Talk:Book of Jeremiah

pessimist?
Is it not relevant here that "Jeremiah" has become a byword for a pessimist? --DominicSayers 07:48, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Heavily Edited
"Both versions are heavily edited and reflect the perspectives of later ages" - this appears prejudicial at least from the standpoint that there are alternative views and explanations for the differences. Since the majority of the Book of Jeremiah is preserved with about 15-17% variance in content (not order of content), to say the book is heavily edited can be misunderstood. It would be better to explain what is meant by heavily edited, and give at least a paragraph or two on why that paradigm is better than the concept that contents have been preserved. JohnRajendra (talk) 13:17, 26 June 2014 (UTC)


 * After reading over the source material provided for the disputed point, the word "redacted" seems to have triggered the use of "heavily edited". In checking the context of the source, the issue seems to be talking more about the problems with having two different versions of Jeremiah that, while parts of it are the same, other parts differ. I've changed the sentence to the following one in light of that information:"'Scholars have had differing opinions as to how to reconstruct the historical aspects of the Book of Jeremiah due to the differences each version contains when compared with each other.'"That change also required the source to include p.85 in addition to p.86. If there's any problems with the edit or otherwise, please let me know. Thanks, Azureindignation (talk) 01:06, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Contents
The current contents section says that Jeremiah is arranged in 5 subsections, or "books". However, the division it describes scatters its "books" among the chapters. clearly doesn't reflect the book's actual organization, but rather, some commentator's views of how to categorize the contents. Could the commentatot's views be sourced, pleased? Otherwise this appears to be original research.

Title (Aramaic)
The Hebrew title of this work, according to the Hebrew Wikipedia, is ספר ירמיהו, which translates to The Book of Jeremiah in English. But, this work wasn't composed entirely in Hebrew. As the article itself states, verse 10:11 was in Aramaic. Yet, there is no mention here of how the work is referred to commonly in Aramaic, nor whether said title also translates to The Book of Jeremiah in English. For that matter, there is not even a mention of this work on the Aramaic Wikipedia. allixpeeke (talk) 01:34, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Distinctive how?
It has come down in two distinct though related versions, one in Hebrew, the other known from a Greek translation.[3]

What is distinctive, other than the language? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pspadaro (talk • contribs) 12:06, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * The contents.PiCo (talk) 06:44, 11 June 2018 (UTC)


 * This article would be much improved if the differences between the two versions were set out: what verses are omitted in each, what the order of passages in each is. That is significant information. -- llywrch (talk) 02:35, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Longest book in the Bible
Should this article mention that if one goes by word count, the Book of Jeremiah is the longest book in the Bible? To me, this would make a good addition to the start of the article. YTKJ (talk) 10:51, 2 April 2023 (UTC)


 * A good point. I did a quick look for a reliable source, but was disappointed. The best answer seems to be that in the Masoretic Hebrew, Jeremiah has the most words, 33,002, followed by Genesis, 32,046. But for the number of letters, I don't know. And then there id the problem that the Hebrew of Jeremiah is about 1/8 longer than the Septuagint Greek - if one can meaningfully compare different languages - which would place Genesis as the longest.
 * And all of this is whether the sources that I found are reliable. TomS TDotO (talk) 18:35, 2 April 2023 (UTC)