Jeremiah 28:1

JEREMIAH 28

JEREMIAH vs. HANANIAH

Having already tried to bring about the execution of Jeremiah under the reign of Jehoiachim, the false priests and prophets elected to counteract Jeremiah's teachings by a dramatic confrontation and denial of his prophecies publicly. Their representative in this endeavor was Hananiah, son of Azur, a Gibeonite, probably a priest, a self-called false prophet with the brazen face, the loud voice, and the arrogant self-confidence that made him quite convincing with his smooth message of peace, prosperity, restoration and glory for Judah, all to be within two years!

There are extensive differences between the Septuagint (LXX) and the text of ASV, which is more complete than the LXX, which is certainly a mere abbreviation of the American Standard Version. The details of the American Standard Version are confirmed by recent archaeological discoveries, thus confirming it as superior to the LXX. False critics love to make those differences the basis of efforts to discredit certain words in the true text.

Hananiah means "`The Lord is Gracious,' and there are no less than fourteen characters in the Old Testament who bear this name."[1] Nothing is revealed in the Bible regarding this man except what is written here. The very fact of his being a Gibeonite should have suggested caution to the people. The citizens of this place deceived Joshua and earned for themselves favored status in the conquest of Canaan (Joshua 9:23); King Saul massacred large numbers of them (2 Samuel 21:1ff); and there Joab treacherously slew Amasa (2 Samuel 20:4ff).[2]

Jeremiah 28:1-4

THE FALSE PROPHECY

"And it came to pass in the same year, in the beginning of the reign of Zedekiah, king of Judah, in the fourth year, in the fifth month, that Hananiah the son of Azur, the prophet, who was of Gibeon, spake unto me in the house of Jehovah, in the presence of the priests and of all the people. Thus speaketh Jehovah of hosts, the God of Israel, saying, I have broken the yoke of the king of Babylon. Within two full years will I bring into this place all the vessels of Jehovah's house, that Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon took away from this place, and carried to Babylon: and I will bring again to this place Jeconiah the son of Jehoiachim, king of Judah, with all the captives of Judah, that went to Babylon, saith Jehovah; for I will break the yoke of the king of Babylon."

"In the beginning of the reign ... in the fourth year ..." (Jeremiah 28:1). The critics, practically all of them, agree that these clauses "are self-contradictory."[3] Now we do not deny that there are in the Bible examples of some copyist's error, or some scribal note, here and there, that may have been accidentally and unconsciously adopted into the traditional text of the scripture. However, we do not believe that this is a blanket reason for explaining everything men do not understand as "a gloss," or "a copyist's error."

Some of the wisest men who ever wrote commentaries on the Bible find no fault with these clauses.

<SIZE=2>"These clauses accord with the common reckoning by dividing a reign into two halves; and, as Zedekiah reigned eleven years, this date was in the first half, therefore `in the beginning.'[4]

"Michaelis states that, "up to the fourth year, Zedekiah had the throne only upon the basis of his yearly appointment by Nebuchadnezzar, but that he was vested with the royal title and authority in the fourth year." (This would make the first year of his full authority as indeed the fourth year). This opinion was also adopted by Scholz.[5] The first four years of Zedekiah's reign were indeed `the beginning of it,' because in those years he was tributary to the king of Babylon; but afterward he was truly "king" in rebellion against Babylon.[6]

"Some interpreters have been troubled by the fact of the fourth year of Zedekiah's reign being here referred to as `the beginning'; but according to Jewish usage it was indeed `the beginning' of his reign, for the Jews divided periods of time into two halves, the beginning and the end. The simple meaning of the passages is, `In the first half of his reign.'"[7]

In the light of such observations as these, we are constrained to label the critical claims of "an interpolation," or of "a gloss," or of "a copyist's error," as being far more likely the inadequate efforts of scholars to explain their ignorance. After all, where is there the slightest evidence of any kind of an error in the text?

"In the presence of the priests and of all the people ..." (Jeremiah 28:1). "He chose either a sabbath or a new moon that he might confront Jeremiah not only in the presence of the priests but also of all the people."[8] It is amazing that not merely this comment, but practically the exegesis of this whole chapter appears almost verbatim in the writings of Payne Smith. On this verse, Smith has this: "He seems to have come to Jerusalem on purpose to confront Jeremiah, and to have chosen either a sabbath or a new moon for the occasion, that his act might be done not only in the presence of the priests, but also of all the people."[9]

"Thus speaketh Jehovah, the God of Israel, saying ..." (Jeremiah 28:2). Hananiah here presented himself as an authentic prophet of God, using all of the right formula, and confronting Jeremiah with a contradiction of that true prophet's word, which was as blunt, convincing, and evil as the claim of Satan himself in the Garden, that "Ye shall not surely die!" How were the people to know who spoke the truth? This chapter will shed light on that problem.

Cheyne commented that, "One has only to say a thing very firmly, and to repeat it very often, and the very force of utterance will make way for it. A brazen face, a loud voice, and a positive assertion are enough to convince many people of assertions that are against all reason."[10] The recent Nazi, Adolph Hitler, exploited this human weakness to the limit, adding the principle that, "the bigger the lie, the more people will believe it!"

One thing that might have bolstered the confident arrogance of Hananiah was the fact that, "Nebuchadnezzar at that very time was busy putting down a rebellion at home, and probably Hananiah's friends had sent him word of this."[11] Additionally, there was also the conspiracy of the kingdoms against Babylon mentioned in the previous chapter. It all seemed very promising from the standpoint of a "prophet" who was relying upon his own political shrewdness, instead of relying upon what God had revealed to him.

"I will bring again to this place Jeconiah ..." (Jeremiah 28:4). For many years, one of the favorite arguments against the authenticity of the prophecy of Ezekiel was the fact that certain events were dated from the reign of Jehoiachin who reigned only three months. "However, archaeology has turned the tables on the critics and has revealed this feature of Ezekiel as an impregnable argument in favor of its genuineness."[12] It also confirms the authenticity of this trust of the false prophet Hananiah in the speedy return of Jeconiah to Jerusalem. "That Jeconiah was still considered king of Judah, even by the Babylonians themselves, was proved in 1940 by the publication of tablets from the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, enumerating the recipients of royal bounty, and including `Yaukin (Jeconiah), king of the land of Yahud (Judah).'"[13]