Falsehood and False Prophets in Jeremiah A View on LXX -Jer

This article explores the use of ר ֶק ֶש in MT-Jer, and the manner in which the Septuagint (LXX ) and Peshitta (P) read i t. In that regar d, the article also discusses lyin g, falsehoods (ψευδής, ψεῦδος, ἄδικος, μάτη, ܐܪܩܘܫ , ܐܬܘܠܓܕ ) , and false prophets (ψευ-δοπροφήτης, ܐܠܓܕ ܐܝܒܢ ) in LXX and P. As suc h, it pioneers the examination of P-Jer’s perspective on false prophets. The article demonstrates that the translators of LXX and P approached the Hebrew source text in a manner that was not strictly litera l, aligning with the nuances of the target languag e. It is argued that both LXX-Jer and P-Jer illu - minate the polysemy inherent in the Hebrew lexeme ר ֶק ֶש . In additio n, both versions demonstrate a degree of textual liberty and interpretative renderings. Finall y, the arti - cle demonstrates that unlike LXX, which labels Hananiah as a false prophet only once (LXX-Jer 35:1), P systematically designates him so throughout P-Jer 28. Consequentl y, the article also adds weight to the argument opposing a direct textual influence of LXX on P.

Compared to other texts within the Hebrew Bible, the book of Jeremiah displays a heightened focus on lying prophets and falsehoods.The attention to this aspect is also evident in ancient translations such as the Septuagint (LXX) consensus tending toward the shorter version as being the more original one.8Since the main focus of this article is to explore lying, falsehoods, and false prophets in MT-Jer, LXX-Jer, and P-Jer, discussions regarding the development of the Hebrew text and the Vorlage of LXX and P lie beyond its immediate scope.The Syriac translation, as displayed in P-Jer, generally maintains the essence of the Hebrew text while diverging from it in style.It is characterized by its accessibility and precision, incorporating specific lexical choices where the translator considered it crucial.9Moreover, in addition to a thoughtful choice of lexical counterparts, both LXX-Jer and P-Jer showcase a level of textual liberty and interpretative renderings.Sporadic resemblances between LXX and P led to disputes on LXX-Jer's influence on P-Jer.Most assume sporadic influences rather than consistency.10"a West Syriac version of the 1887-91 Peshiṭta."The Mosul edition was published as a reprint.See David, Syriac Bible.This edition displays variations from the VTS critical edition and reflects some textual-critical and translational issues.An instructive example can be found in P-Jer 9:4, which highlights a significant disparity between the Gorgias Press edition and the VTS.The text presented in VTS (ms.7a1) bears a closer resemblance to LXX than MT, whereas the Mosul edition as displayed in the Gorgias Press edition aligns more closely with MT. 7 See Jobes and Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint, 123.8 See Dines, Septuagint, 23. 9 See Greenberg,Translation Technique,44.The critical edition of the Syriac text of Jeremiah, as we read it today, is based on manuscript 7a1 (i.e., from the 7th century), which does not always share the readings of other witnesses.An example is manuscript 6pk10, which, despite containing only eight verses, has four unique readings.See Ter Haar et al.,Vetus Testamentum Syriace III.2,[6][7].The P translation also emerged after the translation of LXX-Jer and existing Jeremiah fragments from Qumran.Moreover, P as corpus serves as evidence for the textual content of the Hebrew Bible long before its final standardization by the Masoretes, in the 10th and 11th centuries.See Tully,Translation and Translator,3. 10 The actual discourse about this question in P-Jer commences with Fränkl, and is further developed by Weitzman who, in his study Syriac Version of the Old Testament, 68, refers to Fränkl, Studien über die Septuaginta und Peschito zu Jeremia, 1872.The central thesis posited by Weitzman is that P-Jer primarily corresponds to the extended Hebrew text, "rather than the shorter form reflected in some mss from Qumran (4QJerb .d) and in LXX" (Weitzman,Syriac Version of the Old Testament,57).In addition to Fränkl, Weitzman also refers to Bogaert who argued that two forms of Jeremiah circulated, one of which is preserved in the Masoretic Text (MT) whose structure, as attested by ancient Greek revisions (Theodotion, Aquila, Symmachus), the Vulgate, and the Peshitta, was already known around 200 BCE (Bogaert, "Le Livre de Jérémie," 370).Greenberg considers Weitzman's development of the argument (Translation Technique,226), noting that his main focus was on the application of statistical techniques in establishing the pattern of manuscript tradition, not precisely relevant to the definition of style that she discusses (Translation Technique,291).She also provides insights concerning the correlation between MT, LXX, P, and versions from Qumran (4QJera,4Qjerb,4Qjerc,4Qjerd,and 2Qjer Sporadic influences on a given text may have originated from several potential sources.In the case of LXX and P, theoretically the following scenarios are possible: a) direct derivation of P from LXX; b) derivation facilitated by language contact, a process distinct from corpus contact of P with LXX; c) derivation via a shared historical and theological framework.When considering the likelihood of influence, it becomes apparent that direct influence from LXX on P is not very plausible, the discernible structural disparities between P and LXX speak against it.Conversely, the influence of LXX on P mediated through language contact or the exchange of theological concepts, appears to be a more plausible scenario.
Referring to Jer 6:13, Greenberg argues that despite the fact that the falseness of the prophets is clearly indicated in both P and LXX, there is no basis to presume that the Greek version influenced the Syriac translation, as it is plausible that both P and LXX emerged independently.11Notably, there remains the possibility that the creative agency of both the LXX and P played a significant role, which potentially diminishes the prominence of discussions regarding translational interference between LXX and P. Additionally, it is worth acknowledging that the language attested in the Septuagint differs from conventional Greek.This distinction is exemplified by the presence of a substantial number of neologisms.12It could be attributed to the socio-historical context of post-Classical Greek, or innovations introduced during the translational process.
In this context, it is further noteworthy that the figure of Hananiah, who is recurrently mentioned in the book of Jeremiah, is identified as a false prophet in an explicit list of false prophets from Qumran (4Q33913) as well as in P, but not in MT.Regardless of the specific translation techniques employed by the translators of P, it is important to reckon with the possibility that texts like the list of false prophets may have been in circulation within Jewish communities.

1.2
Falsehood and False Prophets While a few studies on LXX have made contributions to semantic analysis and linguistic comparison of words around falsehood and truth,14 the scholarly examination of the lexical aspects has been more prominently undertaken within the realm of Hebrew scholarship.For example, Klopfenstein's work15 presents a thorough semantic analysis of three Hebrew root terms-‫,שקר‬ ‫,כזב‬ and ‫.כחש‬In contrast, there has been no analogous scholarly investigation examining the Greek and Syriac vocabulary of falsehood as attested in LXX and P. Concerning the semantic nuances of the Hebrew vocabulary, Shemesh16 noticed that in contexts devoid of legal implications, the Bible condemns falsehood, especially in Psalms and wisdom literature, whereas the legal literature of the Bible does not contain a general directive against falsehood.Similarly to Shemesh, Weiss17 observed that the Bible explicitly forbids lying in numerous references, whether in judicial or non-judicial contexts, but it seldom provides a clear evaluation of individuals and their actions.
Furthermore, many scholars have analyzed the phenomenon of lying prophets in the Hebrew Bible more broadly.18In this regard, the utilization of the neologism ψευδοπροφήτης in LXX and the explicit labeling of Hananiah as a false prophet in P-Jer 28, serves to better understand the evaluation of certain biblical figures by the translators.Furthermore, Arena19 contends that the book of Jeremiah exhibits a preeminent concern with the dissemination of falsehoods by the prophetic class.These insights are significant, as they can be gleaned from both LXX and P. Hence, this article aims to supplement prior scholarly discussions and initiate a discourse on false prophets in P.

Method and Data Analysis
Within the book of Jeremiah, individuals deemed as false prophets are identified by their defiance towards Yahweh, a characteristic which results in their role as those who prophesy falsehoods.The way these features are depicted varies in the different versions (MT, LXX, P).To elucidate textual features, in the following I will first outline the usage of ‫ר‬ ‫קֶ‬ ‫שֶ‬ in the Hebrew text of Jeremiah and then compare the lexical choices in LXX and P against the Hebrew.20The data analysis adheres to the Hebrew version, presenting divergent readings, while abstaining from discussing verbal forms and syntactical features.The principal emphasis in the data analysis centers on the Hebrew lexeme ‫ר‬ ‫קֶ‬ ‫שֶ‬ and, by extension, the concept of the false prophet.
In the interest of clarity and due to spatial constraints, the data analysis refrains from providing full quotations of the biblical verses.After identifying the lexemes through which P reads the Hebrew, these lexemes are checked in the database to determine if they occur elsewhere in P-Jer.The contrasting findings are included in the discussion.The comparative table illustrates the lexical choices of LXX and P in respect of the Hebrew text: From the data, it becomes evident that the readings of LXX and P do not consistently exhibit distinctive lexical selections pertaining to particular context situations.With regard to lexical choices, they merely exemplify the polysemy inherent in the Hebrew term ‫ר‬ ‫קֶ‬ ‫.שֶ‬In contrast to LXX, P-Jer introduces pluses with interpretive and stylistic renderings (16:19; 23:26; 29:23; 37:14).

2.2
LXX and P The data illustrate that both LXX and P adhere to the Hebrew Vorlage, but exercise judicious translation to suit the style of the Greek and Syriac languages and their respective audiences.28In the context of the Hebrew lexeme ‫ר‬ ‫קֶ‬ ‫,שֶ‬ the Septuagint29 utilizes a diverse array of lexical selections: ψευδής, ψεῦδος, ἄδικος, and μάτη,30 thus reflecting the polysemic nature of ‫ר‬ ‫קֶ‬ ‫.שֶ‬The lexemes ψευδής and ψεῦδος are the most frequently employed, denoting the act of lying, deception, and false statement.The lexeme ἄδικος implies someone or something that is unjust, and in the context of LXX-Jer is also understood as opposition to the truth.In LXX-Jer, ἄδικος refers to the false prophecies (5:31; 34:11, 12, 13; 36:9, 31), swearing wrongly (7:9), and deception (35:15).Moreover, the lexeme μάτη is used in LXX-Jer 8:8 as adjective (εἰς μάτην) where it designs the lack of purpose.It has the same use in, for example, LXX-Jer 2:30 where it renders the Hebrew ‫א‬ ‫וְ‬ ‫שָ‬ ‫לַ‬ (in vain).In addition to underscoring the polysemy of the Hebrew lexeme ‫ר‬ ‫קֶ‬ ‫,שֶ‬ LXX does not present particular renderings that would substantially alter comprehension.
P-Jeremiah31 follows the Hebrew Vorlage (and not the LXX) both in the wording and in the order of chapters.Like LXX, P's lexical choices reflect the meanings of Hebrew ‫ר‬ ‫קֶ‬ ‫.שֶ‬As the table demonstrates, the lexemes used to translate the Hebrew ‫ר‬ ‫קֶ‬ ‫שֶ‬ are ‫,ܕܓܠܘܬܐ‬ ‫,ܕܓܠ‬ ‫,ܕܓܠܝܬ‬ and ‫,ܫܘܩܪܐ‬ with the statistical predominance of ‫.ܕܓܠܘܬܐ‬ Similarly to LXX, all lexical choices of P-Jer pertain to the lexical field of lying and falsehood.Both lexemes ‫,ܫܘܩܪܐ(‬

28
LXX's primary audience was the Greek-speaking Jewish community.The translation of LXX-Jer originated in Alexandria around the transition from the 2nd to the 1st centuries BCE.See Shead, "Jeremiah," 472.Concerning P, we do not have clear insights into the targeted audience.This is largely due to the inadequately documented connections between Christian and Jewish communities in the region of Edessa, where the P translation most likely originated.See Weitzman, Syriac Version of the Old Testament, 1. 29 The LXX version was consulted manually (both Ziegler's and Rahlfs and Hanhart editions) with the help of the Septuagint concordance.In referencing, I give preference to the Ziegler's edition, and follow the LXX order of chapters in this section.30 At the level of lexical choices, there are no differences between Ziegler's and Rahlfs and Hanhart's editions, except some minor variations at the verse level.These minor variations do not affect the meaning of lexemes we examine here: e.g., the final ν in the 3rd person plural (5:2; 13:25) is not featured in Ziegler; there is a difference in number in 36:31 (ἐπ᾽ ἀδίκοις [Rahlfs and Hanhart]; ἐπ᾽ ἀδίκῳ [Ziegler]); in tense (οὐκ ἀπέστειλέν σε κύριος πρὸς ἡμᾶς λέγων [Rahlfs and Hanhart]; οὐκ ἀπέστειλέν σε κύριος πρὸς ἡμᾶς εἰπεῖν [Ziegler]); variation in the utilization of prepositions (47:16 περὶ Ισμαηλ [Rahlfs and Hanhart]; ὑπέρ Ισμαηλ [Ziegler]).

31
P was consulted manually (VTS critical edition from 2019), with the help of Strothman, Konkordanz zur Syrischen Bibel, and the electronic version available online: Peshitta Online | Scholarly Editions (brill.com).Moreover, I do not vocalize the Syriac text since the features of the vocalization traditions in Syriac are not comparable to MT, and the critical edition (VTS) does not vocalize the Syriac text either.Furthermore, the vocalization system in Syriac is characterized by a lack of strong uniformity and shows a higher degree of dependence on context and regional variations.In the verses featuring false prophets, as evidenced in the table, a lexeme explicitly associated with the semantic domain of falsehood appears only once across all versions (6:13).In the remaining instances, such a lexeme is absent, yet the context permits the translator to impart the concept of a false prophet, as in 26:7, 8, 11, 16; 27:9; 28:1; 29:1, 8.As previously observed, the Hebrew text frequently links the lexemes "prophet" and "lie" (e.g., 5:31; 23:26).LXX and P, in contrast, more overtly establish this conceptual connection.
Some scholars have argued34 that ψευδοπροφήτης represents a clear exegetincal translation in LXX-Jer primarily in chapters 26-29.35Reiling36 noted that ψευδοπροφήτης ("false prophet") appears 9 times in LXX-Jer,37 consistently rendering the Hebrew ‫יא‬ ‫בִ‬ ‫נָ‬ with an interpretive intent, or serves to literarily link the conflict pericopes ) with the condemnation of false prophets in Jer 6:13-15, as argued by Werse.38These interpretative interventions of the LXX translator(s) are statistically sporadic, but they are significant as lexical selections for Hebrew ‫יא‬ ‫בִ‬ ‫,נָ‬ which occurs a total of 94 times in LXX-Jer.The rationale for introducing ψευδοπροφήτης in LXX-Jer39 and the interpretive nuances it carries is not always clear since ψευδοπροφήτης is only used in certain contexts of LXX-Jer but not in others.For example, in instances where ‫יא‬ ‫בִ‬ ‫נָ‬ is paired with ‫ר‬ ‫קֶ‬ ‫שֶ‬ (falsehood) as in 5:31; 14:14, and 23:26, 32, the connection between ‫יא‬ ‫בִ‬ ‫נָ‬ and ‫ר‬ ‫קֶ‬ ‫שֶ‬ through the verb ‫נבא‬ sufficiently conveys the intended meaning.40In the rest of the chapters, LXX-Jer omits "prophet" as a title for Jeremiah, but also for Hananiah, who is explicitly designated as a false prophet in P-Jer.
Contrary to LXX, P explicitly uses the designation "false prophet" and "false prophecies" in Jer 23:26.In P-Jer, a "false prophet" is a first time mentioned in 6:13, like in LXX.41 Unlike LXX, P employs the plural form consistently, without any manuscript variants, likely guided by the Hebrew particle ‫ֹל‬ ‫כ‬ usually having the plural sense.The subsequent occurrence is in 8:10, where P substitutes "false prophets" for the corresponding Hebrew term ‫יא‬ ‫בִ‬ ‫,נָ‬ a distinction absent in LXX-Jer 8:10, probably given its brevity.In 29:8, P does not employ the phrase ‫ܕܓܠܐ‬ ‫.ܢܒܝܐ‬ Perhaps this is because of the inclusion of the term "diviner," which in this context is construed as synonymous with "prophet."Furthermore, the expression ‫ܕܓܠܐ‬ ‫ܢܒܝܐ‬ occurs mainly in the plural form in P-Jer 26:7, 8, 11, 16; 27:9, 14; 29:1.The tendency of P towards regular usage of "false prophets" does reveal individual tendencies of the translator(s), but cannot prove ties with LXX.
In P-Jer 28, a significant divergence emerges: the term is used in the singular form and consistently attributed to the prophet Hananiah.Unlike LXX, which labels Hananiah as a false prophet only in 28 [35]:1, P-Jer systematically designates him so (28:1, 5, 10, 12, 13, 15, 17).42 The P translator appears to deliberately intend to establish a juxtaposition between Hananiah, designated as the false prophet, and the prophet Jeremiah (28:5, 10, 12, 13, and 15).Hananiah is the only individual in P being consistently called a false prophet (LXX labels him as a false prophet only in 35:1).Interestingly, another false prophet, Shemaiah the 10.1163/15685330-bja10166 | Vetus Testamentum (2024) 1-17 Nehemite is mentioned on the famous list of false prophets in 4Q339,43 but neither LXX nor P designate him as a false prophet.

Conclusion
I summarize my findings as follows: First, we have seen that in MT-Jer, the lexeme ‫ר‬ ‫קֶ‬ ‫שֶ‬ is used to underscore the deceitful nature of the prophetic messages put forth by Jeremiah's adversaries.It pertains to falsehoods as the subject of prophecy, actions carried out deceitfully, false appearance, trusting in falsehoods and deceptive words or swearing wrongly.It is also used in the meaning of "hypocrisy" or "appearance." Second, both LXX-Jer and P-Jer showcase a level of textual liberty and interpretative renderings.In addition to underscoring the polysemy of the Hebrew lexeme ‫ר‬ ‫קֶ‬ ‫,שֶ‬ LXX-Jer does not present particular renderings that would substantially alter comprehension.Like LXX-Jer, P-Jer lexical choices also reflect the meanings of the Hebrew ‫ר‬ ‫קֶ‬ ‫.שֶ‬ Third, we have seen that ψευδοπροφήτης appears 9 times in LXX-Jer, consistently rendering the Hebrew ‫יא‬ ‫בִ‬ ‫נָ‬ with an interpretive intent.44These interpretative interventions of the LXX translator are statistically sporadic, but they are significant as lexical selections for the Hebrew ‫יא‬ ‫בִ‬ ‫,נָ‬ which occurs a total of 94 times in LXX-Jer.
Fourth, in P-Jer, the concept of a "false prophet" is introduced in 6:13, akin to its initial occurrence in LXX.The data revealed that in all instances, except 8:10 and 29:8, the lexical choice of P-Jer overlaps with LXX-Jer.This observation does not prove that P is dependent from LXX, but it motivates speculation about the possibility of shared traditions.
Fifth, unlike LXX, which labels Hananiah as a false prophet only once (35:1), P-Jer systematically designates him so.The P translator appears to manifest a deliberate intention to establish a juxtaposition between Hananiah, designated as the false prophet, and the prophet Jeremiah.In this regard, this article strengthens the argument against a direct textual influence of LXX on P.

Table 1
Comparison of lexical choices for "falsehood" In contrast to Rahlfs and Hanhart, Ziegler encloses the second occurrence within square brackets.Whether the second instance is read with or without the inclusion of ἀδίκῳ, the verse maintains its semantic integrity.In other instances in the table, the verse numbering in square brackets indicateRahlfs and Hanhart.dTheversenumberingvaries between Ziegler's edition (34:12) and that ofRahlfs and Hanhart  (34:15).

Table 1
Comparison of lexical choices for "falsehood" (cont.)total in the Hebrew Bible.21Jeremiah also displays the largest number of occurrences of ‫ר‬ ‫קֶ‬ ‫שֶ‬ within a single book of the Hebrew Bible.22Other nouns related to the concept of falsehood are less prevalent in the Hebrew Bible.The term ‫ב‬ ‫זָ‬ ‫כָ‬ appears 31 times, but it is absent from Jeremiah.Likewise, the word ‫ש‬ ‫חָ‬ ‫כֶ‬ occurs only once (Isa 30:9).
i LXX-Jer does not explicitly translate ‫ר‬ ‫קֶ‬ ‫שֶ‬ in Jer 29:23.j This is the only occurrence of this expression in the Hebrew Bible.k The use of ‫ל‬ ‫עַ‬ in this context occurs only twice in the Bible.Here in Jer 7:8 (plural), and in Prov 29:12 (singular) where the LXX and P translators opt for a different lexical choice without using the preposition (λόγον ἄδικον, ‫ܕܓܠܬܐ‬ ‫.)ܡܠܬܐ‬ Downloaded from Brill.com 06/12/2024 11:30:05AM via Open Access.This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC BY 4.0 license.https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/10.1163/15685330-bja10166 | Vetus Testamentum (2024) 1-17 Use of ψευδοπροφήτης," 148.The term neither appears in Classical Greek nor in the Greek papyri of the period contemporary to the the translation of LXX-Jer.Reiling explains the absence of the word in the period before the Septuagint with the argument that the Greek prophets had the relatively unimportant role of the Greek prophets in divination as compared to diviner[s] (μάντις).On the other hand, an idea of pseudo-diviner ψευδόμαντις occurs occasionally, with Herodotus as probably the earliest occurrence of the word.It also occurs in other works like Euripides' tragedy Orestes or in Lucian's Alexander the False Prophet [TLG-Home (uci.edu)].In contrast to the earlier period, ψευδοπροφήτης does occur in the period posterior to the Septuagint, for example, in a papyrus from the 5th century CE (P.Amh.Gr.11).37 10 times in total in the Septuagint if we include LXX-Zech 13:2.38This is the primary argument of Werse's article aiming to show that LXX-Jer portrays the sin of the false prophets in Jer 33-36 (MT 26-29) as trivially reacting to the Babylonian conquest of the region that Jeremiah identified as divine judgement.See Werse, "Literary Function," 4. The article provides an insightful discourse on ψευδοπροφήτης and prophetic conflicts.39GELSdescribes the word as neologism "false prophet," which also confirms the thesis about the LXX first usage of the term.See Lust et al.
, A Greek-English Lexicon, 673.This neologism is more commonly found in the New Testament, Philo, and Josephus, all of which reflect the impact of LXX terminology and wording.The statistics are verified through www.stephanus.tlg.uci.edu.See further Werse, "Literary Function," 6 n. 13.Downloaded from Brill.com 06/12/2024 11:30:05AM via Open Access.This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC BY 4.0 license.https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Falsehood and False Prophets in Jeremiah Vetus Testamentum (2024) 1-17 | 10.1163/15685330-bja10166 Arena, Francesco."False Prophets in the Book of Jeremiah: Did They All Prophesy and Speak Falsehood?"SJOT 34 (2020): 187-200.43 See Cohen "False Prophets," 55. 44 This confirms the findings of previous scholarship on the subject.Downloaded from Brill.com 06/12/2024 11:30:05AM via Open Access.This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC BY 4.0 license.https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/