This academic year, I’ve had the opportunity to oversee the master’s thesis undertaken by Anderson University School of Theology student and MTS degree candidate Andrew J. Klein. Andrew’s burgeoning specialty is in Hebrew Bible prophetic literature, and his thesis focuses on the possibility that Ezekiel, both the prophet writing from Babylonian exile in the early 6th century BCE and the Ezekielian “school” that was seemingly responsible for extending and completing his work, was dependent upon his predecessor Jeremiah for both thematic material and prophetic developments in Yahwism relating, significantly, to the realities of exile, displacement, judgment, theological disappointment, and hope for a just future. I’m very pleased to share that Andrew passed his defense on April 7, 2026, and is well on his way to having his thesis—entitled “Prophecies, Proverbs, and Polemics: Exploring Ezekiel’s Dependence on Jeremiah”—catalogued by ProQuest for the world of biblical scholarship to discover.
Andrew applies the methodology of inner-biblical allusions, developed primarily for discerning references from one book of the Hebrew Bible to another, as expressed by Michael Fishbane, Gary Edward Schnittjer, Matthew Swale, and others, to evaluate five different pericopae/passages from Ezekiel for the potential that their content betrays an allusion to texts and excerpts from Jeremiah:
| Parallel | Ezekielian Passage | Jeremianic Passage |
| 1. The Boiling Pots | Ezek 24:1-14 | Jer 1:13-19 |
| 2. “Bad Shephed” Polemics | Ezek 34 | Jer 23:1-8 |
| 3. Popular “Sour Grapes” Proverb | Ezek 18 | Jer 31:29-30 |
| 4. “New Hearts” Prophecy | Ezek 36:22-38 | Jer 31:31-34 |
| 5. Northern Foe / Gog Oracle | Ezek 38–39 | Jer 4–6, 8, 10 and 25 (excerpted poetic passages) |
The method involves comparing the Hebrew lexemes, verbal roots, and terminology shared in the passages between Ezekiel and Jeremiah, evaluating their usages contextually and rhetorically, and determining whether Ezekiel’s perspective qualifies as a repetition of Jeremianic themes alone or if it contains exegetical advancement of the apparent source text, which may entail expansion, correction, critique, recasting, or enhancement/amplification on Ezekiel’s part. Andrew found that each of these passages features an allusion to Jeremiah’s prophecies from Ezekiel, although some are categorized as more exegetically significant than others per his analysis. Andrew’s thesis statement reads as follows:
These passages [in Ezekiel, as listed above] each have a thematic and linguistic relationship with the appropriate texts in Jeremiah, and an analysis of the shared language, context, and rhetoric between these pericopae will demonstrate this. Each passage examined displays such significant lexical and contextual connections so as to qualify as allusions to Jeremiah. This project concludes that Ezekiel is dependent upon his prophetic predecessor, affirming the observations of [Michael B.] Shepherd and other scholars with fresh evidence from and analysis of the texts of Jeremiah and Ezekiel.
Andrew did not stop or content himself with the evaluation of Hebrew witnesses to Jeremiah and Ezekiel, however. An important piece of his analysis found that two of the comparable passages exhibit further development beyond the initial composition of Ezekiel solidifying or embellishing the allusions discoverable in the Masoretic Text of the Hebrew Bible alone, in one case where the Greek translator of Ezek 24:5 seemingly has the Septuagintal text of Jer 1:13 in mind when he makes translation choices, and in another case where the MT itself showcases an extended awareness of Jer 31:31-34 not apparently present in a manuscript of LXX Ezek 36 or, presumably, its Hebrew/Old Greek Vorlage.
Andrew combines these observations with a philosophical openness to blurring the lines of composition and textual transmission and calls for an increased awareness of the pluriformity of witnesses to the books of the Hebrew Bible. Text-critical projects aiming to produce a singular “original” text of the Old Testament, he argues, must be supplemented to showcase the readings of multiple Jeremiahs and Ezekiels, for example, as enabled by Ronald Hendel’s The Hebrew Bible: A Critical Edition series with SBL Press. This is particularly convincing in light of the comparison to eclectic scholarly endeavors in New Testament textual criticism, which produce a best text from a mix of ancient sources, whereas Hebrew Bible textual criticism still mainly reproduces so-called exemplar manuscripts like Leningradensis or Aleppo—“diplomatic” editions that are more deferential to prominent Hebrew texts rather than plumbing the fruits of the Septuagint and their Vorlagen, as scholars like Andrew would prefer.
Andrew’s scholarship shows immense potential, and he was a pleasure to work with during this academic year! Openness to feedback that ranges from grammar/syntax to presentation and argumentation are not universal features in graduate studies, but I found that Andrew was eager to allow his already keen scholarly instincts to benefit from further refinement and sharpening, even from an interloper to Hebrew Bible/Old Testament studies like myself. Fortunately, Andrew’s committee was rounded out by specialists with expertise in facets of Hebrew Bible studies, including Dr. Adam Harger of Anderson University and Dr. Matthew Swale of Warner University in Florida, who also served as the inspiration for Andrew’s interest in the prophets and inner-biblical allusions during his undergraduate experience in biblical studies courses.
Furthermore, Andrew’s work opens avenues for continued exploration of the relationship between Jeremiah and Ezekiel. Although Andrew documents how scholars preceding him observed and theorized the dependency in isolated ways, Andrew’s data-driven approach and methodology open the door for deeper comparison between the two books that extends not only to other passages from Ezekiel that might allude to Jeremiah, but also a renewed interest in Ezekielian composition that utilizes and assumes this relationship. What, then, might the transmission of a written or oral book of Jeremiah might have looked like in its earliest years? How does it travel from the Judahite context of the late southern kingdom, from which Jeremiah prophesied, to Ezekiel’s Babylonian context? If we presume Ezekiel’s familiarity with some version of Jeremiah, what other Ezekielian passages become more exegetically explicable? And finally, although Ezekiel surely stems from the prophet’s idiosyncratic variety of catalysts, would it be of any probative value to depict Ezekiel as inspired to translate the Jeremianic experience of Judah’s doomed final days to the exiled Israelites’ lamentable plight-turned-theological revitalization by the River Chebar in Babylon? The potential that Ezekiel is broadly motivated to extend Jeremiah’s prophecies to exiled Judahites is tantalizing and enabled by reflection on the cases that Andrew has unveiled in this fashion.
As of our last conversation, Andrew anticipates applying to doctoral programs in the year to come, and also forthcoming is his debut publication, “The Problem of Translation and Transliteration of Architectural Terms in LXX Ezek 40–42 and a Proposed Solution,” an open-source article in SBL’s TC: A Journal of Biblical Textual Criticism this December. His actual thesis will be under embargo for at least a year from its anticipated submission in May 2026, but I am sure he would be willing to share it in limited settings with fellow scholars and interested parties—just contact me and I’ll be happy to connect you with Andrew.
Congratulations Andrew Klein on your academic achievement, graduation from Anderson University’s School of Theology, and on the scholarly endeavors that lie ahead! Andrew’s abstract appears below.
Ezekielian dependence on Jeremiah has often been asserted, but few studies defend this claim and demonstrate this dependence via an analysis of lexical data. Even the most recent scholarship has relied on individuated observations to assert a relationship of dependence between the prophets. This study seeks to fill that empirical gap, conducting a full analysis of several pericopae in Ezekiel and the Jeremianic texts that may be influencing them (sorted by Jeremianic order): Jer 1:13-19 and Ezek 24:1-14; Jer 23:1-8 and Ezek 34; Jer 31:29-30 and Ezek 18; and Jer 31:31-34 and Ezek 36:22-38. Each potentially parallel text is evaluated through an examination of shared lexical data and shared contextual/structural features. Then, if an inner-biblical allusion is present, the rhetorical function of the allusion is treated. Additionally, the diffuse parallels to the Jeremianic “Enemy from the North” tradition in the Gog Oracle of Ezek 38–39 are examined. Through a full analysis of these features, it is demonstrated that certain passages in Ezekiel are dependent upon and intentionally allude to texts from Jeremiah, often in an exegetically significant fashion. This demonstrable dependence has great bearing on text-critical issues related to the different editions of Jeremiah and Ezekiel preserved in the Masoretic Text, the Septuagint, and its Vorlagen. In order to evaluate these text-critical matters, innovative ways of viewing the growth and transmission of the biblical texts must be incorporated.
Robert D. Heaton, Ph.D. 