Since the operation of the gift of prophecy through chosen men is God’s appointed method of communicating His will to the world, it follows that the relation of the individual or the nation to the prophet and to the instruction given is a clear indication of the relation of the individual or the nation to the God who sent the messages. Prophets were spokesmen for the Lord, and God felt justified in holding His people responsible for whatever attitude they might assume toward these men. The importance and results of accepting or rejecting the messages is perhaps best pointed out by the contrast between two verses of Scripture found in 2 Chronicles. On the positive side are the words of Jehoshaphat: “Believe in the Lord your God, so shall ye be established; believe His prophets, so shall ye prosper.” 2 Chronicles 20:20. In marked contrast are the words of the messenger regarding the fate of the people who had ignored the work of the prophets: “And the Lord God of their fathers sent to them by His messengers, rising up betimes, and sending; because He had compassion on His people, and on His dwelling place: but they mocked the messengers of God, and despised His words, and misused His prophets, until the wrath of the Lord arose against His people, till there was no remedy.” 2 Chronicles 36:15, 16.APAY 92.4

A secure way of life with prosperity added were promised to those who would believe God and the word of His prophets. They might be weak, faulty, or misguided; but if they placed their confidence in the Lord and His work, God could bring about a transformation in due time that would make them the wonder of the world. On the other hand, what could He do for any who rejected the only means provided for their help? The study of several examples of individuals and nations will show the results of a variety of attitudes toward the prophets. Again it should be emphasized that “all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.” 1 Corinthians 10:11. Each case will be considered as a separate unit for the purpose of discovering the attitudes involved and the results reached.APAY 93.1

Pharaoh. When Moses and Aaron gave Pharaoh God’s message, “Let My people go,” his retort was, “Who is the Lord, that I should obey His voice to let Israel go? I know not the Lord, neither will I let Israel go.” Exodus 5:2. His inquiry, “Who is the Lord?” was not a request for enlightenment, but a defiant disclaimer of any knowledge of the Lord that would cause a king to respect His wishes as expressed by the two messengers. It is impossible to say how much truth there was in his statement that he did not know the Lord. Obviously he had no personal acquaintance with God, but the records of the works of Joseph, and the presence of the children of Israel among the Egyptians, must have given him some knowledge of the God they served. On the other hand, it must be remembered that Israel had largely stopped their Sabbath observance, and had in many other ways drifted from God. Then, too, forty years before, Moses, the crown prince, had taken the life of an Egyptian and was forced to flee the country. Since the days of Joseph the witness of God’s people had been weak. Conflicting influences and his own reluctance to lose the services of the Israelites caused him to deny Moses’ repeated requests that Israel be permitted to leave Egypt.APAY 93.2

But God did not leave Pharaoh without a knowledge of Himself and a clear demonstration of His power. One plague after another gave him opportunity to recognize the Lord and follow His instruction. During the plague of the locusts, “Pharaoh called for Moses and Aaron in haste; and he said, I have sinned against the Lord your God, and against you. Now therefore forgive, I pray thee, my sin only this once, and entreat the Lord your God, that He may take away from me this death only.” Exodus 10:16, 17. His good intention was soon forgotten, however, and it was not until after death struck the first-born of Egypt that the monarch was willing that Israel leave. Then it was not in response to the command of God, but because of fear that all the land would be destroyed. When Pharaoh’s defiance caused him to reject Moses’ message, there was nothing more the Lord could do for him.APAY 94.1

Korah, Dathan, and Abiram. Rebellion took place also within the ranks of Israel. Jealousy caused Korah, Dathan, and Abiram to reject the appointment of Moses as their leader, and to claim that any one of them had as much right to lead the people as he did. Numbers 16:1-3. Moses made a special appeal to Korah as a Levite, but apparently accomplished nothing.APAY 94.2

Verses 8-11. Then he sent for Dathan and Abiram, but they refused to recognize his leadership or come to talk with him. Verses 12-14. Their rebellion and insolence placed God in a position where He could do nothing more for them. They were destroyed when the earth opened and swallowed them up. Verses 24-33.APAY 95.1

Achan. Through Joshua the Lord had instructed the children of Israel that none of the treasures of Jericho were to be taken for themselves, in order that all credit might be given God for the conquest of the city. Achan’s disobedience resulted in a stinging defeat for the nation at Ai and eventually his sin brought the punishment of death by stoning. Joshua 6:18, 19; 7:1-26.APAY 95.2

Saul. Through Samuel the Lord delegated Saul to destroy the nation of the Amalekites. Israel’s king carried out part of the command, but he failed to complete his task. When challenged by the prophet, his response was, “I have obeyed the voice of the Lord, and have gone the way which the Lord sent me, and have brought Agag the king of Amalek, and have utterly destroyed the Amalekites.” 1 Samuel 15:20. The king of Israel blamed the soldiers for wanting to bring back sheep and oxen, but apparently Saul was persuaded in his own mind that he had completed his mission. A partial fulfillment of the commandment was insufficient, and excuses were unacceptable. On that day the prophet announced to Saul that his kingdom was to be taken from him and given to another.APAY 95.3

David. Despite God’s special blessing on him from the days of his youth, David committed a heinous sin. Nathan the prophet faced the king first with a parable to arouse him to see the sinfulness of his act, and then spoke a direct accusation, “Thou art the man.” 2 Samuel 12:7. David confessed his guilt, returned to the Lord, and was fully accepted. God’s spokesman had been used to bring conviction that led to transformation.APAY 95.4

Nebuchadnezzar. Records of the conversion of heathen kings are few in the Scriptures. It happened in the days of Jonah, and in the book of Daniel we find another instance. Step by step Nebuchadnezzar was led to the truth by divine revelations given directly to him and interpreted by Daniel the prophet, and by messages given to him by Daniel. His thinking was changed, and in his proclamation to the nation he declared his conviction and conversion. “Now I Nebuchadnezzar praise and extol and honor the King of heaven, all whose works are truth, and His ways judgment: and those that walk in pride His is able to abase.” Daniel 4:37. Early in his association with Daniel, Nebuchadnezzar acknowledged the power of God, but many years passed before he permitted that power to bring a complete change in his own life. Finally the work of the prophet, combined with divine interposition to reduce the king’s pride, accomplished the divine purpose.APAY 96.1

Ninevites. Jonah was much more reluctant to take the message of God to the people of Nineveh than they were to receive it. The proclamation of the impending destruction of the city led the inhabitants to believe in God and repent of sin. “So the people of Nineveh believed God, and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them even to the least of them.” Jonah 3:5.APAY 96.2

Israel. The Lord continually held before the children of Israel the high destiny that was theirs if they were obedient to the instruction He sent them through His prophets. They would be exalted in the eyes of the nations round about, who would exclaim, “Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.” Deuteronomy 4:6. Again He promised, “And the Lord shall make thee the head, and not the tail; and thou shalt be above only, and thou shalt not be beneath.” Deuteronomy 28:13. But the favored nation refused to accept the counsel of the prophets. In some of His parables the Savior indicated how rejection of the prophets was only a step toward the rejection of the Son of God Himself. He told of the householder who went to a far country, leaving his property in the hands of husbandmen. At the harvest time he sent servants to receive the harvest, but the servants were beaten and stoned. After repeated attempts to gather what was his own, he decided to send his son to deal with the husbandmen, saying, “They will reverence my son.” Matthew 21:37. But the son fared no better, for “they caught him, and cast him out of the vineyard, and slew him.” Verse 39. In another place Jesus summarized the situation thus: “If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.” Luke 16:31. Taking into consideration the total reaction of Israel to the messages of the prophets, as the Lord viewed the case, we can agree that “there was no remedy.” 2 Chronicles 36:16.APAY 96.3

It mattered little on what basis or with what attitude ancient Israel or others rejected a message of any of the prophets. Some were defiant, others accepted only part of the counsel, still others were simply careless or slow about putting the instruction into practice; but in each instance the practical result was rejection. God regarded the attitudes they took toward the instruction given through the prophets as their attitudes toward Him.APAY 97.1

Range of Instruction

SUMMARY