabernacle or temple only. There are many texts in the OT that state that God does not want sacrifices or request them....what matters more is keeping his covenant: "You wanted no sacrifice or oblation, you asked no holocaust or sacrifice for sin" (Psalm 40:6), "I am not finding fault with your sacrifices, those holocausts constantly put before me; I do not claim one extra bull from your homes, nor one extra goat from your pens....Do I eat the flesh of bulls or drink goats' blood? No, let thanksgiving be your sacrifice to God, fulfill the vows you make to the Most High" (Psalm 50:8-14), "Sacrifice gives you no pleasure, were I to offer holocaust, you would not have it" (Psalm 51:16), "I will extol him with my thanksgiving, more pleasing to Yahweh than any ox or bull" (Psalm 69:30-31), "I am sick of holocausts of rams and the fat of calves. The blood of bulls and of goats revolts me" (Isaiah 1:11), "When you offer me holocausts, I reject your oblations, and refuse to look at your sacrifices of fattened cattle" (Amos 5:22). Jeremiah's point is that nowhere in the Law are holocausts "commanded" or "ordered".
Jeremiah 8:8: Jeremiah here says: "How dare you say: We are wise, and we possess the Law of Yahweh? But look how it has been falsified by the lying pen of the scribes." This is a criticism hurled against the priests who supposedly guarantee the tradition of the Law. It follows references in ch. 7 of people as making up "delusive words" (7:3) and "trusting in delusive words" (7:8), as they give lip-service to the Law, making the requisite sacrifices and then "going on committing all these abominations" (v. 10). It would seem from this context that the priests have "falsified" the Law by legalizing a rather lax penitence system that tolerated widespread idolatry, adultery, theft, etc. (v. 9) -- a system rather reminiscent of the "ingulgence" system that Martin Luther objected to. Jeremiah 2:8 has a similar statement: "The priests have never asked, 'Where is Yahweh?' Those who administer the Law have no knowledge of me. The shepherds have rebelled against me; the prophets have prophesied in the name of Baal, following things with no power in them." Jeremiah is thus complaining about how the Law has been perverted, not saying that the Law was false to begin with.
Leolaia
-
Narkissos
Just a remark: Jeremiah 7 (and 34:8-22) are evidently among the latest (post-deuteronomist) additions to the book, so they are hardly an evidence to the Exodus tradition in the time of the prophet Jeremiah. That being said, it is all the more noteworthy that the special prophetic emphasis (morals over ritual) is maintained against the mainstream priestly tradition.
-
peacefulpete
I wonder if the Persian styled reforms by Ezra and Nehemiah dovetail with Jeremiah's call for a NEW covenant. Perhaps the Chapter 7 piece is a later interpretation (2-3rd cent BC) of this New covenant idea in the light of an apostate priesthood. Anyone offer help?
-
Narkissos
I have no documentation at hand so I won't be of much help. However, chapters 30--31 (including the New covenant) are usually referred to the time of the Exile because of parallels with 2nd Isaiah (40--55). Of course the same kind of "restoration prophecies" also occur much later (Zechariah 10 is a good example).
About the prophetic pattern "morals vs. ritual", it runs from Amos or Hoshea's time down to the synoptic Jesus, so it is very difficult to date such a text as Jr 7 on internal grounds. A postexilic (i.e. Persian) context is very likely though. The 3rd century seems rather low, but not impossible. I'll check that someday if I can.