Abstract
This article offers an interpretation of the textual unit Jer 30,12–17. Within the so‐called “Book of Consolation”; this is one of the seven units introduced by the prophetic formula “Thus speaks “. The literary integrity of the unit has been questioned in the literary‐critical and redaction‐historical approaches (e.g. Duhm, Volz, Holladay), but has been defended without much convincing argument, in the “new‐literary"‐approach (e.g. Bozak, Brueggemann). The two main critical arguments against the coherence are discussed: (1) The shift in the divine image: from a punishing God in 12–15 to a caring God in 16–17, and (2) The character of the particle in 16a, that when translated as “Therefore”;, provokes a hard transition within the unit. As for the first problem, the conceptual background of the metaphor “incurable wound”; is discussed. Against the hypothesis of Hillers it is argued, based on Mesopotamian parallels, that the image is not related to a treaty‐ or covenant‐context, but supposes the image of God as having divine force majeure. This powerful God is not presented in Jer 30,12–17 as acting high‐handedly. The text expresses the possibility of divine changeability. Regarding the second problem, it is argued that can be translated adversatively. The unit Jer 30, 12–17 is interpreted as presenting a changeable God, who punishes his people for deeds that are assessed as “sin”;, but who will heal this people in a changed situation.