Jeremiah, who is not even close to finished with his scathing
indictment of Israel, would go on to say “But just look at you! Your are
putting your confidence in a false belief that will not deliver you. You
steal. You murder. You commit adultery. You lie when you
swear on oath. You sacrifice to the God Baal. You pay allegiance to
other gods whom you have not previously known. Then you come in and
stand in My presence in this Temple I have claimed as My own and say, ‘We are
safe!’ You think you are so safe that you can go on doing all those
hateful sins!” (Jeremiah 7:8-10)
Though many of these things were most likely being carried
out by the acting priesthood, it is safe to presume that the people, who also
stood under Jeremiah’s gaze, are doing the same while also being complicit in
the activity of their leaders. Jeremiah continues to deliver the words of
the Lord, saying “So I will destroy this Temple which I have claimed as My own,
this Temple that you are trusting to protect you. I will destroy this
place that I gave to you and your ancestors, just like I destroyed Shiloh”
(7:14). These are harsh words indeed.
Jesus’ words, as they are directed at the Temple authorities and call
Jeremiah to mind, were no less harsh.
So it is plain to see
that Jesus is using Jeremiah and the historical situation there recorded as His
model. However, is it appropriate to consider if Jeremiah had a model
upon which he drew in some way? If Jesus is relying upon something within
Israel’s history to trigger the thoughts that He desired the people to have and
to provoke the response and hopefully transformation that He desired to see, it
would be reasonable to suggest that there was something within Israel’s history
prior to Jeremiah’s day upon which he was relying as well.
Surely, if Jesus is
not limited to only bringing new teaching founded upon an entirely new basis,
then it would not be right to foist this type of responsibility upon one of the
prophets. Therefore, beyond the assertion that Jeremiah obviously had to
base his understanding of the delivery of the covenant God’s judgment on
Israel’s covenant failures, one could assert that Jeremiah’s words and ministry
had to be rooted within the history and covenant by which Israel was defined in
order for it to have any conceivable impact and permanence (which, as has been
said, would have been true for Jesus as well).
If this premise is
accepted, then to what historical situation might one look in order to gain
insight into Jeremiah’s understanding? Is it possible to find something
similar to the people’s reliance upon the Temple itself to protect and preserve
them from the judgment that was owed to them? The first book of Samuel records
a story that may provide an answer to those questions. The fourth chapter
records in a story in which it is reported that “the Israelites went out to
fight against the Philistines… The Philistines arranged their forces to fight
Israel. As the battle spread out, Israel was defeated by the Philistines,
who killed about four thousand men in the battle line in the field”
(4:1b-2).
When considering the
way in which the Creator God deals with His people, raising up foes such as the
Babylonians and the Romans in order to exercise His judgments, as referenced by
Jeremiah and Jesus, then the Philistines, clearly, demand to be understood as
an instrument of the Creator God’s judgment against His covenant people,
exercised in accordance with His covenant promises as the covenant people
failed to live up to their covenant obligations.
No comments:
Post a Comment