Abstract
A unique feature of the book of Jeremiah is God’s thrice repeated ban on intercession. In 7.16, 11.14 and 14.11, God forbids Jeremiah to pray on behalf of the people. In this article I explore how the ban on intercession connects with the Jeremian themes of falsehood and shalom. I argue that Jeremiah is not allowed to pray for the people because he must identify with God’s point of view. Intercession only becomes meaningful in Jeremiah as a means for the exiled people to learn that God is the source of their shalom.
A unique feature of the book of Jeremiah is God’s thrice repeated ban on intercession. In 7.16, 11.14 and 14.11, God forbids Jeremiah to pray on behalf of the people. In this article I explore how the ban on intercession connects with the Jeremian themes of falsehood and shalom. In the first section of the article I look at the passages in which God commands Jeremiah not to pray. In the second section I investigate why intercession is problematic in the book of Jeremiah by considering verses 4.7 and 29.7–12.
1. ‘As for you, do not pray on behalf of this people …’
Jeremiah 7
God first forbids Jeremiah to pray for the people in verse 7.16: ‘As for you, do not pray on behalf of this people, do not lift up a shout or prayer on their behalf; do not intercede with me, for I will not listen to you.’ Listening is a key theme in Jeremiah 7 and the verb šmՙ (to hear, listen, obey) occurs eight times: 7.2: 7.13: I spoke to you, day after day, but you did not 7.16: … for I will not 7.23: 7.24. But they did not 7.26: But they did not 7.27: They will not 7.28: This is a nation that does not
These verses build pathos by alternating between God’s call to the people to listen and their failure to do so. The first two occurrences of šmՙ form a pair, which bookend Jeremiah’s famous temple sermon, ‘Listen’ … ‘but you did not listen’. The sermon begins by calling the people to repent and ends by observing that the people have not done so and will face God’s punishment. This quick move from call for repentance to punishment may seem unfair. Jeremiah’s sermon, however, is not simply a call to repentance, but a condensation of Israelite history. The point of this history lesson is that God has offered the people opportunity upon opportunity to respond to God’s call; God has sent all the prophets, day after day (7.25). The move from ‘listen’ to ‘but you did not listen’ in the space of a sermon does not indicate divine impatience, but the long-delayed exhaustion of God’s effort to catch the people’s attention.
God’s refusal to listen is a grave decision, with disastrous consequences. To avoid the charge that God is unjust, Jeremiah 7 provides three lists of sins (7.6–7; 7.9–10; 7.17–18). The sins include oppression, violence and idolatry, behaviours that are incompatible with God’s presence. The people do not understand this. They have come to view the temple as an automatic insurance against harm, but the temple will save no one if God refuses to dwell there: ‘Do not trust in false words, saying “the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord”’ (7.4). Failure to listen manifests itself in the false belief that God’s presence in the temple is disconnected from the people’s behaviour in the land. This belief is not simple an error in information, but an erroneous way of living. The necessary consequence is exile, a fate Jeremiah must accept by ceasing to pray for the people.
Jeremiah 11.1–14
God forbids Jeremiah to intercede on behalf of the people a second time in chapter 11: ‘As for you, do not pray on behalf of this people, do not lift up a shout or a prayer on their behalf, for I will not listen in the time when they call to me about their trouble’ (11.14). Listening again dominates the context, but the emphasis now falls on the relationship between listening and covenant: 11.1: 11.3: … Cursed is anyone who does not 11.4: 11.6: … 11.7: For I have warned your fathers … 11.8: But they did not 11.10: … they refuse to 11.11: … they will cry to me, but I will not 11.14: … I will not
Chapter 11 covers similar ground to chapter 7, so I will focus on two areas unique to chapter 11. First, the passage focuses on covenant. According to Jeremiah 11, covenant observance equals listening to God and acting in accordance with God’s words. The people’s refusal to listen is a rejection of the covenant; Jeremiah 11 assumes that deafness to God and idolatry are more or less the same thing (see 11.10, 13). God even places a curse on anyone who does not listen to the covenant: ‘You will say to them: Thus says the Lord the God of Israel: Cursed be anyone who does not listen …’ (11.3).
Second, the prophet consents to God’s curse on the people. God utters the curse in 11.4–5, and Jeremiah responds: ‘Let it be, O Lord’. Jeremiah never agrees to stop praying for the people, but his acquiescence to God’s curse comes close. The curse requires exile, the opposite of shalom: ‘I will bring evil on them, from which they will not be able to escape’ (11.11, see also 11.8).
Jeremiah 14
In chapters 7 and 11, the verb šmՙ is repeated ad nauseam. In chapter 14, the verb šmՙ occurs only once: Do not pray on behalf of this people for [their] good. For though they fast, I will not
Sandwiched between the two prayers of the people is a section held together by multiple references to sword and famine. God first mentions these when forbidding Jeremiah to pray, to which Jeremiah responds: ‘Ah, my Lord God! See, the prophets say to them: “You will not see the sword, nor will you have famine. For I will give you true shalom in this place”’ (14.13). Jeremiah raises the possibility that the people have been tricked and are thus not responsible for their inability to correctly interpret the drought and the other events related to the siege of Jerusalem. Their own prophets, after all, tell them not to be afraid.
God’s response rejects this possibility. God first addresses the prophets: ‘The false prophets, who prophesy in my name … who say “there will not be sword and famine in this land,” those prophets will be cut off by the sword and famine’ (14.14, 15). Second, God addresses the people: ‘And the people to whom they prophesied will be thrown into the streets of Jerusalem, before the sword and famine, and there will be no one to bury them’ (14.16). Though these verses do not establish the guilt of the people, the fact that their punishment parallels the punishment of the false prophets suggests a parallel sin.
How is the sin of the people connected to the sin of the prophets? The lament of 14.17–18 supplies a clue: ‘Both prophet and priest pursue trade (sḥr) in the land without knowledge’ (14.18). The
2. ‘Seek the welfare of the city … pray on its behalf’
Jeremiah 7, 11 and 14 explain why Jeremiah may not pray for the people: the people do not listen to God, they walk after other gods, they oppress each other, they seek false security in the Jerusalem temple. But what is at stake here? Why is it so important that Jeremiah cease praying for the people? The rest of this article will address this question.
The last time God forbids Jeremiah to intercede for the people, Jeremiah responds with bitter complaint: ‘You are to me like a disappointing stream, like waters that cannot be trusted’ (15.18). 4 In other words, Jeremiah is not convinced. Jeremiah, like the people, seems to attribute a certain amount of blame to God. To explore how this relates to intercession, and what is at stake both for Jeremiah and the people, I will look at 4.10 and 29.7–12.
Jeremiah 4.10
In 4.10, Jeremiah says: ‘Ah, my Lord God, how utterly you have deceived this people and Jerusalem, saying “you will have shalom”, but the sword touches their throat!’ While Jeremiah’s favourite word for falsehood and deceit is the noun šqr; here we have the verb nś ՙ. It also occurs in 29.8, 37.9 and 49.16. In every case but this one, the verb refers to the people’s self-deception. In this instance, however, Jeremiah uses the verb to accuse God. God, like the prophets and the priests, has said to the people ‘“peace, peace” and there is no peace (šalôm)’ (6.14; 8.11).
This accusation is potentially disastrous. The book of Jeremiah mentions falsehood (šqr) and welfare (šalôm) again and again (37 and 28 times respectively). One of the major issues is that the people understand neither the source of their welfare nor how to discern the difference between peace and war. When Jeremiah accuses God of having deceived the people, Jeremiah risks deceiving himself much like the people have. Though Jeremiah can see clearly what the people cannot, that the sword is at their throat, Jeremiah does not here see what God will explain in chapters 7, 11 and 14. In the Babylonian siege of Jerusalem, God does not go back on the promises of the covenant, nor has God deceived the people by offering assurance where there is none. Instead, the present wrath flows directly from the covenant, not from its blessings, but from its curses. As God declares to the people in Deuteronomy 30.19, ‘Today I call to witness against you the heavens and the earth, that I set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Choose life, that you and your offspring might live.’ Though the book of Jeremiah does not use the language of choice, the implication throughout the book is that the people have chosen the way of death. Instead of trusting God, they have trusted lies (see 7.8; 13.25; 17.5; 28.15; 29.31). Unless Jeremiah can distinguish between God deceiving the people and the people deceiving themselves, Jeremiah cannot speak accurately for God. He cannot call the people to repentance.
This point illuminates God’s response to Jeremiah’s complaint in chapter 15: ‘If you turn to me, I will turn to you; you will stand before me. If you bring out what is precious, not what is worthless, you will be my mouth. They will turn to you; you will not turn to them’ (15.19). Though Jeremiah clearly empathizes with the suffering of the people, he cannot empathize too closely with their understanding of why they suffer. The people must come around to Jeremiah’s point of view, not the other way around, just like Jeremiah must come around to God’s point of view. What is at stake is Jeremiah’s role as God’s mouth. To pray for the welfare of the people is problematic, because it clings to the notion that perhaps the destruction of Jerusalem can be skipped. Perhaps God will relent. But such relenting means nothing if the people have not learnt the source of their welfare, if they continue to bake cakes to the Queen of Heaven and oppress each other. To ask for their welfare before they themselves can recognize from whom such welfare comes is to do them no good, but instead to ask that they continue on the path of death.
Jeremiah 29.7–12
When God finally commands intercession, the command is directed at the people, not Jeremiah: Seek the welfare (šalôm) of the city to which I have exiled you, pray on its behalf to the Lord. For in its welfare (šalôm) will be your welfare (šalôm). For thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel: Do not let your prophets in your midst deceive you, or your diviners, and do not listen to your dreams that you dream … Only at the completion of Babylon’s seventy years will I visit you … For I know the plans I have planned for you, says the Lord, plans for welfare (šalôm) and not for evil, to give to you a future and hope. You will call to me and come and pray to me, and I will listen to you. (29.7–12)
Conclusion
God’s ban on intercession, however harsh, forms a necessary part of Jeremiah’s prophetic office. As God’s mouth, Jeremiah must understand God’s point of view, must commit to God’s interpretation of events over against that of the people. Because Jeremiah speaks for God in a situation of intense conflict between God and the people, he cannot simultaneously speak for the people. Their view of their suffering simply cannot be reconciled with God’s view.
Though this explanation can satisfy cool logic, it leaves something to be desired. Intercession may be deeply problematic, but how else is Jeremiah to respond to the suffering of the people? Any other response seems heartless and unmerciful, cruelly detached. I recently participated in a discussion about preaching hope using the book of Jeremiah, and one of the participants, Justin Hughes, remarked: ‘It seems to me that any preaching of hope must contain an element of self-condemnation. But if America were to finally get its comeuppance, that would be terrible.’ 5 To hail the recompense for our sins without protest or complaint seems masochistic, not godly. Such acquiescence would make us, in the words of Annie Dillard, ‘monsters of perfection’. 6 When it comes down to it, we do not want our prophets to face our punishments without tears, without prayers on our behalf.
In this regard, it is important to note that my reading of Jeremiah is incomplete. I do not address the abundance of lament in the book of Jeremiah, nor Jeremiah’s continued insistence on praying for the people (see 18.20; 42:4). More importantly, the book of Jeremiah does not stand alone in the canon; Jeremiah does not finally ‘sit alone’ (5.17). God’s ban on intercession is specific to Jeremiah’s office as a prophet. Jeremiah must preach repentance, must describe the horrors that afflict the people as the acts of God. As readers, we recoil to think that God can do such terrible things, and there is no reason to think that Jeremiah would not also recoil. Being charged with a difficult message, one that can hardly be comprehended, Jeremiah must stick closely to God’s point of view. He cannot give himself over to seeing Jerusalem’s fall through the eyes of the people. Yet the canon as a whole gives the people voice. The books of Lamentation, Job and Psalms all express, in different ways, the despair of the people. Though God insists that God will not listen to the cries of the people, the room afforded these cries in the canon suggests otherwise. The lament psalms and the psalms of imprecation, Job’s desperate dialogue with his friends and the wailing of Lamentation give voice and room to the human cry of incomprehension and pain. God will not avert the exile, nor permit the people to continue in their self-deception, yet God writhes in pain over people’s suffering, God cannot finally ignore their despair: ‘my belly, my belly, I writhe; the walls of my heart roar within me, I cannot be silent’ (4.19). Just as Jeremiah struggles to restrain his prayers on behalf of the people, so God struggles to see their pain. My reading of intercession in Jeremiah suggests two clear camps, God and Jeremiah arrayed against the people. But as any reading of the whole of Jeremiah will show, God and Jeremiah weep for the people, lamenting their destruction, calling them ‘beloved’ and ‘daughter’. What finally distinguishes God’s point of view from that of the people is that God can see clearly how to bring about shalom for the people; God’s last word is not to pull up, but to plant.