"Did not your father eat and drink, and do justice and righteousness? Then it was well with him. He judged the cause of the poor and needy; then it was well. Was not this knowing Me?" says the LORD (Jeremiah 22:15–16 NKJV).

Jeremiah wrote against Shallum (Jehoahaz), Jehoiakim, and Coniah (short for Jeconiah, also known as Jehoiachin). These two sons and one grandson of Josiah did not follow in Josiah's footsteps. They did not judge equitably or promote justice for the poor and needy; instead they oppressed them and used them for their political and material advantage (cf. Jeremiah 22:13–14, 17). Jeremiah also declared that the people had "forsaken the covenant of the LORD their God, and worshiped other gods and served them" (Jeremiah 22:9).

Although Josiah met an untimely death in battle against Pharaoh Neco of Egypt, Jeremiah told the people of Judah that the one to mourn was not Josiah but his son Shallum, who would be taken into exile in Egypt and would never return to Jerusalem (Jeremiah 22:10–12). As for wicked Jehoiakim, whom God had warned during his years of prosperity (22:21), he would be dragged away and cast out beyond the gates of Jerusalem without anyone mourning him and without a proper burial (cf. Jeremiah 22:18–19). Finally, his son Coniah would also be taken captive to Babylon, never to return, and none of his descendants would sit on David's throne (22:24–30). Even though Jesus's legal father Joseph was a descendant of Coniah (Matthew 1:11–12), Jesus was not Coniah's biological descendant, since He was born of the virgin Mary; in my view Luke's genealogy traces Mary's line, which does not pass through Coniah.

The text above says that Josiah's righteous acts demonstrated his "knowing" God. Jeremiah wrote in an earlier text:

Thus says the LORD: "Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, Let not the mighty man glory in his might, Nor let the rich man glory in his riches; But let him who glories glory in this, That he understands and knows Me, That I am the LORD, exercising lovingkindness, judgment, and righteousness in the earth. For in these I delight," says the LORD (Jeremiah 9:23–24 NKJV).

God grants authority and wisdom to us not simply for self-preservation and personal benefit, but so that we may bless others, upholding justice, practicing mercy, and defending the weak. In these ways, the LORD says, we glorify Him and please Him.

AI-Expanded Reflection

Jeremiah 22:15–16 contains one of the Bible’s most striking definitions of what it means to know God. Josiah lived well, the verse says; he ate and drank, and it went well with him, because he “judged the cause of the poor and needy.” Then God asks, “Is not this to know me?” Knowledge of God in Jeremiah is not merely correct information about Him. It is a life that reflects His character in how we treat the vulnerable. The contrast is with Jehoiakim, who built a lavish palace with cedar paneling and red paint using unpaid forced labor (22:13–14). The king who built his house by injustice did not know the God whose delight is steadfast love, justice, and righteousness (9:24).

The history behind this chapter is tragic. Josiah was killed at Megiddo in 609 BC when he confronted Pharaoh Neco (2 Kings 23:29). The people made his son Shallum, also called Jehoahaz, king, but Neco deposed him after three months and took him to Egypt, where he died (23:31–34). Neco installed his brother Eliakim, renaming him Jehoiakim. Jeremiah’s point in 22:10 is that the people should weep not for the dead Josiah, who was at rest, but for the exiled Shallum, who would never see his homeland again.

The prophecy that Jehoiakim would receive “the burial of a donkey” (22:19) raises a known question, since 2 Kings 24:6 says simply that he “slept with his fathers.” Interpreters have offered several explanations: that his body was later disturbed or dishonored during the Babylonian siege, that “slept with his fathers” is a formula for death rather than a description of burial, or that the prophecy uses vivid language for a death without honor or mourning. The text does not settle the question, but all agree that Jehoiakim died unlamented.

The judgment on Coniah (22:24–30) is also discussed in connection with Jesus’s genealogy. Several solutions are held. Some, like the comment, understand Luke 3 to trace Mary’s ancestry through David’s son Nathan, avoiding Coniah altogether. Others hold that both Matthew and Luke trace Joseph’s line and note that Jesus, born of a virgin, was Joseph’s legal heir but not his physical descendant, so the curse on Coniah’s physical offspring does not apply. Still others point to Haggai 2:23, where God calls Coniah’s grandson Zerubbabel His “signet ring,” deliberately reversing the image of Jeremiah 22:24, as a sign that God later lifted or limited the curse. Each view preserves Jesus’s rightful claim to David’s throne.

The comment’s closing application gathers the chapter’s meaning well. Authority, wisdom, and wealth are gifts entrusted for the good of others. Jeremiah’s words still apply to anyone with influence, whether in a nation, a business, a church, or a family. Mary’s song celebrates the same God who “has brought down the mighty from their thrones and exalted those of humble estate” (Luke 1:52). To know this God is to share His concern for the poor and needy.

The LORD commanded Jeremiah to tell the besieged people of Judah, "Behold, I set before you the way of life and the way of death" (Jeremiah 21:8). The way of death was to remain in the city, where sword, famine, and pestilence would kill them. The way of life was to surrender to the Babylonians.

King Zedekiah had sent his servants to the prophet Jeremiah. He was hoping that "perhaps the LORD will deal with us according to all His wonderful works, that the king [i.e., Nebuchadnezzar] may go away from us" (Jeremiah 21:2). He would be sorely disappointed, because Jeremiah brought him news that God was against him and the people of Judah, so that any who still remained in the besieged city would soon be struck down without mercy by Nebuchadnezzar, the Babylonian king (cf. Jeremiah 21:7).

Zedekiah would be captured by the Babylonians, his sons killed before his eyes, and then his eyes put out, so that the death of his children would be the last thing he saw as he languished in a Babylonian prison for the rest of his days (Jeremiah 39:6–7; 52:10–11).

Yet he had gone to Jeremiah with the hope that the LORD would deliver him! What did he do wrong?

He did not trust and obey the LORD!

He may have humbled himself. He may have done the right thing by seeking to hear from the LORD through God's prophet. There was nothing wrong with hoping for mercy. But Zedekiah did not listen when God answered him, and finally God simply left him to be judged.

It is not enough simply to be humble. It is not enough simply to inquire of God. These things are but means to an end, namely, to trust and obey God. As Solomon wrote,

Now all has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter: Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the duty of all mankind. For God will bring every deed into judgment, including every hidden thing, whether it is good or evil (Ecclesiastes 12:13–14).

The fear of God should lead to keeping God's commandments. Again, we read these words from Micah:

He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God (Micah 6:8).

Here too, humility before God should produce acts of justice and mercy, which are what God requires of His good servants.

When God has shown us the right thing to do, it does no good simply to hope that God will change His mind. In fact, the Bible says that if we know the right thing to do and choose not to do it, it is sin for us (James 4:17). It would be foolish to think that God would bless us when we sin in this way. On the other hand, James also wrote,

But whoever looks intently into the perfect law that gives freedom, and continues in it—not forgetting what they have heard, but doing it—they will be blessed in what they do (James 1:25).

Consequently, as failure to obey will bring certain judgment, obedience will bring promised blessing.

AI-Expanded Reflection

Jeremiah 21 comes from the final siege of Jerusalem, around 588 BC, but it is placed early in the book, out of chronological order. The editors of Jeremiah often arranged material by theme rather than date, and this chapter follows Jeremiah’s own suffering in chapter 20. Zedekiah’s request that God act “according to all his wonderful deeds” (21:2) may be a deliberate reminder of the Assyrian siege a century earlier, when Hezekiah sought Isaiah’s help and the Lord struck Sennacherib’s army (2 Kings 19). Zedekiah hoped history would repeat. God’s answer is that this time He Himself fights against the city (21:5).

The words “I set before you the way of life and the way of death” (21:8) echo Moses in Deuteronomy 30:15–19, where Israel is called to choose life by loving and obeying the Lord. In Jeremiah the choice has taken a painful form: life lies in surrendering to Babylon. Many in Jerusalem considered this treason, and Jeremiah was accused of weakening the soldiers’ morale (38:4). Obedience to God can look like defeat. The same message appears in Jeremiah 27, where the prophet wears a yoke to show that God has given the nations into Nebuchadnezzar’s hand for a time.

Zedekiah’s story contains a detail that sharpens the comment’s point. Later in the siege he secretly consulted Jeremiah again (38:14–28). Jeremiah told him plainly that if he surrendered, his life would be spared and the city would not be burned (38:17). Zedekiah’s reply is revealing: “I am afraid of the Judeans who have deserted to the Chaldeans” (38:19). He believed the word, but he feared people more than he trusted God. His failure was not a lack of information or even of inquiry. It was a failure to act on what he knew.

This is exactly the danger the comment describes, and James names it: knowing the right thing and not doing it (James 4:17), or hearing the word without doing it (1:22–25). Jesus ends the Sermon on the Mount with the same warning, contrasting the wise builder who hears and does with the foolish builder who hears and does not do (Matthew 7:24–27). Religious seeking can become a substitute for obedience. Zedekiah repeatedly asked for a word from God, perhaps hoping for a different answer, while refusing the one he had already been given.

The comment’s closing contrast between judgment and blessing is true to both Jeremiah and James. It also carries a note of grace. Even at the last hour, Jeremiah offered Zedekiah a way of life. God’s warnings are themselves acts of mercy, because they come while there is still time to respond. For readers who recognize themselves in Zedekiah’s hesitation, the lesson is not despair but urgency: the word God has already made clear is the word to obey today.

"But they say, 'That is in vain! We will follow our own plans,'" each acting according to the stubbornness of his evil heart (a paraphrase of Jeremiah 18:12).

There are different interpretations of the people's response, "It's hopeless!" It is also translated "It's no use!" or "That is in vain!" Some understand the phrase as defiance — telling Jeremiah, in effect, to stop talking about judgment and repentance. Others understand it as the people saying that Jeremiah's words are futile.

Jeremiah declared God's word of judgment and called the people to repent, but they answered, "It's hopeless!" What is interesting is that they openly acknowledged that each of them was acting "according to the stubbornness of his evil heart." They did not sugarcoat their actions. They were bound to their idolatry, and in their own eyes there was no changing them.

Friends, I sometimes wonder whether a similar sense of hopelessness enters the mind of someone caught in addiction, or even someone struggling with depression, who imagines they cannot change. They may feel trapped in a course they know is harmful, and helpless to change it. Feeling that entrapment, they look for ways to cope and to push back against guilt and against calls to change.

In his letter to the Corinthians, Paul reminded them of the stubborn rebellion of the Israelites during their wilderness wanderings. They gave in to temptation and suffered the consequences of their sins. Paul wrote that these things happened as examples and were written down "for our instruction, on whom the end of the ages has come"; therefore let anyone who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall (cf. 1 Corinthians 10:11–12).

The Corinthians might have observed this history and, instead of learning, despaired. If such things happened to most of their ancestors, what hope did they have of doing better? But Paul did not stop at verse 12. He continued with a remarkable promise: no temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man; "God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your ability," but with the temptation will also provide the way of escape; therefore flee from idolatry (a paraphrase of 1 Corinthians 10:13–14).

Paul declared that God would not allow believers to be so overpowered by temptation that they are completely lost to it. It was not a guarantee that they would never fall into temptation and sin, but that they would not be hopelessly trapped in it. They could repent. They could escape and return to the Lord.

Friends, are you sometimes weighed down by your powerlessness against temptation and sin? Do you feel hopelessly caught in thoughts and behaviors that do not honor God or express your confidence in Him? Don't despair. Even if you find yourself again at the bottom rung of the ladder of faith, remember that God has put you on the ladder, you will never fall off, and He will enable you to climb again.

AI-Expanded Reflection

Jeremiah 18 contains the potter's-house image (18:1–11), discussed at #2058, and the people's reply in 18:12 is the tragic response to it. God had just said that He could reshape a nation that turned from evil — and the people answered, in effect, that there was no point. Their "hopelessness" was really a settled decision: "We will follow our own plans." Jeremiah later names the heart of the problem: "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?" (17:9). And he records God's answer: "I the Lord search the heart" (17:10).

The comment's pastoral turn to those who feel trapped is compassionate, and it is worth drawing a careful distinction. Scripture speaks to the hopelessness that comes from sin, and 1 Corinthians 10:13 is a great comfort there — God provides a way of escape. Depression, however, is a real illness that can affect anyone, including the most faithful believers; figures such as Elijah (1 Kings 19:4) and the psalmists (Psalm 42–43; 88) describe despair that was not rooted in rebellion. For anyone experiencing persistent hopelessness, the most faithful step is often to seek help from a doctor, counselor, or pastor, alongside prayer and the support of trusted friends. Addiction, too, is best met with both spiritual care and practical help. The comment's closing image — God holding His children on the ladder — is a word of hope for all of these: "He who began a good work in you will bring it to completion" (Philippians 1:6).

God tells Jeremiah that if at any time He declares concerning a nation or kingdom that He will pluck up, break down, and destroy it, and that nation turns from its evil, "I will relent of the disaster that I intended to do to it." And if at any time He declares concerning a nation that He will build and plant it, and it does evil in His sight, not listening to His voice, then He will relent of the good He had intended to do to it (a paraphrase of Jeremiah 18:7–10).

We have here a very interesting explanation of the nature of God's oracles of judgment and blessing under the Old Covenant. They were not absolute predictions but pronouncements of judgment pending the people's response. They allowed for the possibility of withdrawal. When God pronounced judgment on a nation, the nation was given an opportunity to repent, and if it did, the oracle allowed God to relent from the judgment He had pronounced. On the other hand, if God pronounced blessing on a nation, He could withdraw that blessing if the nation turned away from Him.

These provisions were always part of the Old Covenant Law, which included not only commands but also curses for disobedience and blessings for obedience.

We see this dramatically illustrated in Jonah's prophecy. He announced only disaster against Nineveh, the dreaded Assyrian enemy of Israel. But when the king and people of Nineveh repented at Jonah's preaching, God relented from the disaster He had announced. Did God change His mind? In light of what we understand about judgment oracles, I would answer no, because every such oracle leaves room for God to relent if there is repentance. It takes nothing away from God's omniscience and immutability. Rather than saying God changed His mind, it would be more accurate to say He did not reveal His whole mind to Jonah — although Jonah's own words suggest he knew this was God's intent: he knew God was "gracious... and merciful, slow to anger," abounding in steadfast love, and relenting from disaster (Jonah 4:2).

God is not fickle, changing His mind on a whim. People change their minds because they receive new information that moves them from one course of action to another. But how can One who knows all things, the beginning and the end, receive information He does not already have? God "knows everything" (1 John 3:20). He declares the end from the beginning and says, "My counsel shall stand, and I will accomplish all my purpose" (Isaiah 46:10). Even before a word is on our tongue, He knows it altogether (cf. Psalm 139:4). His word will not return to Him empty but will accomplish His purpose (cf. Isaiah 55:11).

God is omniscient and always achieves His purposes, so I believe it would be unbiblical to claim that God changes His mind in the human sense. "God is not man, that he should lie," nor a son of man, that He should change His mind (Numbers 23:19). "For I the Lord do not change" (Malachi 3:6). Every good and perfect gift is from above, from the Father of lights, "with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change" (James 1:17).

So let us understand: God does not change, and He does not change His mind about His definite predictions of the future. He knows the end from the beginning, but He does not always let us see everything. Today's passage helps us understand that God's oracles of judgment and blessing tied to the Old Covenant were not definite predictions of what would be, but conditional pronouncements.

Friends, some use the fact that God gave these conditional oracles to argue that prophecies can fail. They use this to justify their own failed prophecies or those of other modern self-proclaimed prophets, hoping to remove any accountability. After all, if a prophecy does not come true, they can simply say God changed His mind. In my view, they commit the error of overgeneralization, treating all prophetic pronouncements the same. They are not. The Law given through Moses, with its blessings and curses, was conditioned on the response of those under it. Isaiah's prophecy of Cyrus, the future king of Persia, was not a conditional pronouncement.

Now, a general note on prophecy. God clearly declared that prophecies that contradict what He has already revealed, and prophecies that do not come true, are not from Him. Whoever will not listen to God's words spoken through the prophet, God will require it of him; but the prophet who presumes to speak in God's name what He has not commanded, or speaks in the name of other gods, shall die; and if a prophet's word in the Lord's name does not come to pass, that is a word the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken presumptuously, and you need not fear him (a paraphrase of Deuteronomy 18:19–22).

Friends, I know of pastors who, in my view, are "false prophets," prophesying falsely and blaming their failures on the very people to whom they prophesied. Some prophetic training ministries even boast of producing prophets who grow in accuracy over time. There are even theologians who try to redefine "prophecy," arguing that New Testament prophecy can be fallible even though Old Testament prophecy was not. I believe this has no basis in Scripture. What havoc would such thinking do to passages like this: no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone's own interpretation, no prophecy was produced by human will, but men "spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit" (2 Peter 1:20–21)?

If prophecies were ever fallible, how could anyone rely on biblical prophecy? If prophecies were fallible, God's Word would be fallible, and if God's Word is fallible, how could anything it says be trusted? I believe those who claim that biblical prophecy is inerrant while today's spoken prophecies are not stand on very shaky ground. Did God somehow speak infallibly through one group and fallibly through another? I believe this is human invention with no biblical basis. Some gifts from God do not allow for fallibility, because allowing it would strike at God's very integrity. Prophecy is definitely one of these gifts. Some argue that because some gifts, such as administration, do not seem to require perfection, we must assume the gift of prophecy does not either. That is a non sequitur. Just because gifts share a category does not mean everything in that category shares the same requirements. And even if they did, why assume fallibility as the standard rather than infallibility, which is more biblically defensible?

Dear friends, beware of false prophets!

AI-Expanded Reflection

Jeremiah 18 begins with the prophet watching a potter at work. When the vessel was spoiled in his hand, the potter reworked it into another vessel "as it seemed good to the potter to do" (18:4). God's point was both sovereign and hopeful: "Like the clay in the potter's hand, so are you in my hand" (18:6). The conditional principle the comment explains follows directly — God's announced plans respond to the moral response of nations. Paul later uses the potter image to emphasize God's sovereignty (Romans 9:20–21), while Jeremiah uses it to call for repentance; both emphases belong to Scripture.

The comment's explanation of passages where God "relents" is a classic one, held by many theologians: such language describes God's consistent character as it meets changing human responses, rather than a change in His eternal purpose. Other interpreters emphasize that these texts reveal a genuine relational responsiveness in God, while still affirming that He does not change in His nature or promises. Both views agree with Numbers 23:19 and James 1:17. On whether New Testament congregational prophecy can be fallible, Christians differ (see #2002 and #1957); all agree with the comment that Scripture alone is the infallible Word of God and that claims to speak for God must be tested.

God says that if at any time He declares concerning a nation or kingdom that He will pluck it up, break it down, and destroy it, and that nation turns from its evil, He will relent of the disaster He intended; and if at any time He declares that He will build and plant a nation, and it does evil in His sight and does not listen to His voice, He will relent of the good He intended to do to it (a paraphrase of Jeremiah 18:7–10).

God says that when He pronounces an oracle of judgment, if the nation repents, He will relent from the judgment. God consistently demonstrated this, whether with an individual (e.g., Manasseh) or a city (e.g., Nineveh).

God also says that when He pronounces a blessing, if the nation disobeys Him, He will relent from the blessing. Again, especially with Israel, God consistently demonstrated this. He brought them into the Promised Land of Canaan and blessed them with prosperity, but they disobeyed His Law, so He judged them and ultimately removed them from the land.

Most of us recognize that God worked this way with His oracles of judgment and promises of blessing in the Old Testament. However, some today have used this to support what I believe is the very wrong proposition that prophecies from God can fail. The fallacy is taking something particular and making a generalization from it. It is like saying that because John the Baptist wore camel's hair and lived on locusts in the wilderness, everyone should do the same. It fails to recognize that John the Baptist was a special case, not a model for every believer. There is no command to model our lives on John the Baptist; Jesus Himself did not live that way. In my view, this kind of generalizing from particular Scriptures contributed to the rise of monasticism and the errors I believe it introduced into the church. The same thing happens even in evangelical churches today.

From the beginning of the giving of the Law, God indicated that oracles of judgment and blessing were conditional, dependent on the people's obedience. So we cannot compare this to someone who prophesies something that does not come true. If there is a general truth here, it is not that prophecies can fail but that God's prophecies never fail. Moses tells Israel that if they wonder how to know a word the Lord has not spoken, the answer is this: when a prophet speaks in the Lord's name and the word does not come to pass, the Lord has not spoken it; the prophet has spoken presumptuously, and they need not fear him (a paraphrase of Deuteronomy 18:21–22).

Therefore, when someone prophesies that a person will get a particular job, or a pastor prophesies that a couple will stay together, or another prophesies rain on a particular day after months of drought, or another that Christ will return on a certain day, and these things do not happen, I believe they are false prophets. In the Old Testament such presumptuous prophesying was punishable by death: a prophet who presumes to speak in the Lord's name what He has not commanded, or who speaks in the name of other gods, shall die (a paraphrase of Deuteronomy 18:20).

It is a shameful thing that professing Christians embrace the notion of fallible prophecy, or the idea that prophets can mature into their gift. Where do these ideas come from? I believe they come from those who need to justify prophecies that did not come true. They search the Scriptures diligently — not for truth, but for anything that will justify their error — often by taking verses out of context.

Friends, some of you know people who encourage others to "prophesy," as if everyone should. Some of you know people who say, "God told me..." and when it does not come true, make excuses. If you have been studying the Bible carefully, you also recognize those who interpret the Bible loosely, taking verses out of context and immediately applying them to their own experience — or worse, to others'.

You may say, "We don't hold to what they practice or believe." But you support their ministries financially. You are silent when you hear their errors, even though they influence others who are too young in the faith to know better. Are we not called to judge those inside the church? Paul asks, "Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge?" God judges those outside; "Purge the evil person from among you" (a paraphrase of 1 Corinthians 5:12–13).

If you find yourselves standing idly by, do you think you will not be held to account? We are called to turn our brothers — even pastors and teachers — from their error. James writes that if anyone among us wanders from the truth and someone brings him back, whoever brings back a sinner from his wandering "will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins" (a paraphrase of James 5:19–20).

Jeremiah was a lonely voice of truth among the many false prophets of his day. Yet he stood on the Word of God, even when it meant standing alone. Today there are many who tout this or that word from the Lord that goes beyond or against God's written and only authoritative Word. They claim authority but refuse accountability. I believe God will judge such claims severely. But let us not be taken in by them. Instead, let us stand steadfastly on God's Word alone.

AI-Expanded Reflection

Jeremiah 18 is the potter's house chapter, and its image frames the conditional principle the comment describes. Jeremiah watches a potter working clay; when the vessel is spoiled, the potter reworks it into another vessel "as it seemed good to the potter to do" (18:4). God's sovereignty over the nations is not mechanical — it responds to repentance and rebellion. Jonah 3:10 is the classic example: when God saw how they turned from their evil way, "God relented of the disaster." Jonah himself complained that he knew God would do exactly this (4:2).

The comment's point that God's genuine predictions never fail is well grounded in Deuteronomy 18. On the related questions it raises, Christians hold different views. Continuationists who believe prophecy continues in the church often distinguish Old Testament prophecy, spoken with full divine authority, from New Testament congregational prophecy, which Paul says must be weighed (1 Corinthians 14:29; 1 Thessalonians 5:20–21) and which is exercised "in proportion to our faith" (Romans 12:6) — a basis some use for the idea of growth in the gift. Cessationists, like the comment, reject such distinctions. Similarly, Christians disagree about monastic traditions, which have included both abuses and figures widely admired across denominations. These are good-faith debates, and all sides agree that claimed words from God must be tested and that failed predictions should not be excused.

Jeremiah 18

6 “O house of Israel, can I not do with you as this potter has done? declares the Lord. Behold, like the clay in the potter's hand, so are you in my hand, O house of Israel.

I used to read this and say 'Yes I can complain. But the potter doesn't have to answer, but if the potter can't mold and convey and selling the goal, that's on the potter!'

Even to this posturing before God, I would say to my younger self, something like, but does the clay have any peace? The clay doesn't realize the peace in accepting what is not in your hands. There is peace in submission. The clay is overlooking and will not enjoy the end-purpose, the good, the potter is doing because of its resistance.

In Hebrews 5:

7 In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence. 8 Although he was a son, he learned obedience through what he suffered. 9 And being made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him

Even Jesus, while on earth in flesh, cried out with tears. He cried out for what was coming to be averted but he subjected himself to obedience (he 'learned' obedience). Through that he became something great (not that he wasn't before, but he became a new kind of great). Because he submitted to the potter’s motions, he had to endure something that made his flesh cry out; he was heard, just as we righteous are heard, and answered, as we righteous are answered - and as we experience, his cry was not reflective of the results, he didn't have what was coming, averted, but the Father's will was done.

Submit to the potter; this is the way of peace, healing, and joy.

AI-Expanded Reflection

Jeremiah 18 presents a potter reworking a vessel that has been spoiled in his hands. The image emphasizes God's freedom to act toward Israel, but the explanation that follows is essential. In verses 7–10, a threatened nation may turn from evil and God may relent; a nation promised good may turn to evil and encounter judgment. The lesson is not simply that an unchangeable outcome makes every response irrelevant. God's authority is expressed through a morally serious relationship in which repentance matters.

The original's movement from complaint toward submission can be fruitful when submission means receiving that moral summons. Peace does not come from winning an argument that makes the Creator answerable to our preferred plan. Yet the potter image should not be used to silence every lament or forbid asking why suffering occurs. Jeremiah himself voices difficult questions elsewhere. The issue is whether questioning remains open to God's correction or becomes a declaration that only our account of the good may stand.

Hebrews 5:7–9 adds a distinct but related picture through Jesus' prayers and suffering. Learning obedience does not imply that the Son was previously disobedient or morally defective. It describes obedience experienced and enacted through the actual cost of his human mission. Likewise, being made perfect concerns the completion or qualification of his saving, priestly vocation, not the repair of sinful character. The text depends on the significance of the sinless Son entering the conditions of human weakness.

His prayer to the one able to save him from death and the statement that he was heard do not require the conclusion that he was spared dying. Christian interpretation commonly understands the answer in relation to resurrection and the accomplishment of the Father's purpose. The Gospels also show his honest desire expressed together with submission to the Father's will. Tears and reverence therefore coexist; anguish is not evidence that obedience has failed.

The analogy with believers has limits. We do not become sources of eternal salvation through our suffering, and another person's abuse should not automatically be labeled the potter's required instrument. Faithfulness can include seeking protection, naming injustice, and asking for relief. What the passage commends is trust in God through costly obedience, not passive acceptance of every demand made by someone with power.

The practical response is to identify the clay's moral resistance in our own lives: the correction refused, the truthful word avoided, or the repentance postponed. We can ask for relief from suffering while remaining willing to do what is right. The Son's example gives dignity to obedient tears, and the potter's call gives hope that a spoiled course need not be the final form of a life returned to God's hands.

Look at what God says to Jehoiakim, the wicked son of the good king Josiah:

Woe to him who builds his palace by unrighteousness, his upper rooms by injustice, making his own people work for nothing, not paying them for their labor. He says, 'I will build myself a great palace with spacious upper rooms.' So he makes large windows in it, panels it with cedar and decorates it in red. "Does it make you a king to have more and more cedar? Did not your father have food and drink? He did what was right and just, so all went well with him. He defended the cause of the poor and needy, and so all went well. Is that not what it means to know me?" declares the Lord. "But your eyes and your heart are set only on dishonest gain, on shedding innocent blood and on oppression and extortion. (Jeremiah 22:13–17 NIV)

Wow! What a perspective. King Jehoiakim (also called Eliakim) chose to grow a greater kingdom than his father Josiah. In Jehoiakim's mind the greatness of a kingdom was defined by the splendor of his palace. But Josiah defined his kingdom by spiritual and moral reform. Jehoiakim was about increasing his own glory, represented by a large and beautifully decorated royal palace. But Josiah led the nation in humbling themselves with fasting and repentance, especially when they rediscovered the Law of God, which they learned that they had been violating for generations.

God asks Jehoiakim, "Does it make you a king to have more and more cedar?" Does it make you a king by making your palace grander? God contrasts Jehoiakim with his father Josiah. God simply says, "Did not your father have food and drink?" In other words, your father was not needy. But in contrast to Jehoiakim, Josiah "did what was right and just" and "defended the cause of the poor and needy." Josiah was just and merciful. Then in a rhetorical flourish God declares, "Is that not what it means to know me?" I am reminded of what God says in the Book of Micah:

He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God. (Micah 6:8 NIV)

Jehoiakim would be judged because his eyes and heart were "set only on dishonest gain, on shedding innocent blood and on oppression and extortion." He did not follow in his father's good footsteps.

Friends, I don't gather from this that Josiah was a bad father, for the Scriptures do not say so, but we can say that Jehoiakim was a bad son. Even so, I am reminded that I should do all I can to teach and exemplify godliness to my daughter. But I realize that in the course of time she will go her own way, and I can only hope that my influence will be felt in her for the good.

But there is also a message for us. Let us stop being so concerned with worldly gain and focus more on pleasing God. "To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God" is not just an Old Covenant message. It is reaffirmed in the New Covenant, even in the Sermon on the Mount, where Jesus teaches, "Seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness..." (Matthew 6:33). Jesus illustrated this manner of life in his parable about the sheep and goats:

Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.' "Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?' "The King will reply, 'Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.' "Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.' "They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?' "He will reply, 'Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.' "Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life. (Matthew 25:34–46 NIV)

Friends, God says, when we do justly, love mercy, and walk in humility, then we come to know our God. I am beginning to understand that in the final analysis, after all has been said and done, what matters is not how many services I attend, how many prayers I pray, nor how much Scripture I know, but whether my life humbly and consistently reflects God's justice and mercy.

Father in heaven, I confess that I have not understood a large part of what pleases You. While I understand my own sinful helplessness and absolute dependence upon You for salvation, I have not understood that the nature of my daily walk with you needs to be characterized by justice and mercy. I realize that only as my life reflects Your justice and mercy will I come to know you more. Remove from me every jealousy, bitterness or worldly ambition. Teach me instead to focus on upholding Your Name, that is, your reputation, proclaiming and vindicating it by acts of justice and mercy and the declaration of the Good News of Christ. And I pray this not only for myself but also for my family, over whom I have most immediate influence. I also pray this for the larger community here, as well as those at church and in the Youn Wha Organization and everyone far and near, toward whom You have allowed me to have any measure of influence. Amen.

AI-Expanded Reflection

The royal identification is important here: Jeremiah 22:13–19 concerns Jehoiakim, son of Josiah, rather than Shallum or Jehoahaz, who is addressed in verses 10–12. Verse 18 names Jehoiakim explicitly. Correcting that name leaves the reflection's central contrast intact. A son seeks royal grandeur through an impressive palace, while the Lord measures kingship by the justice and mercy exemplified in his father's conduct.

The palace's beauty is inseparable from the means used to build it. Jeremiah names unpaid labor, dishonest gain, violence, and oppression. Cedar and colored decoration become evidence against the ruler because the display has been purchased through injury to people he should protect. The question about whether more cedar makes a king exposes a confusion between the visible signs of authority and the moral purpose of authority. Splendor cannot compensate for betrayal of office.

Josiah's food and drink show that the contrast is not between every material comfort and holiness. He lived as a king, yet defended the poor and needy. God's question about knowing him makes the relationship explicit: knowledge of the Lord is displayed through conduct consistent with his concern for justice. This does not reduce theology to activism or imply that study and prayer have no value. It denies that such practices have reached their proper end when they leave oppression unchallenged.

Micah 6:8 offers a fitting parallel, while Matthew 25:34–46 extends the reflection toward service rendered to Christ through care for those he identifies with himself. Christians debate the precise referent of the least brothers and sisters in that parable, including its relationship to Jesus' vulnerable messengers. The wider New Testament nevertheless makes care for the hungry, sick, poor, and imprisoned a serious Christian responsibility. Neither interpretive option gives permission for indifference.

The family application also deserves its measured form. A child's later wrongdoing does not automatically prove that a parent failed in every responsibility, and a parent's faithfulness cannot mechanically determine an adult child's choices. Josiah's example remains morally significant even when his son rejects it. Parents can teach, model repentance, set just expectations, and pray while acknowledging that influence is not control.

The closing prayer turns the prophetic accusation into self-examination rather than leaving it directed at a distant king. That is a fruitful response. We can ask whose unpaid effort supports our comfort, whether ambition has made another person's need inconvenient, and what our use of resources communicates about God's character. Knowing the Lord becomes increasingly visible when our learning produces fair dealing, mercy that costs something, and humility that welcomes correction. A beautiful institution or accomplished reputation cannot replace those obligations.

God says: I set before you the way of life and the way of death — whoever stays in this city will die by sword, famine, or plague, but whoever surrenders to the besieging Babylonians will live, escaping with their life as a prize, since I've set my face against this city for harm and not for good; it will be handed over to Babylon's king, who will burn it down (a paraphrase of Jeremiah 21:8–10). What a message for Jeremiah to bring to the king and people! It wasn't Isaiah's message to Hezekiah — "trust the LORD and He'll deliver you" — but rather "give up." Why? Because God had determined to bring harm on anyone who refused to surrender to Babylon. It was reminiscent of Sodom and Gomorrah — Judah's sins had piled up so high that complete destruction was the only remaining outcome, and the best anyone could do, like Lot's family, was flee or surrender. The people assumed surrender to Nebuchadnezzar was the worst possible fate, and that losing the city and Temple was unthinkable — not realizing God's power was never confined to Jerusalem's geography, or His presence to the Temple building. They still didn't grasp that God was sovereign over every ruler on earth, including Nebuchadnezzar himself. They needed to fear God more than Babylon, and obey whatever He commanded — whether to stay, flee, fight, or surrender. Abraham understood this kind of obedience when God asked him to do something that, by any human standard, seemed abhorrent — sacrifice his own son — and Abraham obeyed, and God commended his faith. Jeremiah had a hard time delivering his own message, opposed by nearly everyone; he was one of the few voices prophesying destruction rather than peace, and was rejected and imprisoned for it — yet he still obeyed God.

I've argued elsewhere that there's no good apart from God — that God, as the ultimate Lawgiver, defines what's good, and anything departing from His own standard is evil. Some Christian thinkers instead argue that goodness is itself eternal and essential, existing independently alongside God rather than simply being whatever God wills. If that were true, though, on what basis could we call God's command to Abraham "good"? How is it good that God ordered Israel to destroy the Canaanites, including children? How is it good that God hardened Pharaoh's heart, or allowed Job's suffering, or allowed history's worst disasters? I'd argue instead: there's no eternal "good" that exists apart from God — things are good because God wills them, and He's free to do so because He alone made the moral order in the first place, just as He's free to change what belonged to the old Mosaic Law and replace it with the New Covenant. We don't have standing to judge God's law, only to receive it — as James writes, there is one Lawgiver, able both to save and destroy (a paraphrase of James 4:11–12). And yet, thankfully, we don't serve a capricious, inconsistent God, but one who is "the same yesterday, today, and forever" (Malachi 3:6; Hebrews 13:8) — meaning God's ways remain fully consistent with His own unchanging character, even where His specific commands have changed across covenants. So let's simply follow God's word — no more, no less — trusting Him rather than chasing after some new revelation, miraculous sign, or spiritual experience we think we need on top of what we already have in Christ (a reference to Colossians 1:27–28). Adding too many extra "props" to our faith risks turning them into idols of their own, the way the bronze serpent or Gideon's ephod eventually became stumbling blocks in Israel's own history.

AI-Expanded Reflection

This comment stakes out a strongly voluntarist position in a real and long-running debate within Christian ethics and philosophy — whether goodness is whatever God wills (divine command theory, argued here), or whether goodness reflects God's own necessarily good and unchanging character, which He could never actually will to be otherwise (a view held by other serious Christian philosophers and theologians, including the one this comment directly disputes). Most historic Christian theology has actually tried to find a middle path between these two options: grounding goodness in God's own eternal, unchanging nature rather than in either arbitrary will or some independent standard existing above God — meaning God's commands reflect who He unchangingly is, rather than defining goodness by sheer will alone, which softens (though doesn't fully resolve) the comment's own hypothetical about commands like "you shall not murder" being arbitrarily reversible. The genuinely hard cases this comment raises — the conquest of Canaan, Job's suffering, hardened hearts — remain among the most debated passages in the whole Bible regardless of which side of this philosophical question one takes, and thoughtful Christians across both positions continue to wrestle with them honestly rather than treating either framework as a complete answer.