machine-draft · no human review5 passages · 1,290 words
Work dossier · summary and historical context
Summary
The Fragmenta in Jeremiam attributed to Gregory Thaumaturgus survive only in catenae and florilegia, chiefly the Sacra Parallela of John of Damascus. No continuous manuscript exists. The fragments, of disputed authorship, show Origenist allegory and moral exegesis, applying New Testament proof-texts to Jeremiah's text. They likely date from the 3rd to 8th centuries, with no secure external witness before the 8th. The khazarzar edition lacks critical apparatus, hindering verification of selection and completeness. The work reflects Alexandrian exegetical traditions but may incorporate later redaction.
The Fragmenta in Jeremiam is significant as a rare witness to early Christian exegesis of Jeremiah, attributed to a major 3rd-century figure. It illustrates the use of allegory and New Testament typology in Alexandrian tradition. However, its disputed authorship and fragmentary survival highlight the challenges of reconstructing patristic works from catenae. The text also shows how later Byzantine compilers preserved and possibly reshaped earlier material.
Historical context
The fragments are attributed to Gregory Thaumaturgus (c. 213–270), a pupil of Origen and bishop of Neocaesarea in Pontus. However, no continuous manuscript of his commentary on Jeremiah survives; the fragments appear only in Byzantine catenae and florilegia, especially the Sacra Parallela (8th century). The earliest secure attestation is from John of Damascus (c. 675–749). The text's genre is a homiletic commentary, using lemmata from Jeremiah followed by exegesis with New Testament proof-texts and moral exhortation. The community is likely Greek-speaking Eastern Christian, possibly monastic or scholastic. The fragments show Origenist allegory, consistent with Gregory's teacher, but also phrasing that may reflect later Antiochene or Cappadocian redaction. The transmission is fragmentary and indirect, with no independent liturgical or canonical use. The khazarzar edition provides no manuscript witnesses or critical apparatus, so the selection criteria and completeness are unverifiable.
term — a Coptic word and the rendering chosen for it
background — historical or institutional context the text presupposes
structure — the passage's function in the work
reception — later use — liturgy, canon law, daughter versions
sense — what the passage says
caution — uncertainty or a contested reading
Pipeline notes
coverageNo English translation could be identified: a language model asked twice could not name one, though it could not rule one out either. That is not proof that none exists — translations in dissertations, recent books and other modern languages are easily missed.
limitThe English is a machine draft produced passage by passage from the transcribed Coptic; no human has verified it. The commentary is model-written and cites only keys the pipeline could resolve.
registerRegister: commentary in ancient Greek; the English keeps the liturgical formulae and the vocatives rather than normalising them.
structurePassages: 5 narrative.
sourceSource edition: khazarzar — Migne PG text (public domain); khazarzar host and the digitising project state no licence for this layer
He speaks peaceably to his neighbor, but harbors enmity within himself," etc. The scribes and Pharisees of the people of the Jews would not have inherited so much "woe" from the Savior, were it not for their hypocrisy; for in the refutations of their sins, the Lord did not cease to foretell on every occasion: "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites," calling them whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful to men, but within are full of dead men's bones and every impurity. For if we do some good to our neighbor through unfeigned love, we hear from the Savior: "Inasmuch as you have done for one of these, my least brethren, you have done for me." And likewise, if we show something base toward a brother through deceitful and abominable hypocrisy, or through any other sin whatsoever, we sin similarly against God. Hypocrisy, therefore, is a terrible and hostile thing; and deceit hidden in the heart, for the deception of those who approach simply, those who possess love, speaking one thing from the mouth but bearing another in the breast, it entices. Pride is not good, possessing much vainglory; for it is clear, it is clear, that every perfect good comes from God; and it is not possible for a man to receive it otherwise, as what has been said is truly the most true of all things, that one who boasts ought to pride himself only on this: on understanding and knowing that the Lord Himself is the one who performs mercy, judgment, and righteousness, and that in this lies the will of God.
For the divine is pleased with such a man, and he bears the good things steadfastly and securely throughout, when he attributes the cause of the present good things to the truly most causative one, to whom one must refer the cause also of the good things remaining. How is it that the Word, having named them "circumcised," then names not only Jews, nor Israelites, nor the house of Jacob, nor even the proper name itself, Judah, but includes among them also Egypt, and Edom, and the sons of Ammon, and the sons of Moab, as if all were uncircumcised in their hearts? For does the Word perhaps wish to say something like this, that the sons of Israel seem indeed to have the law of circumcision, but differ in no way from the other uncircumcised nations, being themselves also uncircumcised in their hearts, not having cut off their vices? Or, I say, does the Word wish to say something like this, that the sons of Judah have indeed the word of circumcision and the other oracles of God, but nevertheless differ in no way from those who do not have the law of God, Egypt and Edom, the sons of Ammon and the sons of Moab? Or does it perhaps call all together "circumcised," not only the Israelites and the Jews, but indeed also the remaining nations, as the letters being read also indicate? For it called all "circumcised," then subjoined Egypt and Judah and the remaining nations. And how is it possible to say that all of them are circumcised? All these named nations that are set forth, if one were to reason from above, one would find them to be from the seed of Abraham.
Abraham was circumcised at the age of ninety-nine, he himself and his sons, Ishmael and all the men of his household, and the homeborn slaves, and the silver-purchased slaves from foreign nations; he circumcised them. For these things are recorded verbatim in Genesis. How then does he bring circumcision down upon the Egyptians, and upon Edom, and upon the sons of Moab, and upon the sons of Ammon? Ishmael was circumcised, as I said, according to the law, being about thirteen years old, since he was a son of Abraham by Hagar, the Egyptian maidservant. And
a little later. And Ishmael settled, it says, in the desert, and he became an archer, and he dwelt in the desert. And his mother brought him an Egyptian wife. Why are all these things mythologized for me? I seek those circumcised in Egypt, and I seek those circumcised in the desert, all whom the account records. They seem, then, to be from the lineage of Ishmael, who dwelt in the desert and took an Egyptian wife; and I no longer doubt that these are either those circumcised in Egypt, or those who cut their hair in front and dwell in the desert. For it is likely that Ishmael, having received the paternal law of Abraham, as from a God-loving father, and having withdrawn from his own country, did what he considered most secure for himself, being ancestral traditions, and did these things also for his own descendants. Thus, indeed, one can find Egyptians or those dwelling in the desert circumcised. And how also Edom? This Edom also descends from the seed of Abraham.
For Abraham had a son Ishmael by Hagar, and Isaac was born of Sarah; and Isaac again had two sons, Esau and Jacob.
And Jacob did not take a wife of foreign blood, nor of the Canaanites, his father having taken precautions in these matters. However, Esau took as wife the daughter of Ishmael, the sister of Nebaioth, thus taking as his wife his own cousin on the father's side, but a foreigner on the mother's side, and he became the father of many children. His firstborn was Edom, and the sacred word will bear witness for me, saying: "These are the generations of Esau, father of Edom." Therefore, just as was said a little earlier concerning Ishmael, that having received the law from his father, that of circumcision, he transmitted it to his own descendants, so it is permissible for us to say concerning Esau, that being the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham, the law which he received from both his grandfather and his father, coming down to him, he transmitted also to his children, and he himself circumcised Edom somewhere. Is it no longer unclear? And how about the sons of Ammon and the sons of Moab? Those who are more diligent know these to be the sons of Lot, the nephew of Abraham. And a little later: So from Lot were born both Ammon and Moab, each from his own daughters, at the time when the daughters of Lot, supposing the land to be deserted, wished to preserve the race of men in this way; for Moab was born to the elder, interpreted as "from father," and Ammon to the second, interpreted as "the son of the race.
All these things having been said no longer persuade us with difficulty to agree that all the circumcised are so called by the sacred word, Jeremiah himself bearing witness both concerning the sons of Moab and concerning the sons of Ammon, that he also numbered these among the circumcised. And after a little. But if some benefit must also accrue to us from these sayings, one might rightly speak thus, that the many races of men have a pretense of righteousness, and bear some traces of the law of God, and are somehow shaped, and artificially cultivate virtue, but their purpose stops at the form, at pretense and dissembling, and we have not earnestly endeavored to cut out evil from ourselves and the reproaches against Egypt and against Idumea. 2. According to the ways of the nations, do not learn. But what do you learn? You learn the law of God, which says: You shall have no other gods besides me; gods who did not make heaven and earth, let them perish from the face of the earth and from beneath the heaven.
Citation. Tergwame, “Fragmenta in Jeremiam”, khazarzar-gregory-thaumaturgus-fragmenta-in-jeremiam:1, machine-draft, 2026. https://naxiai.com/christian/works/khazarzar-gregory-thaumaturgus-fragmenta-in-jeremiam#s1
Colophon. Source: khazarzar ·
licence: Migne PG text (public domain); khazarzar host and the digitising project state no licence for this layer ·
model: deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor ·
provider: Relace ·
cost: $0.0032 ·
generated 2026-11-15.