What is the context?
The prophet’s shaking and broken heart introduce a charge against prophets and priests whose conduct spreads ungodliness. Jerusalem’s prophets strengthen evildoers instead of turning people back.
The visions come from their own minds while promising peace to those who despise the Lord and follow stubborn hearts. Pleasant assurance is not proof of divine origin.
The question about the Lord’s council contrasts received and obedient speech with self-appointed running. True hearing would have led the people away from evil.
The Lord’s presence fills heaven and earth, so secret invention cannot be hidden from Him. Repeated claims of dreams can instead cause people to forget His name.
Straw and grain, fire and hammer distinguish powerless inventions from the Lord’s effective word. The closing charge includes stealing words from others and attaching His authority to one’s own tongue.
The warning concerns actual falsehood and its fruit. It does not authorize a person to label every dream or every disagreement false merely because it is unfamiliar.
How is this passage commonly understood?
Wesley contrasts the Lord’s will with the prophets’ dreams and reads the stolen words as collusion in deception. His suggestion that verse 18 voices the false prophets’ challenge differs from reading the question as the Lord’s exposure of them; either way the following verses deny that these speakers were sent.
Where does this fit in God's plan?
2 Timothy 4:1–5 develops the wider Christian charge to teach patiently and truthfully even when hearers prefer teachers who suit their desires. Paul places that task before Christ as Judge and coming King. He does not quote Jeremiah 23; the connection adds the Christian responsibility to proclaim the gospel rather than mirror an audience’s preferred assurances.
What is our position?
We don't have a position on this passage yet. When our study reaches a conclusion the text supports, it will appear here.
Where can I study this further?
No deeper study linked yet.