Jeremiah, Josiah, Barker, and Me (1-2)

Margaret Barker discusses whether Jeremiah supported or opposed Josiah’s reforms in her new book (Mother of the Lord, (2012), 54-75).  I’ve read through her analysis, and I remain unconvinced.  In this thread I’ll present some of my reasons why.

1. The Problem of the Received Text

Barker begins her analysis of Jeremiah and Josiah’s reforms with a discussion of the question of the state of the text.  She rightly notes that Jeremiah 29:16:20, 33:14-26, 39:4-13, 52:28-30 are not found in Greek Septuagint version (54 n. 184).  But these passages have little significance for the question of Jeremiah’s view of Josiah–all passages relevant to this question are found in both the Masoretic and Septuagint version.

Barker also notes that there are textual and redactional questions related to the text of Jeremiah  (54-55)–as there are in all biblical texts.  She claims that Deuteronomist editors later changed the text of Jeremiah–“attributing their own words to Jeremiah” (55)–to bring his prophecies in line with their ideology.  While this is, of course, possible, it is equally possible that many of Jeremiah’s “characteristic words and phrases” (55) sounds Deuteronomistic precisely because he was originally pro-Josiah and pro-reform.  The main reason to think he wasn’t is that a pro-Reform Jeremiah doesn’t fit Barker’s theory.  The text of Jeremiah makes perfect sense if he was indeed in favor of Josiah’s reforms.  This fact forces Barker to assume that there must have been a pro-Deuteronomistic redaction of an originally anti-Deuteronomistic Jeremiah.  In other words, she is required to assume the text of Jeremiah was changed to make it fit her theory.  This is not a propitious start for her argument.

2. Overt Evidence that Jeremiah supported Josiah’s Reforms

There is a good deal of evidence for Jeremiah’s support for Josiah and his reforms.

1- Jeremiah composed a lament at the death of Josiah (2 Chronicles 35:25).

2- Jeremiah was a priest whose father was named Hilkiah (Jeremiah 1:1).  Hilkiah is the name of the High Priest in the time of Josiah, who was a major supporter of the reforms (2 Kings 22-23).  It is not certain that Jeremiah’s father was Hilkiah the High Priest, but if he was it would indicate a close tie to Josiah’s reforms.

3- Jeremiah’s life was saved at his trial by Ahikam ben Shaphan (Jeremiah 26:24; 2 Kings 22:8-10, 12-14).  Shaphan had been the chief scribe of Josiah, and a major supporter of his reforms (2 Kings 22).  If Jeremiah had been an antagonist of Josiah, why would Ahikam have supported him and saved his life?

4- Reinforcing this connection, another son of Shaphan, Gemariah, allowed Jeremiah’s prophecies to be read in in the temple courtyard (Jeremiah 36:9-18).  This is again a pro-reform family supporting Jeremiah.

5- Jeremiah repeatedly condemns Judah for failure to keep the Torah/Law, the standard self-reference for the book of Deuteronomy (4:44, 17:18, 28:58, 61, 29:21, 30:10, 31:26).  (Note “Deuteronomy” is the modern name for the book, deriving from a Greek title meaning “second law.”  In the Bible it’s standard name is the Book of the Law, or just the Law.)

• “as for my Torah, they have rejected it” (6:19)

• “they have forsaken my Torah that I set before them” (9:13)

• they “have forsaken me and have not kept my Torah” (16:11)

• Israel must “listen to me, to walk in my Torah that I have set before you” (26:4)

• “I will put my Torah within them, and I will write it on their hearts” (31:33)

• “they did not obey your voice or walk in your Torah” (32:33)

• “they did not obey the voice of YHWH or walk in his Torah” (44:23)

If Jeremiah was opposed to the reforms outlined in the Torah/Deuteronomy, why consistently condemn Judah for not following the Torah?

Notice that these are all incidental details in the text.  They are not the type of thing an alleged Deuteronomist redactor would manipulate.