Jeremiah had a difficult job to do. He felt called to deliver the bad news of impending disaster, namely that the whole region of the Holy Land was about to be overrun by the forces of the Babylonian Empire. Other prophets felt called to dispute the message delivered by Jeremiah. They felt so strongly, in fact, they stirred up a plot to kill Jeremiah. Those plans failed. Jeremiah lived, but he may have lived cautiously.
I feel some sympathy for the leaders of Judah. One prophet said, “Doom and gloom,” while other prophets said, “Peace and prosperity.” Whom ought the leaders to believe? I suppose it may have depended on the consistency of truth told by the prophets, respectively, and any convictions arising in the leaders as a result.
We are led to believe Jeremiah stated truth when he condemned the leaders’ oppression, greed, injustice, and idolatry. If those leaders came under conviction, if they thought, “He’s right, we have oppressed the poor, we have stolen in order to gain wealth, we have defended our clique against the rightful claims of others, and we have worshiped idols,” then they may have concluded, “All of that is true, so we must believe he’s telling the truth, even in the bad news he seems compelled to publish.”
To be clear: I do not feel sympathy for those leaders in their wrongdoing. My sympathy stems from the predicament of their having received conflicting messages from the prophets. What does one do when the advice one has requested is mixed? For that matter what does one do with unsolicited advice, part of which advises one thing and part of which advises another?
No comments:
Post a Comment