At times we haphazardly use the Bible. We try to prove a point or one of our long-held beliefs, and we yank a verse out of thin air to confirm what we mean. This practice is called "Taking a verse out of Context." One classic example of this practice follows. The Bible teaches that smoking is OK. If Rebecca did it, we could do it. How do we know that Rebecca smoked? Look up Genesis 24:64. There you will find these words - And Rebekah lifted up her eyes, and when she saw Isaac, she lighted off the camel.
Of course, this is a ridiculous illustration. However, it is no more silly than many so-called theological "proof text" to absurd arguments these days.
When studying the Bible, we must remember the age-old adage that says context is king. If we don't know the context of a single verse, we will err in its interpretation. Theologian Dr. D. A. Carson attributed his father, saying, "A text without a context is a pretext for a proof text.
I bring up this subject because I came to a fascinating verse in Jeremiah 23:38. I was reading in the New International Version, where the text goes like this, Although you claim, 'This is a message from the Lord,' this is what the Lord says: You used the words, 'This is a message from the Lord,' even though I told you that you must not claim, 'This is a message from the Lord.'
A little confused, I went to a commentary and got the following explanation. - Seeing, notwithstanding all prohibitions of it, and directions to the contrary, they still persisted to call prophecy by this name, and that in a jocose and bantering way, and asked for it, and what it was, in a scoffing manner:
Therefore thus saith the Lord, because you say this word, the burden of the Lord; will continue to use it, though so displeasing to me: and I have sent unto you, saying, ye shall not say, the burden of the Lord; and therefore could not plead ignorance of his will, or excuse themselves, by saying they would have avoided it, had they known it was disagreeable to him: this was an aggravation of their impiety, that they should obstinately persist in it after he had remonstrated against it by his messages to them.
Well, now, there you have it. Clear as mud.
Written "explanations" like the above were for different generations. We don't use words like "notwithstanding," "jocose," and "remonstrated" too often these days. And, since this commentary entry wasn't too helpful, what are we to make of this seemingly strange verse?
It is here that context will help us. Here is my explanation of chapter 23.
A chapter that begins with "WOE!" warns that severe news is ahead. And indeed it was.
The shepherds, read religious leaders, did the opposite of what shepherds were to do. They were destroying, scattering, and ruining God's flock. God was about to do to them what they had done to His sheep. God would bring the scattered back to the fold and place His leader, the righteous Branch, His king from the line of David (Jesus), over them. This new king would rule wisely and take care of the sheep, and both Judah and Israel would be under his care. His name would be The Lord Our Righteous Savior.
This new turn of events would cause the world to relate Israel's salvation, not to the freedom from Egyptian slavery, but liberation from Babylonian captivity. But, unfortunately, the so-called prophets, these false mouthpieces from God, spewed their own message and afterward proclaimed it as from God. If these false prophets had spoken what God told them, the people would have turned from their evil ways (22).
So, let's look again at our original verse. Although you claim, 'This is a message from the Lord,' this is what the Lord says: You used the words, 'This is a message from the Lord,' even though I told you that you must not claim, 'This is a message from the Lord.'
Now we understand what is going on. These false religious leaders claimed that their message was from God when it wasn't. They were in essence taking words out of context and saying that they were from God. Thus they would be punished, and God would send the people they lead into exile for the next seventy years. Therefore most would die in captivity.
Comments
Post a Comment