A question of casuistry.
A deservedly esteemed commentator observes on this conduct of Jeremiah, "Though we must be so harmless as doves as never to tell a wilful lie, yet we must be so wise as serpents as not needlessly to expose ourselves to danger by telling all we know." But many are not satisfied with this defence, and they hesitate not to apply the terms "equivocation," "subterfuge," and other like censures to the prophet's reply to the princes. Note, therefore??
I. WHAT IS URGED AGAINST SUCH CONDUCT. One says, "The plain meaning of such words is that Jeremiah hoodwinked them. He did not lie to them, certainly; but he did not tell the truth, and left them with a false impression. It comes very near to deception; it was evasive, and certainly was not an honest act. It seems an oblique lie." And this view of the case is supported on grounds such as these:
1. Had he not been afraid, he would have told the whole truth; but fear does not justify falsehood, though it often occasions it.
2. What must the king have thought of a prophet of God so complaisant as this?
3. What would the princes say of his vaunted righteousness when they learnt how he had dealt with them?
4. Our Saviour and his apostles never did the like.
5. It had all the effect of a lie, since it left a false impression on the minds of those to whom he spoke.
6. The very fact that it needs laboured argument to justify it against our instinctive condemnation of it shows that it does not belong to the noble family of truth, etc. But audi alteram partem. Therefore note??
II. WHAT MAY BE URGED IN DEFENCE.
1. In reference to the foregoing arguments. The first assumes that there was no motive but fear. The second and third are assumptions also. The fourth is, to say the least, doubtful (of. John 7:8, John 7:9; Acts 20:20-26). Concerning the fifth, it is not true that all the effect of a lie, nor its worst effect, is that stated. And as to the sixth, it may be said that instinctive condemnations may be unjust as well as just.
2. Other replies to the charge against the prophet are:
3. There are sacred principles on which such suppression of the truth as Jeremiah's is justified.