The Pulpit Commentary — Jeremiah — Volume 1 — Section 470

Vers. 1-6.-.A changed name and a dreadful doom. The change here, from Pashur to Magor-Missabib, reminds us of other divinely indicated changes of name in Scrip- ture; e.g. from Abram to Abraham, from Jacob to Israel, from Simon to Peter, from Zacharias to John. These changes, however, were indicative of advancement and honour; were suggestive of the rise out of nature into grace. But here is a name which becomes at once the memorial of great wickedness and of the sure judgment following upon it. I. THE NAME BEFORE THE CHANGE. Whatever doubt there may be as to the precise signification of the name Pashur, it seems quite clear that the very meaning of the word had in it something peculiarly honourable. 'l'he man himself belonged to a privileged order and held an office of influence and honour; and the name must have been given to him because of something auspicious in the circumstances of his birth. An honourable name is an advantage to its bearer, and to a certain extent also a challenge. He who bears it may so live that in the end there will be the greatest contrast between the name and the character. A less suggestive name, one less pro- vocative of contrasts, might have saved Pashur from the new and portentous name which, once given, would never be forgotten. We are bound to consider well the associations which will gradually gather around the name we happen to bear. Now, at least, the particular name has very little signification in itself; but the longer we bear it the more significant it becomes to all who know us. Every time it is mentioned it brings to mind, more or less, our character. Even on prudential con- siderations one must ever become increasingly careful of what he does, for a single act may obliterate all the associations of respect and confidence which belong to his name. Instead of becoming, what every one may become, the object of respect and confidence to at least a few, he may end in being an object of execration far and wide. II. WHAT BROUGHT THE CHANGE, His treatment of Jeremiah. His treatment of him, bear in mind, as a prophet. We feel that Jeremiah was not put in prison on even a plausible allegation that he was an evil-doer. 'l'hat he was a false prophet was the only possible charge to lay against him. Now, Pashnr must have known that lie himsdf was a false prophet, speaking as God's truth what was only the fabrication of bis own self-willed and deceitful heart. If Jeremiah was speaking falsehood, Pashur's duty was to convince him of error, and show the people that he was.either a fanatic or a mere impostor. We are not allowed to suppose that what Pashnr diu be did from some excusable outbreak of zeal on behalf of the building of which be was custodian. A great punishment from the hand of Gou always argues a corre- spondingly great offence. It is not so amongst men ; there may be a great punishment and a very small offence ; sometimes, indeed, no offence at all, measured by the highest law. But when God punishes severely it lets in light upon the character of him whom be punishes. We know that Pashur must have been a had man ; we know it as well as if all his iniquity had been detailed in the most forcible language, III. THE BIONIFICANOE OF THE CHANGE, We have not information enough to give us the exact meaning of Pashur; and one might almost think this was meant to err. x.x. 1-18.] THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET JEREMIAH. 477