{"id":4512,"date":"2017-11-09T12:33:19","date_gmt":"2017-11-09T09:33:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.ellopos.com\/blog\/?p=4512"},"modified":"2017-11-09T12:33:19","modified_gmt":"2017-11-09T09:33:19","slug":"texts-witnessed-only-in-the-septuagint-sirach-wisdom-letter-of-jeremiah","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.ellopos.com\/blog\/4512\/texts-witnessed-only-in-the-septuagint-sirach-wisdom-letter-of-jeremiah\/","title":{"rendered":"Texts witnessed only in the Septuagint: Sirach, Wisdom, Letter of Jeremiah"},"content":{"rendered":"

Texts witnessed only in the Septuagint: Table of Contents<\/a><\/p>\n

[Edited by Ellopos<\/a> from Wikipedia articles.]<\/em><\/p>\n

Sirach<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

The Book of the All-Virtuous Wisdom of Joshua ben Sira, commonly called the Wisdom of Sirach or simply Sirach, and also known as the Book of Ecclesiasticus (abbreviated Ecclus.) or Ben Sira, is a work of ethical teachings, from approximately 200 to 175 BCE, written by the Jewish scribe Ben Sira of Jerusalem, on the inspiration of his father Joshua son of Sirach, sometimes called Jesus son of Sirach or Yeshua ben Eliezer ben Sira.<\/p>\n

In Egypt, it was translated into Greek by the author’s (unnamed) grandson, who added a prologue. This prologue is generally considered the earliest witness to a canon of the books of the prophets, and thus the date of the text as we have it is the subject of intense scrutiny. The book itself is the largest wisdom book from antiquity to have survived.<\/p>\n

Sirach is accepted as part of the Christian biblical canons by Catholics, Orthodox, and most Oriental Orthodox. The Anglican Church does not accept Sirach as protocanonical, and say it should be read only “for example of life and instruction of manners; but yet doth not apply them to establish any doctrine.” Similarly, the Lutheran Churches include it in their lectionaries, and as a book proper for reading, devotion, and prayer. It was cited in some writings in early Christianity.<\/p>\n

There are claims that it is cited in the Epistle of James, and also the non-canonical Didache (iv. 5) and Epistle of Barnabas (xix. 9). Clement of Alexandria and Origen quote from it repeatedly, as from a \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03ae, or holy book. The Catalogue of Cheltenham, Pope Damasus I, the Councils of Hippo (393) and Council of Carthage (397), Pope Innocent I, the second Council of Carthage (419), and Augustine all regarded it as canonical, although the Council of Laodicea, of Jerome, and of Rufinus of Aquileia, ranked it instead as an ecclesiastical book. The Apostolic Canons (not recognized by the Catholic Church) stated as venerable and sacred the Wisdom of Sirach. The Roman Catholic Church declared it to be canonical in 1546 during the fourth session of the Council of Trent.<\/p>\n

Sirach is not part of the Jewish canon, once thought to have been established at the hypothetical Council of Jamnia, perhaps due to its late authorship, although it is not clear that the canon was completely “closed” at the time of Ben Sira. Others have suggested that Ben Sira’s self-identification as the author precluded it from attaining canonical status, which was reserved for works that were attributed (or could be attributed) to the prophets, or that it was denied entry to the canon as a rabbinical counter-reaction to its embrace by the nascent Christian community.<\/p>\n

However, some Jews in the diaspora considered Sirach scripture. For instance, it was included in the canon of the Septuagint<\/a>, the 2nd century BCE Greek version of the Jewish scriptures used by Diaspora Jews, through which it became part of the Greek canon. The multiplicity of manuscript fragments uncovered in the Cairo Genizah evidence its authoritative status among Egyptian Jewry until the Middle Ages.<\/p>\n

Because it was excluded from the Jewish canon, Sirach was excised from the Protestant canon following the Reformation.
\nStructure<\/p>\n

As with other wisdom books, there is no easily recognizable structure in Sirach; in many parts it is difficult to discover a logical progression of thought or to discern the principles of arrangement. However, a series of six poems about the search for and attainment of wisdom (1:1\u201310, 4:11\u201319; 6:18\u201337; 14:20\u201315:10; 24:1\u201333; and 38:24\u201339:11) divide the book into something resembling chapters, although the divisions are not thematically based. The exceptions are the first two chapters, whose reflections on wisdom and fear of God provide the theological framework for what follows, and the last nine chapters, which function as a sort of climax, first in an extended praise of God’s glory as manifested through creation (42:15\u201343:33) and second in the celebration of the heroes of ancient Israel’s history dating back to before the Great Flood through contemporary times (see previous section).<\/p>\n

Despite the lack of structure, there are certain themes running through the Book that reappear at various points. The New Oxford Annotated Apocrypha identifies ten major recurring topics:<\/p>\n

1. The Creation (16:24\u201317:24, 18:1\u201314; 33:7\u201315; 39:12\u201335; and 42:15\u201343:33);
\n2. Death (11:26\u201328; 22:11\u201312; 38:16\u201323; and 41:1\u201313);
\n3. Friendship (6:5\u201317; 9:10\u201316: 19:13\u201317; 22:19\u201326: 27:16\u201321; and 36:23\u201337:15);
\n4. Happiness (25:1\u201311; 30:14\u201325; and 40:1\u201330);
\n5. Honor and shame (4:20\u20136:4; 10:19\u201311:6; and 41:14\u201342:8);
\n6. Money matters (3:30\u20134:10; 11:7\u201328; 13:1\u201314:19; 29:1\u201328; and 31:1\u201311);
\n7. Sin (7:1\u201317; 15:11\u201320; 16:1\u201317:32; 18:30\u201319:3; 21:1\u201310; 22:27\u201323:27; and 26:28\u201328:7);
\n8. Social justice (4:1\u201310; 34:21\u201327; and 35:14\u201326);
\n9. Speech (5:6,9-15; 18:15\u201329; 19:4\u201317; 20:1\u201331; 23:7\u201315; 27:4\u20137; 27:11\u201315; and 28:8\u201326); and
\n10. Women (9:1\u20139; 23:22\u201327; 25:13\u201326:27; 36:26\u201331; and 42:9\u201314).<\/p>\n

The Wisdom of Sirach is a collection of ethical teachings. Thus Ecclesiasticus closely resembles Proverbs, except that, unlike the latter, it is presented as the work of a single author, not an anthology of maxims drawn from various sources, presented in verse form. The question of which apothegms actually originated with Sirach is open to debate, although scholars tend to regard him as a compiler or anthologist.<\/p>\n

The teachings are applicable to all conditions of life: to parents and children, to husbands and wives, to the young, to masters, to friends, to the rich, and to the poor. Many of them are rules of courtesy and politeness; and a still greater number contain advice and instruction as to the duties of man toward himself and others, especially the poor, as well as toward society and the state, and most of all toward God.<\/p>\n

Wisdom, in ben Sirach’s view, is synonymous with the fear of God, and sometimes is identified in his mind with adherence to the Mosaic law. The maxims are expressed in exact formulas, and are illustrated by striking images. They show a profound knowledge of the human heart, the disillusionment of experience, a fraternal sympathy with the poor and the oppressed.<\/p>\n

By contrast, Sirach exhibits little compassion for either women or slaves, and advocates distrust and possessiveness over women, and the harsh treatment of slaves (which presupposes the validity of slavery as an institution), positions which are not only difficult for modern readers, but cannot be completely reconciled with the social milieu at the time of its composition.<\/p>\n

As in Ecclesiastes, two opposing tendencies war in the author: the faith and the morality of olden times, which are stronger than all argument, and an Epicureanism of modern date. Occasionally Sirach digresses to attack theories which he considers dangerous; for example, that man has no freedom of will, and that God is indifferent to the actions of mankind and does not reward virtue. Some of the refutations of these views are developed at considerable length.<\/p>\n

Through these moralistic chapters runs the prayer of Israel imploring God to gather together his scattered children, to bring to fulfilment the predictions of the Prophets, and to have mercy upon his Temple and his people. The book concludes with a justification of God, whose wisdom and greatness are said to be revealed in all God’s works as well as in the history of Israel. These chapters are completed by the author’s signature, and are followed by two hymns, the latter apparently a sort of alphabetical acrostic.<\/p>\n

Of particular interest to biblical scholars are Chapters 44\u201350, in which Ben Sira praises “men of renown, and our fathers in their generation”, starting from the antediluvian Enoch and continuing through to “Simon, the high priest, son of Onias” (300\u2013270 BCE). Within this recitation, Ben Sira identifies, either directly or indirectly, each of the books of the Old Testament that would eventually become canonical, with the apparent exception of only Ezra, Daniel, Ruth, Esther, and perhaps Chronicles. The ability to date the composition of Sirach within a few years given the autobiographical hints of Ben Sira and his grandson (author of the introduction to the work) provides great insight regarding the historical development and evolution of the Jewish canon.<\/p>\n

Joshua ben Sirach, or, according to the Greek text “Jesus the son of Sirach of Jerusalem”, was a Jewish scribe who had been living in Jerusalem, may have authored the work in Alexandria, Egypt ca. 180\u2013175 BCE, where he is thought to have established a school. Ben Sirach is unique among all Old Testament and Apocryphal writers in that he signed his work.<\/p>\n

The Prologue, attributed to Ben Sira’s grandson and dated to 132 BCE, is generally considered the earliest witness to a canon of the books of the prophets. Thus the date of the text, has been the subject of intense scrutiny by biblical scholars.<\/p>\n

Joshua ben Sirach’s grandson was in Egypt, translating and editing after the usurping Hasmonean line had definitively ousted Simon’s heirs in long struggles and was finally in control of the High Priesthood in Jerusalem. Comparing the Hebrew and Greek versions shows that he altered the prayer for Simon and broadened its application (“may He entrust to us his mercy”), in order to avoid having a work centered around praising God’s covenanted faithfulness that closed on an unanswered prayer.<\/p>\n

The Greek translator states in his preface that he was the grandson of the author, and that he came to Egypt in the thirty-eighth year of the reign of “Euergetes”. This epithet was borne by only two of the Ptolemies. Of these, Ptolemy III Euergetes reigned only twenty-five years (247\u2013222 BCE) and thus Ptolemy VIII Euergetes must be intended; he ascended the throne in the year 170 BCE, together with his brother Ptolemy VI Philometor, but he soon became sole ruler of Cyrene, and from 146 to 117 BCE held sway over all Egypt. He dated his reign from the year in which he received the crown (i.e., from 170 BCE). The translator must therefore have gone to Egypt in 132 BCE.<\/p>\n

The translation into Greek is believed to have been done after 117 BCE<\/p>\n

The “Book of ben Sirach” (\u05e1\u05e4\u05e8 \u05d1\u05df \u05e1\u05d9\u05e8\u05d0, Sefer ben Sira\u02bc) was originally written in Hebrew, and was also known in Hebrew as the “Proverbs of ben Sirach” (\u05de\u05e9\u05dc\u05d9 \u05d1\u05df \u05e1\u05d9\u05e8\u05d0, Mi\u0161ley ben Sira\u02bc) or the “Wisdom of ben Sirach” (\u05d7\u05db\u05de\u05ea \u05d1\u05df \u05e1\u05d9\u05e8\u05d0, \u1e24okhmat ben Sira\u02bc). The book was not accepted into the Hebrew Bible and the original Hebrew text was not preserved in the Jewish canon. However, various original Hebrew versions have since been recovered, including fragments recovered within the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Cairo Genizah, the latter of which includes fragments from six separate manuscripts.<\/p>\n

The Greek translation was accepted in the Septuagint<\/a> under the (abbreviated) name of the author: Sirakh (\u03a3\u03b9\u03c1\u03b1\u03c7). Some Greek manuscripts give as the title the “Wisdom of I\u0113sous Son of Sirakh” or in short the “Wisdom of Sirakh”. The older Latin versions were based on the Septuagint<\/a>, and simply transliterated the Greek title in Latin letters: Sirach. In the Vulgate the book is called Liber Iesu filii Sirach (“Book of Joshua Son of Sirach”).<\/p>\n

The Greek Church Fathers also called it the “All-Virtuous Wisdom”, while the Latin Church Fathers, beginning with Cyprian, termed it Ecclesiasticus because it was frequently read in churches, leading the early Latin Fathers to call it liber ecclesiasticus (Latin and Latinised Greek for “church book”). Similarly, the Nova Vulgata and many modern English translations of the Apocrypha use the title Ecclesiasticus, literally “of the Church” because of its frequent use in Christian teaching and worship.<\/p>\n

Considering the average length of two generations, Sirach’s date must fall in the first third of the 2nd century BCE. Furthermore, Sirach contains a eulogy of “Simon the High Priest, the son of Onias, who in his life repaired the House” (50:1). Festschrift M.Gilbert and other scholars[who?] posit that this seems to have formed the original ending of the text, and that Chapters 50 (from verse 2) and 51 are later interpolations. Under this theory, the second High Priest Simon (died 196 BCE) would have been intended, and the composition would have concluded shortly thereafter, given that struggles between Simon’s successors (175\u2013172 BCE) are not alluded to in the book, nor is the persecution of the Jews by Antiochus IV Epiphanes (168 BCE).<\/p>\n

The Greek version of Sirach is found in many codices of the Septuagint<\/a>.<\/p>\n

As early as 1896, several substantial Hebrew texts of Sirach, copied in the 11th and 12th centuries, were found in the Cairo geniza (a synagogue storage room for damaged manuscripts). Although none of these manuscripts is complete, together they provide the text for about two-thirds of the Wisdom of Sirach. According to scholars including Solomon Schechter and Frederic Kenyon, this shows that the book was originally written in Hebrew.<\/p>\n

In the 1950s and 1960s three copies of portions of Sirach were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. The largest scroll was discovered at Masada, the Jewish fortress destroyed in 73 CE. The earliest of these scrolls (2Q18) has been dated to the second part of the 1st century BCE, approximately 150 years after Sirach was first composed. These early Hebrew texts are in substantial agreement with the Hebrew texts discovered in Cairo, although there are numerous minor textual variants. With these findings, scholars are now more confident that the Cairo texts are reliable witnesses to the Hebrew original.<\/p>\n

Although excluded from the Jewish canon, Sirach was read and quoted as authoritative from the beginning of the rabbinic period. There are numerous citations to Sirach in the Talmud and works of rabbinic literature (as “\u05e1\u05e4\u05e8 \u05d1\u05df \u05e1\u05d9\u05e8\u05d0”, e.g., Hagigah 13a, Niddah 16b; Ber. 11b). Some of those (Sanhedrin 100b) record an unresolved debate between R’Joseph and Abaye as to whether it is forbidden to read the Sirach, wherein Abaye repeatedly draws parallels between statements in Sirach cited by R’Joseph as objectionable and similar statements appearing in canonical books.<\/p>\n

Sirach may have been used as a basis for two important parts of the Jewish liturgy. In the Mahzor (High Holiday prayer book), a medieval Jewish poet may have used Sirach as the basis for a poem, KeOhel HaNimtah, in the Yom Kippur musaf (“additional”) service for the High Holidays. However, some question whether this passage in Sirach is referring at all to Yom Kippur, and thus argue it cannot form the basis of this poem. Some early 20th Century scholars also argued that the vocabulary and framework used by Sirach formed the basis of the most important of all Jewish prayers, the Amidah, but that conclusion is disputed as well.<\/p>\n

Current scholarship takes a more conservative approach. On one hand, scholars find that “Ben Sira links Torah and wisdom with prayer in a manner that calls to mind the later views of the Rabbis”, and that the Jewish liturgy echoes Sirach in the “use of hymns of praise, supplicatory prayers and benedictions, as well as the occurrence of [Biblical] words and phrases [that] take on special forms and meanings.” However, they stop short of concluding a direct relationship existed; rather, what “seems likely is that the Rabbis ultimately borrowed extensively from the kinds of circles which produced Ben Sira and the Dead Sea Scrolls ….”
\nIn the New Testament<\/p>\n

Some people claim that there are several allusions to the Wisdom of Sirach in the New Testament. These include the Virgin Mary’s Magnificat in Luke 1:52 following Sirach 10:14; the description of the seed in Mark 4:5, 16-17 following Sirach 40:15; the statement by Jesus in Matthew 7:16,20 following Sirach 27:6; and James 1:19 quoting Sirach 5:11.<\/p>\n

The distinguished patristic scholar Henry Chadwick has claimed that in Matthew 11:28 Jesus was directly quoting Sirach 51:23, as well as comparing Matthew 6:12 “And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.” (KJV) with Sirach 28:2 “Forgive your neighbor a wrong, and then, when you petition, your sins will be pardoned.”<\/p>\n

Some Christians regard the catalogue of famous men in Sirach as containing several messianic references. The first occurs during the verses on David. Sir 47:11 reads “The Lord took away his sins, and exalted his power for ever; he gave him the covenant of kings and a throne of glory in Israel.” This references the covenant of 2 Sam 7, which pointed toward the Messiah. “Power” (Heb. qeren) is literally translated as horn. This word is often used in a messianic and Davidic sense (e.g. Ezek 29:21, Ps 132:17, Zech 6:12, Jer 33:15). It is also used in the Benedictus to refer to Jesus (“and has raised up a horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David”).<\/p>\n

Another verse (47:22) that Christians interpret messianically begins by again referencing 2 Sam 7. This verse speaks of Solomon and goes on to say that David’s line will continue forever. The verse ends telling us that “he gave a remnant to Jacob, and to David a root of his stock.” This references Isaiah’s prophecy of the Messiah: “There shall come forth a shoot from the stump of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of his roots”; and “In that day the root of Jesse shall stand as an ensign to the peoples; him shall the nations seek\u2026” (Is 11:1, 10).<\/p>\n

__<\/p>\n

Book of Wisdom<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

The Wisdom of Solomon or Book of Wisdom is a Jewish work composed in Alexandria (Egypt) around the 1st century CE, with the aim of bolstering the faith of the Jewish community in a hostile Greek world. It is one of the seven Sapiential or wisdom books included within the Septuagint<\/a>, along with Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs (Song of Solomon), Job, and Sirach, and is included in the canon of Deuterocanonical books by the Roman Catholic Church and the anagignoskomenona (Gr. \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03b9\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03c3\u03ba\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd, meaning “that which is to be read”) of the Orthodox Church.<\/p>\n

The structure can be divided into three sections:<\/p>\n

Book of Eschatology
\nexhortation to justice
\nspeech of the impious, contrasts of the wicked and the just
\nexhortation to wisdom
\nBook of Wisdom
\nSolomon’s speech concerning wisdom, wealth, power and prayer
\nBook of History
\nintroduction, followed by diptychs of plagues
\ndigression on God’s power and mercy
\ndigression on false worship and further plagues
\nrecapitulation and concluding doxology.<\/p>\n

The book is addressed to the rulers of the earth, urging them to love righteousness and seek wisdom; the wicked think that all is chance and that they should enjoy each day, but they are deluded. In the second section Solomon (not explicitly named, but strongly implied) tells of his search for wisdom.<\/p>\n

The Wisdom of Solomon can be linked to several forms of ancient literature, both Jewish and non-Jewish, but it clearly belongs with biblical Wisdom books such as the Book of Job, one of only five such books among ancient Jewish literature. In terms of classical genre it has been identified as an encomium and with the Greek genre of the “exhortatory discourse”, by which a teacher attempts to persuade others to a certain course of action.
\nComposition<\/p>\n

The Wisdom of Solomon was written in Greek, in Alexandria (Egypt), in the late 1st century BCE to early 1st century CE; the author’s prime literary source was the Septuagint<\/a>, in particular the Wisdom literature and the Book of Isaiah, and he was familiar with late Jewish works as the Book of Enoch and with Greek philosophical literature. It is uncertain whether the book has a single author or comes from a school of writers, but recent scholarship has favoured regarding it as a unified work. In either case its blend of Greek and Jewish features suggests a learned Hellenistic background, and despite the address to the “rulers of the world” the actual audience was probably members of the author’s own community who were tempted to give up their Jewishness in the face of the temptations of Greek culture and the hostile conditions facing Jews in the Greek world.
\nThemes<\/p>\n

The book opens with the opposed pairs righteousness\/unrighteousness and death\/immortality: those who do not follow righteousness will fall into “senseless reasoning” and will not be open to wisdom; wisdom is not an inherent human quality nor one that can be taught, but comes from outside, and only to those who are prepared through righteousness. The suffering of the righteous will be rewarded with immortality, while the wicked will end miserably. The unrighteous are doomed because they do not know God’s purpose, but the righteous will judge the unrighteous in God’s presence. Lady Wisdom dominates the next section, in which Solomon speaks. She existed from the Creation, and God is her source and guide. She is to be loved and desired, and kings seek her: Solomon himself preferred Wisdom to wealth, health, and all other things. She in turn has always come to the aid of the righteous, from Adam to the Exodus. The final section takes up the theme of the rescue of the righteous, taking the Exodus as its focus: “You (God) have not neglected to help (your people the Jews) at all times and in all places.” (Wisdom of Solomon, 19:22).<\/p>\n

__<\/p>\n

Letter of Jeremiah<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

Also known as the Epistle of Jeremiah, is a deuterocanonical book of the Old Testament; this letter purports to have been written by Jeremiah to the Jews who were about to be carried away as captives to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar. It is included in Catholic Bibles as the final chapter of the Book of Baruch. It is also included in Orthodox Bibles as a standalone book. Some scholars claim that the title of this work is misleading, as they consider it to be neither a letter nor written by the prophet Jeremiah.<\/p>\n

According to the text of the letter, the author is the biblical prophet Jeremiah. The biblical Book of Jeremiah already contains the words of a letter (Jer 29:1\u201323) sent by Jeremiah “from Jerusalem” to the “captives” in Babylon. The Letter of Jeremiah portrays itself as a similar piece of correspondence.<\/p>\n

As E. H. Gifford puts it, “The fact that Jeremiah had written one such letter to the captives seems to have suggested the idea of dignifying by his name another letter not written in reality till many ages after his death.”[full citation needed] Against the traditional view, most contemporary scholars agree that the author was not Jeremiah. The chief arguments put forward are literary quality, as well as the religious depth and sensitivity. J. T. Marshall adds that the use of “seven generations” (v. 3) rather than “seventy years” (Jer 29:10) for the duration of the exile “points away from Jeremiah towards one who deplored the long exile.” The author may have been a Hellenistic Jew who lived in Alexandria, but it is difficult to say with certainty. The earliest manuscripts containing the Epistle of Jeremiah are all in Greek. The earliest Greek fragment (1st century BC) was discovered in Qumran.<\/p>\n

Gifford reports that in his time “the great majority of competent and impartial critics” considered Greek to be the original language. As one of these critics O. F. Fritzsche put it, “If any one of the Apocryphal books was composed in Greek, this certainly was.” The strongest dissenter from this majority view was C. J. Ball, who marshalled the most compelling argument for a Hebrew original.<\/p>\n

However, Yale Semitic scholar C. C. Torrey was not persuaded: “If the examination by a scholar of Ball’s thoroughness and wide learning can produce nothing better than this, it can be said with little hesitation that the language was probably not Hebrew.” Torrey’s own conclusion was that the work was originally composed in Aramaic. In recent years the tide of opinion has shifted and now the consensus is that the “letter” was originally composed in Hebrew (or Aramaic).
\nDate<\/p>\n

The date of this work is uncertain. Most scholars agree that it is dependent on certain biblical passages, notably Isa 44:9\u201320, 46:5\u20137, and thus can be no earlier than 540 BC. Since a fragment (7Q2) was identified among the scrolls in Qumran Cave 7, it can be no later than 100 BC. Further support for this terminus ad quem may be found in a possible reference to the letter in 2 Maccabees 2:1\u20133.<\/p>\n

As mentioned above, the use of “seven generations” rather than “seventy years” points to a later period. Ball calculates the date to be c. 307 \u2013 317 BC. And Tededche notes: “It is well known that many Jews were attracted to alien cults throughout the Greek period, 300 BC onward, so that the warning in the letter might have been uttered any time during this period.”<\/p>\n

Although the “letter” is included as a discrete unit in the Septuagint<\/a>, there is no evidence of it ever having been canonical in the Masoretic tradition.<\/p>\n

The earliest evidence we have of the question of its canonicity arising in Christian tradition is in the work of Origen of Alexandria, as reported by Eusebius in his Church History. Origen listed Lamentations and the Letter of Jeremiah as one unit with the Book of Jeremiah proper, among “the canonical books as the Hebrews have handed them down,” though scholars agree that this was surely a slip.<\/p>\n

Epiphanius of Salamis in his Panarion writes that Jews had in their books the deuterocanonical Epistle of Jeremiah and Baruch, both combined with Jeremiah and Lamentations in only one book.<\/p>\n

Athanasius of Alexandria mentions the same, he includes the deuterocanonical Epistle of Jeremiah and Baruch as a part of the Old Testament Canon, both combined with Jeremiah and Lamentations in only one book.<\/p>\n

Cyril of Jerusalem states in his list of canonical books “of Jeremiah one, including Baruch and Lamentations and the Epistle”<\/p>\n

The Synod of Laodicea (4th Century) wrote that Jeremiah, and Baruch, the Lamentations, and the Epistle are canonical in only one book.<\/p>\n

Jerome provided the majority of the translation work for the vulgar (popular) Latin translation of the Bible, called the Vulgate Bible. In view of the fact that no Hebrew text was available, Jerome refused to consider the Epistle of Jeremiah, as the other books he called apocryphal, canonical.<\/p>\n

Despite Jerome’s reservations, the epistle is included as chapter 6 of the Book of Baruch in the Old Testament of the Vulgate. The King James Version follows the same practice, while placing Baruch in the Apocrypha section as does Luther’s Bible. In the Ethiopian Orthodox canon, it forms part of the “Rest of Jeremiah”, along with 4 Baruch (also known as the Paraleipomena of Jeremiah).<\/p>\n

The epistle is one of four deuterocanonical books found among the Dead Sea scrolls (see Tanakh at Qumran). (The other three are Psalm 151, Sirach, and Tobit.) The portion of the epistle discovered at Qumran was written in Greek. This does not preclude the possibility of the text being based on a prior Hebrew or Aramaic text. However, the only text available to us has dozens of linguistic features available in Greek, but not in Hebrew; this shows that the Greek text is more than a minimalist translation.
\nContents<\/p>\n

The “letter” is actually a satire, or harangue, against idols and idolatry. Bruce M. Metzger suggests “one might perhaps characterize it as an impassioned sermon which is based on a verse from the canonical Book of Jeremiah.” That verse is Jer 10:11, the only verse in the entire book written in Aramaic.<\/p>\n

Tell them this: “These gods, who did not make the heavens and the earth, will perish from the earth and from under the heavens.”
\n\u2014\u2009Jeremiah 10:11<\/p>\n

The work was written with a serious practical purpose: to instruct the Jews not to worship the gods of the Babylonians, but to worship only the Lord. As Gifford puts it, “the writer is evidently making an earnest appeal to persons actually living in the midst of heathenism, and needing to be warned and encouraged against temptations to apostasy.” The author warned the Hebrew exiles that they were to remain in captivity for seven generations, and that during that time they would see the worship paid to idols.<\/p>\n

Readers were extolled not to participate, because the idols were created by men, without the powers of speech, hearing, or self-preservation. Then follows a satirical denunciation of the idols. As Gifford explains, in this folly of idolatry “there is no clear logical arrangement of the thought, but the divisions are marked by the recurrence of a refrain, which is apparently intended to give a sort of rhythmical air to the whole composition.” The conclusion reiterates the warning to avoid idolatry.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Texts witnessed only in the Septuagint: Table of Contents [Edited by Ellopos from Wikipedia articles.] Sirach The Book of the All-Virtuous Wisdom of Joshua ben Sira, commonly called the Wisdom of Sirach or simply Sirach, and also known as the Book of Ecclesiasticus (abbreviated Ecclus.) or Ben Sira, is a work of ethical teachings, from […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_disable_autopaging":false},"categories":[6702,8,317,11,5766,10],"tags":[332,94,100,101],"class_list":["post-4512","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-thechrist","category-church-of-greece","category-greek-language","category-elpenor-greek-library","category-greek-religion","category-orthodox-christianity","tag-bible","tag-new-testament","tag-old-testament","tag-septuagint"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ellopos.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4512","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ellopos.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ellopos.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ellopos.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ellopos.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4512"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.ellopos.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4512\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ellopos.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4512"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ellopos.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4512"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ellopos.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4512"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}