Why did Azariah and Johanan accuse Jeremiah of lying in Jeremiah 43:2? Historical Setting after Jerusalem’s Fall Nebuchadnezzar’s destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BC left only a small remnant in Judah under the Babylonian-appointed governor Gedaliah (Jeremiah 40:7-12). When Ishmael assassinated Gedaliah, Johanan son of Kareah rescued the survivors (Jeremiah 41:11-18) but feared Babylonian reprisals. Gathering commanders such as Azariah son of Hoshaiah, he led the community to the region of Bethlehem, poised either to remain or to flee to Egypt. The Remnant’s Oath and Jeremiah’s Delayed Reply The people, led by Johanan and Azariah, implored Jeremiah: “Pray that the LORD your God will tell us the way we should walk” (Jeremiah 42:3). They swore, “Whether it is pleasant or unpleasant, we will obey the voice of the LORD our God” (Jeremiah 42:6). After ten days the word came: “Do not go to Egypt. … I will build you up and not tear you down” (Jeremiah 42:10). God warned that flight would bring sword, famine, and pestilence (Jeremiah 42:17). Immediate Cause of the Accusation Upon hearing this, “Azariah son of Hoshaiah, Johanan son of Kareah, and all the arrogant men said to Jeremiah, ‘You speak falsely! The LORD our God has not sent you’” (Jeremiah 43:2-3). They insisted Baruch son of Neriah had manipulated Jeremiah to hand them over to Babylon. Underlying Reasons for Calling Jeremiah a Liar 1. Pre-Existing Decision to Flee Archaeologically confirmed Babylonian brutality (Babylonian Chronicle BM 21946) produced mortal fear. Their request for divine guidance was a formality; flight had already been settled (cf. behavioral science term “confirmation bias”). 2. Political Nationalism and Mistrust Johanan had just risked his life opposing the assassin Ishmael. Remaining under Babylonian sovereignty felt like capitulation; Jeremiah’s pro-Babylon messages (Jeremiah 27–29) had long been unpopular. 3. Pride and Rejection of Prophetic Authority The text calls them “proud men” (Heb. zēdîm). Consistent with earlier refusals to heed the prophet (Jeremiah 18:18), they again dismissed him when his word clashed with their agenda. 4. Influence of Idolatrous Inclinations Egypt offered familiar syncretism. Jeremiah 44 reveals their continued devotion to the “Queen of Heaven,” indicating spiritual motives behind their geographical choice. 5. Suspicion of Baruch’s Involvement Baruch belonged to an elite Jerusalem family (Jeremiah 32:12). Accusing him of collaborating with Babylonians let the leaders frame their disobedience as patriotic resistance. 6. Cognitive Dissonance and Self-Preservation Modern behavioral studies show that when a commitment (escape) is threatened by contrary evidence (prophecy), dissonance is reduced by discrediting the messenger. Theological Significance Their accusation epitomizes human rebellion: hearing God’s Word yet labeling it false when inconvenient. This anticipates later rejection of Christ’s own prophetic authority (John 8:45-47). Scripture consistently affirms that disbelief stems not from lack of evidence but from hardened hearts (Romans 1:18-20). Practical Lessons • Seek God’s will without pre-conditions. • Test decisions against Scripture, not emotions. • Recognize that distrust of God-appointed messengers endangers spiritual survival. Conclusion Azariah and Johanan’s charge that Jeremiah lied arose from fear, nationalist pride, idolatrous desire, and deliberate unbelief. Their story warns every generation that rejecting God’s clear Word, whether through ancient prophecy or the risen Christ, leads inexorably to judgment, whereas humble obedience secures divine protection and blessing. |
    |