NO EXCUSES

"And Hananiah spake in the presence of all the people, saying, Thus saith the LORD; Even so will I break the yoke of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon from the neck of all nations within the space of two full years. And the prophet Jeremiah went his way. Then the word of the LORD came unto Jeremiah the prophet, after that Hananiah the prophet had broken the yoke from off the neck of the prophet Jeremiah, saying, Go and tell Hananiah, saying, Thus saith the LORD; thou hast broken the yokes of wood; but thou shalt make for them yokes of iron. For thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; I have put a yoke of iron upon the neck of all these nations, that they may serve Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon; and they shall serve him: and I have given him the beasts of the field also. Then said the prophet Jeremiah unto Hananiah the prophet, Hear now, Hananiah: The LORD hath not sent thee; but thou makest this people to trust in a lie. Therefore thus saith the LORD; Behold, I will cast thee from off the face of the earth: this year thou shalt die, because thou hast taught rebellion against the LORD. So Hananiah the prophet died the same year in the seventh month." Jeremiah 28: 11-17

We have here an account of a pair of duelling prophets. Two men with two vastly different messages had come into conflict within the context of the Levitical worship system operative during the rise of the Babylonian Empire. Both claimed to communicate the revelation of God. But only one actually spoke on God's behalf. Had we lived within that context, I wonder whether or not we would have been able to discern the true from the false. Certainly, we might find it easy to say that we would have, looking back in retrospective over the centuries, and having the completed Canon of Scripture available to us to reveal the outcome of the debate. But perhaps, had we lived then, we might not have found it so easy. Consider the language of Hananiah's message. It certainly sounds spiritual. It employed biblical terminology and phraseology. Perhaps Hananiah himself had a winning and positive personality in contrast with that of the weeping prophet, Jeremiah, who came burdened with a grievous and solemn message of repentance and impending judgement that conflicted with the political and social temperament of the day. Evidently, he knew how to carry himself so as to convince the Israelite people of his deep spirituality, his close walk with the Lord, and of the authenticity of his message. Perhaps he had even convinced himself, as men so often do, that he stood on the side of truth. Whatever the case, in a convincing message that sounded biblical, he succeeded in leading the Jews away from the clear revelation of God as given by inspiration through the prophet Jeremiah. But underneath the surface, God had identified "rebellion against the LORD." I wonder how often we commit this same sin today. We have received the clear revelation of Scripture.

We know to do good. And yet, we devise cunning explanations robed in the words and phrases of Scripture that seek to justify our disobedience. Perhaps we say that a certain biblical course of action "would not be wise, at this time." That certainly sounds judicious. Perhaps we say that we want to take "a balanced approach." After all, we must guard against fanaticism and extremism. No matter how we phrase it, the sin remains the same. Our excuses may sound wise, but it is not the wisdom that descendeth from above. They may sound balanced, and yet such balance is but a synonym for lukewarmness. Whatever our terminology, it amounts to nothing more than a cloak of maliciousness to veil our disobedience and rebellion against God. The heartbeat of holiness beats in submissive obedience to the Word of God. It learns God's Word. It yields to God's Word. It obeys God's Word. No debates. No discussions. No excuses.