The Commissioning of Paul:

Light from the Prophet Jeremiah on the Self-Understanding of the Apostle?

Lutz Doering, Westflische Wilhelms-Universitt Mnster

1. Introduction
In his letters,1 Paul styles himself an apostle, not a prophet. The difference can be nicely demon-
strated in Rom 1:12: Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel
of God, which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy scriptures (NRSV). The
apostle is set apart for the gospel of God ( ), which the prophets have
announced beforehand (). Nevertheless, it has long been noted that Paul refers to
the prophets of the Hebrew and / or Greek scriptures in the presentation of his own ministry.2 The
question, however, is, how does he do so in detail? Does he follow one or several individual proph-
ets of Israels scriptures or rather the prophetic mode, whatever this may be? Scholars earlier in
the 20th century were quite confident that Paul follows Jeremiah, as either outward similarities or
sense of ministry or both are concerned;3 some thought he followed both Jeremiah and Deutero-
Isaiah.4 In contrast, there has been a significant array of scholars, particularly though not exclu-
sively writing in German from the 1960s onward, who question any relationship with Jeremiah
and claim that Deutero-Isaiah is the exclusive prophetic model that set the scene for Paul. Pro-
grammatic in this respect was Traugott Holtzs article, Zum Selbstverstndnis des Apostels Pau-

1
Apart from 1 (and 2) Thess, Phil and Phm.
2
Cf. e.g. Ernst Lohmeyer, Grundlagen paulinischer Theologie (BHT 1; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1929) 201203.
3
Hans Lietzmann, An die Galater (HNT 10; 3rd ed.; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1932) 8, succinctly writes: Sinn des Gan-
zen [sc. of Gal 1:15] durch Rm 9 20 f. vgl. Jer 1 5 klar: Pls wei sich zum Heidenapostel prdestiniert. That Paul followed
Jeremiah in his sense of ministry (Sendungsbewutsein), either explicitly, implicitly, or merely factually, is forcefully
argued by Karl Heinrich Rengstorf, ., TWNT 1 (1933), 397448 (440441). Rengstorf observes: Die paral-
lelen Zge zwischen Paulus und Jeremia sind lngst bemerkt, aber immer vorwiegend unter ueren Gesichtspunkten
und noch nicht unter dem Gesichtspunkt des Sendungsbewutseins. Gerade hierin ist aber Jeremia Paulus groes
Vorbild geworden (440), and he concludes: Die Frage, ob Paulus sich bewut oder unbewut in seinem Sendungs-
bewutsein an Jeremia angeschlossen hat, wird sich schwer oder gar nicht beantworten lassen. Der Anschlu ist aber
da, und zwar sowohl in der Beurteilung des Leidens als gottgewollten Moments des Lebens als Apostel als auch in der
ausschlielichen Konzentration auf die Wortverkndigung und eng verbunden damit im Verzicht auf jede enthusias-
tische Begrndung des Apostolats (441, partly spaced out in the original).
4
E.g. Lohmeyer, Grundlagen, 201; Heinrich Schlier, Der Brief an die Galater (KEK 7; 14th ed.; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1971) 53 with n. 1. Similarly still Franz Mussner, Der Galaterbrief (HTK; 5th ed.; Freiburg i.Br.: Herder, 1988)
8182; Werner Stenger, Biographisches und Idealbiographisches in Gal 1,112,14, Paul-Gerhard Mller & W. Stenger,
eds., Kontinuitt und Einheit: Fr Franz Muner (Freiburg i.Br.: Herder, 1981) 123140 (124, 132 with n. 20). Similarly,
Martin Hengel & Anna Maria Schwemer, Paul between Damascus and Antioch: The Unknown Years (London: SCM,
1997) 95 write: like the prophet Jeremiah and the servant of God he has been called by God to be a preacher to the
Gentiles from his mothers womb.
 Lutz Doering, The Commissioning of Paul 2

lus;5 a similar argument is made in the important study by Christian Wolff, Jeremia im Frhjuden-
tum und Urchristentum,6 which is in general highly relevant for the study of Jeremiah traditions in
antiquity.7

In recent years, the prophetic background for Pauls self-understanding has received renewed and
increased attention.8 Thus, Florian Wilk developed the above-mentioned line of German-language
scholars further and argued that Pauls self-understanding was significantly shaped by his view of
his apostolate as being announced in certain passages of (Deutero-) Isaiah.9 Other scholars, how-
ever, began to point away from the particular focus on individual prophets and claimed that Paul
built on the prophetic tradition corporately. Thus, in an important monograph, Karl-Olav Sandnes
argued that Paul used biblical language reminiscent of prophetic call narratives in the OT, pre-
sented his apostolate in prophetic terms in other texts too, and used this element of his apostolic
self-understanding in situations which called for his authority.10 According to Sandnes, It is by
recalling the tradition of the biblical prophets that Paul is able to lay a legitimate foundation for his
apostolate.11 And more recently, Jeffrey W. Aernie asked, Is Paul also among the Prophets? Studying
2 Corinthians with its autobiographical traits, Aernie concluded that the prophetic tradition is not
the sole entity upon which Paul constructs and explains his apostolic ministry, but that it is one

5
Traugott Holtz, Zum Selbstverstndnis des Apostels Paulus, TLZ 91 (1966) 321330; reprinted in idem, Geschichte
und Theologie des Urchristentums: Gesammelte Aufstze (ed. E. Reinmuth & C. Wolff; WUNT 57; Tbingen: Mohr Sie-
beck, 1991) 129139. Holtzs argumentation is approved by Joseph Blank, Paulus und Jesus: Eine theologische Grund-
legung (SANT 18; Munich: Ksel, 1968) 224228, with the particular suggestion that Paul might have found a model for
this in the missionary self-understanding of Diaspora Judaism in terms of the Deutero-Isaianic servant.
6
Christian Wolff, Jeremia im Frhjudentum und Urchristentum (TU 118; Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1976).
7
See further Dietrich-Alex Koch, Die Schrift als Zeuge des Evangeliums: Untersuchungen zur Verwendung und zum
Verstndnis der Schrift bei Paulus (BHT 69; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1986) 3548; Florian Wilk, Die Bedeutung des
Jesajabuches fr Paulus (FRLANT 179; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1998) 292297. Outside German language
scholarship, see Albert-Marie Denis, Linvestiture de la fonction apostolique par apocalypse: Etude thmatique de
Gal 1, 16, RB 64 (1957) 335362, 492515 (335); Barnabas Lindars, New Testament Apologetic: The Doctrinal Significance
of the Old Testament Quotations (London: SCM, 1961) 223224.
8
Nevertheless, it would be fair to say that the attention is still limited in comparison with other Pauline topics. Tobi-
as Nicklas, Paulus der Apostel als Prophet, Joseph Verheyden, Korinna Zamfir & Tobias Nicklas, eds., Prophets and
Prophecy in Jewish and Early Christian Literature (WUNT II/286; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010) 77104 (78 n. 5): Ver-
glichen mit anderen Themen um Paulus ist dieses tatschlich kaum bercksichtigt worden.
9
Apart from Wilk, Die Bedeutung (n. 7), see idem, Paulus als Interpret der prophetischen Schriften, KuD 45 (1999)
284306 (esp. 298300); idem, Paulus als Nutzer, Interpret und Leser des Jesajabuches, Stefan Alkier & Richard B.
Hays, eds., Die Bibel im Dialog der Schriften: Konzepte intertextueller Bibellektre (NET 10; Tbingen: Francke, 2005) 93
116 (esp. 109113).
10
Karl-Olav Sandnes, Paul One of the Prophets? (WUNT II/43; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1991) 240.
11
Sandnes, Paul, 242.
 Lutz Doering, The Commissioning of Paul 3

of the conceptual backgrounds upon which Paul forms both his self-presentation and rhetoric.12
More specifically, Paul takes up Mosaic, Isaianic and Jeremianic traditions: Pauls purpose is not
to define his ministry in terms of individual prophetic figures, but to position himself within the
prophetic tradition corporately.13

However, it needs to be asked whether this tendency to shift the emphasis from individual proph-
ets to a general affirmation of the prophetic model is ultimately convincing. Prophecy is an am-
biguous and multifaceted phenomenon, and the question arises indeed whether Paul might have
seen his ministry in light of one or several particular prophets of Israel. In distinguishing Mosaic,
Isaianic, and Jeremianic motifs, Aernie himself recognizes that the individual profiles of these
prophets might have had an impact on Paul, and he thus somewhat relativizes his own blurring of
these profiles.14 The question concerning us here is whether and if so, in what ways the prophet
Jeremiah plays a role in Pauls apostolic self-understanding. We shall look at selected passages from
two letters in which Paul draws most clearly on his commissioning and the nature of his ministry:
chiefly, Galatians and, more cursorily, Second Corinthians, and conclude with the issue of letter
writing, common to Jeremiah and Paul, but largely overlooked in this respect in previous scholar-
ship.

2. Galatians 1:1516a
In Gal 1:1012, Paul programmatically asserts the independence of his gospel, which he received,
not from any human being ( ), but through a revelation of the risen Christ (
; 1:1112). He bolsters this statement with a section that is considered
one of the most autobiographical in Pauls letters: Gal 1:132:10(14). This section initially looks back
to Pauls earlier conduct , namely,15 that he exceedingly persecuted the church of
God and that he advanced beyond many peers among his people because of his

12
Jeffrey W. Aernie, Is Paul also among the Prophets? An Examination of the Relationship between Paul and the Old Tes-
tament Prophetic Tradition in 2 Corinthians (LNTS 467; London: T&T Clark, 2012) 247. In the attention to both self-
presentation and rhetoric, Aernie follows suggestions by Nicklas, Paulus der Apostel als Prophet.
13
Aernie, Is Paul, 248.
14
See, e.g., Aernie, Is Paul, 175, where he affirms that Paul, inter alia, presents his ministry within an Jeremianic frame-
work.
15
With, e.g., Hans Dieter Betz, Betz, Galatians: A Commentary on Pauls Letter to the Churches in Galatia (Hermeneia;
Philadelphia, PA: Fortress, 1979) 57, 6768, I take the statements in 1:13b and 14 as two explications of Pauls earlier
conduct in .
 Lutz Doering, The Commissioning of Paul 4

zeal for the traditions of his ancestors (1:1314). The phrase does not mean in Ju-
daism: it rather refers to the practice of a scrupulous Jewish lifestyle, as suggested by the occur-
rences of the term in 2 and 4 Maccabees.16 Thus, the following verses Gal 1:1516a certainly do not
describe an alleged conversion of Paul from Judaism, although there is an element of turning
away or change that some scholars prefer to reference in terms of conversion.17 However, as
long as we sufficiently account for this element, the category of commissioning or call appears
appropriate, in particular as the presentation of the event in Gal 1:1516a is concerned,18 which ap-
pears to be influenced by the call narratives of prophets in the Hebrew and Greek scriptures.19 Like
prophetic call narratives, these verses constitute what may be termed a specimen of ideal biog-
raphy, which concerns the installation of a person to a public ministry.20 Having thus been com-
missioned, Paul goes on to set out, he remained independent from, and had only measured contact
with, the Jerusalem authorities (1:16b2:10).

As a brief call report, Gal 1:1516a can be compared with passages from both Jeremiah (Jer 1:5)21 and
Deutero-Isaiah (Isa 49:1, 67; 42:6) in the version of the Septuagint.

Gal 1:1516a Jer 1:522 Isa 49:1, 5a, 6b Isa 42:6

(15) [ (5) (1) , , (6)
] ,

, , , ,

16
2 Macc 2:21; 8:1; 14:38 [bis]; 4 Macc 4:26. Cf. also the synagogue inscription of Stobi, CIJ I 694 (= IJO I, Mac1), and an
epitaph from Rome or Portus, JIWE II 584. Cf. James D. G. Dunn, Pauls Conversion: A Light to Twentieth Century
Disputes, idem, The New Perspective on Paul: Collected Essays (Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005) 341359 (351354), who
thinks of Pharisaic Judaism (353); similarly Martinus C. De Boer, Galatians: A Commentary (NTL; Louisville, KY:
Westminster John Knox Press, 2011) 85 (The Judaism referred to is the Pharisaic variety). A. E. Harvey, The Opposi-
tion to Paul, Studia Evangelica 4/1 (ed. F. L. Cross; TU 102; Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1968) 319332, on the one hand
more generally and on the other more specifically, renders the term as the Jewish way of life (322).
17
So Alan F. Segal, Paul the Convert: The Apostolate and Apostasy of Saul the Pharisee (New Haven: Yale University Press,
1990) 6 and passim. Cf. Michael Wolter, Paulus: Ein Grundriss seiner Theologie (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Ver-
lag, 2011) 2325, who allows for both Bekehrung and Berufung: Paul reflected on the event in some texts in terms of
the former and in others in terms of the latter.
18
With, e.g., Betz, Galatians, 64, 6970; Wolter, Paulus, 24; cf. already Schlier, Galater, 53.
19
Cf. Wilk, Die Bedeutung, 293: in Anlehnung an das Muster prophetischer Einsetzungsberichte.
20
For the concept of ideal biography (Ideal-Biographie) cf. Klaus Baltzer, Die Biographie der Propheten (Neukirchen-
Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1975) esp. 2728 (drawing on the work of the Egyptologist Eberhard Otto); for the applica-
tion to Gal 1:1516a cf. W. Stenger, Biographisches und Idealbiographisches.
21
Rengstorf, TWNT 1, 440 n. 192, speaks of Anspielung auf Jer 1, 5 durch Paulus selbst Gl 1, 15.
22
Texts of Jer and Isa LXX follow the Gttingen Septuagint.
 Lutz Doering, The Commissioning of Paul 5

(5a)

(16)
,
(6b)
. ,23

.

Gal 1:1516a Jer 1:524 Isa 49:1, 5a, 6b Isa 42:6

(15) But when God, who (5) Before I formed you in (1) Hear me, O islands, (6) I, the Lord God, have
had set me apart before the belly, I knew you, and pay attention, O na- called you in righteous-
I was born and called before you came forth from tions! After a long time ness, and I will take hold
me through his grace, the womb, I had consecrat- it shall stand, says the of your hand and
was pleased ed you; Lord. From my moth- strengthen you;
ers womb he called
my name.

(5a) And now thus
says Lord, who formed
me from the womb to
be his own slave,
(16) to reveal his Son to I have given you as a
me, so that I might (6b) See, I have made covenant to a race,
proclaim him among a prophet to nations I had you a light of nations, as a light to nations,
the Gentiles, made you. that you may be for
salvation to the end of
the earth.

As mentioned, several scholars, particularly among those writing in German, contest the impact of
Jer 1:5 on Gal 1:1516a and suggest that Paul developed his prophetic self-understanding exclusively

23
The phrase is also attested as a variant in Isa 49:6b ( , )
but not adopted in the textual constitution of the Gttingen LXX.
24
Translations of Jer and Isa LXX follow NETS.
 Lutz Doering, The Commissioning of Paul 6

from Deutero-Isaiah.25 The following arguments are being put forward: (1) Among prophetic texts,
only Isa 49:1 features the phrase , which corresponds precisely to Gal 1:15,
while the wording in Jer 1:5 is different. (2) Among the relevant texts, the important verb ,
highly pertinent for Pauls self-understanding (apart from Gal 1:15 see, for example,
Rom 1:1, mentioned above, and 1 Cor 1:1), occurs only in Isa 49:1 and 42:6. (3) The Deu-
tero-Isaianic servant announces salvation to the nations, whereas Jeremiah has been sent to pro-
claim to them predominantly perdition rather than salvation. (4) Since Isaiah, and here especially
Deutero-Isaiah, is broadly referred to by Paul (22 and 13 times in his letters, respectively), it is
probable that here, too, Paul is indebted to Isaiah, and not to Jeremiah. (5) While Isa 49:1, 5a, like
Gal 1:1516a, is worded in first-person autobiographical speech, Jer 1:5 is divine speech.

However, most of these arguments are less straightforward than they initially seem: The last point
(5) is not fully convincing, since the motif of light for the nations in the Isaianic passages is found
only within statements similarly worded as divine speech (Isa 49:6b; 42:6). Regarding point (2),
with the meaning of to call (German berufen), as in Gal 1:15, is found only in Isa 42:6 but not
in Isa 49:1. In the latter passage at least according to the LXX in conjunction with
has the specific meaning to name; thus, the issue here is not the commissioning of the
prophet but rather his being named. This might be different if Paul had access to a version closer to
MT, where naming is mentioned alongside calling:
. As long as
this is uncertain, we will have to assume that Paul would have conflated two different passages an-
yway;26 that is, Isa 49:1 alone would not be able to do the job.

25
Holtz, Selbstverstndnis; Wolff, Jeremia, 139140; Wilk, Die Bedeutung, 292297 (Wilk additionally suggests an allu-
sion to Isa 52:10 in Gal 1:16; ibid. 299300); cf. idem, Paulus als Interpret, 298299.
26
The difference between and is overlooked by Holtz, Selbstverstndnis, 132133, and also
missed by Sandnes, Paul, 61, but noted by Wilk, Die Bedeutung, 292: Allerdings lt sich die Berufungs-Aussage nicht
aus Jes 491 ableiten, da das Stichwort dort ebenfalls anders als in Gal 115 auf das Geburtsereignis bezogen ist.
Vielmehr rekurriert der Apostel mit dieser Aussage allem Anschein nach auf die Parallelstelle 426. Somewhat sur-
prisingly, Septuaginta Deutsch: Das griechische Alte Testament in deutscher bersetzung (ed. Wolfgang Kraus & Martin
Karrer; Stuttgart: Dt. Bibelgesellschaft, 2009) ad loc. decrees, without further discussion: Den Namen rufen ist (schon
in gypten) Formel fr Berufung (vgl. MT), thereby also harmonizing with MT. But is used in the
LXX, apart from invoking the name (sc. of God; Deut 32:3), for naming a person (Gen 3:30; 16:11 etc.) or a place (Gen
19:22 etc.), for the calling out of a name (Ruth 4:14), and for giving names to things (Ps 147:7, with dative); cf. also cf. Isa
43:1 with double accusative (I have called you [by] your name). Despite the difference between and
, Matthew Harmon still argues that the volume of vocabulary/syntax, combined with the thematic coher-
ence between Isa 49:1 and Gal 1:15, strongly suggests that Paul is alluding to Isa 49:1: Matthew S. Harmon, She Must and
Shall Go Free: Paul's Isaianic Gospel in Galatians (BZNW 168; Berlin: De Gruyter, 2010) 79.
 Lutz Doering, The Commissioning of Paul 7

Point (3) is valid as far as it goes to suggest the relevance of the later chapters of Isaiah for Paul.
However, it may be asked whether it, conversely, rules out Jeremiah because he would have pre-
dominantly been seen as a prophet of perdition for the nations. Thus, Hetty Lalleman has recently
commented: to see Jeremiah as mainly proclaiming a message of doom to the nations is a rather
one-sided view of his ministry: Jer. 1.10 speaks of building and planting just as much as about
judgment, and some prophecies to the nations do contain words of restoration and hope, e.g. Jer.
46.26; 48.47; 49.6 and 49.39.27 In this respect, it is possible that Paul toned down or disregarded the
aspect of judgment in Jeremiahs commission narrative (Jer 1:10); in 2 Cor 10:8 and 13:10, as will be
suggested below, he may have developed the antithesis for building up and not for tearing down
in a creative adaptation of Jer 1:10, maintaining only the word of restoration from the Jeremianic
pre-text. This would not be without precedent: if Paul draws indeed on Isa 49:1, 5a, 6b and 42:6 in
Gal 1:1516a he will likewise have disregarded both Isa 49:5b6a28 and the phrase
(as a covenant to a race, as NETS renders it) in Isa 42:6,29 which both reference a ministry imme-
diately directed to Israel and run counter to Pauls deployment of the prophetic passages.30 Since
Isaiah and Jeremiah are the two only scriptural prophets for whom an explicit sending to the na-
tions is mentioned,31 and as long as Jeremiahs message to the nations is not exclusively a negative

27
Hetty Lalleman, Pauls Self-Understanding in the Light of Jeremiah, A God of Faithfulness: Essays in Honour of J.
Gordon McConville on His 60th Birthday (ed. Jamie A. Grant, Alison Lo & Gordon J. Wenham; LHB/OTS 538; London:
T&T Clark, 2011) 96111 (106). One might add Jer 3:17, At that time Jerusalem shall be called the throne of the LORD,
and all nations shall gather to it, to the presence of the LORD in Jerusalem, and they shall no longer stubbornly follow
their own evil will, or Jer 12:1416, about the neighbours, if they will diligently learn the ways of my people, to swear
by my name, As the LORD lives, as they taught my people to swear by Baal, then they shall be built up in the midst of my
people.
28
Significant are the following omissions: to gather Jacob and Israel to him [sc. God] (6) And he said to me, It is a
great thing for you to be called my servant so that you may set up the tribes of Jacob and turn back the dispersion of
Israel. As compared with MT, LXX even strengthens the commission to Israel in v. 6 (MT: It is too light a thing ).
David A. Baer, Its All about Us! Nationalistic Exegesis in the Greek Isaiah (Chapters 112), As Those Who Are
Taught: The Interpretation of Isaiah from the LXX to the SBL (ed. Claire Mathews McGinnis & Patricia K. Tull; SBL.SymS
27; Atlanta, GA: SBL, 2006) 2947 considers it likely that the translator referred the function as a light to the nations
to his role in bringing Diaspora Jews back from such distant places (3132). This would evidently not have tied in
with Pauls vision of the salvation of both Gentiles and Jews. According to Arie van der Kooij, The Servant of the Lord:
A Particular Group of Jews in Egypt according to the Old Greek of Isaiah. Some Comments on LXX Isa 49,16 and Re-
lated Passages, Studies in the Book of Isaiah: FS W. A. M. Beuken (BETL 132; Leuven: University Press & Peeters, 1997)
383396, the servant who shall be gathered (Isa 49:5) is to be equated, within the whole of LXX Isaiah, with my
people in Egypt (cf. 11:16) and should be identified with the priest Onias (IV) and his followers (394395).
29
On this phrase see also above n. 23. It is understood to refer to Israel (in MT) by Baltzer, Biographie, 172, who takes
the servant as an individual figure. However, LXX Isa 42:1 presents the servant explicitly as Jacob and Israel (van der
Kooij, Servant, 383), although van der Kooij raises the possibility (ibid. 394) that this likewise (see the preceding
note) refers to a particular group within Israel, in which case covenant to a race can be taken as referring to Israel.
30
Thus correctly Wilk, Die Bedeutung, 295296. We thus have to distinguish between Pauls commission to the Gentiles
and his reflections (in Rom 11:11, 1314, 2526) that his apostolate to the Gentiles is also a form of ministry to Israel.
31
As noted by Holtz, Holtz, Selbstverstndnis, 131132.
 Lutz Doering, The Commissioning of Paul 8

one, I do not deem it convincing to rule him out as a prophetic model for Pauls self-
understanding. A similar conclusion emerges from critical interaction with point (4). Just because
the impact of Isaiah on Paul is well attested, this does not mean that Jeremiah may not have played
any role for him. Especially Holtzs claim that Paul hardly knew the Book of Jeremiah; at any rate,
he does not use it with certainty,32 can be contested, as we shall see in the following.

Regarding point (1), the observation that Isa 49:1, (cf. in v. 5a), is
closer to Gal 1:15 than Jer 1:5, , is certainly correct. However, it can be
questioned that the focus in Jer 1:5 is on a time long before the forming of embryonic Jeremiah in
his mothers womb.33 First of all, the phrase is in parallelism with
. Here, the reference is to coming out of the womb, and it can therefore be understood
that both Gods knowing and his sanctifying of Jeremiah take place in the womb. While not
necessarily synonymous, the parallelism suggests that the two divine actions are seen in a close
conjunction. That the focus may have been on Gods consecrating the prophet in the womb is sug-
gested by the Praise of the Fathers (laus patrum) in Sirach 49:7b, which renders Jeremiahs com-
missioning as follows:34

who even in the womb had been consecrated a prophet,

, to pluck up and ruin and destroy,
. and likewise to build and to plant.

For the first stichos, the Hebrew text attested by ms. B35 of Ben Sira reads . This
wording, intriguingly, suggests that the phrases in the womb and from the womb are potentially
interchangeable, so that (Jer 1:5) and () (Gal 1:15; Isa 49:1, 5) should not be
seen as semantically being too far apart from one another. The notion underlying both the Hebrew
and the Greek version of Ben Sira / Sirach at this point is that the prophet was singled out (made
or consecrated, respectively) by God in the womb. Whether this was the predominant view of

32
Holtz, Selbstverstndnis, 134: Er hat das Jeremia-Buch offenbar kaum gekannt; jedenfalls benutzt er es nicht sicher
erkennbar. Holtz himself relativizes this judgment somewhat when he concludes a review of potential passages from
Jer echoed in Paul by conceding that Paul may have used Jer doch nur in ganz geringem Ma (135).
33
As seems to be suggested by Bernhard Duhms remark, Lngst ehe es einen Jer gab, war er schon ein Gedanke
Gottes. Quoted by Wilhelm Rudolph, Jeremia (HAT 1/12; 2nd ed.; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1958) 45.
34
Text according to the Gttingen Septuagint. Cf. Sandnes, Paul, 3234, 6364.
35
Bodleian Ms. Heb. e. 62.
 Lutz Doering, The Commissioning of Paul 9

Jeremiahs call in Second Temple Judaism, is unclear, but it is at least one view attested in that
period. Such an understanding of Jeremiah is conceptually comparable to Pauls statement,
in Gal 1:15.

In addition, Sandnes36 has justly pointed out that in the Septuagint is frequently used for
places, times, animals or arrangements which are set apart and consecrated to the Lord,37 and that
the verb in these passages occurs in the context of 38, ,39 and .40 On account of
this inherent affinity between and , the phrase
in Jer 1:5 arguably provides a relevant background to Gal 1:15 (
)41 that is not covered by any of the Isaianic texts mentioned.42 Thus, the linguistic similari-
ty of Gal 1:15 with Isa 49:1 should not mask the amount of material difference between the two
texts: Isa 49:1 says nothing about the prophet being set apart by God in the womb. While it is likely
that Isa 49:1, 5a, 6b has influenced Paul, Jer 1:5 provides the better fit regarding this motif.

In addition, one could argue that the sequence of individual events in the calling of both figures
points to a greater similarity of Pauls call with that of Jeremiah, as compared with the Isaianic
servant. Over against the relatively straightforward prenatal setting apart or sanctifying of Jere-
miah and Paul, respectively, and their later inauguration into their ministry, the reflection on the
commissioning of the Isaianic servant in Isa 49:16 is much more complex, consisting (according
to the form attested in the Septuagint) of the account before the islands and nations of the serv-
ants naming in womb (v. 1), his equipment (v. 2) and confirmation as slave (v. 3), his stating the
fruitlessness of his task (v. 4), then a flashback to Gods forming the servant from the womb to be a
slave, with the brief to gather Jacob and Israel to him, interspersed by the servants statement that
he will be gathered and glorified before the Lord (v. 5), and offset by the divine saying that it is a

36
Sandnes, Paul, 61.
37
Exod 19:12; 29:27; Lev 20:2526; 27:21; Ezek 45:1, 4. In the passages from Leviticus, the Hebrew equivalent is hi.,
whereas in Exod 19:12 it is hi., in Exod 29:27 hof., and in Ezek 45:1 hif. In Ezek 45:4, is an inter-
pretative translation of .
38
Exod 19:14, 22, 23; 29:27.
39
Lev 20:26; 27:21; Ezek 45:1, 3, 4.
40
Ezek 45:2, 4.
41
Cf. also Rom 1:1 .
42
The specific relevance of Jer 1:5 for Gal 1:15 in this respect is also recognized by, e.g., Schlier, Galater, 53 nn. 12; Betz,
Galatians, 70 n. 134. Holtz, however, refers to Isa 41:9 and deems a better comparandum to
than Jers ; yet, Isa 41:9 clearly refers to Israel, and nothing is said about the election happening before birth.
 Lutz Doering, The Commissioning of Paul 10

great thing for you to be called my servant, to establish the tribes of Israel and to bring back the
dispersion of Israel; probably as rationale for this greatness, the servants installation as light of
the nations is given (v. 6). Reception of this passage by Paul requires a considerable reduction of
this complexity and especially, as we have already seen, disregard for the Israel-related aspects of
the servants task. The inauguration account Isa 42:6(9)43 is more concise, but it does not refer to a
calling in the womb, and it equally requires the bracketing of the task related to Israel (covenant
to a race, see above). Florian Wilk has suggested that Paul has not simply modelled his call on that
of the Isaianic servant but rather viewed his own call announced by Isaiah. This assumption may
be possible; but it can base itself predominantly on the passage Isa 49:1, 56, which on its own, as
we have seen, is insufficient to account for all aspects of Pauls account. Paul will therefore addi-
tionally have drawn on texts in which a prophetic figure is commissioned, and it is in light of the
foregoing likely that Jeremiah plays a role here. In sum, I am inclined to concur with Sandnes in his
conclusion, It is narrowminded to exclude the significance of Jeremiah for Paul.44 In my view,
Jeremiah is even more crucial than Sandnes allows for in the context his thesis that Paul conceived
of his ministry more generally in prophetic terms.45

Jeremiah might also have been formative for Paul in the apologetic use of his call narrative since he
is the prophet who confronts the issue of false prophets most clearly. Jeremiah has to defend his
prophecy amidst controversy in Jerusalem (for example, Jer 20:1011; 26:717). In doing so, he em-
phasizes that he has been sent by God.46 In his struggle for authority and legitimacy with other
prophetic figures, he addresses the issue of false prophecy heads-on: these prophets have not been
sent by God;47 they have not stood in the council ( ) of the Lord because had
they stood in it they would have preached his word;48 they proclaim lies in that what they prophesy
contradicts what will happen.49 A true prophet will be recognized by the coming of the events he

43
Cf. Baltzer, Biographie, 171: Isa 42:19 ist die Darstellung einer Einsetzung. Vv. 14 enthlt die Beratung ber die
Person, Vv. 59 die eigentliche Einsetzung.
44
Sandnes, Paul, 243.
45
See above, at nn. 1011, and Sandnes, Paul, 240246.
46
Jer 26 [33]:12:
; 26 [33]:15:

.
47
Jer 14:1416; 23:21; 27 [34]:15; 28 [35]:15; 29 [36]:9, 31.
48
Jer 23:1822.
49
Jer 27 [34]:910, 1418.
 Lutz Doering, The Commissioning of Paul 11

has prophesied,50 and the false prophets contradicting Jeremiahs prophecy will be punished by
God.51

In Gal 1:132:10(14), Paul, in turn, argues for the authority of his ministry with the independence of
his gospel from human agency and its direct attribution to a revelation of the risen Christ. This can
fruitfully be compared with Jeremiahs theme of false prophecy.52 The preached
by those who attempt to pervert the gospel of Christ, which the Galatians addressees are so willing
to follow (Gal 1:67), can be compared with the false prophecies uttered by Jeremiahs competitors.
In both cases, claims of divine origin as such are not decisive: even if Paul or an angel from heaven
preached against the gospel communicated by Paul ( ), they would be
anathema (1:8). Although the criterion of the true gospel is different from that of true prophecy,
the problem of competing claims is similar. As Bruce states, Paul was not a prophet in the sense
that Jeremiah was, and he could not appeal in the same way to the verdict of the coming days; but
he could in another fashion male the fulfilment of his message the criterion of its validity. Not only
had it produced a revolution in his own life, but the Galatian Christians themselves, as he reminds
them at the beginning of the third chapter, had experienced through the gospel of grace the liber-
ating power of the Spirit.53

3. Second Corinthians 101354

Another important section of a letter in which Paul defends his apostleship by reference to true
and false agents of God is 2 Cor 1013, which is perhaps (part of) a letter distinct from 2 Cor 19.55
Here, Paul reacts against a group of newly arrived apostles, which he calls pseudo-apostles
(, 2 Cor 11:13). Apart from the connection between the notions of pseudo-apostles
and pseudo-prophets (see above), there are a couple of further Jeremianic motifs in these chapters:

50
Jer 28 [35]:517.
51
Jer 29 [36]:89, 15, 2129, 3032.
52
Cf. F. F. Bruce, Further Thoughts on Pauls Autobiography (Galatians 1:112:14), Jesus und Paulus: FS Werner Georg
Kmmel (ed. E. Earle Ellis & Erich Grer; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1975) 2129; Sandnes, Paul, 63, 6668;
Lalleman, Pauls Self-Understanding, 101103.
53
Bruce, Further Thoughts, 25.
54
In order to prevent misunderstanding: In what follows I do not discuss quotations and echoes of Isaiah (e.g. in 2 Cor
6:12) not because I do not deem them relevant for Paul but because this contribution focuses on the potential sig-
nificance of Jeremiah for Paul.
55
This discussion cannot be taken up here but is not strictly necessary for our purposes. A recent overview from a
papyrological point of view is Peter Arzt-Grabner, 2. Korinther (PapKNT 4; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2013)
71116 (without firm conclusion).
 Lutz Doering, The Commissioning of Paul 12

(1) Both at the beginning and at the end of this section, Paul speaks about our authority which the
Lord has given for building you up and not for tearing you down (
).56 This is conceivable as an antithetical adaptation of the opposition between
building and destroying as part of the authoritative mission of Jeremiah (Jer 1:10).57 This opposition
recurs in relation to Gods work in the people of Israel and the nations throughout the book of Jer-
emiah. Although in the Septuagint of Jer 1:10 the relevant verbs are translated as
, we do find the opposition of
() and , within other parts of the book, in LXX Jer 24:6; 38:28; 49:10; 51:34. Aer-
nie suggests that Paul is, more generally, referring to the overarching theme of restoration and
judgment that moves throughout the course of Jeremiahs poetic and prosaic language.58

(2) In 2 Cor 10:17, we find a condensed citation of LXX Jer 9:2223:

Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord. The same quotation occurs also in 1 Cor 1:31, where it is
introduced by and concludes a section about Gods electing the foolish and the
weak. Thus, there is a connection with LXX Jer 9:2223 beyond the excerpt quoted: the references
to the wise and to the strong are missing from the excerpt and can only be established from the full
citation of the Jeremianic verses ( ,
).59 This makes it rather unlikely that Paul would have worked with a testimonia quo-
tation or a proverbial, oral saying.60 In light of the other repercussions with Jeremianic themes as
well as of specific pragmatic affinities it is also more likely that Paul took this passage from Jeremi-

56
2 Cor 10:8 ; 13:10
.
57
Cf. Lalleman, Pauls Self-Understanding, 106109; Aernie, Is Paul?, 166175.
58
Aernie, Is Paul?, 167.
59
Cf. Gail R. ODay, Jeremiah 9:2223 and 1 Corinthians 1:2631: A Study in Intertextuality, JBL 109 (1990) 259267; and
Christopher D. Stanley, Paul and the Language of Scripture: Citation Technique in the Pauline Epistles and Contemporary
Literature (MSSNTS 74; Cambridge: CUP, 1992) 187. For an extensive argumentation for Pauls indebtedness to Jer 9:22
23, cf. Ulrich Heckel, Kraft in Schwachheit: Untersuchungen zu 2. Kor 1013 (WUNT 2/56; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1993)
159214.
60
So Holtz, Selbstverstndnis, 134: drfte die Vermutung berechtigter sein, da Paulus das geprgte Wort dem
lebendigen Gebrauch, nicht aber einer schriftlichen Quelle in irgendeiner Form entnommen hat. In this, he is fol-
lowed by Koch, Die Schrift, 36. Koch does pay attention to the literary context but wonders why Paul, given the con-
text, does not quote the words italicized above. However, this may precisely be the way in which Paul weds textual
excerpt and literary context. It certainly suggests that he knew the literary context of the excerpt.
 Lutz Doering, The Commissioning of Paul 13

ah rather than LXX 1 Sam 2:10 / Od 3:10, where it is quoted as well.61 In 2 Cor 10:17, Paul uses the
same quotation to conclude a section about the distinction he perceives between his own legiti-
mate standard and that of his opponents.62 Argumentatively, the foundation for the quotation is
laid in the following verse 18 (introduced by ): the one who is approved is the one whom the
Lord commends, not the one who commends himself. Thus, this section shows that Jeremiah, far
from being a book hardly known to Paul, was a prophetic text he drew on in contexts in which he
defended his apostleship.

4. Second Corinthians 3:26

This segment of the letter initially refers to the congregation as a letter of Christ, written in our
heart, not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God. By this, Paul is in possession of the right
recommendation. Paul is involved in this letter insofar as the letter is taken
care of by us (2 Cor 3:23). This development of the metaphor may point to Pauls imagined func-
tion of a scribe or, perhaps even more apposite in view of ancient practicalities of letter writing, a
letter carrier.63 Consequently, Paul denies that his sufficiency comes of and from himself. Rather,
our sufficiency is from God, to be ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit.
For the letter kills but the Spirit gives life (2 Cor 3:56). Several scholars have suggested that Paul
is here referring to Jer 31 [38]:31, 33 in combination with Ezek 36:2627.64 Again, this has been ques-
tioned by Wolff and Koch: Wolff thinks that the motif of the stone tablets is an allusion to Exod
24:12; 31:18; 34:1, whereas he argues that the writing on the tablets of the heart takes up Prov 3:3 (B,
A, , ).65 Koch claims66 that Jer 31 [38]:33 is not a good fit for 2 Cor 3:3 since it merely mentions

61
Cf. Heckel, Kraft in Schwachheit, 172 n. 164: da der Apostel mit dem Zitat 1. Kor 1,31 und 2. Kor 10,17 die Ge-
meindeglieder nicht wie 1. Sam 2,10 LXX zum Tun von Recht und Gerechtigkeit auffordern, sondern an das Handeln
des Herrn erinnern will (vgl. 1. Kor 1,30; 2. Kor 10,8; 12,9), steht der Wortlaut von Jer 9,22f der paulinischen Intention
nher und verdient als Quelle den Vorzug gegenber jenem Septuaginta-Einschub im Lobgesang der Hanna. Jer 9:22
23 is also preferred as the source text by Wilk, Die Bedeutung, 102.
62
Aernie, Is Paul?, 181.
63
Pauls imagined role as carrier has been suggested by Hans Lietzmann, An die Korinther III (HNT 9; 5th ed., supple-
mented by Werner Georg Kmmel; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1969) 110, whereas Kmmel in his supplementary note,
ibid. 199, prefers the image of the scribe because he deems das Bild von der berbringung des Briefes durch Paulus
noch weniger vorstellbar. However, one type of the ancient letter of recommendation would have typically been
delivered by the person commended; cf. the type Empfehlungsbriefe mit Vorstellung in Rodolfo Buzn, Die Briefe
der Ptolemerzeit: Ihre Struktur und ihre Formeln (Diss. phil. Heidelberg, 1984) 48, and the discussion of relevant
letters ibid. 5458. Cf. now Arzt-Grabner, 2. Korinther, 171177, 270276, and the conclusion ibid. 277: Von der
Alltagssprache der Papyri her kann Paulus hier im metaphorischen Sinn als Briefbote verstanden werden.
64
Scott J. Hafemann, Paul, Moses, and the History of Israel: The Letter/Sprit Contrast and the Argument from Scripture in
2 Corinthians 3 (WUNT 81; Tbingen; Mohr Siebeck, 1995) 120 n. 98; Aernie, Is Paul?, 161166.
65
Wolff, Jeremia, 134137.
 Lutz Doering, The Commissioning of Paul 14

, not . Without paying attention to the coherence between 2

Cor 3:3 and 3:6, he additionally and thus somewhat atomistically claims that Paul adopted the
expression new covenant, not from Jer 31 [38]:31, but rather from the eucharistic tradition (1 Cor
11:25). However, it is questionable whether Prov 3:3 with its advice from teacher to pupil, bind
them [sc. my teaching and my commandments] around your neck and write them on the tablet
of your heart, is really the focus in this heilsgeschichtliche argumentation. If we have to look for
another scriptural reference, then Jer 31:33 with its mention of a writing of the laws into the hearts
becomes a vitally important link.67 Thus, despite the term new covenant being also available in
the eucharistic paradosis, Paul seems to have drawn on, and conflated, Jer 31:31, 33; Ezek 36:2627
and the stone tablets of the Exodus pericope in the development of his argumentation in 2 Cor
3:26.68 As Richard Hays has put it: The reader who follows these echoes will be led into a thesau-
rus of narrative and promise; only there, in the company of Moses, Jeremiah and Ezekiel, does
Pauls metaphor of the Corinthians as a letter from Christ disclose its true wealth.69 Hays further
points to the possibility that the connection between Jer 31 and the stone tablets of Exodus in Paul
may be prepared by the functioning of Jer 31:3139 as the haftarah correlated with the Torah read-
ing of Exod 34:2735 in the Palestinian triennial lectionary cycle. Thus, the linkage of these texts
might already have been traditional in the Judaism of Pauls time, though his distinctive interpre-
tation of the text was certainly far from traditional.70 However, although the Prophets were appar-
ently read in the first century CE, at least in milieus known to Luke (cf. Luke 4:1620; Acts 13:15, 27),
we do not know at all how firm the reading assignments to specific Torah portions were at the
time.71

66
Koch, Die Schrift, 4546.
67
See Hafemann, Paul, 120 n. 98: But contra Wolff and Koch, it must be emphasized that 3:6 combines Ezek. 36 with
Jer. 31 and that the reference to the Law as is explicable only on the ground of Jer. 31, and not Ezek. 36, since
only Jer. 31:31 ff. offers the reason for the need of the new covenant summarized in Pauls use of the letter motif.
68
It has also been suggested that Pauls primary reference to the call of Moses in 2 Cor. 2.16 by means of the discussion
of sufficiency may also represent a secondary reference to the call of Jeremiah since the ministry of Jeremiah is also
shaped by the essential characteristics of the prophetic call tradition (Aernie, Is Paul?, 160). For the issue of sufficiency
in relation to the call narratives of Moses and Jeremiah as well as to 2 Cor 2:16, cf. Hafemann, Paul, 4762.
69
Richard B. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989) 127128.
70
Hays, Echoes, 132.
71
A case for a certain sequence of haftarot in Philo of Alexandria (though not containing Jer 31) has been made by
Naomi G. Cohen, Philos Scriptures: Citations from the Prophets and Writings. Evidence for a Haftarah Cycle in Second
Temple Judaism (JSJSup 127; Leiden: Brill, 2007). However, this should be compared with the more cautious stance in
Ellen Birnbaums review of the book, JJS 60 (2009) 331334, especially 332333: it is far from certain that this reading
cycle existed in Philos day or that he knew these quotations from a liturgical context.
 Lutz Doering, The Commissioning of Paul 15

5. Jeremiah and Paul as Letter Writers

The reference to a letter in the previous section leads us to a further aspect that has, to my
knowledge, not yet been considered in discussions about Pauls potential indebtedness to Jeremi-
ah. Both Jeremiah and Paul were letter writers. What is more, Jeremiah is the only letter-writing
Schriftprophet,72 and his epistolary activity according to Jer 29 [36]:115, (1820 MT), 2123, 3032
(cf. 51 [28]:5964) has set the model for several letters pseudepigraphically attaching themselves to
either Jeremiah (Epistle of Jeremiah LXX; 4Q389 = 4QApocrJer Cd; 4 Baruch 7:2329[2434]; Tg. Jer
10:11) or his scribe Baruch (Baruch LXX; 2 Baruch 7886; 4 Baruch 6:1723 [1925]). Of these, Paul
knew Jer and may have known Ep Jer and also Bar LXX; 4Q389 shows more generally that Jeremi-
anic traditions, and among them the tradition of Jeremiah as letter writer, were alive in the late
Second Temple period. Both the prophetic persona of Jeremiah and his book do not become rele-
vant only after 70 CE,73 and this opens again, from another perspective, the possibility that Paul,
too, engaged with this prophet. In a recent monograph, I have argued, against a dominant trend in
New Testament scholarship, for taking Jewish letter writing more seriously when evaluating the
beginnings of early Christian epistolography.74 This applies also and particularly to Paul,75 who in
many ways founded and shaped early Christian letter writing. In the present context, I want to
focus on the potential relevance of the prophetic-paraenetic letters found in the Jeremiah-Baruch

72
Although Josephus, Ant. 10:106, going beyond the scriptural Vorlage, makes Ezekiel write down his prophecies
about the calamities that were coming upon the people and send the written record to Jerusalem. Note that Josephus
does not refer to the tradition of Jeremiahs letter to the Babylonian golah. This is all the more surprising in view of the
well-known Jeremiah typology deployed by Josephus (who also styles himself as a skilled letter writer outsmarting his
adversaries), as shown by the references below, n. 90; for possible reasons cf. Lutz Doering, Ancient Jewish Letters and
the Beginnings of Christian Epistolography (WUNT 298; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2012) 278280.
73
Against the earlier view argued for by Wolff, Jeremiah, 6668, 188192, echoed by Koch, Die Schrift, 46: So werden
anders als Jesaja und das Zwlfprophetenbuch Jeremia, Ezechiel und Daniel in der jdischen Literatur vor 70 n. Chr.
ausgesprochen selten zitiert. If we allow for other forms of intertextuality than zitiert this will now have to be modi-
fied in light of the infelicitously so-called pseudo-prophetic texts from Qumran (4QApocrJer AC; 4QpsEzek;
4QsDan).
74
Doering, Ancient Jewish Letters.
75
Apart from Doering, Ancient Jewish Letters, 377428, see Irene Taatz, Frhjdische Briefe: Die paulinischen Briefe im
Rahmen der offiziellen religisen Briefe des Frhjudentums (NTOA 16; Fribourg: Universittsverlag; Gttingen: Vanden-
hoeck & Ruprecht, 1991), esp. 110114. However, Taatz (ibid. 111) follows her teacher Holtz in questioning Pauls famili-
arity with, and use of, the Book of Jeremiah, without further arguments. Cf. further Franois Vouga, Der Brief als Form
der apostolischen Autoritt, Studien und Texte zur Formgeschichte (ed. K. Berger et al.; TANZ 7; Tbingen: Francke,
192) 758 (1216); Ulrich Mell, Der Galaterbrief als urchristlicher Gemeindeleitungsbrief, Paulus und Johannes: Exege-
tische Studien zur paulinischen und johanneischen Theologie und Literatur (ed. D. Snger & U. Mell; WUNT 198; Tbing-
en: Mohr Siebeck, 2006) 353380; Christina Hoegen-Rohls, Zwischen Augenblickskorrespondenz und Ewigkeitstexten:
Eine Einfhrung in die paulinische Epistolographie (BTS 135; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2013) 3439.
 Lutz Doering, The Commissioning of Paul 16

tradition76 for Pauls letter writing. Both Jeremiah / Jeremiah / Baruch and Paul write to com-
munities, not individual addressees.77 Both Jeremiah / Jeremiah / Baruch and Paul write under a
divine commission, so that their work can be considered Auftragsarbeit, work commissioned by
God.78 Emphatically, Paul deploys the title apostle in most of his letters,79 and he argues for the
divine origin and authorization of his apostolate in his correspondence with the addressees. In his
usual salutation, God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ80 are referenced as the sources of
grace and peace extended. It is thus clear that Paul writes his letters as part and parcel of his ap-
ostolic ministry. Mutatis mutandis, the idea of divine order is also present in some of the Jeremiah-
Baruch letters, although its instantiation changes over time: Initially, the prophet Jeremiah con-
veys the contents of his letter as divine speech with the Botenformel, Thus speaks YHWH (Jer 29
[36]:4). In the Epistle of Jeremiah, the relation becomes less immediate, but Jeremiah still writes
as it was commanded () to him by God (Ep Jer inscriptio). And in 4 Bar. 6:1315 [1618], an
angel instructs Baruch on what he should write to Jeremiah ( 6:13 [16]), although the con-
tents of the letter Baruch actually will write deviate to no small degree from the angels suggestion;
nevertheless, Baruch claims explicitly that it is the words of the angel that he is sending in this
letter (6:19 [22]). Overall, it seems worthwhile looking at Pauls letter writing activity in the context
of prophetic, and this means, within ancient Jewish tradition, predominantly Jeremianic, letter
writing.81

6. Conclusion

76
These letters are tradition-historically related. For reasons that have to do with the overall character of the respective
work and the imagined location of the character(s), some of these letters figure under the name of Jeremiah, others
under that of Baruch. For the present comparison with Pauls letters, I shall consider them as a group.
77
In a modified form, this is true even for the letters in 4 Bar. 6 and 7 despite the address being in the singular, since
these letters have wider ramifications for the people. See Doering, Ancient Jewish Letters, 253262.
78
So Christoph Burchard with respect to Jas 1:1: Christoph Burchard, Der Jakobusbrief (HNT 15/I; Tbingen: Mohr Sie-
beck, 2000) 48, also referring to Ep Jer inscriptio (see presently). Similarly for Paul, Vouga, Brief, 16, commenting on
the connection between the motifs in the prescript of Pauls letters (except for 1 Thess) with his claim of authority as
well as the authority of his gospel: Der Brief ist im Auftrag geschrieben und zugesandt und soll als solcher gelesen
werden.
79
See above, n. 1.
80
Except for 1 Thess; Kol only: from God our Father. Cf. also the similar formulae in the Pastoral Letters.
81
Thus, the self-stylization of the letter writer (Baruch) as in 4 Bar. 6:17 [19] may shed light on the
deployment of phrases like slave of God, slave of Christ Jesus or some variant thereof in New Testament letter pre-
scripts (Rom 1:1 , ; Phil 1:1 ; Tit 1:1 ,
; Jas 1:1 ; Jude 1 ). Rather than assuming literary
dependence between all of the New Testament letter writers, this may suggest a traditional self-stylization, taking up
the scriptural designation of prophets as slaves of God; cf. in greater detail Doering, Ancient Jewish Letters, 397398.
 Lutz Doering, The Commissioning of Paul 17

There can be no question that Paul drew to a large extent on Isaiah, and here especially on the
chapters attributed to Deutero-Isaiah, for the presentation of his self-understanding; others have
studied this in detail,82 and, in any event, a volume devoted to Jeremiahs scriptures would not be
the place to revisit this beyond the minimal account necessary here, as already stated above. How-
ever, it appears that the extreme scepticism exhibited by scholars like Holtz and Wolff as to Pauls
familiarity and interaction with both the book and the literary as well as traditional persona of
Jeremiah is unwarranted. Arguably, Paul alludes to the commissioning not only of the Isaianic
Servant but also of Jeremiah when arguing for the divine origin of his gospel of Jesus Christ in Gal
1:1516a, with the important theme of being prenatally set aside being most likely inspired by
Gods sanctifying Jeremiah before his birth. Further, he likely draws on the Jeremianic theme of
true versus false prophecy / prophets in both Galatians and 2 Corinthians. He quotes from Jer 9:22
23 twice in contexts in which he contrasts boasting in human and divine realities (1 Cor 1:31; 2 Cor
10:17), and he seems to interact with Jer 31 [38]:31, 33 in 2 Cor 3:26, where he presents himself as
minister of the new covenant. Finally, Paul will have been aware that Jeremiah is the quintessen-
tial prophetic letter writer who triggered a tradition of letters in the names of Jeremiah and Ba-
ruch. Even if Paul was not, and could not be, aware of all of the letters attributed to Jeremiah that
we know of, he may have witnessed the early stages of the development of this epistolary tradition.
At the very least, Jeremiah and Paul are comparable as letter writers in that they write with divine
authority to communities, addressing problems of such communities, and conveying to them di-
vine promises as well as paraenesis.

There are a few further parallels between Jeremiah and Paul, but it is unclear what significance, if
any, can be attributed to them. Since they are sometimes discussed in this respect, we shall briefly
refer to them. Thus, like Jeremiah (Jer 1:1), Paul hails from Benjamin (Rom 11:1; Phil 3:5),83 although,
unlike Jeremiah, he is from the tribe of Benjamin and not a priest84 from the land of Benjamin. Like
Jeremiah (16:24), Paul is apparently unmarried (1 Cor 7:78),85 although the emphasis in Pauls
case is, more specifically, on sexual abstinence. And like Jeremiah (for example, Jer 11:21; 12:6; 15:18),

82
See in particular Wilk, Die Bedeutung; Aernie, Is Paul.
83
As pointed out by Lionel Windsor, Paul and the Vocation of Israel: How Paul's Jewish Identity Informs his Apostolic
Ministry, with Special Reference to Romans (BZNW 205; Berlin: De Gruyter, 2014) 237238.
84
Windsor, Paul, 114119 refers to Pauls application of cultic language to his role in Rom 15:16 (on which see also M.
Vahrenhorst, Kultische Sprache in den Paulusbriefen [WUNT 230; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008] 314320), although
this should be distinguished from Jeremiahs priestly pedigree.
85
As pointed out by Hengel & Schwemer, Paul, 95.
 Lutz Doering, The Commissioning of Paul 18

Paul is exposed to suffering (for example, 1 Cor 4:11; 2 Cor 1:510),86 although the reasons and cir-
cumstances are quite different. In my view, there is not enough information in Pauls letters avail-
able to elevate these parallels beyond coincidence.

Moreover, Richard Hays argues that Rom 9:2021 provides an echo to Jer 18:36:87

Jer 18:36 Rom 9:2021

(3) , (20) ,
(4) , ; ; (21)
, ,
, ;
. (5) (6 )
,
;
.

Jer 18:36 Rom 9:2021

(3) So I went down to the potters house, and there he (20) But who indeed are you, a human being, to argue
was working at his wheel. (4) The vessel he was making with God? Will what is moulded say to the one who moulds
of clay fell away in his hand, and he reworked it into it, Why have you made me like this? (21) Has the potter
another vessel, as seemed good to him to do. (5) Then the no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one
word of the Lord came to me: (6) Can I not do with you, object for special use and another for ordinary use?
O house of Israel, just as this potter has done? Look, just
like the potters clay, so are you in my hand.

If this is an echo, then it will have to be considered, again, to be a conflation of (at least) Isaianic
and Jeremianic motifs, since Rom 9:20 contains verbal allusions to Isa 29:16b; 45:9b (LXX).88 Jer 18:6
seems to provide a slightly closer fit with Rom 9:21 in the rhetorical question about the potters
power over the clay. As an individual text, this example may not be compelling,89 but seen in con-
nection with other Jeremianic allusions it can enrich our perception of Pauls intertextual web.

86
As pointed out by Lalleman, Pauls Self-Understanding, 110111. And see above, n. 3.
87
Hays, Echoes, 6566.
88
See Wilk, Die Bedeutung, 304307, who speaks of [z]itathnliche Anspielungen. Koch, Die Schrift, 18, 144 refers to a
quotation of Isa 29:16b. Cf. Hays, Echoes, 206, n. 64: In addition to Jer. 18:36, we can hear echoes here of Job 9:12,
10:89; Isa. 29:16, 45:9, 64:8; Sir. 33:1013.
89
Consequently, Koch, Die Schrift, 18, adduces Jer 18:6 merely for the sake of comparison.
 Lutz Doering, The Commissioning of Paul 19

And while the passage in Rom 9:2021 may be taken to relate to Pauls role, these verses are not
explicitly dealing with his self-understanding.

In sum, Paul draws on more than one prophet for his self-understanding. Thus, he certainly does
not develop an extensive (or exclusive) Jeremiah typology, as has been suggested, for example, in
various ways, for Josephus, especially by David Daube and Shaye Cohen.90 Nevertheless, his inter-
action with Jeremiah points to a mode that is more contoured than a corporate reference to the
prophetic. Rather, Paul combines specific concepts derivative of specific prophets in fashioning his
self-understanding. He draws on (Deutero-) Isaiah, in part perhaps, as Wilk has suggested, as an-
nouncing Pauls ministry. In addition, however, he appears to draw on Jeremiah, notably in refer-
ence to his prenatal being set apart and his struggle against false apostles, and there are similar-
ities between Paul and Jeremiah (as well as his companion Baruch) in that they are authors of
authoritative letters to communities. Thus, is Paul well placed in a debate about Jeremiahs scrip-
tures? I suggest the answer is a qualified Yes: we see some of Jeremiahs scriptures in Paul, in
important aspects of his letters, but set alongside references to other scriptures, chiefly Isaiah.

90
See Josephus, War 5:391393; and cf. David Daube, Typology in Josephus, JJS 31 (1980) 1836; Shaye J. D. Cohen,
Josephus, Jeremiah, and Polybius, History and Theory 21 (1982) 366381 [reprinted in idem, The Significance of Yavneh
and Other Essays in Jewish Hellenism (TSAJ 136; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010) 105120]. In Ant. 10:79, Josephus claims
that Jeremiah even foretold the capture of Jerusalem in Josephuss own time.