The Theology of the Book of Jeremiah

Biblical Theology Bulletin, Winter, 2008 by Amy Gohdes-Luhman

The Theology of the Book of Jeremiah. By Walter Brueggemann. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2006. Pp. xviii 213. Paper, $18.00.

The Cambridge University Press series on Old Testament Theology seeks to "bridge the gap between the too-slim theological precis and the too-full commentary where theological concerns are lost" (xii). As part of that series, Walter Brueggemann's work on the prophetic imagination of the book of Jeremiah is surely a main truss in that bridge. Brueggemann's accessible writing style makes it possible for pastors, graduate students, and upper level college students as well as scholars to benefit from this theological conversation.

Brueggemann passionately argues that God as presented in the book of Jeremiah both destroys and rebuilds (Jer 1:10). According to Brueggemann "what distinguishes this prophetic tradition ... is its rhetorical capacity ... to ponder the radical devastation of that in which Israel long trusted" (185), while at the same time presenting God as the one who makes all things new.

Brueggemann opens with a chapter exploring the "sources" and context out of which the Book of Jeremiah was formed. He deftly collapses the three source theory of Mowinckel and Duhm, arguing that the poetic words of Jeremiah, the prose passages of Baruch the scribe, and the "speeches" of the Deuteronomist "nicely converge" in a "theologically rooted political opposition to dynasty and temple" (39).

Chapter two addresses the theology of the book of Jeremiah by moving from larger issues of prophetic rhetoric and the understanding of God to the specific rhetorical images that are found in the book. Brueggemann rightly argues that the prophetic task was to explain lived reality in theological terms (77). In the context of Jerusalem in the seventh century BCE, the political reality was the Babylonian invasion and the destruction of temple and state. Through what Brueggemann terms "an immense act of rhetoric" or "prophetic imagination," the tradition of Jeremiah argues that God's sovereignty is identifiable in the very act of destruction. An even greater rhetorical act is demonstrated in the tradition's ability to paint a picture of restoration, not after repentance, but after punishment.

Before turning to individual examples of Jeremian imagery that illustrate YHWH'S sovereignty in judgment and in promise (YHWH as scorned spouse, provoked and punishing sovereign, powerful healer, creator of order, God of life and God of death, angry and unrestrained), Brueggemann makes an arguable methodological claim. He argues that because the connection between political reality and theological claim is made through

   vigorous and daring rhetorical ventures
   ... primary attention in the study of prophets
   need not focus on historical context
   but rather on the rhetorical inventiveness
   that makes these connections [77].

Brueggemann has effectively drawn historical context and rhetorical inventiveness as two separate entities. But can rhetorical inventiveness be understood outside of historical context? Doubling back, Brueggemann parenthetically states that while historical context is important, it can be "seen quickly in broad strokes" (77). This may be true, but in this case it has led to the omission of something important: i. e., attention to audience.

While I think Brueggemann ably puts the person of Jeremiah and the scribal and deuteronomic traditions in historic context, he does not aptly take into account the notion of audience--specifically the character of the opposing voice, variously called the "Jerusalem ideology" (56), the "royal temple ideology" (32, 68), and the "Jerusalem establishment" (34, 60, 69). Brueggemann does characterize the ideology at various points in his book as being alienated from older covenants and "practicing policies of death and destruction" (32). Elsewhere the Jerusalem ideology imagines an accommodating God who has affirmed king, city and people as chosen (56, 67, 69). But there is no sustained characterization of this opposing voice. Even less is said about the general audience to whom Jeremiah and the tradition speak. We know from the biblical text that some found Jeremiah's rhetoric unconvincing (Jer 44). Bruggemann's painting of the historical context may be a bit too broad and his understanding of rhetoric a bit narrow. An additional chapter or subsection on the ancient audience (both opposing and affirming voices) would have aided his argument.

Chapter three places the book of Jeremiah in the context of the Pentateuch, the Prophets, and the Writings. Brueggemann argues well the book's connection with the Deuteronomistic History, and the books of Hosea and Amos, and he enlightens connections with Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah. In my estimation, however, Brueggemann's account of the book of Jeremiah's connection with Job, Proverbs and the book of Jonah is a bridge too far.

The last ten pages bring the book of Jeremiah through the New Testament to the contemporary context of shoah and 9/11. Here Brueggemann is cautious and brief; he has already given his reader much to consider.