The children of Israel again did that which was evil in Yahweh’s sight, and Yahweh strengthened Eglon the king of Moab against Israel, because they had done that which was evil in Yahweh’s sight.
Parallel Translations
-
The children of Israel again did that which was evil in Yahweh’s sight, and Yahweh strengthened Eglon the king of Moab against Israel, because they had done that which was evil in Yahweh’s sight.
-
And the children of Israel did evil again in the sight of the LORD: and the LORD strengthened Eglon the king of Moab against Israel, because they had done evil in the sight of the LORD.
-
And the children of Israel again did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD strengthened Eglon the king of Moab against Israel, because they had done that which was evil in the sight of the LORD.
Cross-references (14)
Passages linked to Judges 3:12 in the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, ordered by reader-vote popularity; verse text shown in World English Bible.
- 1 Samuel 12:9 “But they forgot Yahweh their God; and he sold them into the hand of Sisera, captain of the army of Hazor, and into the hand of the Philistines, and into the hand of the king of Moab; and they fought against them.
- Judges 2:19 But when the judge was dead, they turned back, and dealt more corruptly than their fathers in following other gods to serve them and to bow down to them. They didn’t cease what they were doing, or give up their stubborn ways.
- John 19:11 Jesus answered, “You would have no power at all against me, unless it were given to you from above. Therefore he who delivered me to you has greater sin.”
- Exodus 9:16 but indeed for this cause I have made you stand: to show you my power, and that my name may be declared throughout all the earth,
- Judges 2:11 The children of Israel did that which was evil in Yahweh’s sight, and served the Baals.
- Judges 2:14 Yahweh’s anger burned against Israel, and he delivered them into the hands of raiders who plundered them. He sold them into the hands of their enemies all around, so that they could no longer stand before their enemies.
- 2 Kings 5:1 Now Naaman, captain of the army of the king of Syria, was a great man with his master, and honorable, because by him Yahweh had given victory to Syria: he was also a mighty man of valor, but he was a leper.
- Isaiah 10:15 Should an ax brag against him who chops with it? Should a saw exalt itself above him who saws with it? As if a rod should lift those who lift it up, or as if a staff should lift up someone who is not wood.
- Isaiah 37:26 “ ‘Have you not heard how I have done it long ago, and formed it in ancient times? Now I have brought it to pass, that it should be yours to destroy fortified cities, turning them into ruinous heaps.
- Isaiah 45:1-4 Yahweh says to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have held, to subdue nations before him, and strip kings of their armor; to open the doors before him, and the gates shall not be shut: “I will go before you and make the rough places smooth. I will break the doors of bronze in pieces and cut apart the bars of iron. I will give you the treasures of darkness and hidden riches of secret places, that you may know that it is I, Yahweh, who call you by your name, even the God of Israel. For Jacob my servant’s sake, and Israel my chosen, I have called you by your name. I have given you a title, though you have not known me.
- Ezekiel 38:16 You will come up against my people Israel, as a cloud to cover the land. It will happen in the latter days, that I will bring you against my land, that the nations may know me, when I am sanctified in you, Gog, before their eyes.”
- Daniel 4:22 it is you, O king, that have grown and become strong; for your greatness has grown, and reaches to the sky, and your dominion to the end of the earth.
- Daniel 5:18 “You, king, the Most High God gave Nebuchadnezzar your father the kingdom, and greatness, and glory, and majesty.
- Hosea 6:4 “Ephraim, what shall I do to you? Judah, what shall I do to you? For your love is like a morning cloud, and like the dew that disappears early.
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this verse (22 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Private notes
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain So that the enemies of God’s people have no…
So that the enemies of God’s people have no power over them, but by God’s appointment.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain Jdg 3:12 And the children of Israel did evil…
Jdg 3:12 And the children of Israel did evil again in the sight of the LORD: and the LORD strengthened Eglon the king of Moab against Israel, because they had done evil in the sight of the LORD.
Ver. 12. And the children of Israel did evil, &c.] Hoc est, rem non gratam Deo qui cuncta intuetur, saith Vatablus: they did that which was offensive to the eyes of his glory. Neither ministry, nor miracle, nor misery, nor mercy could mollify their hard hearts, or contain them within the bounds of obedience.
Read full note →
And the Lord strengthened Eglon.] It is God who strengtheneth or weakeneth the arm of either party. {Eze 30:24}
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain Strengthened Eglon, by giving him courage, and power, and…
Strengthened Eglon, by giving him courage, and power, and success against them.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Matthew Henry 1710 · Public Domain Ehud is the next of the judges whose achievements…
Ehud is the next of the judges whose achievements are related in this history, and here is an account of his actions.
I. When Israel sins again God raises up a new oppressor, Jdg 3:12-14. It was an aggravation of their wickedness that they did evil again after they had smarted so long for their former iniquities, promised so fair when Othniel judged them, and received so much mercy from God in their deliverance. What, and after all this, again to break his commandments! Was the disease obstinate to all the methods of cure, both corrosives and lenitives? It seems it was. Perhaps they thought they might make the more bold with their old sins because they saw themselves in no danger from their old oppressor; the powers of that kingdom were weakened and brought low. But God made them know that he had variety of rods wherewith to chastise them: He strengthened Eglon king of Moab against them. This oppressor lay nearer to them than the former, and therefore would be the more mischievous to them; God's judgments thus approached them gradually, to bring them to repentance. When Israel dwelt in tents, but kept their integrity, Balak king of Moab, who would have strengthened himself against them, was baffled; but now that they had forsaken God, and worshipped the gods of the nations round about them (and perhaps those of the Moabites among the rest), here was another king of Moab, whom God strengthened against them, put power into his hands, though a wicked man, that he might be a scourge to Israel. The staff in his hand with which he beat Israel was God's indignation; howbeit he meant not so, neither did his heart think so, Isa 10:6, Isa 10:7. Israelites did ill, and, we may suppose, Moabites did worse; yet because God commonly punishes the sins of his own people in this world, that, the flesh being destroyed, the spirit may be saved, Israel is weakened and Moab strengthened against them. God would not suffer the Israelites, when they were the stronger, to distress the Moabites, nor give them any disturbance, though they were idolaters (Deu 2:9); yet now he suffered the Moabites to distress Israel, and strengthened them on purpose that they might: Thy judgments, O God! are a great deep. The king of Moab took to his assistance the Ammonites and Amalekites (Jdg 3:13), and this strengthened him; and we are here told how they prevailed. 1. They beat them in the field: They went and smote Israel (Jdg 3:13), not only those tribes that lay next them on the other side Jordan, who, though first settled, being frontier-tribes, were most disturbed; but those also within Jordan, for they made themselves masters of the city of palm-trees, which, it is probable, was a strong-hold erected near the place where Jericho had stood, for that was so called (Deu 34:3), into which the Moabites put a garrison, to be a bridle upon Israel, and to secure the passes of Jordan, for the preservation of the communication with their own country. It was well for the Kenites that they had left this city (Jdg 1:16) before it fell into the hands of the enemy. See how quickly the Israelites lost that by their own sin which they had gained by miracles of divine mercy. 2. They made them to serve (Jdg 3:14), that is, exacted tribute from them, either the fruits of the earth in kind or money in lieu of them. They neglected the service of God, and did not pay him his tribute; thus therefore did God recover from them that wine and oil, that silver and gold, which they prepared for Baal, Hos 2:8. What should have been paid to the divine grace, and was not, was distrained for, and paid to the divine justice. The former servitude (Jdg 3:8) lasted but eight years, this eighteen; for, if less troubles do not do the work, God will send greater.
Read full note →
II. When Israel prays again God raises up a new deliverer (Jdg 3:15), named Ehud. We are here told,
1. That he was a Benjamite. The city of palm-trees lay within the lot of this tribe, by which it is probable that they suffered most, and therefore stirred first to shake off the yoke. It is supposed by the chronologers that the Israelites' war with Benjamin for the wickedness of Gibeah, by which that whole tribe was reduced to 600 men, happened before this, so that we may well think that tribe to be now the weakest of all the tribes, yet out of it God raised up this deliverer, in token of his being perfectly reconciled to them, to manifest his own power in ordaining strength out of weakness, and that he might bestow more abundant honour upon that part which lacked, Co1 12:24.
2. That he was left-handed, as it seems many of that tribe were, Jdg 20:16. Benjamin signifies the son of the right hand, and yet multitudes of them were left-handed; for men's natures do not always answer their names. The lxx. say he was an ambidexter, one that could use both hands alike, supposing that this was an advantage to him in the action he was called to; but the Hebrew phrase, that he was shut of his right hand, intimates that, either through disease of disuse, he made little or no use of that, but of his left hand only, and so was the less fit for war, because he must needs handle his sword but awkwardly; yet God chose this left-handed man to be the man of his right hand, whom he would make strong for himself, Psa 80:17. It was God's right hand that gained Israel the victory (Psa 44:3), not the right hand of the instruments he employed.
3. We are here told what Ehud did for the deliverance of Israel out of the hands of the Moabites. He saved the oppressed by destroying the oppressors, when the measure of their iniquity was full and the set time to favour Israel had come.
(1.) He put to death Eglon the king of Moab; I say, put him to death, not murdered or assassinated him, but as a judge, or minister of divine justice, executed the judgments of God upon him, as an implacable enemy to God and Israel. This story is particularly related.
[1.] He had a fair occasion of access to him. Being an ingenious active man, and fit to stand before kings, his people chose him to carry a present in the name of all Israel, over and above their tribute, to their great lord the king of Moab, that they might find favour in his eyes, Jdg 3:15. The present is called mincha in the original, which is the word used in the law for the offerings that were presented to God to obtain his favour; these the children of Israel had not offered in their season to the God that loved them; and now, to punish them for their neglect, they are laid under a necessity of bringing their offerings to a heathen prince that hated them. Ehud went on his errand to Eglon, offered his present with the usual ceremony and expressions of dutiful respect, the better to colour what he intended and to prevent suspicion.
[2.] It should seem, from the first, he designed to be the death of him, God putting it into his heart, and letting him know also that the motion was from himself, by the Spirit that came upon him, the impulses of which carried with them their own evidence, and so gave him full satisfaction both as to the lawfulness and the success of this daring attempt, of both which he would have had reason enough to doubt. If he be sure that God bids him do it, he is sure both that he may do it and that he shall do it; for a command from God is sufficient to bear us out, and bring us off, both against our consciences and against all the world. That he compassed and imagined the death of this tyrant appears by the preparation he made of a weapon for the purpose, a short dagger, but half a yard long, like a bayonet, which might easily be concealed under his clothes (Jdg 3:16), perhaps because none were suffered to come near the king with their swords by their sides. This he wore on his right thigh, that it might be the more ready to his left hand, and might be the less suspected.
[3.] He contrived how to be alone with him, which he might the more easily be now that he had not only made himself known to him, but ingratiated himself by the present, and the compliments which perhaps, on this occasion, he had passed upon him. Observe, how he laid his plot. First, He concealed his design even from his own attendants, brought them part of the way, and then ordered them to go forward towards home, while he himself, as if he had forgotten something behind him, went back to the king of Moab's court, Jdg 3:18. There needed but one hand to do the execution; had more been engaged they could not so safely have kept counsel, nor so easily have made an escape. Secondly, He returned from the quarries by Gilgal (Jdg 3:19), from the graven images (so it is in the margin) which were with Gilgal, set up perhaps by the Moabites with the twelve stones which Joshua had set up there. Some suggest that the sight of these idols stirred up in him such an indignation against the king of Moab as put him upon the execution of that design which otherwise he had thought to let fall for the present. Or, perhaps, he came so far as to these images, that, telling from what place he returned, the king of Moab might be the more apt to believe he had a message from God. Thirdly, He begged a private audience, and obtained it in a withdrawing-room, here called a summer parlour. He told the king he had a secret errand to him, who thereupon ordered all his attendants to withdraw, Jdg 3:19. Whether he expected to receive some private instructions from an oracle, or some private informations concerning the present state of Israel, as if Ehud would betray his country, it was a very unwise thing for him to be all alone with a stronger and one whom he had reason to look upon as an enemy; but those that are marked for ruin are infatuated, and their hearts hid from understanding; God deprives them of discretion.
[4.] When he had him alone he soon dispatched him. His summer parlour, where he used to indulge himself in ease and luxury, was the place of his execution. First, Ehud demands his attention to a message from God (Jdg 3:20), and that message was a dagger. God sends to us by the judgments of his hand, as well as by the judgments of his mouth. Secondly, Eglon pays respect to a message from God. Though a king, though a heathen king, though rich and powerful, though now tyrannizing over the people of God, though a fat unwieldy man that could not easily rise nor stand long, though in private and what he did was not under observation, yet, when he expected to receive orders form heaven, he rose out of his seat; whether it was low and easy, or whether it was high and stately, he quitted it, and stood up when God was about to speak to him, thereby owning God his superior. This shames the irreverence of many who are called Christians, and yet, when a message from God is delivered to them, study to show, by all the marks of carelessness, how little they regard it. Ehud, in calling what he had to do a message from God, plainly avouches a divine commission for it; and God's inclining Eglon to stand up to it did both confirm the commission and facilitate the execution. Thirdly, The message was delivered, not to his ear, but immediately, and literally, to his heart, into which the fatal knife was thrust, and was left there, Jdg 3:21, Jdg 3:22. His extreme fatness made him unable to resist or to help himself; probably it was the effect of his luxury and excess; and, when the fat closed up the blade, God would by this circumstance show how those that pamper the body do but prepare for their own misery. However, it was an emblem of his carnal security and senselessness. His heart was a fat as grease, and in that he thought himself enclosed. See Psa 119:70; Psa 17:10. Eglon signifies a calf, and he fell like a fatted calf, by the knife, an acceptable sacrifice to divine justice. Notice is taken of the coming out of the dirt or dung, that the death of this proud tyrant may appear the more ignominious and shameful. He that had been so very nice and curious about his own body, to keep it easy and clean, shall now be found wallowing in his own blood and excrements. Thus does God pour contempt upon princes. Now this act of Ehud's may justify itself because he had special direction from God to do it, and it was agreeable to the usual method which, under that dispensation, God took to avenge his people of their enemies, and to manifest to the world his own justice. But it will by no means justify any now in doing the like. No such commissions are now given, and to pretend to them is to blaspheme God, and made him patronize the worst of villanies. Christ bade Peter sheathe the sword, and we find not that he bade him draw it again.
[5.] Providence wonderfully favoured his escape, when he had done the execution. First, The tyrant fell silently, without any shriek or out-cry, which might have been overheard by his servants at a distance. How silently does he go down to the pit, choked up, it may be, with his own fat, which stifled his dying groans, though he had made so great a noise in the world, and had been the terror of the mighty in the land of the living! Secondly, The heroic executioner of this vengeance, with such a presence of mind as discovered not only no consciousness of guilt, but a strong confidence in the divine protection, shut the doors after him, took the key with him, and passed through the guards with such an air of innocence, and boldness, and unconcernedness, as made them not at all to suspect his having done any thing amiss. Thirdly, The servants that attended in the antechamber, coming to the door of the inner parlour, when Ehud had gone, to know their master's pleasure, and finding it locked and all quiet, concluded he had lain down to sleep, had covered his feet upon his couch, and gone to consult his pillow about the message he had received, and to dream upon it (Jdg 3:24), and therefore would not offer to open the door. Thus by their care not to disturb his sleep they lost the opportunity of revenging his death. See what comes of men's taking state too much, and obliging those about them to keep their distance; some time or other it may come against them more than they think of. Fourthly, The servants at length opened the door, and found their master had slept indeed his long sleep, Jdg 3:25. The horror of this tragical spectacle, and the confusion it must needs put them into, to reflect upon their own inconsideration in not opening the door sooner, quite put by the thoughts of sending pursuers after him that had done it, whom now they despaired of overtaking. Lastly, Ehud by this means made his escape to Sierath, a thick wood; so some, Jdg 3:26. It is not said any where in this story what was the place in which Eglon lived now; but, there being no mention of Ehud passing and repassing Jordan, I am inclined to think that Eglon had left his own country of Moab, on the other side Jordan, and made his principal residence at this time in the city of palm-trees, within the land of Canaan, a richer country than his own, and that there he was slain, and then the quarries by Gilgal were not far off him. There where he had settled himself, and thought he had sufficiently fortified himself to lord it over the people of God, there he was cut off, and proved to be fed for the slaughter like a lamb in a large place.
(2.) Ehud, having slain the king of Moab, gave a total rout to the forces of the Moabites that were among them, and so effectually shook off the yoke of their oppression. [1.] He raised an army immediately in Mount Ephraim, at some distance form the headquarters of the Moabites, and headed them himself, Jdg 3:27. The trumpet he blew was indeed a jubilee-trumpet, proclaiming liberty, and a joyful sound it was to the oppressed Israelites, who for a long time had heard no other trumpets than those of their enemies. [2.] Like a pious man, and as one that did all this in faith, he took encouragement himself, and gave encouragement to his soldiers, from the power of God engaged for them (Jdg 3:28): "Follow me, for the Lord hath delivered your enemies into your hands; we are sure to have God with us, and therefore may go on boldly, and shall go on triumphantly." [3.] Like a politic general, he first secured the fords of Jordan, set strong guards upon all those passes, to cut off the communications between the Moabites that were in the land of Israel (for upon them only his design was) and their own country on the other side Jordan, that if, upon the alarm given them, they resolved to fly, they might not escape thither, and, if they resolved to fight, they might not have assistance thence. Thus he shut them up in that land as their prison in which they were pleasing themselves as their palace and paradise. [4.] He then fell upon them, and put them all to the sword, 10,000 of them, which it seems was the number appointed to keep Israel in subjection (Jdg 3:29): There escaped not a man of them. And they were the best and choicest of all the king of Moab's forces, all lusty men, men of bulk and stature, and not only able-bodied, but high spirited too, and men of valour, Jdg 3:29. But neither their strength nor their courage stood them in any stead when the set time had come for God to deliver them into the hand of Israel. [5.] The consequence of this victory was that the power of the Moabites was wholly broken in the land of Israel. The country was cleared of these oppressors, and the land had rest eighty years, Jdg 3:30. We may hope that there was likewise a reformation among them, and a check give to idolatry, by the influence of Ehud which continued a good part of this time. It was a great while for the land to rest, fourscore years; yet what is that to the saints' everlasting rest in the heavenly Canaan?
Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain And the children of Israel did evil again in…
And the children of Israel did evil again in the sight of the Lord,.... Fell into idolatry again, which was a great evil in the sight of God, and what they were prone to fall into:
and the Lord strengthened Eglon the king of Moab against Israel; put it into his heart to invade them, and encouraged him to it, and gave him success; what kings reigned over Moab between Balak and this king we know not: it is a commonly received notion of the Jews, that Ruth was the daughter of Eglon; see Rut 1:4; and it was about this time that Elimelech with his two sons went into Moab, and when many of those things recorded in the book of Ruth were transacted:
Read full note →
because they had done evil in the sight of the Lord; which had greatly provoked him to anger, and was the cause of stirring up the king of Moab against them.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain Strengthened Eglon - By giving him courage, and power,…
Strengthened Eglon - By giving him courage, and power, and success against them.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain Verse 12. The children of Israel did evil] They…
Verse 12. The children of Israel did evil] They forgat the Lord and became idolaters, and God made those very people, whom they had imitated in their idolatrous worship, the means of their chastisement.
The Lord strengthened Eglon the king of Moab] The success he had against the Israelites was by the especial appointment and energy of God. He not only abandoned the Israelites, but strengthened the Moabites against them.
Read full note →
Eglon is supposed to have been the immediate successor of Balak. Some great men have borne names which, when reduced to their grammatical meaning, appear very ridiculous: the word עגלון Eglon signifies a little calf!
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain Jdg 3:12. And the children of Israel did evil…
Jdg 3:12. And the children of Israel did evil again — This was the case of the Israelites during all the time of their judges: the same person who freed them from servitude, purified them also from idolatry; but he was no sooner dead than their religion was at an end, though their peace and happiness were sure to expire with it. Thus every epocha of their history, during the administration of the judges, is only an alternate succession of sinning and contrition, of servitude and deliverance. This may evince what a mighty influence even one good man in authority may have over a whole people. The Lord strengthened Eglon — By giving him courage, and power, and success against them. As God raised up deliverers to Israel, when they became penitent, so he spirited up enemies against them, and gave them power to oppress them, whenever they revolted from his service.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain The “strengthening” Eglon was the special work of God,…
The “strengthening” Eglon was the special work of God, and because Israel “had done evil,” etc. Samuel’s comment on the event is to the same effect 1Sa 12:9.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain Eglon, signifies "a calf." (Calmet) --- God made use…
Eglon, signifies "a calf." (Calmet) --- God made use of this prince to scourge his people, with the assistance of the neighbouring nations. He took Engaddi, in the plains of Jericho, and was thus enabled to keep an eye both upon his own subjects and the conquered Israelites. (Calmet) --- Here he probably met with his untimely end. (Haydock)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures 1864 · Public Domain the servitude to eglon, king of moab. ehud, the…
SECOND SECTION
the servitude to eglon, king of moab. ehud, the judge with the double-edged dagger. shamgar, the deliverer with the ox-goad
Read full note →
__________________
Eglon, King of Moab, reduces Israel to servitude, and seizes on the City of Palms: they are delivered by Ehud, who destroys the oppressor
Jdg_3:12-30
12And the children [sons] of Israel did evil again [continued to do evil] in the sight of the Lord [Jehovah]: and the Lord [Jehovah] strengthened [encouraged17] Eglon the king of Moab against Israel, because they had done [did] evil in the sight of the Lord [Jehovah]. 13And he gathered unto him [having allied himself with] the children [sons] of Ammon and Amalek, and went and smote Israel, and [they] 14possessed [took possession of] the city of palm-trees. So [And] the children [sons] 15of Israel served Eglon the king of Moab eighteen years. But when [And] the children [sons] of Israel cried unto the Lord [Jehovah], [and] the Lord [Jehovah] raised them up a deliverer, Ehud the son of Gera, a Benjamite [Ben-jemini], a man left-handed [weak18 of his right hand]: and by him the children [sons] of Israel 16sent a present unto Eglon the king of Moab.19 But [And] Ehud made him a dagger which had two edges, of a cubit [gomed] length: and he did gird it under his raiment upon his right thigh. 17And he brought the present unto Eglon king of Moab: and Eglon was a very fat man. 18And when he had made an end to offer the present, he sent away [dismissed20] the people that bare the present. 19But he himself turned again [turned back] from the quarries [Pesilim] that were by Gilgal, and said, I have a secret errand21 unto thee, O king: who said, Keep [omit: keep] silence. 20And [thereupon] all that stood by him went out from him. And Ehud came [drew near] unto him; and he was sitting in a summer parlour [now he, i.e. the king, was sitting in the upper story of the cooling-house22], which he had for himself alone [his private apartment]: and Ehud said, I have a message from God [the Deity] unto thee. And 21[Then] he arose out of his seat. And [immediately] Ehud put forth his left hand, and took the dagger from his right thigh, and thrust it into his belly: 22And the haft also went in after the blade: and the fat closed upon [about] the blade, so that he could not [for he did not] draw the dagger out of his belly; and the dirt [the dagger23] came 23out [behind]. Then [And] Ehud went forth through the porch [went upon the balcony], and shut the doors of the parlour [upper story] upon him [after him], and locked them. 24When he was gone out, his [the king’s] servants came; and when they saw that [and they looked, and] behold, the doors of the parlour [upper story] were locked, [and] they said, Surely [doubtless], he covereth his feet in his summer-chamber 25[chamber of the cooling-house]. And they tarried till they were ashamed [waited very long]: and behold, he opened not [no one opened] the doors of the parlour [upper story], therefore they took a [the] key and opened them: and behold, their 26lord was fallen down dead on the earth. And [But] Ehud [had] escaped while they tarried; and [had already] passed beyond the quarries [Pesilim], and 27[had] escaped unto Seirath [Seirah]. And it came to pass when he was come [when he arrived], that he blew a [the] trumpet in the mountain [mountains] of Ephraim, and the children [sons] of Israel went down with him from the mount 28[mountains], and he before them. And he said unto them, Follow [Hasten] after me: for the Lord [Jehovah] hath delivered your enemies the Moabites into your hand. And they went down after him, and took the fords of Jordan toward Moab, and suffered not a man to pass oJudges Jdg_3:29 And they slew [smote] of Moab at that time about ten thousand men, all lusty,24 and all men of valour: and there escaped not a man. 30So Moab was subdued that day under the hand of Israel: and the land had rest four-score years.
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL
[1 Jdg_3:12.—וַיְחַזֵּק: the same word is used Exo_4:21, etc., Jos_11:20; but is here, as Bachmann remarks, to be explained not by those passages, but by Eze_30:24. It implies here the impartation not so much of strength as of the consciousness of it.—Tr.]
[2 Jdg_3:15.—אִטֵּר: Dr. Cassel, schwach, weak. “Impeded” would be the better word. Against the opinion of some, that Ehud’s right hand was either lamed or mutilated, Bachmann quotes the remark of Schmid that it would have been a breach of decorum to send such a physically imperfect person on an embassy to the king. It may be added that this explanation of אִטֵּר is at all events not to be thought of in the case of the 700 chosen men mentioned in Jdg_20:16.—Tr.]
[3 Jdg_3:15.—Dr. Cassel translates this clause: “when [als; i. e. Jehovah raised up Ehud as a deliverer, when] the sons of Israel sent a present by him to Eglon, the king of Moab.” But it is altogether simpler and better to take the clause as an independent progressive sentence, as in the E. V. So Bachmann also.—Tr.]
[4 Jdg_3:18.—יְשַׁלַּח: dismissed them by accompanying them part of the way back, cf. Gen_12:20; Gen_18:16; etc.—Tr.]
[5 Jdg_3:19.—דְּבַר־סֵתֶר: Dr. Cassel translates, “a secret word.” But “errand” is better; because like דָּבָר, it may be a word or message, or it may be a commission of a more active nature. Bachmann quotes Chyträus: rem, negotium secretum habeo apud te agendum. So, he goes on to remark, in Jdg_3:20 “דְּבַר־אֱלהִֹים לִי אֵלֶיךָ, is not necessarily, ‘I have a word from God to say to thee;’ but may mean, ‘I have a commission from God to execute to thee.’ It would be preferable, therefore, to conform the English Version in Jdg_3:20 to Jdg_3:19, rather than the reverse.—Tr.]
[6 Jdg_3:20.—The rendering given above is Dr. Cassel’s, except that he puts the verb (ישֵׁב) in the pluperfect, which can scarcely be approved. He translates בַּעֲלִיַּת הַמְּקֵרָה by Obergeschoss des kühlhauses, which we can only represent by the awkward phrase: “upper story of the cooling-house.” It would be better, however, to take מְקֵרָה as containing an adjective idea, descriptive of the ’alijah: “cool upper story.” Cf. Bachmann.—Tr.]
[7 Jdg_3:22.—The term פַּרְשְׁדוֹן occurs only here, and is of exceedingly doubtful interpretation. Bachmann assumes that the וַיֵּצֵא which precedes it has Ehud for its subject, and then—by a course of reasoning far too lengthy and intricate to be here discussed—comes to the conclusion that פַּרְשְׁדוֹן denotes a locality, which in the next verse is more definitely indicated by מִסְדְּרוֹן. The latter term, he thinks, is best understood “of the lattice-work by which the roof was inclosed, or rather of the inclosed platform of the roof itself.” Accordingly he conceives the text to say that Ehud issued forth from Eglon’s private apartment “upon the flat roof, more definitely upon the inclosed plat from or gallery.”—Tr.]
[8 Jdg_3:29.—Dr. Cassel: angesehene Leute, cf. the Commentary; but it seems better to hold fast to the E. V. The expression is literally: “fat men,” i. e. well-fed, lusty men, of great physical strength. So Bachmann also.—Tr.]
EXEGETICAL AND DOCTRINAL
Jdg_3:12-14. And Jehovah encouraged Eglon, king of Moab. The second attack on Israel came likewise from the east, but from a point much nearer home than that from which the first by Aram had come. A warlike prince of Moab had formed a league for the occasion with neighbors north and south of him. For the sons of Ammon dwelt beyond the Jordan, east of the Dead Sea, above the Moabites; while the hosts of Amalek roved lower down, to the southwest of Moab. Hitherto no actual conflict had occurred between Moab and Israel. But the order that “no Ammonite or Moabite shall enter into the congregation of Jehovah” (Deu_23:4 (3)), sufficiently marks the antagonism that existed between them. The Moabites longed for the excellent oasis of the City of Palms. Jericho, it is true, was destroyed; but the indestructible wealth of its splendid site attracted them. They surprised Israel, now become dull and incapable. Neither in the land of Benjamin, where the battle was fought, nor from the neighboring tribes of Judah and Ephraim, did they meet with any energetic resistance. From the words “and they took possession of,” in connection with the following narrative, it appears that Eglon had fixed his residence in the City of Palms.25 This renders it probable that Eglon was not the king of all Moab, (whose principal seat was in Rabbath Moab,) but a Moabitish chieftain, whom this successful expedition placed in possession of this fair territory west of the Jordan.
Jdg_3:15. And Jehovah raised them up a deliverer, Ehud, the son of Gera, a Ben-jemini, a man weak of his right hand. אֵהוּד; for which the LXX. read אהוֹד, Aod (Jerome has Eud). It seems to me that the older derivation of this name from הוֹד, giving it the sense of “one who praises,’ or “one who is praised’ (gloriam accipiens, Jerome), is to be unqualifiedly preferred to the later, proposed by Fürst, from a conjectural root, אֵהוּד אָד is related to הדַד,הוּד, as אָהַל, to be bright, is to הַל, הָלַל, and אַהֲרוֹן (Arabic, Hârûn) to הָרַר, הַר. Elsewhere I have already compared hod with the Sanskrit vad, ἄδω, ἀείδω, ὕδω, and the Gothic audags (Irene, p. 6, note.) At all events, as Ehud belongs to hod, so such names as Audo, Eudo, Heudo, seem to belong to audags (cf. Förstemann, Namenbuch, 1:162, 391).
He was a Ben-jemini, of the tribe of Benjamin, as the Targum expressly adds. When the son of Jacob was born, his dying mother named him Benoni, “son of my sorrow;” but his father, by way of euphemism, called him Ben-jamin, “son of good fortune” (Gen_35:18). Jamin came to signify “good fortune,” only because it designated the right side. The inhabitants of the holy land had the sea (jam26) on the right, hence called that side jamin, literally, sea-side; and the high lands of Aram (or Sham, cf. Magyar, Altherth., p. 228) on the left, hence semol, the left, from Sam. Different nations derived their expressions for right and left from conceptions peculiar to themselves. Thus δεξιός and dexter27 are based on the idea of showing, pointing, with the right hand (δείκνυμι); sinister, from sinus, on the action of laying the right hand on the side of the heart. The left hand has everywhere been regarded as the weaker, which, properly speaking, did not wield arms. When oriental custom placed the stranger on the left, it assigned him the seat of honor in so far as the left side seemed to be the weaker and less protected (cf. Xenoph. Cyrop. viii. 4; Meiners, Ueber die Versch. der Menschennaturen, ii. 588). From the idea of weakness, sprang such terms as λαιοʹς, lœvus, Ger. link, [Eng. left], because that side is harmless, smooth, and gentle (cf. λε͂ιος, lœvis). Hence also the custom among Asiatic nations of inclining toward the left side, and resting on the left hand, when seated, (Meiners, iii. 213): the right hand was thus left free. It was by a euphemism that the name of Jacob’s son was Ben-jamin. Among the Greeks also the “left” was euphemistically called εὐώνυμος, good-omened, because it was wished to avoid the ominous ἀριστερός. A similar custom must have obtained in Israel, since just in the tribe of Benjamin there were, as we are informed Jdg_20:16, large numbers of men who, like Ehud, were אִטֵּר יַד יְמִינוֹ, i.e. left-handed,—the sons of the right hand being thus most addicted to the use of the left. But for the very reason that it seems to have been a habit of the tribe to use the left hand, it cannot be supposed that אִטֵּר is meant to indicate lameness of the right hand. The LXX. felt this when they rendered the phrase by ἀμφιδέξιος, “double right-handed.” The same consideration influenced those more recent scholars who instanced (as Serarius already did, p. 84) the Homeric Asteropæus, who fought with both hands. However, this also contradicts the spirit of the narrative, and, as the peculiarity occurs only in Benjamin, the name as well. Those Ben-jemini, who, like Ehud, use the left hand, do it in contrast with others, who make use of the right without any lameness in the left. That which Stobæus (Eclogœ Physicœ, ed. Heeren, i. 52, 992) relates of certain African nations, might also be said of the Benjamites: that they are “good and for the most part left-handed fighters (ἀριστερομάχους), and do with the left hand whatever others do with the right.” These are manifestly the same tribes of whom Stephanus of Byzantium (ed. Westermann, p. 128) speaks as an Egyptian people near Ethiopia, and whom he styles ’Ευωνυμίται (thus designating them, like Benjamin, by the euphemistic term for left-handed). Accordingly אִטֵּר יַד יְמִינוֹ means no more than “unpracticed, weak, awk ward, with the right hand,” as other people are with the left. They are such as among other nations the people frequently called Linketatz, Linkfuss [literally, “left-paw,” “left-foot”] (Frisch, i. 616), in France gauchier [lit. “left-hander”; cf. the English awk, gawk, and their derivative forms]. It is remarkable that in the Roman legend the hero, who, like Ehud, undertakes to kill the enemy of his country, is also named Scævola, left-handed. The traditional explanation that he was so named because he burned his right hand, is not very suitable; he should in that case, be named “one-handed.” Still, no one will agree with Niebuhr (Röm. Gesch., i. 569), who, following Varro, proposed an altogether different derivation. The tradition must refer to an actually left-handed hero. Scœvus, says Ulpian (Digestor., lib. 1. tit. 1, 12, 3), does not apply to one who is maimed; hence, he who cannot move the right hand is called mancus. As such a left-handed person we are to consider Laïus (Λάϊος), the father of Œdipus (Οἰδίπους).
Jdg_3:16. And Ehud made him a dagger [German: Dolch] which had two edges, a gomed long. The word dolch [dagger, dirk] has passed over into the German, from the Slavic, since the sixteenth century, and was not yet known to Luther.28 It answers to חֶרֶב in this passage, better than “sword” would ”do, because it has become quite synonymous with stichdegen (dirk or poniard). Oriental daggers have always been double-edged and short-handled (Jdg_3:22). Gomed is translated σπιθαμή by the Septuaginta. Among the Greeks, the σπιθαμή was half an ell, i.e. twelve digits or three fourths of a foot (cf. Böckh, Metrolog. Unters., p. 211). With this measure, gomed, in its general sense of cubitus, which is also given in the garmida of the Targum, corresponds. The dagger of Ehud was not curved, as the sicœ usually were and as the daggers of the Bedouins still are (cf. Jos. Ant. xx. 10). Its length could only be such as was consistent with concealment.
And girded it under his raiment. “To the presence of Dionysius the Tyrant, glided Mœros, the dagger in his garment,” sings our poet,29 and is withal perfectly historical, even though the Fable (n. 257) of Hyginus does not expressly say this. With such daggers in their garments the Sicarii raged among the crowds at the fall of Jerusalem. Prudentius (Psychomachia, 689) sings of Discordia: “sicam sub veste tegit!” Rothari, the would-be murderer of the Longobard king Luitprand, wore coat of mail and a dagger beneath his clothing (Paulus Diaconus, Hist. Lomb. vi. 37). Ehud had to wear the dagger on his right side because he was left-handed. However, among German warriors who were not left-handed, the dagger was also frequently worn on the right, because the sword hung on the left, as may be seen in old pictures and on gravestones (Klemm, Waffen und Werkzeuge, Leipzig, 1854, p. 173).
Jdg_3:17. And Eglon was a very fat man. Considering the sense of בָּרִיא wherever it occurs in Scripture, there can be no doubt that it is intended here to express the corpulency of the king. The LXX. in giving ἀστεῖος, follow another interpretation. They do not (as Bochart thought, Phaleg, p. 534) take it as descriptive of a handsome man, nor do they imagine that all urbani, on account of their comfortable mode of living, have a tendency to become fat (cf. Serarius, p. 87); but since the statement “and Eglon was a fat man” is closely connected with the narrative of the presentation of the gifts, they make it refer to the manner in which the king received the presents.30 ’Αστεῖος is friendly, accessible (Plato, Phœd., 116 b.). In Egypt, where the translators lived, it was probably still a matter of present experience, that presentations of tribute and gifts to the rulers did not always meet with a gracious reception.
Jdg_3:18. When the presentation of the present was over, he dismissed the people. Meuschen (Nov. Test, ex Talm., p. 971) very properly observes that קרַב, here employed to express the presentation of gifts to a king, is elsewhere used to denote the bringing of oblations to God, hence קָרְבָּן, offering. It was not lawful to appear before an Asiatic king without bringing a gift31 (Seneca, Ep. xvii.); only in this way, therefore, could Ehud inform himself of the situation and humor of the king. The presentation of gifts is a lengthy ceremony. The tenacious adherence of oriental nations to ancient customs, enables us to depict the present scene by the help of Persian descriptions of similar occasions. Our narrator properly speaks of the bearers of the present as הָעָם, the people; for the more numerous the persons who carried the gifts, the more honored was the king. “Fifty persons often bear what one man could easily carry,” says Chardin (Voyage, iii. 217). At this ceremony Ehud had no opportunity to attempt anything, for he neither came near the king, nor saw him alone; nor yet was he willing, among so many bystanders, to involve his companions in the consequences of a possible failure. On the contrary, he accompanied them back to the borders, in order to be sure that he was alone when making the dangerous attempt. Whether he suffered or escaped, he wished to be unhindered by their presence, and also to appear as acting without their concurrence.
Jdg_3:19. But he himself turned back from the boundary-stones. This is evidently the sense in which פְּסִילִים is to be taken. פֶּסֶל is always a carved image, γλυπτόν. The entire number of instances in which this word is used by Scripture writers fails to suggest any reason for thinking here of “stone-quarries,” a definition which moreover does not appear to harmonize with the locality. But as the connection implies that the borders of Eglon’s territory, which he had wrenched from Israel, were at the pesilim, we must understand by them the posts, στῆλαι, stones, lapides sacri, which marked the line. In consequence of the honors everywhere paid them, these were considered Pesilim, idol images, just as at a later time the Hermœ, (ἕρμακες, heaps of stone) were prohibited as idolatrous objects (cf. Aboda Sara, Mischna, 4). With this, the interpretation of the Targum, מַחְצָבַיָּא, heaps of unhewn stones, may also be made to harmonize.32 This border line was in the vicinity of Gilgal, which had not fallen into the hands of Moab. Ewald has rightly insisted upon it that Gilgal must have lain northeast of Jericho (Gesch. des Volkes Israel, ii. 317). That this was the relative position of Gilgal, and its direction from Jericho, has already received confirmation from the first chapter of our Book.
And said, I have a secret message. It could not be matter of surprise that Ehud did not make this request until his return. The ceremony of the public audience did not allow it to be made at that time. The presentation of the presents must have been so conducted as to impress the king with the conviction that Ehud was especially devoted to him. Signs of discontent and ill-will on the part of the subjugated people cannot have escaped the conqueror. The more highly would he value the devotion of one of the Israelitish leaders. That Ehud had sent his companions away, and had not returned until they had crossed the border, was easily explained as indicating that he had a matter to present in which he did not wish to be observed by them. All the more eager, therefore, was Eglon to hear that which Ehud seemed to hide from Israel. It was only by such a feint that Ehud could succeed in approaching the tyrant and obtaining a private interview. Israel’s deliverer must first seem to be its betrayer. The same artifice has been used by others. When the Persians wished to destroy the pseudo-Smerdis, and doubtingly considered how they could pass the guards, Darius said that he would pretend to have a secret commission, concerning Persia, from his father to the king; adding, as Herodotus (iii. 72) says: “For when lying is necessary, lie”!
Who said, Silence! Thereupon all that stood by him went out. Ehud does not demean himself as if he wished that those present would depart. He appears to be on the point of telling his secret before them all. But this Eglon will not permit. Oriental manners could not be more perfectly set forth. The king’s injunction of silence (הָס, ’st!) on Ehud, is of itself a sufficient command to those present to leave the room. Eglon must therefore have expected matters not to be heard by all ears. All who “stood” about him, went out. They were his servants (Jdg_3:24), who do not sit when the king is present. “Happy are these thy servants,” says the queen of Sheba to Solomon, “who stand continually before thee, and hear thy wisdom.” In the Tutinameh (translated by Rosen, i. 42, 43) it is said: “The King of Khorassan was once sitting in his palace, and before his throne stood the pillars of the empire, the servants of the crown, high and low, great and small,” etc.
Jdg_3:20. Now, he had seated himself in the upper story of the cooling-house. To understand what part of the house is thus indicated, we have only to attend to the description of oriental architecture given by Shaw, in his Travels (i. 386, Edinb. edit. 1808). Down to the present day many oriental houses have a smaller one annexed to them, which sometimes rises one story higher than the main building. In Arabic as in Hebrew this is called alijah, and serves for purposes of entire seclusion or rest. “There is a door of communication from it into the gallery of the house, besides another which opens immediately, from a privy stairs, down into the porch or street, without giving the least disturbance to the house.” The alijah of Eglon consisted of an inner chamber. opening on an exposed balcony (מסדּרוֹן), from which a door led into the house itself (at present called dor or bait) Within the door of the alijah there was however still another apartment (חֶדֶר, Jdg_3:24), which served the purpose of a necessary-house. Being high and freely accessible to currents of air, the alijah was a cool retreat. Similar purposes were subserved in Germany by the pergulœ, balconies, galleries, arbors (Lauben); hence Luther’s translation, Sommer-laube (summer-arbor or bower). He followed the rendering of the LXX. who have τψ͂ θερινψ͂, while the Targum gives more prominence to the idea of repose (בֵּית קַיְטָא, κοίτη). The public reception of the gifts had taken place in the house. Afterwards, while Ehud accompanied his companions, the king had betaken himself to the alijah “which was for himself alone” (his private chamber). When Ehud returned he was received there, as he had anticipated.
And Ehud said, I have a message from the Deity unto thee. Then he arose from his seat. דְּבַר אֱלֹהִים is a commission from a higher being. He does not say Jehovah, for this is the name of the Israelitish God, with whom Eglon has nothing to do. We are not however to assume that the God of Eglon is meant; for what can Ehud the Israelite announce from Chemosh! It is therefore probable that by Elohim a superior prince is to be understood, whose liegeman or satrap Eglon was, as was already intimated above,—a human possessor of majesty and authority. As it is not to be supposed that the capital of Moab was transferred from Rabbah to the small bit of territory which had been acquired across the Jordan, Eglon in Jericho is not to be looked on as lord of all Moab. The relation in which he stood to the mother-country was most likely that of a vassal or feudal baron. That he is styled king does not contradict this. The potentates of single cities were all called “kings,” as the Greeks called them τύραννοι, without on that account being anything more than dependents of more powerful states and princes.33 It suits the rôle which Ehud wishes to be ascribed to him, that he should also have relations with the transfluvial Moab, a fact which of course must be kept profoundly secret. Thus Eglon’s rising is explained. The same honor was due to a message from the superior lord as to his presence. Like reverence was shown to royal letters even, as appears from the narrative of Herodotus concerning a message to Oroetes; and from it, the fidelity of those whom the message concerned was inferred (Herod. iii. 128). The same mark of honor was paid to parents and aged persons. From this custom the ecclesiastical usage of standing during the reading of the Gospel, is also to be derived. Eglon rises out of respect for the דְּבַר אֱלֹהִים. This has been the constant explanation. The diverging view of Bertheau34 does not commend itself. The Talmud—understanding the words, however, of the God of Israel—already deduces from them the lesson, that if a stranger thus rose up to receive a message from God, much more is it the duty of an Israelite so to do (Sanhedrin, 60 a).
Jdg_3:21-24. Immediately Ehud put forth his left hand. Ehud made use of a pretext, in order to cause Eglon to rise. He was surer of his thrust if his victim stood. Eglon’s attention must be wholly diverted, that the attack, entirely unresisted, might be the more effective. In such sudden assaults, bulky people like Eglon are at a disadvantage. Cimber pressed closely on Cæsar, as if to make most urgent entreaty for his brother (Plut., Cœsar, 86). Parmenio was stabbed by cleander, while cheerfully reading a letter (Curtius, vii. 2, 27). The instance most like Eglon’s case, is that of King Henry III. of France. Clement, to secure an interview, had provided himself with a commission from a friend of the king. When he arrived, the king was sitting on his close-stool. Hoping to hear of an understanding with his opponents, Henry bade the messenger draw near; whereupon the monk stabbed him in the abdomen (cf. Ranke, Französ. Gesch., i. 171). Ehud’s thrust, though left-handed, was powerful. The dagger, together with its short handle, buried itself in the fat of the man, and came out behind. לַהַב signifies a flame; then the blade of a sword, which glitters and burns like a flame. In a mediæval writing, the following words occur: “Sîn swert flamnieret an sîner hant35 (Müller’s Mittelh. Wörterb., iii. 336). In technical language we also speak of flaming blades (geflammten klingen).
And came out behind, וַיֵּצֵא הַפַּרְשְׁדֹנָה. The ancient doubt as to this word, which occurs but once, and about which opinions are still divided, appears from the divergent renderings of the Septuagint and the Targum. It is certain, however, in the first place, that the Greek rendering προστάδα, can have little weight; for it arose from the similarity of the word in the text to מְּרוּכְדָא, current at the time, and meaning προστάς, vestibule. In the second place, the addition of Ehud after the second וַיֵּצֵא (Jdg_3:23), shows that another subject begins, and that therefore the first וַיֵּצֵא can refer only to the sword, not to the man. Further, since הַפַּרְשְׁדֹנָה is provided with ה local, it manifestly denotes that part of the body toward which the course of the sword was directed, while וַיֵּצֵא testifies to the actual perforation of the body. Now, as the sword was thrust from before into the abdomen (בֶּטֶן), there would be no doubt as to the part where it emerged, even if the etymology, which has here to deal with an onomatopoetic word, did not make this perfectly plain. Parshedon is the Greek πρωκτός, and belongs to the same family as the Lithuanian persti, Lettish pirst, Polish pierdziec, Russian perdjet, Greek πέρδειν, Sanscrit pard, Latin pedere, Gothic fairtan, Old High German fërzan (cf. Pott, Etymolog. Forsch., i. 245; Grimm. Wörterb., iii. 1335). The sword emerged behind through the fundament. The king fell down without uttering a sound. Ehud did not delay, but went out unhindered through the balcony. The attendants had entirely withdrawn from the alijah: Ehud takes advantage of this circumstance, and locks the door to it, in order to delay the moment of discovery. The heedless conduct of the unsuspecting attendants supports his boldness. As soon however as they see him go out,—an earlier return to their lord is not lawful,—they endeavor to enter the alijah. Ehud had gone away so calmly, that they suspect nothing. They are not even surprised when they find the doors fastened. Serarius has properly directed attention to the aversion felt by the ancients to the least degree of exposure when complying with the necessities of nature. This applies especially to kings, inasmuch as subjection to these necessities, too plainly proved them men. Of Pharaoh, the Jewish legend says that he wished to appear like a god, above the need of such things. “He covers his feet,” is a euphemism, taken from the descent of the long garments (Cf. Bochart, Hierozoicon, i. 677).
Jdg_3:25-30. And they waited long, בּוֹשׁעַד. These words add the notion of displeasure and ill humor to the idea of waiting (cf. 2Ki_2:17; 2Ki_8:11). At length they comprehend that something extraordinary must have taken place. They procure another key, with which they open the doors, and find their lord—dead. Ehud’s artifice, however, had succeeded. While they delayed (הִתְמַהְמְהָם, from מַהְמַה, morari, is onomatopoetic), he had got beyond the border, as far as Seirah. This place, which according to Jdg_3:27 belonged to the mountains of Ephraim, is unknown. It bounded the territories of Benjamin on the north. Ehud reached it by way of the border which ran by Gilgal, which shows that both these places were north of Jericho. It is evident that he had agreed with the Israelites to give the signal there, in case he were successful. His trumpet-blast was transmitted among the mountains. Israel flocked together, and heard of the unprecedentedly fortunate deed. The people saw in it the firm resolve, which gives victory. The plan of battle had also been already determined by Ehud. It was of the last importance to cut the terrified and leaderless Moabites off from the assistance of their transjordanic friends. Hence, the first care of Israel is to seize the ford of the river. The ford in question was manifestly no other than that which, directly east of Jericho, half an hour north of Wady Heshban, is still in use. Seetzen called it el-Mökhtaa, Robinson el-Helu36 (Ritter xv. 484, 547, Gage’s transl. iii. 4, 49). That the occupation of this ford decides the victory, proves clearly that Eglon was not king of all Moab, but only of the Moab on this side of the Jordan. It was a terrible retribution, a sort of “Sicilian vespers,” which Israel, rising up after long subjection, inflicted on Eglon and his people. The falling foes were men of might. אִישׁ שָׁמֵן expresses the distinction (das Ansehn),37אִישׁ חַיִל the warlike character and abilities, of the smitten enemies. Moab was thoroughly vanquished, and Israel had rest for eighty years.
The exploit of Ehud doubtless surpasses all similar deeds of ancient history in the purity of its motive, as well as in the energy and boldness of its execution. Harmodius and Aristogiton, however celebrated by the Athenians, were moved to kill Hipparchus by private interests (cf. Thucyd. vi. 56). Blind warrior fury fills Mucius Scævola, as also Theodotus (Polyb. v. 81), the would-be murderer of Ptolemæus, and they fail of success. Ehud was equally bold and pure. He risked his life for no interest of his own, but for his people. And not merely for the external freedom of his nation, but for the maintenance and honor of its divine religion, which was inseparably linked with freedom. It was against the mortal enemy of Israel—against one lying under the ban, and shut out from the congregation of Israel—that he lifted up his sword. He exposed himself to a fearful peril, in order, if successful, to give therewith a signal of courage and comfort to his people. To be sure, if he did not succeed, the hatred and oppression of the enemy would increase in violence. But for that very reason men saw the more clearly that God had raised him up to be a deliverer. And yet, where in Israel are those praises of Ehud, which in Athens resounded for centuries in honor of Harmodius? Scævola’s deed38 is celebrated as one of the nation’s heroic performances. The historian makes him say (Livy, xi. 12): “As an enemy have I slain the enemy.” It is true, the remarkable act has had the honor of being minutely handed down, even to the least details of its progress. But all this was to point out the sagacity and energy of the strong left-handed man. Not one word of praise is found. On the contrary—and this fact deserves attention—the remark usually made of other Judges, is here wanting: it is not said that “the Spirit of Jehovah was upon him.” Nor is it said, as of Othniel, that he “judged Israel.” Neither are we told that the rest and peace of Israel were connected with his life and death. Subsequent exegesis called him the Wolf, with which Benjamin is compared (Midrash, Ber. Rabba, cap. 89, p. 87-a). As the wolf throws himself on his prey, so had Ehud thrown himself on Eglon. They saw in Ehud’s deed the act of a mighty man, influenced by zeal for God; but the “Spirit of Jehovah” inspires neither suck artifice nor such murder. So much the less could the act of Ehud, however brilliant under the circumstances, be made to exculpate similar deeds. So much the less could the crimes that defile the pages of Christian history, such as those committed against Henry III. and Henry IV., use it as a cover for themselves.39 Although Eglon was a heathen, a foreigner, a tyrant, an enemy actually engaged in hostilities, the Scripture speaks of Ehud only as a deliverer, but never of his deed as sprung from the Spirit of God. How much more disgraceful are murder and treason against one’s own king, countrymen, and fellow Christians! It was an insult to Christianity, a sin against the Holy Ghost, when in answer to Clement’s question, whether a priest might kill a tyrant, it was determined that “it was not a mortal sin, but only an irregularity” (Ranke, Franz. Gesch., i. 473); or when Pope Paul V. exclaimed, with reference to the murder of Henry IV. by Ravaillac: “Deus gentium fecit hoc, quia datus in reprobum sensum.” Worse than the dagger is such doctrine.40
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
Ehud, the Judge with the two-edged sword.—1. Israel was again in bondage on account of sin. And the compassion of God was not exhausted, although no deliverer came out of Judah. In the kingdom of God, the great and rich may indeed become instruments of God’s will; but his power is not confined to them. If no one arises in Judah, some one in Benjamin does. If it be not Othniel, Caleb’s nephew, it is some unknown person who comes to rescue his people. Neither the name, nor the physique, is material. Deliverance may be begun with the left hand.
2. Ehud kills Eglon, the tyrant of Israel; yet he is not properly a murderer, but only a warrior. However, it is better to conquer as Othniel and Gideon conquered. He did it, not for private revenge, nor from fanaticism, but for the just freedom of Israel and its religion. He did it against Moab, and not against one who shared his own faith and country. God raised him up; but yet the Word of God does not approve his deed. He was a deliverer of Israel; but there hangs a shadow nevertheless over his official activity. Therefore, no murderous passion can appeal to him. By him no tyrant-murder, no political assassination, is exculpated. And this not simply because in Christian states and churches there can be no Eglons or Moabs.—Starke: “The Jesuit principle that it is right to put an heretical prince out of the way, will never be valid until a person can be certain of having such a calling from God to it, as Ehud undoubtedly had.”—His cause was pure; which cannot be said of any other assassination in history,—Christian history not excepted,—down to the murder of the North American President Lincoln; not even of those instances which remind us (as Mallet, Altes und Neues, p. 92, so beautifully did with reference to G. Sand, the murderer of Kotzebue) of the words of the Lord: “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.”
Gerlach: We are not to think that the deed of Ehud, in the manner of its accomplishment, is set before us as an example; but we must also beware lest, because the manner is no longer allowable, we be led to deny the operation of the Holy Ghost by whom this deliverer of his people was impelled.
3. Because Ehud’s cause was pure, his deed was followed by peace and freedom. That can be said of no other similar deed. He first searched out the enemy in his hiding-place, and then triumphed over him in the battlefield. He shows himself,—1, a true Israelite by faith; 2, a true son of Benjamin, who was compared with the wolf, by his strength. He drew his sword, not for the sake of war, but of peace. Therefore, Israel had peace through him until he died.
Ehud may not improperly be considered a type in spirit of him who likewise sprang from Benjamin—of Saul who first ravened like a wolf, but became patient and trustful like a lamb; of the Apostle who called the Word of God a two-edged sword that pierces through the conscience; of Paul, whose symbol in the church is the sword through which as martyr he lost his own life, after he had saved the lives of thousands by the sword of the Spirit.
Footnotes:
[17][Jdg_3:12.—וַיְחַזֵּק: the same word is used Exo_4:21, etc., Jos_11:20; but is here, as Bachmann remarks, to be explained not by those passages, but by Eze_30:24. It implies here the impartation not so much of strength as of the consciousness of it.—Tr.]
[18][Jdg_3:15.—אִטֵּר: Dr. Cassel, schwach, weak. “Impeded” would be the better word. Against the opinion of some, that Ehud’s right hand was either lamed or mutilated, Bachmann quotes the remark of Schmid that it would have been a breach of decorum to send such a physically imperfect person on an embassy to the king. It may be added that this explanation of אִטֵּר is at all events not to be thought of in the case of the 700 chosen men mentioned in Jdg_20:16.—Tr.]
[19][Jdg_3:15.—Dr. Cassel translates this clause: “when [als; i. e. Jehovah raised up Ehud as a deliverer, when] the sons of Israel sent a present by him to Eglon, the king of Moab.” But it is altogether simpler and better to take the clause as an independent progressive sentence, as in the E. V. So Bachmann also.—Tr.]
[20][Jdg_3:18.—יְשַׁלַּח: dismissed them by accompanying them part of the way back, cf. Gen_12:20; Gen_18:16; etc.—Tr.]
[21][Jdg_3:19.—דְּבַר־סֵתֶר: Dr. Cassel translates, “a secret word.” But “errand” is better; because like דָּבָר, it may be a word or message, or it may be a commission of a more active nature. Bachmann quotes Chyträus: rem, negotium secretum habeo apud te agendum. So, he goes on to remark, in Jdg_3:20 “דְּבַר־אֱלהִֹים לִי אֵלֶיךָ, is not necessarily, ‘I have a word from God to say to thee;’ but may mean, ‘I have a commission from God to execute to thee.’ It would be preferable, therefore, to conform the English Version in Jdg_3:20 to Jdg_3:19, rather than the reverse.—Tr.]
[22][Jdg_3:20.—The rendering given above is Dr. Cassel’s, except that he puts the verb (ישֵׁב) in the pluperfect, which can scarcely be approved. He translates בַּעֲלִיַּת הַמְּקֵרָה by Obergeschoss des kühlhauses, which we can only represent by the awkward phrase: “upper story of the cooling-house.” It would be better, however, to take מְקֵרָה as containing an adjective idea, descriptive of the ’alijah: “cool upper story.” Cf. Bachmann.—Tr.]
[23][Jdg_3:22.—The term פַּרְשְׁדוֹן occurs only here, and is of exceedingly doubtful interpretation. Bachmann assumes that the וַיֵּצֵא which precedes it has Ehud for its subject, and then—by a course of reasoning far too lengthy and intricate to be here discussed—comes to the conclusion that פַּרְשְׁדוֹן denotes a locality, which in the next verse is more definitely indicated by מִסְדְּרוֹן. The latter term, he thinks, is best understood “of the lattice-work by which the roof was inclosed, or rather of the inclosed platform of the roof itself.” Accordingly he conceives the text to say that Ehud issued forth from Eglon’s private apartment “upon the flat roof, more definitely upon the inclosed plat from or gallery.”—Tr.]
[24][Jdg_3:29.—Dr. Cassel: angesehene Leute, cf. the Commentary; but it seems better to hold fast to the E. V. The expression is literally: “fat men,” i. e. well-fed, lusty men, of great physical strength. So Bachmann also.—Tr.]
[25][It certainly appears that he had done so temporarily, but by no means that he had done so permanently.—Tr.]
[26]The importance of this observation has been overlooked with reference to other lands as well as Palestine. The general fact that the sea-side was the right side, has been constantly ignored. That was the reason why Jacob Grimm (Gesch. der Deutschen Sprache, p. 990, etc.) failed to understand why among the Indians, Romans, etc., the south side of the mountains was the right, and the north side the left. The same idea prevailed among the Greeks. That in Roman augury “to the left” was more favorable than “to the right,” originated only in another view of the object which was supposed to produce good fortune. The sea-side was the free side.
[27]Cf. Benfey, Griech. Grammat., i. 240.
[28]This is the opinion of Grimm (Deutsch. Wörterb., ii. 1222). However, the view of Klemm (Waffen und Werkzeuge, p. 172) may nevertheless serve to find the original stymology of the word. [Luther has Schwert, sword.—Tr.]
[29][Schiller, in his ballad entitled Die Bürgschaft.—Tr.]
[30]Hence they also translate טוֹב by ἀστεῖος, Exo_2:2, where, to be sure, it rather signifies “beautiful.”
[31]Transferred to God, Exo_23:15 : “None shall appear before me empty.”
[32][To this interpretation of the pesilim, Bachmann (who agrees with our author in rejecting the commonly received “stone-quarries”) objects that it is not in accordance with he usual meaning of the word. He thinks that the pesiim were idolatrous images set up either by the apostate Israelites themselves, or by Eglon, “as boundary-marks of the territory immediately subject to him, and as signs of his supremacy.” He seems inclined to prefer the latter alternative, because of “the fact that Ehud does not feel himself and those with him secure until he has passed the pesilim.”—Tr.]
[33]Thus the king of Hazor was king paramount over all the kings of his vicinity (Jos_11:10).
[34][Bertheau says: “Divining the purpose of Ehud, he rose up to defend himself.”—Tr.]
[35][“His sword flamed in his hand.”—Tr.]
[36][Robinson’s map locates El-Helu not directly east, but southeast of Jericho, not north but south of Wady Heshban (cf. Bibl. Res. i. 535). It appears that the words “directly east” belong to Seetzen, and must in Ritter’s opinion be made to conform to Robinson’s location of El Helu. Cf. Gage’s Ritter, iii. 49. Van de Velde’s map places El-Helu southeast of Jericho, a short distance north of W. Heshban.—Tr.]
[37][Bertheau: “שָׁמֵן, the fat, i. e. (in contrast with persons of starved appearance) the well-fed and opulent man; cf. Latin opimus; hence, the man of consequence.” But compare note 8 under “Textual and Grammatical.”—Tr.]
[38]In Plutarch’s Parallels of Greek and Roman History (n. 2), the same history is given of a Greek, Neocles, who made an attempt against Xerxes like that of Scævola against Porsenna.
[39]Excellent remarks are found in the work of Hugo Grotius, De Jure Belli et Pacis, lib. 1. cap. 4. (ed. Traj, 1773), p. 178. Serarius declines to treat the subject, under the feeble pretext of lack of time, p. 92. (Compare Bayle, Dictionnaire, s. v. Mariana, ii. 2051, e.)
[40][Wordsworth: “Some have raised objections to this act of Ehud, as censurable on moral grounds: and they have described him as a ‘crafty Israelite,’ taking an unfair advantage over an unwieldy corpulent Moabite; others have apologized for it, on the plea that it is not to be measured by what way call the standard of our ‘enlightened modern civilization’ compared with what they term the ‘barbarous temper of those times.’ But surely these are low and unworthy motives.” He then quotes with approbation from Bp. Sanderson and Dr. Waterland, the gist of whose remarks (Sanderson’s however being made with immediate reference to the act of Phinehas, Numbers 25.) is, that the Lord raises up deliverers for Israel, and divinely warranted their actions, which actions, however, form no precedents for those who have not similar divine authority. But it is surely not an improper question to ask, whether, when God raised up a hero, endowed him with faith and zeal, with strength and energy, to secure certain results, He also, always and necessarily, suggested or even approved the methods adopted not only as a whole but even in detail.—Tr.]
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain EHUD SLAYS EGLON. (Jdg. 3:12-30)
EHUD SLAYS EGLON. (Jdg. 3:12-30)
the children of Israel did evil again in the sight of the Lord--The Israelites, deprived of the moral and political influences of Othniel, were not long in following their native bias to idolatry.
Read full note →
the Lord strengthened Eglon the king of Moab--The reigning monarch's ambition was to recover that extensive portion of his ancient territory possessed by the Israelites. In conjunction with his neighbors, the Ammonites and the Amalekites, sworn enemies of Israel, he first subjected the eastern tribes; then crossing the Jordan, he made a sudden incursion on western Canaan, and in virtue of his conquests, erected fortifications in the territory adjoining Jericho [JOSEPHUS], to secure the frontier, and fixed his residence there. This oppressor was permitted, in the providence of God, to triumph for eighteen years.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain MOABITISH OPPRESSION, AND THE DELIVERANCE BY EHUD, Jdg_3:12-30.
MOABITISH OPPRESSION, AND THE DELIVERANCE BY EHUD, Jdg_3:12-30.
12. The Lord strengthened Eglon — Or, as some explain, encouraged Eglon. He inspired him with zeal and consciousness of ability to vanquish Israel. Jehovah did this, not because Eglon was the righteous king of a righteous nation, but because he wished to use him as an instrument for the punishment of Israel. All that is known of Eglon and his rule over Israel is recorded in this passage of Holy Scripture. The archives of Moab have been destroyed for thousands of years; the word of the Lord endureth for ever.
Read full note →
Moab — This nation occupied the territory east of the Dead Sea and south of the Arnon river.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain 12. again did that which was evil] The introduction…
12. again did that which was evil] The introduction to the story is made up of the familiar phrases of Rd, see Jdg_2:11-19; the special details are derived from the story itself. For strengthened cf. Eze_30:24.
Eglon the king of Moab] Elsewhere Eglon (= calf) is the name of a town in Judah, Jos_10:3; Jos_10:34; it survives in the mod. ‘Ajlûn, i.e. the highlands between the Yabbok and the Yarmuk. But Eglah is a personal pr. name in 2Sa_3:5. The land of Moab lay on the E. of the Dead Sea and stretched eastwards to the desert; on the S.W. it bordered on Edom; on the N.E. were the Ammonites, and on the N. Reuben and Gad. The northern frontier at this period probably extended beyond the N. end of the Dead Sea.
Read full note →
12–30. Ehud delivers Israel from Moab
The story of Ehud is furnished by the editor with an introduction (Jdg_3:12-15 a) and conclusion (Jdg_3:30) in his usual manner. The narrative thus enclosed is one of the oldest in the Book; it has the freshness and vigour which belong to the best style of Hebrew story-telling. Traces of editorial interference may perhaps be detected here and there, Jdg_3:19-20; Jdg_3:22-23; Jdg_3:27-28 are taken by some to be doublets; but the narrative as a whole (Jdg_3:15-29) is homogeneous. The Moabites, whose territory lay on the E. of the Dead Sea and reached northwards probably to the fords of the Jordan, had crossed the river, occupied Jericho, and reduced the Israelites of the neighbourhood. The Benjamites were the principal sufferers; and it was the Benjamite hero Ehud who, by a clever and courageous stratagem, freed his countrymen from the tyrant. By the Dtc. compiler the subjugation and deliverance are extended so as to affect all Israel.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain (12) Did evil again.—Literally, “added to do evil.” We…
(12) Did evil again.—Literally, “added to do evil.” We find this Hebraism even in the New Testament. “He added (prosetheto) to send” (Luk_20:11-12).
Evil.—Literally, the evil, with special reference to idolatry, as in Jdg_2:11, &c.
Read full note →
Strengthened Eglon the king of Moab.—See this event referred to by the prophet Samuel, in 1Sa_12:9. Eglon was a successor of Balak. We have seen that Rishathaim is probably a term of hatred or scorn; is the name Eglon due to the same tendency? It may be so, since Eglon means “a fat bullock” (comp. Psa_22:12; Amo_4:1).
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain Vers. 12-31. Miscellaneous Thoughts.
Vers. 12-31. Miscellaneous Thoughts.
Sin and punishment, repentance and ready mercy, prayer and answer to prayer, and the providential government of God, ordering all things after the counsel of his own will, are the general subjects which the course of the narrative still sets before us. But other questions of considerable difficulty arise from the history of Ehud to which we shall do well to direct our attention. To avoid repetition the analogous case of Jael recorded in ch. 4. may be considered at the same time.
Read full note →
I MORAL PROBLEMS. Ehud and Jael are both represented to us as signal deliverers raised up by God to save Israel from his oppressors. Ehud holds a conspicuous place among the judges, and Jael is declared in the song of Deborah to be "blessed among women." But if we try this hero and this heroine by the standard of morality set up by Christianity and by modern Christian civilisation, we find that they were both guilty of acts of assassination coupled with deceit and treachery. Ehud deceived Eglon into his confidence by pretending to have a message to deliver to him from God, and then stabbed him; and Jael enticed Sisera into her tent with the offer Of hospitality that she might murder him in his sleep. Some commentators on this history have justified both these actions on the dangerous ground that they were done by God"s special command, and that what would in themselves have been crimes became virtues under the dispensing power of God"s sovereign will. But such an explanation is neither warranted by Scripture nor satisfactory in itself. The true explanation is to be found in deeper views of God"s providential government of the world, by which man"s free will is reconciled with the sovereignty of God. It is manifest that, given the existence of evil in the world, and given the truth that the Most High doeth according to his will in the army of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth, it must be that bad actions as well as good ones subserve and bring about the purposes of God. That Jacob"s deceit obtained his father"s blessing, or that the malice of the Jews brought about the great sacrifice of the death of Christ, are no proofs that God approves either deceit or malice, but are merely instances how man"s free-will, whether choosing good or evil, brings about the will of God a truth which however unfathomable to our reason, we can see to be necessary to the existence of the government of the world. This view, too, while it does not disturb our trust in the perfect righteousness of God, confirms our trust in the absolute sovereignty of his power. It leaves to the righteous a sense of perfect security amidst the perplexing spectacles of wrong and wickedness triumphing for a time.
II GOOD AND EVIL IN THE SAME HUMAN WILL. But are we then to set down Ehud and Jael among the wicked of the earth? By no means. But we must turn to another difficult problem, the co-existence of good and evil in the same human will. It is a simple fact, borne witness to by profane as well as sacred history, that in individuals the main bent of whose character is towards good, a great amount of evil may remain, when such evil is countenanced by the public opinion of their day, and by the practice of their contemporaries. Just as even wise men retain many gross popular errors in science till they are refuted and exploded by the light of new discoveries, so even good men remain unconsciously under the dominion of special evils till some new light has shined upon them and exposed their real nature. The cruelty of our penal laws down to the present century, the existence of the slave-trade and of slavery within our own memory, persecution unto cruel deaths for religious opinions, the severities of arbitrary governments till exploded in the light of freedom, are familiar examples how things evil in themselves may be approved by good and humane men when they are sanctioned by prevalent custom and by public opinion. And the observation of these and numerous analogous facts teaches us the folly as well as the injustice of judging men of one age by the standard of another. Turning then to Ehud and Jael, we know that in their days human life was not more valued than it is in Afghanistan to the present hour. We know that the life of an enemy was looked upon as a lawful and desirable prey to be seized whenever possible. We know that, in times when the weak have no protection from the strong by the action of law, the only weapon of defence that remains to them, that of cunning and deceit, becomes sharpened by constant use, and is habitually worn at their side. Guile in communities where there is no justice is not the exception but the rule, and feigned blandishments have a tendency to increase the fierceness which they were intended to conceal, when the time for concealment is past. When, therefore, Ehud and Jael in their respective times saw the people of God whom they loved trampled underfoot by cruel tyrants and oppressors; when they saw the glory of God in whom they believed profaned by the triumphs of idolatry; when they heard the cries and groans of those who Were reduced to bondage and were plundered of their lands; when indignation burnt in their hearts, and the blush of shame rose to their cheek, for the indignities which the people suffered at heathen hands can we wonder that their generous hearts planned vengeance and deliverance, and that they accomplished their purpose by such weapons as came to hand. Violence was no crime, deceit was no sin in their eyes. They had not, it is true, the grace to wait in patient faith, and They had the noble spirit of self-sacrifice, seeking nothing for themselves, ready to give all they had on the altar of religion and patriotism. They had the faith in God which marks the saint, and the disdain of danger which marks the hero. And so he who in his compassionate estimate of human conduct accepts a man according to what he hath and not according to what he hath not, accepted their virtues and covered their sin, even as we hope he will accept us when we act up to the light given to us, even though our best deeds are mixed up with sin, and our holiest works fall immeasurably short of the purity and holiness of God.
III THE CONCLUSION WHICH WE THUS ARRIVE AT IS, THAT GOD"S PURPOSE OF DELIVERANCE TO HIS CHURCH MAY BE ACCOMPLISHED BY BAD MEN AS WELL AS BY GOOD, and by bad as well as good actions; that the degree in which good men fall short of the glory of God varies widely according to their opportunities; and that God graciously accepts the thoughts and intents of loving and faithful hearts in spite of sin committed in ignorance of his will, dealing with men"s souls through the infinite merits of the death of his dear Son, and with respect to the full satisfaction of his atoning blood to whom he glory and praise for ever and ever! We learn also to take a juster view of the great figures which are set before us in Holy Scripture. They are not ideal figures or perfect characters. They are faithful delineations of the real lives of men and women who lived two or three thousand years ago; who stood up head and shoulders above their contemporaries in certain great gifts and qualities, but who necessarily partook of the character of the age they lived in. While we try to emulate their faith, we must judge of their actions by the light of the perfect law of God.
HOMILIES BY A.F. MUIR. Vers. 12-14. Continued and repeated offence entails more signal punishment.
Jehovah is spoken of here as if he had become the God of heathen nations. He takes the side of the enemies of Israel, and strengthens them for the subjugation of his own people.
I THE INSTRUMENT OF CHASTISEMENT IS SPECIALLY PREPARED BY GOD.
II A VISIBLE SIGN OF DISGRACE EXISTED IN THE CONQUEST OF JERICHO.
III THE PERIOD OF OPPRESSION WAS MORE THAN DOUBLED. M.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain The Lord strengthened Eglon the king of Moab against…
Jdg_3:12-30
The Lord strengthened Eglon the king of Moab against Israel.
Read full note →
Sin--suffering; penitence and deliverance repeated
I. New sin added: Again
1. A painful surprise.
2. Deeper guilt. It showed more deliberation in the act of rebellion, more stubborness of will, and greater defiance of the Divine authority. It also implied the heavy guilt of despising all the argument involved in the close and faithful dealing God had with them, in the terrible chastisements He had already brought down on their heads.
3. A perplexing problem to solve. Why should the children of such holy men as Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob become such incorrigible rebels? This is the puzzle that meets us everywhere in the history of Gods Israel.
(1) The people had lost their leader.
(2) Apostasy was due in part to the universal bad example.
(3) Idolatry was their easily besetting sin.
(4) A new generation had sprung up.
(5) The inveterate depravity of the human heart.
II. New chastisement inflicted.
1. The Lord chastises in faithfulness.
2. He makes use of a new rod.
3. He sends a more severe token of His displeasure.
We do not know, indeed, that the oppression of the Moabites was heavier than that of the Mesepotamian hordes. Probably there was not much to choose between them. But it was certainly much longer continued. Now it is eighteen years of servitude, whereas formerly it was but eight years. In this respect, the scourge was much more severe, not only because the lash was longer applied, but also because God showed that His ear was more heavy to hear their prayer. It was also a deeper humiliation to be trodden upon by a people whom till now they had despised, from their birth onwards, and who had been accustomed for more than three generations to tremble at the name, and the mention of the God of Israel.
4. He helps His enemies against His own people.
III. New expressions of penitence.
1. In distress they flee to the universal refuge.
2. They had a special plea with God as children of the covenant.
3. Their temporary apostasy did not shut them out from the privilege of prayer.
(1) They had a mediator to plead for them in their priesthood, and the continual sacrifices were laid on the altar, as the means of propitiating.
(2) Their apostasy was not allowed by their covenant God to become permanent.
IV. New deliverances experienced.
1. This deliverance came in answer to prayer.
2. It was brought about by a suitable instrument. (J. P. Millar.)
Ehud the son of Gera.
The summer parlour
I. A man under great physical disadvantages may accomplish wonders. Ehud was left-handed; and the original implies some serious defect in the right hand. So it has often been. Among poets, the three greatest of all times were totally blind, viz.: Homer, Ossian, and Milton. Among sculptors: Gambassio could not see the marble or the chisel. Among authors: Pope, the poet, was a wretched invalid. Among preachers: Robert Hall, Richard Baxter, Edward Payson, Samuel Rutherford, and Dr. McAll were all invalids. These men in the battle of life fought with the right hand tied behind them; but they had something better, viz., the spirit of consecration to a righteous and noble life.
II. Ehud teaches us to make thorough work of what belongs to our deliverance from sin. Some are content to cut down sins which may be ranked as kings, princes, and captains: but Ehud slew the common soldiers as well. It is to work as thorough that each of us is called. This is no easy work. But heaven is not to be reached by easy-going people.
III. God makes ready in some sense every instrument of death, and is the sovereign disposer of all events. There are three kingdoms--of Nature, of Providence, and of Grace. Of each and all Jehovah is King. In the kingdom of Providence, some of the instruments of death are common sickness, epidemics, accidents in erecting houses, accidents at sea, accidents on the rail-train. These are no accidents! God has perfect right to slay a man either by malaria or by the instrumentality of man. He alone has the keys of the grave.
IV. Nobody steps out of life as he expects. It was so with the king of Moab. Death to him was a great surprise. There was but a step between him and death; but he knew it not. The unexpected is the probable! The manner in which we step out of life is pre-eminently unlooked for. If so, we press an inference: Prepare! Be ready! The accepted time is now! (W.F. Bishop.)
I have a message from God unto thee.--
A message from God
I. Before proceeding to the delivery of this message, I would insist upon The fact here stated--namely, that I come to you, as a messenger from God. One chief reason why mankind hear with so much indifference and with so little effect upon themselves, is simply that they fail to recognise that he who thus speaks to them does come from God. Suppose, however, that yonder heaven should open, and that down through the everlasting gates and along the fields of air should come an angel burning with celestial glory and should stand suddenly in your midst. Would not your minds be instantly raised to a fixed and reverent attention? Would you not almost seem to hear in the tones and words of the heavenly messenger the very voice of the Mighty One by whom he was sent? But I claim that I as truly come from God.
II. We pass on then, to The delivery of this message. It is a message from God; there is no place for argument. It is a message to a soul in imminent danger of destruction; there is no room for the play of imagination.
1. Man of the world, absorbed in the occupations of this present life, whatever those occupations may be, I have a message from God unto thee. Riches and honours, He declares, come of Me alone. Riches, He affirms, certainly take to themselves wings, they fly away as an eagle toward heaven. Riches, He warns you, profit not in the day of wrath. God declares to you, that if you allow mammon to have a higher place in your hearts than Himself and His service, you must expect nothing else but that He will strip you of all your gains when perhaps you least expect it, and render all your labour of none effect. He reminds you that you can take nothing out of this world. And He bids me remind you that after death there is a judgment.
2. Young man and young woman just entering life, I have a message from God unto thee. God bids me tell you that you have in your possession a priceless treasure which He has committed to you to be used for His glory, and for which He will hold you hereafter to a strict account. You are in the possession of sensibilities not yet dead to the influence of His grace. He has afforded you a perfect knowledge of His will, and He has, moreover, brought to bear upon your hearts the power of His Spirit. He tells you that you may squander and lose all the advantages which you now possess, but He warns you of the result.
3. Lukewarm Christian, I have a message from God unto thee. God bids me tell you, in few words, just what your religion means, and what it is worth. You profess with your lips to serve God, while you plot in your heart how you may serve God and the world. But God tells you that while you imagine you are deceiving Him, He sees through the duplicity, the meanness of your conduct.
4. Daring and impenitent man, you who can violate Gods law without a feeling of alarm or remorse, I have a message from God unto thee. You have travelled far. If ever you repent now, to the saving of your soul, it must be by a severe and terrible struggle. You have trifled with Gods mercy, but His justice has abated not one tittle of severity. God, however, sends me once more, to tell you that if you will even now put forth all your strength to break the cords wherewith sin has bound you, He will still vouchsafe to assist and bless you in your endeavours. But if you are deaf to this message, if you will still go on in impenitence and sin if you refuse to be reconciled to Him, He informs you that He reserveth wrath to His enemies. (W. Rudder, D. D.)
The gospel message
I. The Tidings I bring to-day are very different from those which Ehud carried to the King of Moab, and my design in delivering them is very opposite to his. He came, evidently, with an hostile intention, and concealed, under his garment, a deadly weapon. The message he brought was a message of vengeance, and though artfully disguised, was to prove fatal to the King of Moab. But the message I bring is a message of peace and goodwill to men, and my intention in delivering it is the most kind and friendly.
1. In the first place, let me beseech you to awake from that slumber and insensibility in which, perhaps, you have too long remained. If you were hanging upon the brink of a precipice, would you not haste away to some place of safety?
2. A second message which I have from God to you is, to intreat you to be reconciled to Him. Will you persist in your enmity to God when He is willing to become your friend?
3. A third message I have got from God to you is to beseech you to kiss the Son; that is, honour, love, and obey the Son lest He be angry, and ye perish from the way. It was the great object of our blessed Lords ministry to recommend Himself to the affections of men, and to persuade them to come to Him.
4. A fourth message I have from God to you is, that you be prepared to meet Him.
5. A fifth message which I have got from God to you is, that you set your hearts and your house in order, for you must die and not live.
II. I go on to urge you to comply with the gospel message, by a few motives and arguments.
1. Reflect first on the authority of the Person who sends the message.
2. A second argument to persuade you to comply with the gospel message, is the vast importance of it. It is not of a trifling nature, like a piece of idle news, to which you may listen or not as you please. It is the most interesting which was ever published to mankind. What is the history of all the arts and sciences, when compared with the life and doctrine, with the sufferings and death, with the resurrection and glory of the Son of God? Are they not mere childish tales? And shall we prefer what tends to amuse and entertain us, to what contributes to enlighten and to save us? S. A third argument to engage you to comply with the gospel message is the encouraging and precious promises contained in it. It is suited to our guilt and depravity as sinners, and to our weakness and imperfection as creatures.
4. One argument more to engage you to comply with the gospel message is, that your ruin is certain and inevitable if you do it not. Perhaps the message I have now delivered you may be the last you ever shall receive; and is not this a strong argument for complying with it? (D. Johnston, D. D.)
I have a message from God unto thee
And perhaps you are ready to say, If we were certain you had, we should hang upon your lips with the utmost attention. Have you, indeed, had any immediate communication from heaven concerning us? No. Have you any new revelation to deliver to us? No: and yet, I have a message from God unto you: that message is in this book--this book that many of you neglect and despise. I have a message from God unto you. You are all equally interested in it.
I. To the young. It may be you start astonished that I begin with you. You fancy I should begin with the aged who are just stepping into the grave. But how do you know they are nearer death than you?
II. I have a message from God unto you who are in the meridian of life. You who are engaged in its active business--ye merchants, ye tradesmen, I have a message from God unto you: Be careful for nothing, etc. Seek ye first the kingdom of God, etc. What shall it profit a man, if he should gain, etc.
III. I have a message to the old and grey-headed: The hoary head is a crown of glory, if it be found in the way of righteousness. Is that honour yours? Though you walk through the valley, etc. But are you an aged sinner, a hoary-headed trifler, scoffing at eternity, with one foot in the grave? Alas! alas! I have a message from God unto you: The Judge standeth at the door. Behold, I come quickly, etc.
IV. I have a message from God unto the rich. I have a message of warning: Charge those that are rich in this world, etc. It is a message of caution: How hardly shall they that have riches, etc. It is a message of admonition. What says the wise man, Wilt thou set thine eyes upon that which is not? Riches make to themselves wings, etc. Are riches the right soil for piety? No--but the most formidable obstruction to its growth.
V. I have a message to the poor. Are you poor and pious? Then yours is the kingdom of heaven. The poor have the gospel preached unto them. The promises of Scripture are principally applicable to the poor.
VI. Are any of you sceptical? I have a message from God unto you. Are you sincere? Do you really wish to ascertain the truth? I have a message from God unto you: If any man will do His will, etc., that is the man who shall ascertain the truth, and be emancipated by its freedom. But it is not the man who comes to speculate--who comes to gratify an idle curiosity--who comes cherishing the love of sin; that is not the man who shall know the truth.
VII. is your mind deistical? You want more evidence to prove that this holy book is the Word of God. Do you want mathematical demonstration? It were madness to ask it upon a moral subject. What evidence do you want? Is it evidence of testimony? You have it; and, I venture to say, there is more evidence of the Scriptures than of any other history on the face of the earth. What evidence do you want? Is it the evidence of prophecy? You have it. The Jews, at the present day, are a living and a mighty argument in proof of the truth of the Scriptures. What evidence do you want? Is it the evidence of miracles? That evidence was given in the first ages of Christianity, in order to establish the Divine authority of the Christian system, and, having accomplished it, it is done away; for if miracles had continued to the present hour, they would have ceased to operate in the way of miracles. There is sufficient evidence to justify the ways of God to men in your condemnation, if, after all this evidence, you reject Him.
VIII. Do I speak to any who are desponding and penitential? What a sudden change! what a delightful contrast! I have a message from God unto you. Come, and let us reason together, etc. (T. Raffles, D. D.)
The gospel message
I. The ministers of the gospel are Gods messengers.
II. The ministers of the gospel must be faithful in delivering their message.
III. If men refuse to attend to the message thus delivered to them, it is at their own peril.
IV. A more direct application of the text: I have a message from God unto thee.
1. To the careless, thoughtless person.
2. To the ungodly and the profane.
3. To the humble and serious inquirer after Divine truth (Heb_10:38; Revelations 2:5).
4. To those who, having once known the way of righteousness, are turned from the holy commandment delivered unto them.
5. To him whose heart now labours under a sense of sin; who, being brought to see his guilt and danger, is full of fear, and trembles for the consequences. How shall he escape the sentence of His righteous law? What shall he do to be saved? Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, etc.
6. To the established Christian; the man who, having fled to Christ for refuge, from the guilt and power of sin, has found peace and joy in believing; and being now professedly devoted to the Lords service, is living in hope of the glory that shall be revealed. Be faithful unto death, etc. Be not weary of well-doing. Grow in grace, and Let thy profiting appear unto all men. (E. Cooper, M. A.)
Gods messages
I. Gods messages are of different kinds.
1. Reconciliation.
2. Repentance.
3. Faith.
4. Life and salvation.
5. Gospel privileges.
6. Special tokens of Divine favour.
7. Deliverances.
8. Warning and threatening.
9. Calls to duty.
10. Commands.
11. Encouragement.
12. Doom.
II. Every man has Divine messages sent to him personally. In the gospel, in the ordinary providence of God, and in the workings of his own conscience.
1. God individualises every man.
2. The wise thing for every man is to act as if he were the only person dealt with.
3. The messages are framed so as to have always an individual application.
III. Gods messages are always to be reverently received.
IV. it is dangerous to turn a deaf ear to Gods messages.
V. Messages of good to the righteous and of evil to the wicked often come together.
VI. God sends messages of mercy before he sends messages of judgment.
VII. It is our duty and our wisdom to be always ready to receive the Lords messages. Most men are not ready when the message comes (Luk_17:27-30; Luk_12:20; Luk_16:19, with 23; Mat_25:5; 1Th_5:3; 1Ki_22:26-27, with 34-37; Pro_14:32; Mat_7:13; 2Sa_18:9). Some are ready (Luk_2:29-30; 2Ti_4:6-8; Act_7:59-60; Heb_11:13-16; 2Co_5:2; 2Co_5:9; 2Sa_15:26; 1Ch_23:5; 1Sa_3:18). (J. P. Millar.)
A distinct message
Can there be any person to whom God has never sent a message? Is He your Creator? And has He made you to drift on the tempestuous sea of life in solitude without compass or guide?
I. Messages from God. This Bible is in the house of every Englishman. It is a message from God unto thee. Other messengers you have had. Ought not the kindness and compassion extended to you in providence to have led you to say, How can I grieve such a God? Other messages have come to you draped in black. Can you forget the season when life trembled in the scale, and the physician knew not which way it would turn? Another dark messenger has come to you. Death has bereaved you of friends and comrades. Are there those whom thou didst ensnare who have gone their way before thee to feel their terrible remorse? Let the remembrance of them make you pause and think and turn from your sins to the living and true God.
II. The gospel of the grace of God is in itself a message from God to you. Be sure of this, let our case be what it may, the gospel preached is a message from God to our souls. The hypocrite cannot long attend upon the means of grace without finding that its doctrines are very heart-searching. They pierce his thoughts; they hold a candle up to him, and if he would but look they would expose his desperate condition. The formalists, the men who delight in ceremonies, cannot long frequent Gods hallowed courts, where His true ministers proclaim His name, with out perceiving that there is a message from God to them. The most careless spirit will find in the Word a looking-glass held up to his face in which he can see a reflection of himself.
III. If there be such a message as this from God to us, how should we treat it? (C. H. Spurgeon.)
The Christian minister bearing a message from God to man
I. The bearers of the message.
II. The nature of the message. Ehud.
III. The danger of neglecting this message. (H. S. Plumptre, M. A.)
A message from God
I. It is a message of truth.
II. It is a message of love.
III. It is a message of peace.
IV. It is a message of reconciliation.
V. It is needed by thee. This alone is the message humanity needs; it alone meets the breadth and depth and multitude of its necessities. The light of nature is Cimmerian darkness. It reveals your danger, but reveals no means of rescue.
VI. It is suited to thee.
1. It is suited to your ignorance, making wise unto salvation.
2. It is suited to mans sin, expiating its guilt by the blood of the Cross,
3. It is suited to mans misery.
VII. It is sufficient for thee. No want is there in our being which it cannot fill--no multitude it cannot minister to. VIII. It is sent to thee. (J. Cumming, D. D.)
A message from God
Think, first of all, of the feelings with which we should expect such a message to be received. For, consider the scene from which that message comes: from Gods throne on high. And consider the Presence from which that message emanates--even from our Creator, our Preserver, in whose presence we may at any moment be called to stand. And think next of the effects which we should expect the delivery of such a message to produce--profound attention, deep gratitude, perfect obedience. A message from God! Is such a thing possible? Has there ever come to earth, and to us men, a message from God? Surely. The whole world is full of voices of God. The night wears away--the grey light comes stealing on. And the sweet dawn of early day says, I have a message from God unto thee. To the sick--I have a message to thee. There shall be neither sorrow, nor crying . . . neither shall there be any more pain. To the mourner--I have a message to thee. God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes. To the secret sinner--I have a message from God unto thee. God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil. The day goes on--a clock strikes. I have a message from God unto thee, it says: to thee, O careless one. The sands are fast running out--take heed how you waste time. Men are at work in the fields. Suddenly there comes a booming sound, borne towards them on the breezes, Hark! thats the passing bell. I have a message from God--It is appointed unto men once to die; and after this, the judgment! (J. B. C. Murphy, B. A.)
Application of the truth
D. L. Moody was first awakened to an interest in spiritual things while sitting drowsily in Dr. Kirks church in Boston, by some one suddenly rousing him and telling him that the sermon meant him.
Ehud . . . took the dagger . . . and thrust it into his belly.--
Ehud: left-handedness
According to the Septuagint, Ehud was an ambidexter; that is, a man who could use both hands with equal facility. Hector boasted Many a Greek hath bled by me, and I can shift my shield from right to left. Of the children of Benjamin we read (Jdg_20:16). Plato recommended all soldiers to acquire equal facility in the use of both hands. It is evident from all this, as well as from what is known amongst ourselves, that left-handedness has always been considered peculiar, otherwise it would, not have been pointed out as a feature in any case. We never say of a man that he is right-handed, but we do remark upon any man whom we see using his left hand for purposes which are usually assigned to the right.
I. Many men may be dependent upon one man.
1. The one man may be in a better position than the many, and this may account for his influence. Take the case of a besieged city: one man outside the walls may work out the deliverance of the whole, etc.
2. The one man may be able to move about more quickly than the many. Crowds cannot be hurried to any wise action. They soon lose themselves in confusion. They need leadership to give unity and precision to their movements.
3. Specially is one good man more than all the hosts of evil. For the sake of the one God preserves the many.
II. The instruments chosen of God may often surprise and disappoint men. God sent a left-handed man to deliver Israel! It seemed like a mockery. In view of this apparent eccentricity of the Divine method we should remember--
1. A man is not a great man merely because he is left-handed. Bunyan was a tinker, but it does not follow that every tinker is a Bunyan. George Whitefield was cross-eyed, but it does not follow that squinting is a condition of good preaching.
2. No man should be condemned merely because he does not take hold of things in the common way. Give every man an opportunity of proving himself.
III. Some good use may be made of the most unlikely qualifications. Many are secretly lamenting some peculiarity of temperament, some defect of body, or some circumstance which seems to shut them off from the general band of workers. Let such persons look at the text and take heart again! (J. Parker, D. D.)
Lessons from the death of Eglon
I. The power of left-handed men. There are some men who, by physical organisation, have as much strength in their left hand as in their right hand; but there is something in this text which implies that Ehud had some defect in his right hand which compelled him to use the left. Oh, the power of left-handed men! Genius is often self-observant, careful of itself, not given to much toil, bringing increase to its own aggrandisement, while many a man with no natural endowments, actually defective in physical and mental organisation, has an earnestness for the right, a patient industry, an all-consuming perseverance, which achieves marvels for the kingdom of Christ. Though left-handed, as Ehud, they can strike down a sin as great and imperial as Eglon. But! dont suppose that Ehud, the first time he took a sling in his left hand, could throw a stone a hairs breadth and not miss. I suppose it was practice that gave him the wonderful dexterity. Go forth to your spheres of duty, and be not discouraged if in your first attempts you miss the mark. There was an oculist performing a very difficult operation on the human eye. A young doctor stood by and said, How easily you do that--it dont seem to cause you any trouble at all. Ah, said the old oculist, it is very easy now, but I spoiled a hat full of eyes to learn that. Be not surprised if it takes some practice before we can help men to moral eyesight, and bring them to a vision of the Cross. Left-handed men, to the work! Take the gospel for a sling, and faith and repentance for the smooth stone from the brook. Take sure aim, God directs the weapon, and great Goliaths will tumble before you.
II. The danger of worldly elevations. This Eglon was what the world called a great man. There were hundreds of people who would have considered it the greatest honour of their life just to have him speak to them; yet, although he is so high up in worldly position, he is not beyond the reach of Ehuds dagger. I see a great many people trying to climb up in social position, having an idea that there is a safe place somewhere far above, not knowing that the mountain of fame has a top like Mont Blanc, covered with perpetual snow. Oh, be content with just such a position as God has placed you in. It may not be said of us, He was a great general, or He was an honoured chieftain, or He was mighty in worldly attainments; but this thing may be said of you and me, He was a good citizen, a faithful Christian, a friend of Jesus. And that in the last day will be the highest of all eulogiums.
III. Death comes to the summer-house. Eglon did not expect to die in that fine place. Amid all the flower-leaves that drifted like summer snow into the window; in the tinkle and dash of the fountains; in the sound of a thousand leaves fluttering on one tree branch; in the cool breeze that came up to shake feverish troubles out of the kings locks--there was nothing that spake of death, but there he died! In the winter, when the snow is a shroud, and when the wind is a dirge, it is easy to think of our mortality. And yet my text teaches that death does sometimes come to the summer-house. He is blind, and cannot see the leaves. He is deaf, and cannot hear the fountains. Gather about us what we will of comfort and luxury, when the pale messenger comes he does not stop to look at the architecture of the house before he comes in; nor, entering, does he wait to examine the pictures we have gathered on the wall. (T. De Witt Talmage.)
Unexpected perils
1. I daresay you think it was a rash thing of Eglon to receive Ehud in private, when he knew very well that the man who asked to see him was one of a people that hated him and longed to be rid of his oppression. And what is more extraordinary in his rashness is that he suffers Ehud to come to him with that great dagger a cubit long on his thigh. It is true that Ehud had a cloak, but I do not think it could altogether have concealed the weapon. I believe the reason why Eglon was easy in mind was this, Ehud had got his dagger slung on the wrong side. He left the fact of Ehud being left-handed entirely out of his calculation, and that was his ruin.
2. Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall. We have enemies, temptations without and within, to watch against. It is just when, and where, and how you least expect danger, that a fall may come. Take care! be sober! be vigilant l (S. Baring-Gould, M. A.)
Effective preachers compared to Ehud
When you see a man with a gift in his right hand, and his dagger concealed where only his left hand could get at it, that man is worth the watching. There is no preacher in the world worth his salt who is not like that. Like Ehud, have the right hand filled with the gift, with the gospel offer and present, if you like, but for Gods sake, and for the sake of everything, hit hard with the left! Preaching that does any good is typified in Ehud. The gift, and the gift in the best hand, and the gift put first; but look out for the left, look out for the blow. It is not to be all coddling, and wheedling, and coaxing, and pleading, Oh! and Ah! and Wont you come? There must be the law, the terror, the close-quarters, the words that are daggers, and the daggers driven home, and that unexpectedly. For that is another element in Ehud. Ehud is what we may call a man who does his work in his own way, and therefore he abounds in what I may call surprise. In the Church, in all our pulpits, in all our active operations for God at home and abroad, would that we had more of the surprise; more unexpected things happening. More men who can work the left hand when the right hand gets tired, And when God sends a surprise-man to us, dont you turn round and find fault with that man. Encourage him; cheer him on. He doesnt do as you do--he does, it may be, the other way; dont find fault with his methods. The test of all preaching styles is, do they hit? Do they go home? Do they minimise man and magnify God? Then they are all right. (John McNeill.)
They took a key.--
A sermon upon keys
There are many different kinds of keys in the world, but I think we might select one or two of them, and try if we can make them keys of wisdom, to open our understandings. We shall, then, begin with a small but a very important key, namely--
I. The Watch-Key. The heart of the watch is the mainspring. The watch will not go unless the main spring is right.
II. The Safe Key. Two burglars have been trying hard for hours to break into a merchants safe. At last they give it up as hopeless and make their escape. In due time the merchant opens his shop, and takes a small key out of his pocket, and in less than a minute, and as if by magic, the heavy iron doors swing open. Then he takes out the gold, silver, and other valuables that he only can reach. The Bible is the safe of the Christian. Many people look at it, but only a few possess the key and are able to get at the treasures. Some people are so foolish as to deny that there are treasures in the Word of God because they cannot find them.
III. The House Key. To be presented with the key of a house signifies to have liberty to go in and out of that house. Christ speaks of a house of which He is the door (Joh_10:9). Faith is the key to open it, for He again tells us that (Joh_3:19). All who are in Christ are safe from the many dangers that ruin the souls of men. Within the fold there is pasture for the sheep. So in Christ there is refreshing and satisfying pasture. Nothing else can satisfy us. (John Mitchell.)
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Expositor's Bible 1887 · Public Domain THE world is served by men of very diverse…
THE DAGGER AND THE OX-GOAD
Jdg_3:12-31
Read full note →
THE world is served by men of very diverse kinds, and we pass now to one who is in strong contrast to Israels first deliverer. Othniel the judge without reproach is followed by Ehud the regicide. The long peace which the country enjoyed after the Mesopotamian army was driven out allowed a return of prosperity and with it a relaxing of spiritual tone. Again there was disorganisation; again the Hebrew strength decayed and watchful enemies found an opportunity. The Moabites led the attack, and their king was at the head of a federation including the Ammonites and the Amalekites. It was this coalition the power of which Ehud had to break.
We can only surmise the causes of the assault made on the Hebrews west of Jordan by those peoples on the east. When the Israelites first appeared on the plains of the Jordan under the shadow of the mountains of Moab, before crossing into Palestine proper, Balak king of Moab viewed with alarm this new nation which was advancing to seek a settlement so near his territory. It was then he sent to Pethor for Balaam, in the hope that by a powerful incantation or curse the great diviner would blight the Hebrew armies and make them an easy prey. Notwithstanding this scheme, which even to the Israelites did not appear contemptible, Moses so far respected the relationship between Moab and Israel that he did not attack Balaks kingdom, although at the time it had been weakened by an unsuccessful contest with the Amorites from Gilead. Moab to the south and Ammon to the north were both left unharmed.
But to Reuben, Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh was allotted the land from which the Amorites had been completely driven, a region extending from the frontier of Moab on the south away towards Hermon and the Argob; and these tribes entering vigorously on their possession could not long remain at peace with the bordering races. We can easily see how their encroachments, their growing strength would vex Moab and Ammon and drive them to plans of retaliation. Balaam had not cursed Israel; he had blessed it, and the blessing was being fulfilled. It seemed to be decreed that all other peoples east of Jordan were to be overborne by the descendants of Abraham; yet one fear wrought against another, and the hour of Israels security was seized as a fit occasion for a vigorous sally across the river. A desperate effort was made to strike at the heart of the Hebrew power and assert the claims of Chemosh to be a greater god than He Who was reverenced at the sanctuary of the ark.
Or Amalek may have instigated the attack. Away in the Sinaitic wilderness there stood an altar which Moses had named Jehovah-Nissi, Jehovah is my banner, and that altar commemorated a great victory gained by Israel over the Amalekites. The greater part of a century had gone by since the battle, but the memory of defeat lingers long with the Arab-and these Amalekites were pure Arabs, savage, vindictive, cherishing their cause of war, waiting their revenge. We know the command in Deuteronomy, "Remember what Amalek did unto thee by the way, when ye were come forth out of Egypt. How he met thee by the way and smote the hindmost of thee, even all that were feeble behind thee. Thou shalt blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven. Thou shalt not forget it." We may be sure that Reuben and Gad did not forget the dastardly attack; we may be sure that Amalek did not forget the day of Rephidim. If Moab was not of itself disposed to cross the Jordan and fall on Benjamin and Ephraim, there was the urgency of Amalek, the proffered help of that fiery people to ripen decision. The ferment of war rose. Moab, having walled cities to form a basis of operations, took the lead. The confederates marched northward along the Dead Sea, seized the ford near Gilgal and mastering the plain of Jericho pushed their conquest beyond the hills. Nor was it a temporary advance. They established themselves. Eighteen years afterwards we find Eglon, in his palace or castle near the City of Palm Trees, claiming authority over all Israel.
So the Hebrew tribes, partly by reason of an old strife not forgotten, partly because they have gone on vigorously adding to their territory, again suffer assault and are brought under oppression, and the coalition against them reminds us of confederacies that are in full force today. Ammon and Moab are united against the church of Christ, and Amalek joins in the attack. The parable is one, we shall say, of the opposition the church is constantly provoking, constantly experiencing, not entirely to its own credit. Allowing that, in the main, Christianity is truly and honestly aggressive, that on its march to the heights it does straight battle with the enemies of mankind and thus awakens the hatred of bandit Amaleks, yet this is not a complete account of the assaults which are renewed century after century. Must it not be owned that those who pass for Christians often go beyond the lines and methods of their proper warfare and are found on fields where the weapons are carnal and the fight is not "the good fight of faith"? There is a strain of modern talk which defends the worldly ambition of Christian men, sounding very hollow and insincere to all excepting those whose interest and illusion it is to think it heavenly. We hear from a thousand tongues the gospel of Christianised commerce, of sanctified success, of making business a religion. In the press and hurry of competition there is a less and a greater conscientiousness. Let men have it in the greater degree, let them be less anxious for speedy success than some they know, not quite so eager to add factory to factory and field to field, more careful to interpret bargains fairly and do good work; let them figure often as benefactors and be free with their money to the church, and the residue of worldly ambition is glorified, being sufficient, perhaps, to develop a merchant prince, a railway king, a "millionaire" of the kind the age adores. Thus it comes to pass that the domain which appeared safe enough from the followers of Him who sought no power in the earthly range is invaded by men who reckon all their business efforts privileged under the laws of heaven, and every advantage they win a Divine plan for wresting money from the hands of the devil.
Now it is upon Christianity as approving all this that the Moabites and Ammonites of our day are falling. They are frankly worshippers of Chemosh and Milcom, not of Jehovah; they believe in wealth, their all is staked on the earthly prosperity and enjoyment for which they strive. It is too bad, they feel, to have their sphere and hopes curtailed by men who profess no respect for the world, no desire for its glory but a constant preference for things unseen; they writhe when they consider the triumphs wrested from them by rivals who count success an answer to prayer and believe themselves favourites of God. Or the frank heathen finds that in business a man professing Christianity in the customary way is as little cumbered as himself by any disdain of tarnished profits and "smart" devices. What else can be expected but that, driven back and back by the energy of Christians so called, the others shall begin to think Christianity itself largely a pretence? Do we wonder to see the revolution in France hurling its forces not only against wealth and rank, but also against the religion identified with wealth and rank? Do we wonder to see in our day socialism, which girds at great fortunes as an insult to humanity, joining hands with agnosticism and secularism to make assault on the church? It is precisely what might be looked for; nay, more, the opposition will go on till Christian profession is purged of hypocrisy and Christian practice is harmonised with the law of Christ. Not the push, not the equivocal success of one person here and there is it that creates doubt of Christianity and provokes antagonism, but the whole systems of society and business in so-called Christian lands, and even the conduct of affairs within the church, the strain of feeling there. For in the church as without it wealth and rank are important in themselves, and make some important who have little or no other claim to respect. In the church as without it methods are adopted that involve large outlay and a constant need for the support of the wealthy; in the church as without it life depends too much on the abundance of the things that are possessed. And, in the not unfair judgment of those who stand outside, all this proceeds from a secret doubt of Christs law and authority, which more than excuses their own denial. The strifes of the day, even those that turn on the Godhead of Christ and the inspiration of the Bible, as well as on the divine claim of the church, are not due solely to hatred of truth and the depravity of the human heart. They have more reason than the church has yet confessed. Christianity in its practical and speculative aspects is one; it cannot be a creed unless it is a life. It is essentially a life not conformed to this world, but transformed, redeemed. Our faith will stand secure from all attacks, vindicated as a supernatural revelation and inspiration, when the whole of church life and Christian endeavour shall rise above the earthly and be manifest everywhere as a fervent striving for the spiritual and eternal.
We have been assuming the unfaithfulness of Israel to its duty and vocation. The people of God, instead of commending His faith by their neighbourliness and generosity, were, we fear, too often proud and selfish, seeking their own things, not the well being of others, sending no attractive light into the heathenism around. Moab was akin to the Hebrews and in many respects similar in character. When we come to the Book of Ruth we find a certain intercourse between the two. Ammon, more unsettled and barbarous, was of the same stock. Israel, giving nothing to these peoples, but taking all she could from them, provoked antagonism all the more bitter that they were of kin to her, and they felt no scruple when their opportunity came. Not only had the Israelites to suffer for their failure, but Moab and Ammon also. The wrong beginning of the relations between them was never undone. Moab and Ammon went on worshipping their own gods, enemies of Israel to the last.
Ehud appears a deliverer. He was a Benjamite, a man left-handed; he chose his own method of action, and it was to strike directly at the Moabite king. Eager words regarding the shamefulness of Israels subjection had perhaps already marked him as a leader, and it may have been with the expectation that he would do a bold deed that he was chosen to bear the periodical tribute on this occasion to Eglons palace. Girding a long dagger under his garment on his right thigh, where if found it might appear to be worn without evil intent, he set out with some attendants to the Moabite headquarters. The narrative is so vivid that we seem able to follow Ehud step by step. He has gone from the neighbourhood of Jebus to Jericho, perhaps by the road in which the scene of our Lords parable of the Good Samaritan was long afterwards laid, Having delivered the tribute into the hands of Eglon he goes southward a few miles to the sculptured stones at Gilgal, where possibly some outpost of the Moabites kept guard. There he leaves his attendants, and swiftly retracing his steps to the palace craves a private interview with the king and announces a message from God, at Whose name Eglon respectfully rises from his seat. One flash of the dagger and the bloody deed is done. Leaving the kings dead body there in the chamber, Ehud bolts the door and boldly passes the attendants, then quickening his pace, is soon beyond Gilgal and away by another route through the steep hills to the mountains of Ephraim. Meanwhile the murder is discovered and there is confusion at the palace. No one being at hand to give orders, the garrison is unprepared to act, and as Ehud loses no time in gathering a band and returning to finish his work, the fords of Jordan are taken before the Moabites can cross to the eastern side. They are caught, and the defeat is so decisive that Israel is free again for fourscore years.
Now this deed of Ehuds was clearly a case of assassination, and as such we have to consider it. The crime is one which stinks in our nostrils because it is associated with treachery and cowardice, the basest revenge or the most undisciplined passion. But if we go back to times of ruder morality and regard the circumstances of such a people as Israel, scattered and oppressed, waiting for a sign of bold energy that may give it new heart, we can easily see that one who chose to act as Ehud did would by no means incur the reprobation we now attach to the assassin. To go no farther back than the French Revolution and the deed of Charlotte Corday, we cannot reckon her among the basest-that woman of "the beautiful still countenance" who believed her task to be the duty of a patriot. Nevertheless, it is not possible to make a complete defence of Ehud. His act was treacherous. The man he slew was a legitimate king, and is not said to have done his ruling ill. Even allowing for the period, there was something peculiarly detestable in striking one to death who stood up reverently expecting a message from God. Yet Ehud may have thoroughly believed himself to be a Divine instrument.
This too we see, that the great just providence of the Almighty is not impeached by such an act. No word in the narrative justifies assassination; but, being done, place is found for it as a thing overruled for good in the development of Israels history. Man has no defence for his treachery and violence, yet in the process of events the barbarous deed, the fierce crime, are shown to be under the control of the Wisdom that guides all men and things. And here the issue which justifies Divine providence, though it does not purge the criminal, is clear. For through Ehud a genuine deliverance was wrought for Israel. The nation, curbed by aliens, overborne by an idolatrous power, was free once more to move toward the great spiritual end for which it had been created. We might be disposed to say that on the whole Israel made nothing of freedom, that the faith of God revived and the heart of the people became devout in times of oppression rather than of liberty. In a sense it was so, and the story of this people is the story of all, for men go to sleep over their best, they misuse freedom, they forget why they are free. Yet every eulogy of freedom is true. Man must even have the power of misusing it if he is to arrive at the best. It is in liberty that manhood is nursed, and therefore in liberty that religion matures. Autocratic laws mean tyranny, and tyranny denies the soul its responsibility to justice, truth, and God. Mind and conscience held from their high office, responsibility to the greatest overborne by some tyrant hand that may seem beneficent, the soul has no space, faith no room to breathe; man is kept from the spontaneity and gladness of his proper life. So we have to win liberty in hard struggle and know ourselves free in order that we may belong completely to God.
See how life advances! God deals with the human race according to a vast plan of discipline leading to heights which at first appear inaccessible. Freedom is one of the first of these, and only by way of it are the higher summits reached. During the long ages of the dark and weary struggle, which seem to many but a fruitless martyrdom, the Divine idea was interfused with all the strife. Not one blind stroke, not one agony of the craving soul was wasted in all the wisdom of God wrought for man, through mans pathetic feebleness or most daring achievement. So out of the chaos of the gloomy valleys a highway of order was raised by which the race should mount to Freedom and thence to Faith. We see it in the history of nations, those that have led the way and those that are following. the possessors of clear faith have won it in liberty. In Switzerland, in Scotland, in England, the order has been, first civil freedom, then Christian thought and vigour. Wallace and Bruce prepare the way for Knox; Boadicea, Hereward, the Barons of Magna Charta for Wycliffe and the Reformation; the men of the Swiss Cantons who won Morgarten and routed Charles the Bold were the forerunners of Zwingli and Farel. Israel, too, had its heroes of freedom; and even those who, like Ehud and Samson, did little or nothing for faith and struck wildly, wrongly for their country, did yet choose consciously to serve their people and were helpers of a righteousness and a holy purpose they did not know. When all has been said against them it remains true that the freedom they brought to Israel was a Divine gift.
It is to be remarked that Ehud did not judge Israel. He was a deliverer, but nowise fitted to exercise high office in the name of God. In some way not made clear in the narrative he had become the centre of the resolute spirits of Benjamin and was looked to by them to find an opportunity of striking at the oppressors. His calling, we may say, was human, not Divine; it was limited, not national; and he was not a man who could rise to any high thought of leadership. The heads of tribes, ingloriously paying tribute to the Moabites, may have scoffed at him as of no account. Yet he did what they supposed impossible. The little rising grew with the rapidity of a thundercloud, and, when it passed, Moab, smitten as by a lightning flash, no longer overshadowed Israel. As for the deliverer, his work having been done apparently in the course of a few days, he is seen no more in the history. While he lived, however, his name was a terror to the enemies of Israel, for what he had effected once he might be depended upon to do again if necessity arose. And the land had rest.
Here is an example of what is possible to the obscure whose qualifications are not great, but who have spirit and firmness, who are not afraid of dangers and privations on the way to an end worth gaining, be it the deliverance of their country, the freedom or purity of their church, or the rousing of society against a flagrant wrong. Do the rich and powerful angrily refuse their patronage? Do they find much to say about the impossibility of doing anything, the evil of disturbing peoples minds, the duty of submission to Providence and to the advice of wise and learned persons? Those who see the time and place for acting, who hear the clarion call of duty, will not be deterred. Armed for their task with fit weapons-the two-edged dagger of truth for the corpulent lie, the penetrating stone of a just scorn for the forehead of arrogance, they have the right to go forth, the right to succeed, though probably, when the stroke has told, many will be heard lamenting its untimeliness and proving the dangerous indiscretion of Ehud and all who followed him.
In the same line another type is represented by Shamgar, son of Anath, the man of the ox-goad, who considered not whether he was equipped for attacking Philistines, but turned on them from the plough, his blood leaping in him with swift indignation. The instrument of his assault was not made for the use to which it was put: the power lay in the arm that wielded the goad and the fearless wilt of the man who struck for his own birthright, freedom, -for Israels birthright, to be the servant of no other race. Undoubtedly it is well that, in any efforts made for the church or for society, men should consider how they are to act and should furnish themselves in the best manner for the work that is to be done. No outfit of knowledge, skill, experience is to be despised. A man does not serve the world better in ignorance than in learning, in bluntness than in refinement. But the serious danger for such an age as our own is that strength may be frittered away and zeal expended in the mere preparation of weapons, in the mere exercise before the war begins. The important points at issue are apt to be lost sight of, and the vital distinctions on which the whole battle turns to fade away in an atmosphere of compromise. There are those who, to begin, are Israelites indeed, with a keen sense of their nationality, of the urgency of certain great thoughts and the example of heroes. Their nationality becomes less and less to them as they touch the world; the great thoughts begin to seem parochial and antiquated; the heroes are found to have been mistaken, their names cease to thrill. The man now sees nothing to fight for, he cares only to go on perfecting his equipment. Let us do him justice. It is not the toil of the conflict he shrinks from, but the rudeness of it, the dust and heat of warfare. He is no voluntary now, for he values the dignity of a State Church and feels the charm of ancient traditions. He is not a good churchman, for he will not be pledged to any creed or opposed to any school. He is rarely seen on any political platform, for he hates the watchwords of party. And this is the least of it. He is a man without a cause, a believer without a faith, a Christian without a stroke of brave work to do in the world. We love his mildness; we admire his mental possessions, his broad sympathies. But when we are throbbing with indignation he is too calm; when we catch at the ox-goad and fly at the enemy we know that he disdains our weapon and is affronted by our fire. Better, if it must be so, the rustic from the plough, the herdsman from the hillside; better far he of the camels-hair garment and the keen cry, Repent, repent!
Israel, then, appears in these stories of her iron age as the cradle of the manhood of the modern world; in Israel the true standard was lifted up for the people. It is liberty put to a noble use that is the mark of manhood, and in Israels history the idea of responsibility to the one living and true God takes form and clearness as that alone which fulfils and justifies liberty. Israel has a God Whose will man must do, and for the doing of it he is free.
If at the outset the vigour which this thought of God infused into the Hebrew struggle for independence was tempestuous; if Jehovah was seen not in the majesty of eternal justice and sublime magnanimity, not as the Friend of all, but as the unseen King of a favoured people, -still, as freedom came, there came with it always, in some prophetic word, some Divine psalm, a more living conception of God as gracious, merciful, holy, unchangeable; and notwithstanding all lapses the Hebrew was a man of higher quality than those about him. You stand by the cradle and see no promise, nothing to attract. But give the faith which is here in infancy time to assert itself, give time for the vision of God to enlarge, and the finest type of human life will arise and establish itself, a type possible in no other way. Egypt with its long and wonderful history gives nothing to the moral life of the new world, for it produces no men. Its kings are despots, tomb builders, its people contented or discontented slaves. Babylon and Nineveh are names that dwarf Israels into insignificance, but their power passes and leaves only some monuments for the antiquarian, some corroborations of a Hebrew record. Egypt and Chaldea, Assyria and Persia never reached through freedom the idea of mans proper life, never rose to the sense of that sublime calling or bowed in that profound adoration of the Holy One which made the Israelite, rude fanatic as he often was, a man and a father of men. From Egypt, from Babylon, -yea, from Greece and Rome came no redeemer of mankind, for they grew bewildered in the search after the chief end of existence and fell before they found it. In the prepared people it was, the people cramped in the narrow land between the Syrian desert and the sea, that the form of the future Man was seen, and there, where the human spirit felt at least, if it did not realise its dignity and place, the Messiah was born.
William Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor's Bible (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1887–1910) — public domain. 65 of 66 books (1 Corinthians is not separately keyed, as that volume carries no machine-parseable verse references); section-level commentary keyed to the opening verse. Introductory and overview sections not keyed to a specific passage are excluded.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary 1892 · Public Domain ADDED SIN, RENEWED CHASTISEMENT, AND GRACIOUS DELIVERANCE. Jdg_3:12-30
ADDED SIN, RENEWED CHASTISEMENT, AND GRACIOUS DELIVERANCE. Jdg_3:12-30
CRITICAL NOTES.— Jdg_3:12. Did evil again in sight of the Lord.] The word הָרַע or רָעָה from רוּעַ is used the same both here and in Jdg_3:7 to signify evil; but whereas in Jdg_3:7 we have the verb יּעֲשׂוּ, meaning simply did, or wrought, in Jdg_3:12 we have יֹּספוּ, meaning added to former sin (see also Jdg_4:1; Jdg_10:6; Jdg_13:1), or continued to do evil. God does not forget to count the old sin, when He marks the commission of new sin. Did evil,] not evil generally, but the evil to which they were prone, and on account of which the Lord had a controversy with them, viz., idolatry. The Lord strengthened Eglon, the king of Moab, against Israel,] stirred him up, gave him facilities for carrying out the designs of his own heart against that people, and overruled all the circumstances of Providence, so as to give him easy success in oppressing Israel. The name Eglon signifies “little calf.” In the present instance, the contrary epithet would be more correct.
Read full note →
Jdg_3:13. Gathered unto him—Ammon and Amalek.] Allied himself with these near neighbours. Moab and Ammon were brothers, having the same parentage, and might naturally be supposed to co-operate in all great enterprises. In the Amalekites the old spirit of Esau breathed, who looked on Jacob with undying hate, because by him he had been defrauded of the blessing. Now that spirit still rankles in the hearts of generations far down the scale; and if we even go on to the days of Jehoshaphat, we find it burning with undiminished intensity (2 Chronicles 20.)—if, as is probable, “the inhabitants of Mount Seir” there spoken of, be the same, in whole, or in part, with the Amalekites (comp. 1Ch_4:42-43). (See also Exo_17:14; Deu_25:18-19; 1 Samuel 15; Psa_83:6-7.) “As God raised up deliverers to Israel when they were penitent, so He stirred up enemies to them, and gave them power to oppress them, when they revolted from Him. Since they worshipped the gods of the people round about them (Jdg_2:12), it was fit that they should be punished by those very people.” [Patrick.] In this crusade against Israel, all the parties might not have the same motives, but they were at one in their bitter hatred of that people—the seed of the serpent as against that of the woman—the world as against the church of God. Moab was the chief actor, tempted partly by the richness of the country, for Josephus says it was a “divine country.” Cassel says, “The Moabites longed for the excellent oasis of “The city of Palms.” Jericho was indeed destroyed, but the indestructible wealth of its splendid site attracted them. Perhaps, too, they had began to observe signs of a certain weakness among the tribes of Israel, now that Othniel was dead; for it could not escape the notice of surrounding nations, that states of weakness and strength were periodical with Israel, according as God was absent from them, or was with them. This was now, therefore, reckoned a fit time to put in execution a long-cherished design. A large part of the territory occupied by Reuben and Gad, to the east of Jordan, was of old time possessed by Moab. Of this it had been dispossessed by the Amorites. When the Israelites came round on their march to Canaan, they routed and annihilated these Amorites under Sihon, and took possession of their lands. These lands Moab now claimed, and made this a pretext for war. Josephus says, Eglon first subjugated the tribes to the east of the river, and then made a sudden incursion to the west. He probably regarded the site of Jericho as a good strategical point for headquarters, whence he could stretch his hand on either side with ease. It was also the spot to command the fords; and so he could split Israel into two, preventing those on the east and west sides from helping each other. The city of palm trees.] A heavy curse was pronounced against it by Joshua, and a blight seems already to have fallen upon its name; for it is no longer known as “Jericho,” but as “the city of palm trees” (Jos_6:26). Sixty years had passed since it had been burned, and it was not rebuilt until the time of Ahab (1Ki_16:34). But the exceedingly desirable character of the site led the Israelites to occupy it as an unwalled town, or village, but not as a fortress, or compactly built city. Eglon would disregard the curse of Joshua.
Jdg_3:14. Israel served Eglon.] He became their absolute master, which was very humbling at the hands of an old enemy, who was struck with dismay before them in the days of Balak. But probably the word has the force of stating that they lay at his mercy, i.e., the mercy of a cruel, despotic, and capricious tyrant. “Eighteen years” is more than double the period of their former servitude. But their sin being repeated was now aggravated.
Jdg_3:15. Israel cried unto the Lord.] (See notes on Jdg_3:9.) Probably “humbled themselves before Him, acknowledged their offence, begged His pardom, and besought His help.” [Patrick.] They may have used such supplications as are recorded in Psa_44:20-26. The Lord raised.] “The same hand that raised up Eglon against Israel, raised up also Ehud for Israel against Eglon.” He was not chosen by the people on account of any supposed gifts of wisdom and prowess which he possessed, but was the instrument God was pleased to employ in working out His salvation for the people. Hengstenberg says, “the choice of means was left to Himself.” That is at best an assertion, to meet a difficulty. It is not likely that God would leave His chosen instrument to use means of which He would not Himself approve. The deliverance here wrought certainly was from God, whose servant in doing it Ehud was. Son of Gera, etc.], i.e., a. descendant of Gera, who was an immediate son of Benjamin (Gen_46:21). He was a Benjamite in the line of Gera—of that family-tree. Shimei, who cursed David long afterwards, was also “a son of Gera,” which may mean a descendant of Gera; or there were very likely more persons of that name in the same tribe. Benjamin was the tribe which, being nearest, was likely to be most severely oppressed by the invader, and therefore it was fit that the deliverer should come from it. A man left-handed]—shut up, or bound in, his right hand. Some suppose that Ehud was an ambidexter, and could use both hands alike, corresponding with Jdg_20:16, and 1Ch_12:2. It is singular, as appears from these passages was the fact, that the descendants of the man who was “the son of the right hand,” should have coveted the distinction of being skilled in the use of the left. The word used here neither means strictly both-handed, nor one-handed, but rather that from some cause he was disabled as to his use of the right hand, and therefore, as Josephus expresses it, “of the two could use the left hand best.” There was some deficiency of power in the use of the right hand, whether from habitual non-use, or accidental defect, it matters not. It was by a man who had only the effective use of his left hand that God delivered His people. A deliverer] means one to set them free from bondage. Sent a present unto Eglon.] Some say, this was a voluntary offering sent to purchase peace with Eglon, or to secure the, lightening of the yoke he put upon them. But the general opinion is, that it was the annual tribute which they were required to pay in acknowledgment of their subjection, and which it was better for them to pay voluntarily, than to have exactors coming through among their homes. It also gratified the vanity of the monarch, and led him to be better pleased with them. The word מִגְחָה, though used of “meat offerings” in Lev_2:1, is generally a euphemistic phrase for tribute (1Ki_5:1; 2Sa_8:2; 2Sa_8:6), an acknowledgment of dependence, but also a token of goodwill (Gen_32:18; Psa_72:10). Ehud was chosen to be the bearer of it, because he was recognised as raised up of God to be the deliverer or redeemer of Israel, and not because of the high place he held in the estimation of his countrymen. [Fausset.]
Jdg_3:16. Made him a dagger which had two edges, etc.] The Hebrew word signifies sword (Sept. and Vulg.). The word dagger or dirk properly expresses it here; or, some regard it as a stiletto, as used by the Italians. It was a somewhat peculiar weapon, made very sharp and short, to be both very effective, and capable of being easily concealed. It was clear that the purpose for which it was eventually used was already in Ehud’s mind. The “word of God” is compared to a “sharp sword with two edges,” because it is a more powerful weapon, as applied to the heart and conscience than any other (Heb_4:12; Rev_1:16, etc.). He did gird it on his right thigh (comp. Psa_45:3), to be in readiness for use by the left hand, and where its presence would not be suspected, the left being the sword side. A cubit length.] Go-med is not the usual word for cubit. The Sept. translates it σπιθαμὴ, which the Greeks made half an ell, or three-fourths of a foot. Being thus only nine inches in length, and the handle also being short, it could easily be concealed. Put under raiment.] Military cloak, or wide flowing garments. He thus would have the appearance of a man unarmed. “With such daggers in their garments, the Sicarii raged among the crowds at the fall of Jerusalem.”
Jdg_3:17. Eglon was a very fat man.] Probably was a luxurious liver, and belonged to the class described as “natural brute beasts” (2Pe_2:12), “whose god is their belly” (Php_3:18), “who spend their days amid wealth, and in a moment go down to the grave” (Job_21:13; Luk_21:34; Rom_12:13). Belshazzar and Nabal are examples.
Jdg_3:18. Dismissed the people.] His retinue, here called אֶת־הָעָם, implying that there was a considerable number of persons employed to bear the minchah. Also the phrase “made an end to offer the present” implies it was a matter of great ceremony. It is quite in keeping with Oriental customs to make great parade in presenting such offerings. To enhance the apparent value of the gift, a great number of persons, camels, and horses were employed to convey what might have been carried with ease by two or three. (See account in Pictorial Bible in loco.) This ceremony was now gone through with punctilious order, and signs of due submission.
Jdg_3:19. Quarries.] פְּסִילִים. In other places where this word occurs it signifies graven images (Deu_7:25; Jer_8:19; Jer_51:52). So also the Sept. and Vulg., and the margin of our Bibles. The Targum renders as our version. Lias says it is never elsewhere used of stone qnarries; but it is derived from a word signifying to hew stones (Exo_34:1; Exo_34:4; Deu_10:1; Deu_10:3), where it is used of the making of the two tables of stone. Keil thinks it unlikely that stone idols were set up in the open air, and prefers rendering it as in the text, “stone quarries,” which is the one adopted by the Chaldee, by Rashi, and most Jewish commentators, also by the Syriac version. Fausset prefers “graven images.” which he says the Moabites would put up to mark the conquered country as under the tutelage of their gods, at the place which marked the boundary line of the Moabitish dominion. This was Gilgal, about four miles to the west of Jordan. The name signifies “rolled.” because here the Israelites rolled off the reproach of Egypt by being circumcised. Now that reproach is rolled back on them again, The sight of these images would fire Ehud’s zeal against Eglon. We prefer Cassel’s interpretation, who translates the word boundary stones—not quarries, for this does not harmonise with the locality, but stones set up to mark the borders of Eglon’s territory, which he had wrenched from Israel. They might be called posts, στηλαι or lapides sacri, which marked the line. Honours were generally paid to them, and hence they were called Pesilim, idol-images, or idolatrous objects. The Targum substantially agrees with this, which makes it to mean heaps of unhewn stones. Bachmann only slightly differs, who thinks the Pesilim were idolatrous images set up as boundary marks of the territory ruled over by the heathen king. So Ehud did not feel secure till he had passed the Pesilim. Edersheim concurs, who makes it signify terminal columns, which were always objects of idolatrous worship, that divided the territory of Israel from that of Eglon. He turned again from the boundary stones, etc.] The account now becomes very vivid and graphic. He returns all alone to the king, perhaps within a few hours. His coming alone both disarmed suspicion, and also consisted with his profession to have a sacred mission to the king. Eglon would doubtless be already fovourably impressed towards the man who had been, only a few hours ago, the bearer of so handsome an offering, and would be prepared to grant any reasonable request he might make. The way was thus open; and Ehud, as if eager and in haste, said—rather, bid say, to the king, “I have a secret word to thee, O king.” On hearing this, the call is given הָס Hush! All present at once understood, and retired, leaving the sovereign liege and his vassal together alone. “All that stood by.” The attendants did not sit in the royal presence; all stood. It was natural to suppose that Ehud wished to communicate something which, at his previous visit, he could not tell in the hearing of the people who were with him.
Jdg_3:20. And Ehud came unto him.] At first he appears to have been only in the ante-chamber. Now he is admitted into the inner apartment—the king’s own. This is called a summer parlour, an upper room of cooling. Luther calls it, his summer arbour. It was something like a Turkish kiosk—“a small room built by itself on the roof of the house, having many windows to catch the breeze.” At that part of the course of the river, its bed lies low, and there being high grounds on either side, it is necessarily very warm, so that such a cooling shelter is greatly needed. An Eastern traveller says, “there is often a door of communication from the cooling apartment, or alijah, into the gallery of the house, besides another which opens immediately from a privy stair, down into the porch or street, without giving the least disturbance to the house.” Persons having secret audience with the king might be admitted or dismissed through that private stair, without passing through the rooms of the house. The apartment where the king was sitting was properly intended for purposes of entire seclusion and rest, but might be used as an audience chamber—which he had for himself alone.] It was entirely for his own private use. Possibly Ehud found this out only on the early part of that same day, when he came with the present, and saw how things were arranged in the king’s palace. He then discovered that it would be perfectly possible to get access to him alone, could he but assign a proper reason for asking such a privilege. Doubtless he prayed for Divine direction and success in regard to what he was about to do, for he felt he was working for God. And Ehud said, I have a message from God unto thee]—from Elohim—which Ehud would understand to mean the true God, the God of Israel, but which Eglon would probably regard as a name for the gods. We cannot suppose that Ehud a man chosen by God Himself for doing His work, should directly lie to the heathen king, saying that chemosh or some heathen deity had sent him, and so by a nefarious method seek to gain his end. It is also quite fanciful to suppose, as Cassel does, that the reference is not to the Deity at all, but to the supreme authority of Moab—the reigning monarch, of whom Eglon was only a satrap or liegeman. The reference must have been to the Deity; and even if Eglon had regarded it as meaning the God of Israel, princes sitting on his throne had trembled at that name before and might do so again. The story of Balak and his frantic efforts to get that people cursed by their God, had lived down through the three generations that had elapsed since; and the destruction of the whole of the Canaanitish peoples before the sword of Joshua, created a mighty shock among all the surrounding nations; so that the name of such a God was certain to strike with dismay every heart among the worshippers of idols (Jos_2:9; Jos_2:11; Jos_9:24). To have a message sent direct to himself personally from such a Deity, would inspire Eglon with an undefined awe, and he would almost involuntarily rise from his seat, at the very mention of such a thing. It was really a message from the God of Israel to Moab’s ruler, in a way similar to that which was addressed to Pharaoh. To the latter the message was, “Let my people go, that they may serve me.” To the former, it was a message of doom. “Because thou hast oppressed my people so long, now the hour of thy doom and of their deliverance has come, and thou must die.” Ehud might have supposed that this statement would induce the king to rise, but the principal reason for his so addressing the monarch was to assure him from whose hand the blow came—the God whose people he had been treading down like the mire. We believe that Ehud’s conduct was straightforward throughout, and without deceit, however strong the step he was taking.
Jdg_3:21. At once Ehud put forth his left hand, etc.] We now see the value of Ehud’s left-handedness. He could lay his hand on his dagger without exciting any suspicion, till it was too late for the victim to call for help. In like manner Cleander stabbed Parmenio while he was reading a letter. And Clement, a monk, who had obtained a commission to get into the presence of Henry III. of France, stabbed the king the moment he was bidden to draw near. Metillius Cimber, along with other conspirators, pressed closely on Cæsar, making most urgent entreaty for the recall of his banished brother, and so they all closed in upon their victim.
Jdg_3:22-23. And the haft also went in, etc.] It appears there was an actual perforation of the body The poniard was so forcibly thrust into the abdomen, that the hilt followed the blade, and, the fat closing on both, it was impossible to draw the dagger out again. To show the force of the blow, it is added that the excrement came out. The king appears to have fallen without being able to utter a single cry; the deed was done so swiftly and so overwhelmingly. Ehud lost not a moment. First, he is careful to lock the door or doors (for there seems to have been two—one leading into the antechamber where the attendants usually stood in waiting, and the other leading to the private stair which conducted down to the porch or front hall and street). He must, at the foot of that stair, down which he went, have had to pass through some of the attendants before getting to the outside of the building. But his demeanour seems to have been so cool and collected, that no suspicion was excited of anything so terrible having happened in so incredibly short a space of time; and more especially, as not even the most distant hint, or sign, of throwing off the yoke of the conqueror had been given, but the very contrary had happened that very day. Nothing therefore was farther from their thoughts than such a suspicion. But what did occur to them we are told of in—
Jdg_3:24-25. They said, Surely he covereth his feet, etc.] The rules required that they should not enter into the alijah or private cooling chamber, till the person who had been privileged with the secret audience had gone away, nor, indeed, till called. After waiting for some time, and no call being made, they examined the doors of the alijah, both of which they found locked. On which they concluded that their lord was taking his siesta—it still being the hot part of the day. In this case, it would have been dangerous for them to have awakened him, at any rate for some time. Hence they waited till they were ashamed of having waited so long. Then only they began to suspect that all was not right. These small circumstances, though natural, were yet overruled by Divine Providence to accomplish important ends. To gain time was essential to Ehud’s safety. Had the servants burst open the door at once, he would infallibly have been pursued, and brought back to be put to a certain and cruel death—that which they would reckon suitable to a regicide, and so the great cause of the liberation of God’s people from a foreign yoke, with which Ehud’s life was bound up, would have come to nought. It was of God that such thoughts should be made to rise in the minds of the servants, and so, that much time should have been allowed to elapse, ere a discovery was made of the fearful tragedy which had just been enacted. At length they opened the doors with another key, of which the chief officer of the house was in possession (for it was his privilege to keep a duplicate of the key) and behold their master was stretched on the floor quite dead!
Jdg_3:26. And Ehud escaped while they tarried.] That Ehud should make a clear escape was of God. First he got to the boundary-stones. These are referred to, because they marked the border between Moab and Israel as it then existed. Then he took the direction towards Ephraim, and seems not to have halted till he reached “Seirath,” where he reckoned himself safe from pursuit. It was either a forest or weald, that bordered on the cultivated land near Gilgal, and extended into the mountain or hill country of Ephraim (Jos_17:15-18); or it was a continuation of the bushy, rugged hills, that stretch to Judah’s northern territory from Mount Ephraim (Jos_15:10). But Seirath is little known, and is not referred to again. It seems to have been in Ephraim, on the southern frontier, and near the borders of either Judah or Benjamin.
Jdg_3:27. Having got among his own people Ehud felt there was not a moment to be lost. With vigorous hand he seized a trumpet, and blew a blast loud and long, awakening the whole land with the tidings, that now the door was open for regaining their precious liberties from the yoke of the oppressor. They had but to follow up the blow that had been struck, and every home in Israel would be free. It was a true “reveillé” note. Fresh with hope Israel rose at the call. As awakened out of sleep those who heard it sprung up, and came trooping to the deliverer—from the caves, the thickets, the rocks, and even the pits, in which the country abounded (1Sa_13:6), and to which the people in large numbers had betaken themselves, as a refuge from the oppression of Moab. It was chiefly the men of Ephraim and perhaps of Benjamin who responded to the call; and they went as one man, flushed with the hope that victory was already sure, and that God was with their deliverer in the work which had been so well begun. Ehud had already matured his plan of operations. Believing that so much depended on courage and confidence, he himself sets the example, not calling to them to move forward, but going forward himself in front, and then calling on them to follow him. The vital point of strategy was the fords of Jordan. With these in their possession, they could prevent the Moabites on the west side from returning homewards, and equally prevent those on the east side from crossing over to assist their countrymen who were attacked on all sides in the land of Israel.
Note to Jdg_3:27. It has been noticed in connection with the people taking refuge in the mountains, that “in those days of cruel warfare and oppression, the home of liberty was always in the fastnesses of the mountains. As the narrative of Xenophon shows, the mountain peoples in the Persian empire were practically independent of the central power. So in the middle ages, the Swiss mountaineers defied alike the power of Austria and Burgundy. And among ourselves, the history of Wales and the Highlands of Scotland, are proofs, that even a powerful government had very little real authority in the inaccessible recesses of the mountains. It is only the rapid advance of modern discovery which has enabled us to penetrate these regions, and to place the invaders of a mountain district upon a footing of something more like equality with its defenders.”
Jdg_3:28-29. The Lord hath delivered your enemies into your hands, etc.] This announcement coming from the lips of the man whom God had already owned with such signal success, would inspire them with the assurance of victory. Moving on with leaps and bounds, they soon reached the fords of Jordan; of which they at once took possession, and slaughtered the Moabites who came in straggling bands from Jericho, with the view of crossing the river. Of the whole army of Eglon on the west side of the river, not a man seems to have escaped. There fell of them 10,000 men—all robust or chosen men—(אּישׁ שָׁמֵן robust, well-conditioned, חַיִל power, valour) and men of valour. This had the effect, we are told, in Jdg_3:30, of crushing all further attempts of Moab to oppress Israel.
NOTE.—How we are to view Ehud’s conduct. Most commentators pass a severe censure on “the manner in which Ehud acted throughout this whole transaction, and feel difficulty in accounting for the fact, that God should make use of such means to emancipate His people from bondage. Some go so far as to deny to Ehud any grandeur of character at all, and accuse him of duplicity and sleight of hand. Others, while admitting that a measure of admiration is due to the courage he displayed, his heroic spirit of self-sacrifice for the good of his country, and his purity of motive on the whole; yet denounce the means he adopted as treacherous and savage. Most writers regard it as conduct of which God could not approve, and notice that it is not said “the Spirit of the Lord came upon him,” and that no special mark of commendation is put on his conduct, while his name is not found in the list of those “elders who by faith obtained a good report.” Neither, we might add, is it said that “the Spirit of the Lord came upon” Barak, or Tola or Jair, who were all “judges” of Israel, and the first of whom has his name enrolled in the honourable list of the men of faith. As to that list, it is evident, that only a few names are given as a specimen; otherwise, why should no mention be made in it of such men as Joshua, Caleb, Othniel, and many others? As to the means adopted, if these had been displeasing to God, would there not have been some special mark of His disapprobation given, of the manner in which the messenger had fulfilled his duty, as in the case of Saul, when he returned from his expedition against Amalek, and was severely reprimanded for having failed to perform the commandment of the Lord; or, as in the case of Moses, when, standing in the stead of God, he smote the rock, in a spirit of unhallowed impatience, in place of calmly and solemnly speaking to it.
It is affirmed in the record, that “God raised up Ehud to be a deliverer” to Israel (Jdg_3:15). Admitting this, Hengstenberg says, “the choice of the means was left to himself.” Fausset adds, that “assassination by a lie and treachery was a method of his own devising.” The Speakers’ Commentary regards his adoption of such a method as due to the age in which he lived, when human society applauded such acts, though viewed in the light of Christianity and the advanced civilisation of the present day, it would be reckoned a serious crime. Dr. Cassell holds that the brilliancy of the act cannot exculpate its highly reprehensible character. Ehud had, indeed, zeal for God, but “the Spirit of the Lord inspires neither such artifice, nor such murder.” While The Pulpit Commentary sees, in this transaction, the Ruler among the nations making use of bad actions as well as good ones, to subserve His purposes. Thus, Jacob’s deceit in obtaining the blessing, is referred to as an illustration. But there the Divine disapprobation was distinctly marked in Jacob’s future history. If the Jews put the Saviour to death, and thereby God’s high purpose in our redemption was fulfilled, they never contemplated any such issue, but thought only of gratifying their own malicious feelings against a Messiah, in whom they were completely disappointed. This was no parallel to the case of Ehud, who had no end of his own to serve, but meant only to carry out the purpose of Him who sent him. Besides, the Divine displeasure with the conduct of the crucifiers has been expressed with unexampled emphasis in the whole of their subsequent history. Ehud’s name, on the contrary, has been handed down to immortality, without a single note of disapprobation at what he did, while the Providence of God wrought along with him, and protected him at every step in his perilous enterprise.
These explanations of Ehud’s act appear to us to be alike defective and erroneous. We do not believe that God would choose an agent to do an important work in which His own glory was concerned, such as the emancipation of His own people from bondage, without both giving him qualification for the work (or causing the Spirit to rest upon him), and also giving him instructions as to how he should act so as to glorify God in the doing of it. Had Ehud out of revenge, and at his own instance, committed a cold-blooded murder on a defenceless man, without a note of warning, hurrying him into the presence of his God all unprepared, with his crimes on his head, even though he was lying under a ban, was a tyrant, a heathen, and an oppressor, we cannot suppose that God would accept such a deliberate act of assassination as the means of working out His holy purposes, without some explicit mark of reprobation of the means used. Had Ehud put Eglon to death of his own thought, it must have been murder, and that is a crime of such magnitude, that when committed by one who was acknowledged by God to be acting as His servant, it must have been marked by the sternest condemnation. Even among men, such an act could not escape severe reprehension, on the part of all who repudiate the principles of retaliation, and who believe it wrong to do evil that good may come. We feel then shut up to the conclusion, that, in what he did, he acted in obedience to Divine command. This agrees with his own declaration, “I have a message from Elohim unto thee,” and the parallel statement in Jdg_3:19, “I have a secret errand unto thee, O King,” meaning a message, or errand of doom. In going to the king then, he acted as one commissioned; it was not at his own instance. The statement in Jdg_3:28 corresponds, “Follow me, for the Lord hath delivered your enemies into your hands.” This seems to be said oracularly, as by one who was under God’s guidance in the whole transaction, and had received the intimations of His will.
This we believe is the first step to any true explanation of the facts. The matter proceeded from the Lord. The Supreme Ruler took this method of executing sentence on a noted criminal under the administration of His moral government of the world. It is not Eglon’s personal sins as a man that are here referred to so much, as his crimes in his public character as the King of Moab, and the long-known oppressor of God’s people. To oppress any people without cause was a crime of itself; but Eglon was chargeable with something incomparably more heinous. He had dared to attack the people whom Jehovah had set apart for Himself, to be His own, to be His jewels, to be called by His name, and to be entrusted with the high duty of holding up that name for the reverence of the world. That people were the custodiers of the Divine honour, and their history was inseparably associated with the promotion of the Divine glory in the earth. To attempt to crush such a people, as Eglon had done, was to challenge the majesty of Israel’s King as their Protector; it was to stretch forth his hand against the Lord’s annointed; it was to maltreat the beloved children of the living God; it was to lay unholy hands on the sacred property of the Most High; it was to waste the church of the living God, an object incomparably dearer to Him than heaven and earth.
For such a crime Pharaoh and all his host had been cast like a millstone into the the sea. From the days of the redemption from Egyptian bondage onwards, every other potentate that had dared to lift a hand against this people had been ground to the dust. And now here was this Prince of Moab not only trampling them under foot, but taking occasion thereby to magnify his own gods, as superior to the great “I am” of the oppressed Israel. This contempt of the Divine name, and the treading down as the mire of that people whom God so dearly loved, constituted Eglon’s special crimes. It is for the Judge of all the earth to decide as to the time, the form, and the means, whereby any transgressor under His government shall be punished. Pharaoh He overthrew in the waters of the Red Sea. The Canaanites He wasted by the sword of Joshua. The ringleader in the sin of Baalpeor was put to death by the javelin of Phinehas. And now the head of the Moabitish nation must meet death at the hand of Ehud, the man whom God has raised up to deliver His chosen Israel. If such a proceeding should be thought harsh, what shall we say of the hundreds of thousands of Canaanites who were put to death so sternly and unrelentingly, that in all the cities attacked not a man, woman, or child was left to breathe. This was done by Jehovah’s express command on account of the extremely heinous character of their sins. And if such a spectacle is justifiable, where vast multitudes become victims, it is a comparatively insignificant matter to hear of the same thing being done where only a solitary individual is concerned.
But there is no cruelty, or barbarity in either case. Rather in such cases we see the Righteous Governor among the nations giving to the wicked the due reward of their deeds. Should the punishment inflicted seem to us appalling, the natural and wise inference is, that there must be something correspondingly awful in that which could have brought down such a doom upon them, at the hands of so merciful and just a God. If men wonder at the terrible nature of the calamity, which is not only permitted, but appointed, in such a case, to take place, why should they not equally wonder at the terrible character of the cause which has gone before—the greatness of the sins committed? Men are so accustomed to the exercise of God’s forbearing mercy, that they forget what is due to the majesty of His great name. They reflect not, that in conducting His holy government, He must, before all other things, maintain the purity of His own character as God, His authority as Supreme Ruler in His own universe, and give specimens of how He will, sooner or later, visit with just indignation flagrant and long-continued sin. To show forth God’s glory, by making His universe a scene of holiness and happiness, was the grand end for which all things were made, and not to suit men’s wishes by sparing them though running on to any length in a career of sin, and forgetfulness of Him to whom they owe their being. Men’s wishes are not the principal element that guides the formation of God’s purposes; and though He will never forget the length and breadth of His tender mercies in His dealings with men, what is due to His own character as God will ever form His first consideration in the moral government of His intelligent creatures.
It does seem strange, that many persons who write on this subject, and attempt to account for the tragic character of this death, should make little or no mention of the heinous character of the sins of him on whom the judgment fell. May we not suppose that, to fix the eye on the atrocious aspect which this man’s sin presented to the God of Israel, was the real reason why the naked narrative is allowed to stand as it is, without any farther explanation? All the spectacles of mourning and woe in this world are simply the natural consequences of sin. If the woe be so dreadful, even though it is but the beginning of sorrows, how dreadful in God’s estimation must be the character of the sin of which it is the index!
But to rise for a moment to the higher view of God’s method of acting in His government of this world. Human life is justly reckoned more precious in this age of advanced civilisation than it was in the days of Ehud, and especially under the light of a much longer and fuller experience of the value of Scriptural truth, than the early fathers had. Yet, however revolting to us the act of assassinating the King of Moab may seem; though we regard as truly terrible the massacre of whole Canaanitish peoples, the aged and the feeble, the women and the children, as well as those who could carry arms; and though we are appalled at the slaying of all the first-born in the land of Egypt in one night, or at the destruction of a formidable Assyrian army at one fell stroke—all these are but temporary specimens of Jehovah’s jealousy for the honour of His holy name, and fall far short of the height of that eternal monument which He has set up in sight of heaven and earth in the cross of Christ, as a spectacle to be looked at by all, where every eye may read, through everlasting ages, the real estimate in which He holds His own glorious perfections, the measure of reverence which is due to Him as God, and His unalterable determination not to lower His standard in judging of the evil of sin, but to give it a treatment to the full as it deserves, whatever sacrifice it may cost!
To sum up: We regard this act of Ehud as the infliction by Jehovah’s direction, of a special retribution on the head of the heathen monarch, for having dared to insult the majesty of the God of Israel, and for having oppressed the people that were called by his name. But though clearly justifiable as having been commanded of God, it is yet to be viewed as one of those special events that seldom happen, and form almost a class by themselves. It is on no account to be held as a warrant, or precedent, to authorise any one, however zealous, for God’s cause, to rise up against a blasphemer of God’s name, or a persecutor of God’s people, in any other age, and put him to death in like manner. For Ehud did nothing of himself, but only as he was commanded of God—God alone has the right to punish the adversaries of His own truth.
It is also to be particularly noted that this event belongs to the history of the Old Testament period, which takes its complexion throughout from the fact, that the great atonement had not yet been made, and that God, in all His dealings with man, acted as the unpropitiated deity. Hence a certain aspect of sternness and rigour in the divine dispensations, which disappears when the great sacrifice on Calvary has been offered. In that sacrifice, so grand an exhibition has been made of “the righteousness of God” with all its claims, and such security has been taken against all possible lowering of the standard of the evil of sin, that there is not now the same necessity for displays of the divine anger against men’s wickedness or for heavy judgments occurring in Providence to manifest God’s jealousy, as did exist in the anti-christian age. Though sin itself be the same still—ever hateful to a holy God, and though it is attended now with even higher aggravations than under the former economy, so gloriously complete is the satisfaction which has been rendered to the character of Him whose law has been transgressed, that the way is opened for a more benignant exercise of the Divine government among men, and other monuments are not needed to impress men’s minds with the terrible evil of sin, and God’s determination to punish it as it deserves, so far as the present world is concerned. Hence God’s attitude towards men in this the Christian age has in it the character of “the God of peace,” because all His transactions with them are done under the shadow of Calvary.
MAIN HOMILETICS.—Jdg_3:12-30
SIN—SUFFERING; PENITENCE AND DELIVERANCE REPEATED
It is to be noticed that the history of mankind generally, and of this people in particular, is represented in the Bible as always taking place under the observation of God as “King of all the earth.” God is the faithful witness and rightful judge. It is His world which men occupy; they are His creatures, made to serve and to glorify Him; His sceptre is over them; and it is before Him, and to Him, that human life is led. Hence it is ever said, the actors, in history, did this or that “in the sight of the Lord.” “The children of Israel did evil in the sight of the Lord.” He is the constant observer of men’s conduct. “The ways of man are before the eyes of the Lord, and He pondereth all His goings.” He looks on men’s conduct not merely as a spectator, but as the judge who has to reckon with them at last. It is “He with whom they have to do.” To Him all that is done in human life belongs, and He is the proper judge of it all. To Him men are accountable for all their actions; for was not man brought into existence to show forth God’s glory by his love and obedience (1Sa_2:3). It is His prerogative to sit in review of men’s actions from day to day, and to pass an absolutely accurate verdict on every man’s character and conduct, with the authority of the judgment seat, from which there is no appeal. That man acts wisely who says, “with me it is a small thing to be judged of you, or of men’s judgment.; He that judgeth me is the Lord.” Here we have—
I. Now sin added (Jdg_3:12).—“Israel did evil again in the sight of the Lord.” There is emphasis in saying—“did evil again.” It implies—
1. A painful surprise. After such thorough yet tender dealing on the part of the covenant God, it might have been supposed that the ungodliness of the people would have been effectually cured, and that henceforth no accounts would have been heard, but those of hearty and permanent allegiance to Him, whom they had accepted as their own God. The disease had been so deeply lanced, that it might well have been supposed to be now entirely eradicated, and that we should hear no more of Israelitish apostacy. What long suffering had been shown! What arguments of loving kindness and tender mercy used! What faithfulness in using the rod rather than permit them to continue the infatuation of sleeping on in sin! But alas! for the inconstancy and shallowness of human good resolutions apart from the grace of God! Here they are, sinning as before, in the sight of God’s holy heavens, as if “the Lord did not see, and the God of Jacob did not regard.” After being crushed to the very dust under the weight of Divine chastisements, they yet show themselves capable, when the pressure of the Divine hand is removed, of committing over again the same fatal error, of going astray from the living and true God. But we have the same truth in every part of human history. Go back to the days of the great deluge. We have the same account given of the human heart after that catastrophe as before (comp. Gen_8:21, with Jdg_6:5)—or, come forward to our own times, and after all the superior advantages enjoyed, and greatly multiplied arguments used, the same melancholy truth comes out, that men are by nature “bent to backsliding” from the living and true God. After their long chapter of sad experiences, this people “did evil again in the sight of the Lord.”
2. Deeper guilt. It was heinous sin to apostatise the first time. It was greatly more aggravated sin to do it a second time. On many accounts it was so. It showed more deliberation in the act of rebellion, more stubbornness of will, and greater defiance of the Divine Authority. It also implied the heavy guilt of despising all the argument involved in the close and faithful dealing God had with them, in the terrible chastisements He had already brought down on their heads. To what purpose had all the severe remedies been made use of if the old evil should now break out again? Had the faithful use of the rod, by the wise and kind Father, in the awful scourge of the Syrian invasion, for eight years been wholly in vain? And must the same drastic process be gone through again, ere the cancerous spot be removed? Fearful was the guilt of this people to forget their sacred character so far, as “a holy nation and a peculiar people,” dedicated to the service of God by so many hallowed ties, as even once to cross the line between fealty and apostacy; but what shall we say of their daring to lift an unhallowed foot in that direction again, notwithstanding all the entreaties, warnings, and chastisements used to prevent them, by their gracious and long-suffering God? This was a systematic despising of the voice of their God.
3. A perplexing problem to solve. Why should the children of such holy men as Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob become such incorrigible rebels? This is the puzzle that meets us everywhere in the history of God’s Israel. Greater obstinacy in sin, or more wilful persistence in forsaking a holy and loving God, could hardly be found among the worst of the heathen nations. How then can we account for such a tendency among the descendants of the most pious stock that ever existed in the history of our humanity, and who, if any, might be expected to be an honour to our race, for their strictly religious character, and entire consecration to the keeping of God’s commandments? Some reasons, indeed, may be assigned for the present apostacy.
(1) The people had lost their leader. We hear of no outbreak of the tendency to go after other gods, so long as he was alive. Had he been at the helm of affairs now, there is little doubt how he would have acted. Swift and sure would have been the steps he would have taken to restore the spirit of reverence for Jehovah’s character and law throughout the kingdom. At whatever risk, he would have tolerated no disloyalty to the Divine King. He would have said, “It is not necessary for me to live; it is indispensable that I should be faithful to my God.” As a “judge” he was responsible for seeing that the people had at least a visible respect for the covenant of their God. And while he was alive, both by his example and personal influence, not to speak of his authority as judge, he would have deterred many from turning aside to crooked ways. But now that he was gone no barrier remained to the bursting of the banks of the river, so that, almost at once, idolatry again reached the floodmark among the chosen people!
(2) Aspostasy was due in part to the universal evil example. It is not easy to withstand the force of the current when surrounded by a multitude of waters. While the whole human race around them were moving strongly in one direction, it was hard for a single nation to stand out by itself, and dare to be singular. This may in part account for the fact, though it does not afford the slightest justification of the lapse into idolatry. If, on the one side the temptation was strong, the motives on the other side were incomparably stronger. The word and character of their God ought infinitely to have outweighed every other consideration; but to this had to be added the long course of gracious and solemn dealing He had had with them, from the beginning of their history onwards. Besides this general consideration, their aspostacy was inexcusable, on the ground of the strong representation of the dangers arising from giving way to it, and the many helps and encouragements supplied for maintaining their stedfastness in the covenant. The greatest care also was taken to make them live apart from “the world lying in wickedness.” Israel was to “dwell safely, being alone” (Deu_33:28.) Thus too is it with the people of God in every age. When they are separate from the world they are safe; when they are in it, they are in danger (2Co_6:17; 1Co_15:33; Act_2:40; Act_2:44; Pro_13:20; Psa_26:8-9; Psa_101:4-7; Eph_5:11).
(3) Idolatry was their easily-besetting sin. While all sin is strong in a sinful nature, there is a specially enslaving power in an “easily-besetting sin.” By it a man is led captive, even when his eyes are open to the terrible consequences which must come out in the end. He is like a captive in chains. Idolatry had a fascination for the eye of the Israelite. It allowed him free indulgence in all the corrupt propensities of his fallen nature. In one word, it allowed him to make his God after his own wishes. This was the great allurement to idolatry among mankind everywhere. No wonder if God should say of it, “Oh, do not this abominable thing which I hate.” It diverted the homage of the creature from being given to the Creator, and led to its being bestowed on the meanest and most grovelling things. Yet it presented to man the form of a religion, and gave room for the exercise of the devout feelings of the heart—so satisfying the craving for a religion which exists in man’s nature. Such a system kept the Israelite abreast of the religious fashion of the age. He did not require to be singular, and look sourly on every other form of religious worship that was practised among the nations.
(4) A new generation had sprung up. It was not the same generation that saw the great deliverance which God had wrought by Othniel. It was a new generation that had not seen God’s mighty works, on behalf of Israel, with their own eyes. Their fathers in all likelihood told them much of the glorious past, and they would listen with interest to the thrilling accounts; but not having personally passed through the scenes described, and regarding them only as matter of hearsay, they would be looked on as little better than beautiful shadows. Out of this circumstance would sin deceitfully construct an apology. The impression made by a bare recital is indeed not of so vivid a character as when one personally passes through the excitement of great perils, and is an eye-witness to sublime deliverances wrought. Yet the bare recital, accompanied by irrefragable evidence of the truth, and astonishing character of the wonders accomplished, was sufficient to inspire the most thorough belief, and to call forth earnest gratitude and devout obedience. It is thus that God always reckons—that after generations should give Him their allegiance and confidence, because of mercies which He has bestowed on generations that have gone before, of which an account is given to those that come after. The whole series of generations He views as hanging together, both as regards duties, and as regards privileges. He never addresses any one generation as if it stood apart from all the rest. Links are always supposed to exist, binding the whole in one—links of duty—of a common heritage—of a common example, instruction, and interest. They are always addressed as one people, allied in blood, as children of one father, heirs of the same promises, and partakers of the same Divine covenant-relationship, with its laws, and ordinances, and privileges, and hopes. The men of this backsliding generation, therefore, were verily guilty in not having been fully confirmed in their allegiance to God by the argument derived from the experience of the fathers. (See pp. 92–94.)
(5) The inveterate depravity of the human heart. This is too truly the principal reason that accounts for the apostacy of Israel from their God. Nothing could more strikingly bring out the fact of this inveterate depravity than the truth that in all ages, under all circumstances, and among all peoples, the heart shows an invariable tendency to depart from the living God. The tendency indeed shows itself with all the force and regularity of a law, and hence we read of “the law of sin.” We have also the distinct testimony of Scripture, “The Lord looked down from heaven on the children of men to see if there were any that did understand and seek God. They are all gone aside—there is none that doeth good; no, not one.” This testimony is given twice over (Psalms 14, 53). A melancholy confirmation of the testimony we have in the history recorded in the book of Judges. Of Israel it may be said that “though woo’d and aw’d” they are “rebels still.” “Neither ministry, nor miracle, nor misery, nor mercy, could mollify their hard hearts, or contain them within the bounds of obedience.” [Trapp.] The unqualified verdict of Him who searcheth the heart is, that it is “desperately wicked”—or incurable by any natural means. Alas! for the honour of our race, that it should pass into a proverb “humanum est peccare,” and yet this is mild compared with the Divine verdict.
II. New chastisement inflicted (Jdg_3:12-14).—“The Lord strengthened Eglon against Israel,” etc.
1. The Lord chastises in faithfulness (pp. 118, 119). In all circumstances God marks sin with His abhorrence. As He would be faithful to Himself, He must keep up a due sense of His sovereign authority, and the unsullied purity of His character and government, before the eyes of His creatures. According to an established arrangement with His people (Psa_89:30-34), He gives them to understand, it is due both to Him and to them, that they should be chastised when they sin against Him. He afflicts them to show His jealousy for His holy name; that He is deeply offended with sin even in His own people; that He cannot love them at the expense of His own glory as a holy God; that He cannot allow them to go on in sin at the expense of sacrificing their best interests; that He cannot trifle with that which would poison their happiness, and sap the foundations of their future good. By chastisement, too, He reminds them that sin implies loss of character, as well as loss of favour; that it brings them under the Divine frown, and sinks them in the scale of honour. And finally He afflicts them, to bring them quickly to a state of penitence and reformation of conduct. He impresses it on them, that while they continue to sin, He must continue to punish; and that if, after all His dealings with them, “they will not hearken, but walk contrary to Him, then He will walk contrary unto them in fury, and chastise them seven times for their sins.” The standard of His holiness as absolutely perfect must not be let down, in the estimation of the subjects of His government, however clamantly certain circumstances may seem to call for a relaxation. His moral government, even of a sinful world, must go on without a stain, notwithstanding that so much sin is ever being committed. How that could be so, consistently with His vast designs of mercy, was a problem for His Divine wisdom to solve. And in the great sacrifice of Calvary, we see the purity and righteousness of the Divine character kept up, for ever, at an absolute height. But as there is need, in every age, for some immediate expression of the Divine displeasure, in the case of individual sins as they are committed, this is supplied by chastisements, both to remind us of the sin-hating character of our God, and to be a check on farther indulgence in sin.
When sin is committed afresh, after the application of costly means of cure, men would be disposed to give up the case in despair, or to inflict summary vengeance once for all on the transgressors. God does neither; but with a patience which is calm and regular as the laws of nature, He proceeds again in the same course which has already proved abortive; and for many times he does so, to show the glory of His long-suffering, and the multitude of His mercies (Psa_106:43-45).
2. He makes use of a new rod. It is not the same scourge that is now employed. A nation by their side is raised up, apparently one of the weakest of the surrounding nations, certainly one that hitherto had been too much awed by the mighty hand, and outstretched arm of the God of Israel, to dare to meet them in battle array. Moab now becomes “the rod of God’s anger” to chastise his people for their unfaithfulness to His covenant. For the greater part of a hundred years, they had longed to wreak their vengeance on this much hated people, but hitherto had lacked courage and opportunity. Now both are supplied, and with eager foot, they tread the soil of Israel, for purposes of plunder and oppression. God’s quiver is full of arrows, and it is glorifying to Him to show the fulness of His resources, by using a variety of instruments to execute His will. It proves His universal supremacy to make choice now of one, now of another nation, in turn all round, to serve His purpose—not always the most suited, but though the most unfit, yet made by Him most successful in gaining the end. (See pp. 88, 89).
3. He sends a more severe token of His displeasure. When a man has had the character of having been a transgressor in the past, and is brought up anew, charged with crime at the bar of justice, it must go harder with him, than if he had been spotless before. For now he shows more settledness of purpose as a criminal, and greater persistence in defying constituted authority. Thus it was with Israel. Theirs was now a case of sin added to sin. The old sin was remembered when the new sin was committed, and the guilt was accounted to be much greater than before, calling for many stripes. We do not know indeed, that the oppression of the Moabites was heavier than that of the Mesopotamian hordes. Probably there was not much to choose between them. But it was certainly much longer continued. Now it is 18 years of servitude, whereas formerly it was but eight years. In this respect, the scourge was much more severe, not only because the lash was longer applied, but also because God showed that His ear was more heavy to hear their prayer. It was also a deeper humiliation to be trodden upon by a people whom till now they had despised, from their birth onwards, and who had been accustomed for more than three generations to tremble at the name, and the mention of the God of Israel. “It must have been most mortifying to Israel to see Jericho, the very city which had been delivered into their hands by a miracle, now made a Moabite stronghold to guard the passes of Jordan, and to keep Israel down in lasting subjection. Now, too, their old enemies, Ammon and Amalek join against them. Their adversaries seem to flock together to crush them (Psa_83:5-8). They would not serve the Lord with their corn, wine, and oil, which He had given them; so now they must serve the oppressor, and pay him tribute of all (Hos_2:5-10; Deu_28:47-48.)”
As to their groanings under the yoke, the history is silent. These we can only imagine; but doubtless they implied a deep sense of degradation as well as suffering. This feature of passing over details in silence adds greatly to the sadness of the history of so many victims of oppression, in various countries of the world, in the terrible past. How much more miserable has this world been in its numerous wretched homes, than the world itself knows! What heavy clouds of sorrow have discharged their contents on these homes at various epochs, of which no record has been kept! Had that portion of the history of our race which has been left untold, been given in full on the printed page, in what red and dark colours must the pen have been dipped, suitably to pourtray the facts! How many heart-rending cries have gone up before high heaven, which no human ear has heard, from the wretched, down-trodden subjects of tyrannical and despotic rulers in the ages of the mournful past, not only among savage nations, but those also that are the so-called civilised! We need not conjecture what sufferings must have been endured but never told, under the iron hands of such incarnations of cruelty, as Jenghis Khan and Tamerlane, of Tartar notoriety, or the occupants of the throne of the great Mogul; but were the history of it written, what tales of misery might be given to the world from the prisons of Europe, the mines of Siberia, the slave-grounds of Africa and America, and the manifold homes of oppression and hardship in lands which have been ruled over by capricious and cruel monarchs! What cries of bleeding, tortured, mangled humanity have been raised which no ear of sympathy has ever listened to, save that of Him who “looks down from heaven to hear the groaning of the prisoners,” to mark the oppression of the poor, and the sighing of the needy, and who will appear in due time “to judge the world in righteousness, and the people with equity!”
4. He helps His enemies against His own people. “He strengthened Eglon against Israel,” etc. How He did so we are not informed, but in Providence He so ordered it that all Eglon’s schemes and efforts should succeed, while disastrous failure attended all the movements of Israel. On a former occasion, while the Lord was with His people, Balak had no power to curse them, or to lift a finger against them; but now Jehovah not only permits the heathen king to triumph, but Himself actually takes the side of the enemy against His own. How deep must have been the provocation given, when the Divine Father proceeds to take the part of a ruthless stranger, in the enslavement and degradation of His own son! It was even worse. It was giving up His wellbeloved child, whom He had so tenderly cared for all along, to be savagely beaten by a slave; while He, the Father, stands by, not to protect Him from chastisement, but rather to see that a sufficient number of stripes is given! This is the same God, who was always so ready to exalt the horn of Israel, in opposition, or in preference to, all others! How great the offence which He must have taken at Israel’s sins! Yet this mysterious dealing of the God of Jacob was really a blessing in disguise. Seeming to work against them, He was by this course all the more effectually working for them. He was casting the metal into the fire to get the dross consumed. He was thus opening their eyes, and leading them to see that things must be fearfully out of course, when their God deemed it necessary to join Himself to their enemies. It was God fulfilling, in part, the awful threatening which He had long ago made in the days of Moses (Lev_26:28), when He would walk contrary to them in like manner as they had walked contrary to Him. In short, it was lifting the veil of warning in time, to prevent the fearful issue of being for ever cast off.
III. New expressions of penitence (Jdg_3:15).—“The children of Israel cried unto the Lord.”
1. In distress they flee to the universal refuge. As when a ship is overtaken by a great storm at sea, those who sail in it either cast anchor, or betake themselves to some accessible harbour of refuge, so these Israelites in their extremity fell back on the Divinely-established means of relief in prayer. Taught by a bitter experience that “the ways of transgressors are hard,” the unfaithful Church soliloquises in her bondage thus—“I will go and return to my first husband; for then it was better with me than now.” Prayer is indeed a refuge for all. It is the instinctive cry of the creature to Him who made it, when feeling its feebleness, its wants, its perils, above all its sins and their threatening consequences. “Should not a people seek unto their God?” “Is any afflicted? let him pray.”
Prayer is the cry of the heart in returning to its God. It is a refuge for all. “O thou that hearest prayer, to thee shall all flesh come” (Isa_56:7). While we are in the land of the living, we are in the place of hope, and on praying ground. While the gospel trumpet blows, prayer is never shut against the guilty during the day of human life. For all classes, mercy’s gate in prayer stands open—at all times, and under all circumstances. God is said to sit on a “throne of grace” to receive all the petitioners who come to Him. By whatever name miserable men are known, it is the privilege of all to come to this throne, before which a brother-man as mediator between God and man continually pleads.
As the “Creator” of all, God finds an interest in every living being. As the “Father of mercies,” He is “kind even to the evil and unthankful.” Rejoicing in the consciousness of His own fulness, He is naturally disposed to supply the wants of the needy. As being Himself the “ever-blessed God,” He finds pleasure in diffusing happiness among His creatures around Him. But it is a guilty world that He has before Him, and a special mode of approach is established. Christ as sacrifice and intercessor is the way. “Through Him we all have access by one Spirit, unto the Father.”
The voice which Christianity raises among the abodes of our suffering humanity, is one, not only of hope, but of assurance, that the God in whose hands we are, is disposed to listen to all the cries and plaints that come from distressed hearts. The notion of the ancient Epicureans, who represented the Deity as indolently reposing in His own high region of undisturbed happiness, careless of what might pass among men under His footstool, on whom He could hardly deign to look, has long since been exploded as a dream of the murky nights which brooded over men, ere yet the “Day-spring from on high” began to gleam on their dwellings of sorrow. Abortive, too, have proved the efforts of the men of cold intellect, during the past, and a portion of the present century, who would represent the Deity as dwelling apart from men amid the unapproachable splendours of His own heavens, having cut off every tie with His creatures, regarding their history as too insignificant to engage His attention, and their interests too unimportant to claim His aid. On the contrary, Christianity teaches that “The Lord looketh upon all the inhabitants of the earth, and considereth all their works; that He is good unto all and His tender mercies are over all His works; that the eyes of all wait on Him, He opens His hand and satisfies the desire of every living thing; that His eye is on the righteous, and His ear is open unto their prayer; that He is the helper of the fatherless, relieveth the widow, preserveth the strangers, and looseth the prisoners”—in one word, that He is “The preserver of all men specially of them that believe.” To this God all men are taught to pray, coming with penitent hearts, and asking, in the name of Christ, for such things as may be agreeable to His will.
2. They had a special plea with God as children of the Covenant. The plea which men had with God merely as His creatures, is lost on their becoming sinners. “For we know that God heareth not sinners.” He cannot continue to be the Father of apostate children. He cannot bless the guilty, till some great thing is done to dispose of their guilt. But this people were adopted by God into the relation of Father and children, on the ground of the covenant He had been pleased to establish with them; and thus though by nature “far off” from God, they were “made nigh.” The great promise, “I will be a God to thee,” went with them as a pillar of hope in all the steps of their wonderful history. And however often they might come with their requests to His throne, He was never weary of remembering the word of His covenant, and acting according to it in all the difficulties through which they had to pass. “I said not to the seed of Jacob, seek ye me in vain.”
3. Their temporary apostasy did not shut them out from the privilege of prayer. It might be said, that if men as God’s creatures, lost their title to call God Father because of their sins, for the same reason, these children of the covenant ought to be held as having lost all title to any of the blessings of the covenant. This would have been the case but for two reasons;
(1) They had a mediator to plead for them in their priesthood, and the continual sacrifices were laid on the altar, as the means of propitiating.
(2) Their apostasy was not allowed by their covenant God to become permanent. For if so, they must, in the nature of things, necessarily have forfeited every title they had to God’s favour and promised blessings, on the ground of their sacred relationship. That is, God must have cast them off. In these latter times the most solid and permanent security is taken that the privileges and blessings reserved for the people of God shall not be lost—prayer included. The rule which is laid down objectively reads thus: “If any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ, the Righteous.” “We have a Great High Priest that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God: let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace,” etc. No case that is once fairly put into the hands of that advocate can be considered hopeless. For “He is able to save to the uttermost,” etc. And we have “boldness to enter into the holiest, by a new and living way, even by the blood of Jesus, which He hath consecrated for us,” etc. And there is provision made subjectively also. “I will pray the Father, and He shall give you another Comforter, that He may abide with you for ever.” What is the force of this but practically saying, on the one hand, if the Spirit is given, no other blessing can be withheld; and such arrangement is everlasting; while, on the other, it is doing the same thing as “putting God’s laws into the mind, and writing them in the heart,” so that the most effectual security is taken for the fulfilling of the condition of the covenant, and so it is established for evermore.
IV. New Deliverances experienced (Jdg_3:15-30).—For an account of this we must read the narrative, and mark how providence overruled events so as to secure the complete emancipation of the people from their state of vassalage. The point to be noticed is, that the hand of the Lord specially directed the events to this issue.
1. This deliverance came in answer to prayer. Thus is it best seen, that all is “of Him, through Him, and to Him,” and so it is the mode most glorifying to God. It is the fixed rule—“Ask, and ye shall receive.” Acknowledge the Fountainhead. “When the children of Israel cried unto the Lord, He raised up a deliverer.” His compassion and tender mercy would prompt Him to save them at the mere spectacle of their misery, but to maintain His character as the Holy One of Israel, He grants deliverance only in answer to their professions of return to God, and suitable expressions of their sorrow for sin. Their professions in most cases might be only in appearance, and in only a few cases might there be “that godly sorrow for sin which needeth not to be repented of.” The majority of the people may only have done what they did in Hosea’s days—“howled to God on their beds,” without crying to Him with their hearts (Hos_7:14). Yet God is pleased to see even the appearance of penitence, and in cases where temporal blessings are concerned, He often gives these though there should be nothing more than the appearance (1Ki_21:27-29). There is however, in every age “a remnant”—“the living in Jerusalem”—“the Israelites indeed”—“the tenth”—who “follow the Lord fully,” and whose “hearts are circumcised.” These would now act the part of Ezra (Ezr_9:6), or of David (Psa_51:17).
2. It was brought about by a suitable instrument. God Himself made the selection. “He raised him up.” As a particular description is given of him, the features of that description must he held to indicate the reason of his fitness to serve as an instrument for accomplishing the Divine purpose. It was a man who wanted the natural use of his right hand, and had only left to him the effective use of his left. He seems likely to have been among the last who could do any great thing by his own power. And his fitness seems to have consisted rather in his defects, than in his powers. God at one time chooses one that is specially gifted, at another one that is defective, to show that He can do his work with any kind of instrument. For while a man’s natural gifts are not despised, but made use of so far as they can be of service, it is not so much by these that he succeeds in discharging his mission, as by the special aid given him by the Spirit of God. “Not by might, nor by power,” etc.
The manner of the Deliverance. We believe the manner of accomplishment, as well as the end to be gained, were matter of Divine direction to Ehud. He was commissioned to deliver Israel from Moabitish bondage. This was to be accomplished.
(1) By the death of the King. The oppressor was marked to die. Eglon had served God’s purpose in being a rod wherewith to chastise His children, and now that the purpose is served, there being no further need for it, He casts it into the fire. [Trapp]. How many illustrations of this kind occur throughout history! All the nations round about the ancient Israel so suffered in the end, because of the injuries or indignities they inflicted on the people of God. How many examples might be found among the kingdoms or powers of Europe during the Christian era, who once persecuted the church of God, and have had troubles and degradation in their future history. For it is specially to be noticed that whilst a valuable purpose was served by the chastisement of the backsliding church, that was as far as possible away from the intention of these persecuting powers. Their only thought was partly to gratify their malice against a religion which they intensely hated, and so they strove to put it down; and partly to extend their own power and possessions. To do this at the expense of the interests of the church of God, was to offer an insult and defiance to Him to whom the church belonged.
Eglon’s sins, therefore, were not merely, that he had acted the part of a public robber, in seizing the property which belonged to another nation, and that as a tyrant and oppressor he had for a great length of time filled the homes of that nation with misery and wailing. But he had dared to stretch forth his hand against the Lord’s anointed—a sin which even David shrunk from after he had himself been anointed, and when the object was the wicked Saul, whom the Lord had now rejected, from being king. Because this monarch had been chosen to the sacred office of being king over God’s people, and so had the Divine seal set upon him in that office, David preferred to risk his own life rather than do harm to one whose person had thus become consecrated. It was therefore a grave crime of which Eglon had been guilty, for Israel had been thus consecrated, and so were regarded by their God as sacred property. Their name He had associated in the most intimate manner with His own great name. By them, and their history, was His name known on the earth. In attacking such a people, Eglon was virtually making war upon Jehovah Himself! A worm of the dust was defying the Omnipotent at arms! God’s jewels he had been appropriating to himself, and treating them as if they were the merest dross! Eglon, though himself an alien, had dared for so long a time to treat God’s dear children as if they had been the veriest slaves! This was the same people before whose march God had dried up the sea, and rolled back Jordan when in full flood; for whose &c in the desert, for He had caused the rock to gush forth streams, and the heavens above to rain down manna; before whom every nation in Canaan, from the one end to the other, had been either annihilated or paralysed, and who still lay under the shelter of the same Almighty arm.
Now the time was come for delivering Israel, and at the same hour, Eglon’s sins come into remembrance before God, not having been repented of, nor a pardon given. Hence the sentence goes forth that the oppressor of God’s Israel must die, and His ransomed ones be set free from the yoke, while Ehud is the man appointed to execute the work.
(2.) Special qualifications were given to the instrument chosen.
(a.) We hold it to be a rule, that in all cases where God sends a man on a special mission, He both qualifies and directs him more or less in the discharge of the duties of that mission. Many have felt a difficulty in supposing that God had given instructions to Ehud in the present case, because there seems to be a cold-blooded and deliberate murder committed, with circumstances of treachery and lying accompanying it. But we have already seen, that before God, Eglon’s death was not regarded as murder, or the unlawful taking away of life, but a just retribution on a daring criminal, under the Divine government, for his great sins, at a point when the time had come for the emancipation of his vassals, and for the infliction of his own doom as their oppressor.
(b.) Objection. As to the charge of duplicity and deceit, our judgment must be guided by the interpretation we put on the narrative itself. To us the main features of the story are consistent with perfect honesty of purpose and truthfulness of statement. His principal statements are, “I have a secret errand unto thee, O King,” and “I have a message from God unto thee.” It has been generally supposed, that by this he meant some statement which he was to make in words, which was used as a mere blind to gain for him admission into the royal presence, and also to deceive the king and throw him off his guard. But why make any such supposition? We believe Ehud sincerely meant what he said. He had a message from God to deliver, but it was one of deeds not words. He meant to say, “I have come with a message from that God against whom you have so dreadfully sinned, whose name you have blasphemed, whose people you have trampled on, and whose power you have defied; and that message is, that your hour is come, and you are doomed by my hand to die! There is no strain in this interpretation; it seems most natural, and yet it vindicates the uprightness of Ehud throughout the transaction. That Eglon put another interpretation on the words is beside the question. He was already a doomed man before Ehud’s visit, and had no right to any mercy shown. Already he had had a long day of mercy, and the last moment had now expired. From Ehud’s words he was given distinctly to understand whence and why the blow came that stretched him a corpse at his feet.
(c.) On Ehud rested the spirit of loyalty to his God. He was specially called by God to be the saviour of his people, who formed at that time the only church of God in the world. Like as God said to Saul, “Go and smite Amalek, and spare them not; slay man and woman, infant and suckling,” or like as Joshua was commanded concerning the Canaanites and other nations, “thou shalt utterly destroy them, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth.” So now Ehud received the command, “Go and slay Eglon, the oppressor of my people, and spare him not.” It was a very stern duty that was imposed upon him, both very revolting in itself, and involving the greatest risks to his personal safety. It was, we believe, the last thing which he would have chosen to do, if it had been left to himself to decide. But believing that all God’s commands were in truth and uprightness, he went forward in Joshua-like spirit at the call of duty. It was, indeed, not a duty of so bewildering a character as that imposed on Abraham, when required to offer up his only son as a burnt offering, yet it was a severe test of his loyalty to his God, and his staunchness to the call of duty.
(d.) He had the spirit of self-sacrifice for the cause of God on earth. He had to discharge this duty alone. “Of the people there was none with him.” He dismissed all that accompanied him on his first visit to the king. He kept the secret locked up in his own bosom. He prepared the instrument of death unknown to others; and every step of the omnious journey was undertaken alone. Other “judges” were commanded to raise an army, generally one far inferior in number and equipment to the force of the enemy. But in such a case there is something, however little it might be, to sustain natural courage. But here there is nothing. Only such is the will of his God; and the end to be gained is the liberation of his country, and, what was to him more important still, the preservation of the Church of God on the earth. And for that he risks all. Since not only the well-being, but the very existence, of the cause of God on the earth depended on his going through with the perilous duty entrusted to him, he takes his life in his hand; and without a murmur proceeds to discharge it. He stood the test of zeal for the holy cause in which he was embarked.
(e.) He had the spirit of great boldness and courage. Many such cases stand out in history, such as that of the Roman Seæva, a soldier of Cæsar’s, who at the siege of Dyrrachium alone resisted Pompey’s army until he had two hundred and twenty darts sticking in his shield. It was said of the great Caesar that he always said to his soldiers, “Come,” never “Go”—meaning that he himself ever went first. It was also said of Hannibal, the Carthagenian general, that he was always first in the battle and the last out. Truly heroic courage was displayed also by the Swiss Tell, and the Scottish Wallace, and many other great patriots. But in the courage and boldness displayed by these “judges,” there was a higher than the natural element. They went forward in a state of absolute fearlessness, conscious that Omnipotence itself was with them, that all obstacles must give way before them, and that success would attend their action with the certainty of a law of nature. Thus moral considerations were at the root of their courage.
(f.) He had the spirit of strong faith. He believed that God would, by his hand, work a great deliverance; both because he believed that He had such complete control of all events and issues, that He could in any circumstances open a way of escape, and also because he had the conviction that God was with him, and would not fail him. Over all his other armour, this warrior threw “the shield of faith,” and so became not only mighty, but invincible. This accounts for all his high qualities, and for his noble bearing throughout the whole occasion. It was by his faith that he obtained a good report. His allegiance to his God, his spirit of self sacrifice for the cause of God, his courage, coolness, zeal, and fearlessness all arise from his strong faith.
When he left his companions and returned alone, the thought which he carried in his heart was the terrible one of taking a life, and that in cold blood. It was too the life of a king surrounded by all the attendants of his household, and chosen troops within easy call. It was a king too who had long been able to crush Ehud’s people. It was to be done in open day and in the very heart of the palace. He knew that if he should make the attempt and not succeed, his own life was certain to be forfeited, and that he would die a very cruel death. He was single handed in the project; he had no backing; nor any place of shelter to flee to. The deed itself was of the most tragic character, and in all but universal estimation, would be reckoned infamous. Even if successful it was fitted to mark his name with a stigma to future ages. Yet he is calm, intrepid, and decided. There is no hesitation, no flurry, not a doubt as to what he should do—not a trace of blanching seen in his countenance, nor a moment’s misgiving felt in his heart. He is in no hurry, neither before nor after, nor does he show the slightest discomposure in any of the steps taken. How do we account for this demeanour? Was it merely natural courage? Was he a fanatic, or a desperado? Was he nothing more than a patriot in the usual sense of the term? Did he hold human life so cheap, and regard it so legitimate a thing to get rid of tyrants, that he was reckless what means might be used if only the end could be accomplished?
We do not so interpret the character. Ehud, we believe, acted as a man who felt he had received a sacred commission from Jehovah to execute judgment, not on a fellow man merely, or on a wicked man, but on one who held the church of God bound down under oppression, and whom it was necessary to get rid of, now that the hour was come for setting the captive free.
(3.) The Providence of God co-operates in bringing out the issue. Ehud found remarkable facility in carrying out every step of the process. He might have said, “I came; I saw; I conquered.” Not an obstacle remained standing in the way. We hear of no demurring on the part of his companions, that he should return to the city of palm-trees, nor does any suspicion seem to have been awakened among the enemy by his return visit. He had already secured favour at court by the presentation of his handsome gift. The effect of his statement that he had a secret errand to the king (the nature of which he was not bound to explain), was that admission was at once granted to the royal presence, for still there was no suspicion. Nor in Eglon’s own mind was there any apprehension of danger, for he gave the signal for their being left alone together. The other circumstances—his never supposing that Ehud came as an enemy, his rising up to meet him, and his not calling aloud for help—all seemed arranged for the successful execution of the project. Ehud’s firmness of nerve and coolness of manner, his locking the door of the summer-parlour and abstracting the key, his going down by the privy stairs into the porch, and calmly passing through such of the attendants as might be there, while no suspicion of anything wrong having been done was excited, seemed all to be providentially arranged. And still more striking was the fact, of the attendants waiting so long, before they entertained the thought that something wrong had occurred. Every minute of time during which they waited was most precious to Ehud, for it allowed him to get clear away, not only beyond the boundary stones, but also to escape as far as Mount Ephraim, before any arrangements could be made for pursuit.
Farther, the fact that no pursuit was made, and that the Moabites were paralysed from taking any kind of energetic action by the death of their king, specially favoured the success of the scheme. All this was crowned by the activity which was awakened on the other hand in Israel, the spirit of enthusiasm which in a moment took possession of all classes, and the vigour with which they threw themselves on the astonished Moabites, ere they had time to recover from their consternation. In all these items there was not a single interruption to what might be called Ehud’s good fortune, or as we interpret it, not a single break in the chain of favouring providential circumstances. Had there been only two or three particulars propitious, success might either have not come at all, or have been greatly delayed, and so the hand of God might not have been distinctly traceable in the occurrences. But when so many circumstances hang all together in a chain, and several of them were less likely to have happened than their opposites, while yet every one of them directly favoured the result that was sought, we cannot resist the conviction that all was arranged by the Ruler of Providence to effect the emancipation of his chosen people.
COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS.—Jdg_3:12-30
GOD’S MESSAGES
What constitutes a message from God to any man? Any intimation of His will made, either directly to a single individual alone, or generally to a number of persons together, with individual application to each. It may be made:—
(1.) By words, written or spoken.
(2.) By Providential events or dealings.
(3.) By the workings of conscience, or impressions made on the mind consistently with right reason, or it may be in other ways still. Scripture throughout is generally a Book full of messages from God to each individual reader.
I. God’s messages are of different kinds.
That at now sent from God to Eglon by the hand of Ehud was of a very special character. It was determined altogether by Eglon’s relations to the people with whom God’s name was intimately associated, and under whose special protection they were. It was one, therefore, of an awful character, corresponding with these two facts, that he had dared to stretch out his hand to crush God’s church on earth, and he had dared to blaspheme the name of the Holy One of Israel. Hence, it was a message of doom. But messages addressed to men generally are of all different kinds. In God’s word there are messages of:—
1. Reconciliation. Sometimes an individual man is addressed, as in the case of Nicodemus, Zaccheus, or the jailor of Philippi. More frequently men in masses are addressed with a strict application to each distinctly understood. But either way, this message which is sent to all, is the most important of all messages, and gives colour to all. Nothing can be more important for guilty men than to hear that God is willing to receive them back again into His favour, and has actually provided means complete and effectual for their being so received; and that now He calls them, commands them, and pleads with them to become reconciled to Him. The sentiment of 2Co_5:18-21, is not only paralleled by many passages, but is the general drift of God’s addresses to men every where in Scripture.
2. Repentance. This is a message which God sends to every man in connection with the message of reconciliation, Mat_3:2; Mat_4:17; Luk_13:3; Luk_13:5; Act_17:30; Act_20:21; Act_2:38; Isa_1:16-18; Eze_18:31-32; also Dan_4:27; Jer_3:12-14; Psa_95:8; Joe_2:12-13, etc., etc.
3. Faith. That every man all the world over should believe in Christ—is God’s message in chief to every reader of the Bible, and every hearer of the preached Gospel. Compliance with that message carries with it compliance with all others. Hence we find this message put in the fore ground in every part of God’s word—for the most part addressed to men generally with an individual application, as Joh_6:29; Joh_5:24; Joh_3:16-18; Joh_3:36; 1Jn_5:11-12. And this call to believe which is so often made is always accompanied by the assurance that pardon of sins, peace with God, and the gift of eternal life shall follow the true exercise of faith, Joh_6:47; Mar_16:16; Rom_5:1; Rom_10:4; Rom_3:25-26.
4. Life and Salvation. These appear in many forms, but are all messages from God, properly so called to mankind sinners as such. These are offers of pardon, peace, and every blessing through Christ; invitations to come to Christ; calls to accept of Christ as a Saviour; promises to give every blessing from first to last, which the blood of Christ has procured; entreaties to accept what is put within our reach; expostulations employed to overcome men’s backwardness, or reluctance; and threatenings made use of when other means fail, so that men may be appealed to on every side of their nature.
5. Gospel privileges. Such as:—
(1.) Access to God, in prayer and otherwise; as Heb_4:14-16; Heb_10:19-22; Eph_2:18., etc., etc.
(2.) Acceptance with God. This, along with pardon, constitutes justification before God, as in Rom_5:1; Rom_3:24; Gal_2:16, etc.
(3.) Peace of conscience. Rom_8:1; Rom_8:6; Php_4:6-7; Psa_119:165, etc.
(4.) Adoption. All who receive Christ to become theirs are greatly raised in rank, and cannot be regarded as less than sons. Hence, Joh_1:12; Gal_4:4-5, etc.
(5.) lndwelling of the Holy Spirit. Gal_4:6; Rom_8:9; Rom_8:16-17; 1Co_6:19; Gal_5:25; Eph_5:18, etc.
(6.) Fruits and witnessing of the Spirit, such as love, hope, joy, gentleness, humility, etc. See Gal_5:22-23; Rom_8:16; 1Jn_4:7-8; Rom_5:2; Rom_5:5; Rom_8:24; Rom_15:13; Php_4:4; 1Co_13:4-7; 2Ti_2:24; 1Pe_5:5.
(7.) Guidance. Psa_32:8; Psa_73:24; Psa_107:6-7; Pro_2:1-5; Psa_37:5; Pro_4:13-15; Act_16:6-7; Act_16:9-10, etc.
(8.) Support and protection. Psa_37:3-4; Psa_34:9-10; Psa_23:1-2; Psa_23:5; Psa_55:22; Psalms 91; Exo_19:4; Deu_33:27-29.
6. Special tokens of Divine favour. Given to David in 2 Samuel 7; to Abraham in Gen_22:15-18; to Jacob in Gen_28:10-22, and in Gen_32:28, also Rev_3:5; Rev_3:10, etc.
7. Deliverances. Message to Hezekiah in 2Ki_19:28; 2Ki_19:32-36; Isa_10:24-34; chariots, of fire round about Elisha, 2Ki_6:15-17; to Joram, 2Ki_7:1, etc.; to Joram and other two kings, 2Ki_3:17-18; to Joash, King of Israel, 2Ki_13:17, etc.; to Ahab, 1Ki_18:44, Exo_3:7-10; to Jehoshaphat, 2Ch_20:15, etc.
8. Messages of warning and threatening to the false prophet, Jer_28:16-17; to Hezekiah, Isa_38:1-5; to Pharaoh, Gen_41:1-8; Gen_41:25-36; to Eli, 1Sa_3:11-14; to house of Israel, Hos_2:6-7; 2Ki_8:11-13; to Ahaziah, 2Ki_1:16; also adverse providences, such as sickness, bereavements, defeating of schemes, losses—each and all of which have a voice of reproof, warning or threatening.
9. Calls to Duty,—to Saul of Tarsus; Act_9:15-16; Act_22:21; Act_13:2; to Joshua, Jdg_1:1-9; to the different Judges; to smite Midian, Num_31:1-4; to anoint a king, 1Sa_8:7-9; 1Sa_8:22; to build a temple, 1Ch_22:7-11; to build it after captivity, Ezr_1:1-4; many exhortations to duties.
10. Commands. Messages from Moses to Pharaoh, from Exo_4:21-23 to Exo_11:8; all the Decalogue in Exo_20:3-17; the laws and ordinances given through Moses; all the commands or messages given by the prophets, priests, or kings; many special commands given at different times.
11. Encouragement to Israel at Red Sea, Exo_14:15-16; the name of Israel’s God, Exo_34:6-7; Ebenezer, 1Sa_7:12; comfort, Isa_40:1-2; Isa_61:3-11; chaps. 60, 62; to Solomon in 1Ki_9:2-9; by Haggai, Hag_2:1-9; Isa_41:10; also Psa_34:8-9; Psalms passim. Hos_14:4, calls, to trust, wait, hope, be glad, fear, be grateful, be strong, etc. in Psalms.
12. Doom. Eglon as here; Cain Gen_4:12; Gen_4:15; Belshazzar, Daniel 5; Pharaoh and Egyptians, Exo_11:4-8; Exo_14:13-31, Antediluvians, Gen_6:13; Ahab, 1Ki_21:21-24; also 1Ki_22:28-37; Pro_1:24-31; Pro_14:32; Herod, Act_12:21-23.
II. Every man has Divine messages sent to him personally. In the Gospel, in the ordinary Providence of God, and in the workings of His own conscience every man has messages sent to him. Thus Herod’s conscience was set to work when he heard of the works done by Jesus. “It is John! it is John!” That good man’s blood was on his hands; and every moment he feared some messenger of judgment would visit him from the other world. Mar_6:16. Thus too did Joseph’s brethren feel as to the past. Gen_42:21-22.
(1.) God individualises every man. None are passed over, sooner or later every man hears a voice saying to him, “I have a message from God unto thee.” None are lost in the crowd. “Some one hath touched me” said the Saviour, when the multitude thronged around Him. He knew all about every individual that was there; and all over the land where He went, He knew about every case without being told. He knew every individual person on land, as he knew about every individual fish in the sea—where he was, what he was, the life he was leading, and the state of his heart as to receiving or rejecting Christ. He knew Zaccheus—his person, name, character, wants, wishes—all about him, though for the first time He met him on that day when He passed through Jericho. And he addressed him accurately. So does He with all—no inaccurate messages. In God’s vast universe there is not an object great, or small but He knows in its place.
(2.) The wise thing for every man is to act as if he were the only person dealt with. As the Judge dealt with the first culprit, so does He deal still with all culprits. “Adam! where art thou?” every man should count on having his conduct as narrowly scanned, and his purposes and motives as fully known, as if he were the only subject of God’s moral government in the world. We are expressly told that at the final reckoning, “every one of us shall give an account of himself unto God.” It follows that every one now must regard the great message of salvation as sent to him personally, the same as if he were the only person addressed. Men may be addressed in masses, but they are saved only as individuals. Multitudes came around the Saviour, and He spake to them all together, yet the good experienced by each individual hearer depended entirely on how he heard for himself. Of the thousands that were sometimes present, every individual felt that the message was for him equally as if he had formed the sole auditor—the eye of the Master was upon his heart, and the finger of the Speaker was pointed to him, saying, “Thou art the man!” And on the solemn day of account, every hearer will be singled out and dealt with by the judge as if he were the only person placed at the bar.
(3.) The messages are framed so as to have always an individual application. “Ho! every one that thirsteth;” “come ye—he that hath no money, come;” “incline your ear and come;” “hear (thou) and your soul shall live;” “if any man thirst let him come to Me,” etc.; “if any man hear My voice and open the door, I will come in to him,” etc.; “him that cometh to Me I will in no wise cast out;” believe (thou) in the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved;” “he that believeth shall be saved,” etc.; “whosoever will, let him take,” etc.
III. God’s messages are always to be reverently received. What Mary said to the servants at the marriage is still said to all who have the privilege of hearing Christ’s voice—“Whatsoever He saith unto you, do it.” “Fear God and keep His commandments, for this is the whole duty of man.” This was the final conclusion to which the wise man was brought in all his meditations. “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom; a good understanding have all they that keep His commandments.” All God’s messages are “holy, just, and good,” most reasonable and wise, never against but always for our interests. And a solemn caution is given respecting the manner in which God’s messages should be received. “If thou be wise, thou shalt be wise for thyself; but if thou scornest, thou alone shalt bear it.” Every message from the officer must be obeyed implicitly by the soldier, otherwise the battle cannot be won; and he would be treated as a deserter from duty if he did not yield such obedience. The farmer must obey the messages he receives from God, in the laws of nature, if he would reap a harvest in due season. The child must obey the messages, or rules for his guidance, which his father laysdown for him, all through his early life, if he would receive in the long run the great promise anrexed to the Fifth Commandment. To “hearken to God’s voice” in all His messages was the one thing indispensable to securing His favour in the former dispensation. And to hearken to the messages of life and salvation sent to men over the blood of His Son, is the one condition of enjoying all the blessings set forth under the new and better covenant.
IV. It is dangerous to turn a deaf ear to God’s messages (Pro_29:1). When Pharaoh would not listen to God’s messages though warned by one plague after another, he was at last visited by the death of his first born; and when after a pause, he would not listen even to that, he was drowned and all his host in the waters of the Red Sea! When the Israelites in their wanderings would not believe in God’s course of leading them, but complained of every new trial they met with, He at last condemned them to wander in the desert for life, so that they never reached the promised rest (Psa_95:10-11). When Eli did not set forth with sufficient reprobation the evil conduct of his sons in the priests’ office, but allowed them to remain in the priesthood, notwithstanding their grievous sins, God punished both father and sons, by the terrible death which befell the latter in one day (1Sa_2:26-34; 1Sa_4:17). When Saul disobeyed repeatedly the commandment of the Lord by-and-bye “the Spirit of the Lord departed from him, and an evil spirit from the Lord troubled him” (1Sa_16:14). This ended in his going to a sorceress for comfort, and finally finding a tragic death in the battle-field (chap. 31). The curse of barrenness in Ahab’s days came because of the wide-spread idolatries in the land, and the refusal of both king and people to hear the Divine messages sent to them (1Ki_18:18). For a like reason destruction came on Ahab’s house (Jdg_21:20-23). (See also 2Ch_25:16; 2Ch_33:10-11), and on the kingdom of Israel first, and then of Judah, for their long-continued idolatries (2Ki_17:5-18; 2Ch_36:15-17; Jer_25:3-11). Destruction of Jerusalem (Luk_19:41-44).
V. Messages of good to the righteous, and of evil to the wicked often come together. The message of a son at last to be born to Abraham, and so the first step taken to fulfil the great promises made to him, came the same day and by the same hands as the message that the hour of Sodom’s doom was at last come (Gen_18:10, with Jdg_3:20-23). Here, the message of doom to Eglon was also a message of liberty to his captives. Ehud was a death-bearer to the one, but a “Saviour” to the other. The death of the first-born meant deliverance to the bond-men, see also Isa_10:5-19, with Jdg_3:20-21.
The condemnation of unbelievers always goes with the message of pardon and eternal life to those who believe. The future lot of the righteous and that of the wicked are also set side by side in parallel columns on the page of Scripture, Isa_3:10-11; Mat_13:41-42, with Mat_13:43; Mat_25:34, Mat_25:41, also Mat_25:46. Here Jdg_5:20 with Jdg_5:28. See Psa_37:18-19 with Jdg_20:9-10 with Jdg_11:34-36 with Jdg_11:37.
VI. God sends messages of mercy before He sends messages of judgment. He would prevent the necessity of sending the latter by sending the former first. When Moses gave the final messages of his God to the people, he narrates first the blessings which shall come on the people, if they should obey, and afterwards denounces the curses which shall come on them on their disobedience, (Deu_28:1-14, with Jdg_3:15-31; comp. Lev_26:3-13, with Jdg_3:14-31). In the Gospel dispensation, God uniformly sends messages of peace and reconciliation to all classes of sinners in the first instance, calling on them to repent and believe, and assuring them that if they do so, the thunder cloud will pass away—but adding that if they refuse “the wrath of God shall abide upon them.” The present is “the day of merciful visitation “to every man; but at death comes the message of judgment to all the impenitent (Act_17:30-31; Rev_21:6-7, with 8; and N. T. passim).
VII. It is our duty and our wisdom to be always ready to receive the Lord’s messages. Most men are not ready when the message comes, Luk_17:27-30; Luk_12:20; Luk_16:19, with Luk_16:23; Mat_25:5; 1Th_5:3; 1Ki_22:26-27, with 1Ki_22:34-37; Pro_14:32; Mat_7:13; 2Sa_18:9.
Some are ready, Luk_2:29-30; 2Ti_4:6-8; Act_7:59-60; Heb_11:13-16; 2Co_5:2; 2Co_5:9; 2Sa_15:26; 2Sa_23:5; 1Sa_3:18.
HARD TESTS OF LOYALTY
I. Fidelity to God’s cause costs much. If a man would be faithful to God in standing up for the cause of righteousness in a world of sin, he must be ready to sacrifice flesh and blood. Christ lays it down as a rule, that we must “bear a cross,” if we would follow after him. He even goes the length of saying—“If a man come to me, and hate not father and mother, yea and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple” These judges had, each of them to take his life in his hand, in proving his fidelity to his God. Most of them were at the head of armies in the field, yet these armies were small in comparison with the force of the enemy; and all hope of victory according to mere natural calculation was taken away. But Ehud’s case was one that required a greater sacrifice still. He had to do the work of an army all alone; and in this respect bore some analogy to the case of Samson. The work assigned him was to emancipate the church by putting to death the persecutor. The duty was a stern one. It was most revolting in itself—a savage and cruel act, having all the appearance of murder—the murder too of a king, without the least warning, in the midst of his guards and the entire responsibility rested on him alone. But the victim was the oppressor of God’s church, and Ehud’s eye must not spare. The question was how far would he go in loyalty to God’s command, and for the good of God’s church. Would he go through the most disagreeable, revolting and dangerous duty without flinching, when it became a question of duty to his God?
II. Examples from Scripture.
(1.) The case of the Levites. When Moses called on them to go from gate to gate of the camp, and slay every man, his brother, his companion, his neighbour, and even his children, who had been guilty of the capital crime of idolatry. The test was stern; but they stood it, and in proof of their loyalty to their God no less than 3000 perished in this way. A greater sacrifice of their feelings they could not make. Hence they are honoured ever afterwards, and rewarded with the Divine blessing, Deu_33:9, with Exo_32:26-28.
(2.) The case of Abraham and his son. Gen_22:1-3; Gen_22:10.
(3.) The case of Aaron making no mourning for his sons. Lev_10:1-7.
(4.) The case of Phinehas. Num_25:6-13.
(5.) The case of Abraham yielding up the richest soil to Lot, rather than have any quarrel; for the Canaanite was still in the land, and strife was a reproach to religion. Gen_13:9.
(6.) The case of those who acquiesce in the destruction of all that are disloyal to the Saviour. 1Co_16:22; Rev_19:3; Luk_16:24-31.
III. General examples.
(1.) At a critical moment in the battle of Waterloo, when everything depended on the steadiness of the soldiery, the iron Duke himself rode up to one of the bravest regiments in the British army, to encourage them in the perilous position which they occupied. It was in the heat of the fight, when the bullets were flying thick as hail. Many had fallen, and many were falling. The men were most anxious to be allowed to meet the enemy with the bayonet. And when they saw their commander so near, the cry went up, “Let us at ’em, my lord! let us at ’em!” “Not yet, my brave men” was the reply; “but you shall have at ’em soon! Stand firm—stand firm!” “Enough my lord!” was the rejoinder, “We stand here till the last man falls!” Severe was the test of loyalty, and nobly did these heroes stand the test.
(2.) Memento of fidelity. That fatal day on which Vesuvius, at whose feet Pompeii stood, burst out into an eruption that shook the earth, a sentinel kept watch by the gate which looked to the burning mountain, and amidst the fearful disorder the sentinel had been forgotten; as it was the stern rule, that happen what might, the sentinels must hold their posts till relieved, he had to choose between death and dishonour. He resolved to stand by his post. Slowly but surely the ashes rise on his manly form; now they reach his breast; and now, covering his lips they choke his breathing. He was faithful to his soldier’s duty unto death. After nearly eighteen centuries, they found his skeleton standing erect in a marble niche, clad in its rusty armour, the helmet on his empty skull, and his bony fingers still closed upon spear.
(3.) An incident of the Seikh war. (1846). At the celebrated battle of Ferozeshahr, when the English Empire in India hung by a thread, an incident is related by one who was present on the field, which forcibly illustrates the stedfastness and loyalty of the British troops under severely trying circumstances. The battle had been raging throughout the day. A deadly storm of lead and iron, consisting of round shot, shells, grape and musketry had been playing on the small British army throughout the day, while mines also were sprung under their feet. Not a man had tasted food, that day, nor had had a drop of water to cool his parched lips. A fearful night followed. The enemy kept firing on incessantly. The glare of the burning camp, the explosion of mines, shells, and ammunition wagons, mixed with the wild cries of the enemy, the huzzas of our men, and the groans of the wounded and dying—the trampling of men and horses, and the continual plunging of the shot among us, altogether formed a scene of terrific and awful grandeur which it is impossible to describe.
Many a gallant fellow was lying in those silent squares, bleeding to death, yet not a murmur was heard. Among other cases, a man of a cowardly spirit was struck with a grape-shot in the shoulder, receiving a flesh wound. The foolish fellow wished to get out of the square, and would not be quiet, but kept on telling everyone he was wounded, as if his wound was of more consequence than that of anybody else. Being refused by a Sergeant of his company, he went to his Colour-Sergeant, saying, “Sir! I am badly wounded; let me go out of the square, that I may get a surgeon.” The reply was, “Lie down where you are, sir!—look at me,” lifting up his leg without a foot! But he was determined to gain his point, and came to a Lieutenant, who commanded his company, and was lying near me, saying, “O, sir! I wish you would give orders to let me out of the square—I am wounded.” “So am I,” coolly answered the Lieutenant, at the same time lifting up his left arm, which hung shattered by his side. Though he was so near me, I knew not till then that he was hurt.
The man still persisted, and went to a higher officer with the same request, who replied, “I too am wounded as well as you.” Still he persevered, and came now to the Colonel commanding the regiment, who was still on horseback. He was only two yards distant from me. “Sir!” the man cried, “I am wounded.” “Oh! you are wounded, are you?” said the Colonel. “And so am I!” I then perceived that he was wounded just below the knee, and the blood having filled his boot, was trickling from the heel to the ground! The Assistant Sergeant-Major was watching the man, and being annoyed at the disturbance he was causing, determined to stop it. He ran and seized him, and was about to give him a severe reprimand. But just at that instant, a large cannon-ball carried away both his head and that of the cowardly complainer at the same moment—so killing both! What a severe test to the loyalty of those noble troops!
[An Eye-witness.]
PERIOD OF REST.—Jdg_3:30-31
30. The land had rest fourscore years.] This must mean the whole country, and not merely the tribes of Benjamin, Judah, and Ephraim. The fourscore years would date from the deliverance by Ehud till the oppression by Jabin. During some part of that long course, Ehud died; and it may have been a considerable time after his death that the invasion by Jabin commenced. The mention of Ehud’s name in Jdg_4:1 does not mean that Ehud had just died, open sin again began, and the scourge by that northern power was sent—all simultaneously. But the case stood thus: Ehud, while he lived, was a check on the open exhibition of idolatry, which all the time had been more or less secretly cherished in the hearts of most of the people. On his death, the obstruction being removed, the tide again began to flow, and gradually reached high-water mark. But then there was no Ehud to roll it back. Therefore the Divine judgments again fell, on the land. This may have been a considerable time after Ehud was dead.
It is instructive to notice, what a beneficent influence for good a single righteous man at the helm of power, may exercise in giving a tone to the character of his people and his age. If he is but faithful to his trust, and skilful at the helm, he may, under the Divine blessing, steer the vessel safely through all the mountain waves that threaten to engulph her, and in due time bring her into a smooth sea, with canvas spread to a favouring breeze, giving promise of a prosperous voyage and a rich harvest of results to all concerned. On this topic we do not now dwell, as it will come under review again. But meanwhile it speaks much for Ehud, that he was so much missed after he was gone. This is one of the best testimonies a man can have—that when he is gone things go wrong, and it is hard to get one to fill his place.
SHAMGAR
After him was Shamgar, the son of Anath.] Not after his example [Cassel], meaning, in like manner as Shamgar did so did Shamgar. Nor yet does it imply, that after Ehud was dead, Shamgar came as his successor. But the next deliverance in the series was that wrought through the instrumentality of Shamgar. Some suppose that this exploit of Shamgar took place during Ehud’s time, at some part of the period of the eighty years. [Jewish Expositors generally, Cassel, etc.] This is most unlikely, both because Ehud while alive acted as the protector of the land, and also because the times of Shamgar were times of great oppression (Jdg_5:6), which was not true of Ehud’s time. It is indeed all but certain that Ehud was dead, and that another time of oppression had come on the land, when there was no Ehud to stand in the gap. The people were again going on sinning, and God was again beginning to smite them with the rod—Jabin in the north, and the Philistines in the south. Anath, some suppose to be the same with Anathoth, which was a sacerdotal city of the tribe of Benjamin, a few miles to the north of Jerusalem, and the birthplace afterwards of the prophet Jeremiah.
Slew of the Philistines six hundred men with an ox goad.] The Septuagint uses the word ἀροτροπούς, or the plough handle—that part which the ploughman holds in his hand, and with which he guides the plough. But the Targum version seems more correct, viz., the “prick” against which the oxen “kicked” when struck with it—the ox-goad proper. Jamieson says “this implement was eight feet long, and about six inches in circumference. It is armed at the lesser end with a sharp prong for driving the cattle, and on the other with a small iron paddle for removing the clay which encumbers the plough in working. Such an instrument, wielded by a strong arm, would do no mean execution. He may, however, have been only the leader of a band of peasants, who, by means of such implements of labour (and in particular the ox-goads), as they could lay hold of at the moment, achieved this heroic exploit.”
The Greeks called it βουπληξ. With such an instrument, king Lycurgus is said to have attacked the wandering Bacchus and his followers. In like manner Camillus and Curius went from the plough to save Rome from the Gauls. A tradition in Holstein says, that in the Swedish time a peasant armed with a pole put to flight a multitude of Swedes, who had entered his house and threatened to burn it.
He also delivered Israel.] There is something peculiar in the manner in which these victories of the judges are gained. It is not in the exact proportion in which the spirit of heroism is possessed. There is a deeper element than bravery, or skill, or physical force. There is the element of piety. The victors were more than patriots. They were men of faith. While ardently devoted to their country, they saw in their land a sacred possession given them by their God as a pledge of His covenant love; and they saw in their people the church of the living God, among whom He had planted His institutions and His laws. Faith in the promises He had given His Church and people lay at the root of all their action, both as regards the object they had in view, and the confidence of victory which they cherished. “The Lord of hosts is with us, the God of Jacob is our refuge.”
It is for this reason that Shamgar’s act receives an honourable mention in this Book. It was an act of deliverance wrought for the Church of God in an evil time; it was done on the spot where his lot was cast; it was done of his own free will when no others appeared ready to repair the breach; it was done against the greatest odds; and, above all, it was done in faith—that sacred feature of character by which “all the elders obtained a good report.” On this account a single verse is added to notice this noble act of a man of true faith; and through this single verse his name “will be held in everlasting remembrance.” More imperishable is the monument thus raised to an otherwise humble man, than to those mighty Egyptian monarchs who have the Pyramids for their memorial. God has always a few names, in a backsliding age, of those who are loyal to His cause, to show that His Spirit has not left His Church on earth. And now there was at least one man of the Joshua and Caleb spirit still in the land. Though only one man comes to the front, there may have been, as in Elijah’s day, other 7000 hidden behind the curtain, who did not bow the knee to Baal.
Was Shamgar entitled to the honourable distinction of being a Judge over the people of God? Many answer in the negative, because it is not said, “the Lord raised him up,” nor that “the Spirit of the Lord came upon him;” nor is he said to have ruled, but only to have gained a victory with small means. He is also passed over in Jdg_4:1. Yet his name stands in the same honourable roll, (“After Ehud rose Shamgar,” etc.) Few could doubt on reflection, that it was the Spirit of the Lord coming upon him that led him to do as he did The value of his act affected the whole land, for it was not merely the slaughter of a few hundred men in some isolated foray; it seems rather to have been the nipping of an invasion in the bud—arresting a calamity at its outset, which but for this timely extinction might have overspread the whole country. There can be little doubt, that if Shamgar had not stood forward to the rescue, this incursion of the Philistines would have rapidly overshadowed the nation.
Besides, it is expressly stated, that he “delivered Israel” like the other Judges. The office of a “judge” in that age was not to administer justice in the ordinary way. It was rather to act the part of a “saviour,” (so it is expressly termed in Neh_9:27)—one who accomplishes a deliverance on the foundation of righteousness. He was to lead the people to penitence, not only to sorrow for the past, but to reformation for the future. His duty was to see that the law of God be kept by the people as the only secure foundation for a lasting peace. On this footing, all the “judges” were types of the Saviour, whose great work in this world was to work out an eternal redemption on the ground of perfect righteousness—to make “grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life,” etc. It is easy for God to work deliverance for any people when His law is kept. When that is not done, He cannot deliver, because He cannot offer a slight to His own character.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.
Arno C. Gaebelein 1922 · Public Domain 2. Second Declension Under Moab--Ehud and Shamgar
2. Second Declension Under Moab--Ehud and Shamgar
CHAPTER 3:12-31
Read full note →
1. The second declension: serving Eglon, king of Moab (Jdg 3:12-14)
2. Ehud raised up (Jdg 3:15)
3. Eglon, king of Moab, slain by Ehud (Jdg 3:16-25)
4. The deliverance by Shamgar (Jdg 3:31)
When they continued to do evil Jehovah used Eglon, king of Moab to punish their disobedience and evil-doings. With him there is Ammon and Amalek, a trinity of evil. The city of Palms is Jericho (Deu 34:3) a type of the world, as we saw from Joshua. Moab pictures typically an outward, empty, Christian profession. Amalek is the type of the lusts of the flesh which flourish with those, who have the form of godliness but deny the power thereof. How many today have become captives of Moab! The greater part of Protestantism, with a name to live, yet dead, is in that deplorable condition.
They served Eglon eighteen years. For the second time they cried unto the Lord and again He answered graciously by raising up Ehud, the son of Gera, the left-handed Benjamite. The story of the deliverance wrought by him is interesting. Without repeating the history of the chapter we give briefly its typical meaning. Ehud’s father was Gera, which means “meditation.” This is needed first of all to get deliverance from a mere profession or world prosperity with its attending evils to bring the soul to a blessed realization of its possessions and blessings in Christ. Ehud means “I will give praise.” Here is the deliverance for God’s people out of a dead formalism. Meditation on the Word leads to a believing possession of the realities of redemption in our Lord Jesus Christ. This is followed by praise, the confession of His Name. Then Moab’s bondage is ended.
Ehud was left-handed, showing the weakness of the instrument. The two-edged dagger is the type of the Word of God, while the hand which grasps it illustrates how faith is to use the sword of the Spirit. Then Ehud, the Son of Gera, the left-handed, thrust the two-edged dagger into the fat belly of Eglon. Fat is the emblem of prosperity, the prosperity of the world by which so many of God’s people become captivated. The sword of the Spirit must be plunged into that which is of the world, the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes and the pride of life.
“Face to face in this solemn place, in solemn silence and alone they stand; the fat, prosperous world; and poor, left-handed faith. The scene is quickly over. Into the very belly of Eglon sinks the sharp sword of Ehud; the very belly, the center of all that is of the world and not of the Father; of ‘the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eye, the pride of life’; that which flesh serves (Phil. 3) and which is never satisfied, is pierced through and through. With what result? Its true nature is fully exposed. Let us not be so falsely delicate as not to profit by this strong-worded truth. The prosperity of the world, fat and flourishing as it appears externally, is seen under the stroke of God’s word--in the light of Jesus, whom it crucified, being the Son of the living God--as nothing but ‘dirt.’ Yea, so says another Benjamite, who well knew how to wield that sword: ‘I count all things but loss, for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord; for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung that I may win Christ and be found in Him.’ How much does this leave of fat Eglon alive?” (F.C. Jennings, Notes on judges.)
Then the trumpet of victory was blown. Even so is our faith the victory which overcometh the world.
Shamgar’s work seems to have been closely connected with that of Ehud. He smote the Philistines with an ox-goad. The ox-goad is like the sword, an emblem of the Word of God. Then the land had rest for eighty years.
Arno C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible (1913–1922) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain Ehud and the Moabites
Ehud and the Moabites
v. 12. And the children of Israel did evil again in the sight of the Lord; and the Lord strengthened, encouraged, Eglon, the king of Moab, the country southeast of the Dead Sea, against Israel, because they had done evil in the sight of the Lord.
Read full note →
v. 13. And he, Eglon, who evidently combined shrewdness with energy, gathered unto him the children of Ammon, to the northeast, like those of Moab, inveterate enemies of Israel, Deu 23:3-4, and Amalek, toward the southwest, also ancient enemies of the Lord’s people, Exo 17:10-16, and went and smote Israel, and possessed the city of palmtrees, the fertile oasis in which the ruins of Jericho were located. Evidently not only the tribe of Benjamin, in whose territory the battle was fought, but all Israel, had grown careless, dull, and incapable.
v. 14. So the children of Israel served Eglon, the king of Moab, eighteen years, by a regular payment of tribute, such as he chose to exact.
v. 15. But when the children of Israel cried unto the Lord, being roused from their lethargy once more, the Lord raised them up a deliverer, as before, Ehud, the son of Gera, a Benjamite, a man left-handed, literally, "unpracticed, awkward, with the right hand," because the skill which other people have in their right hand he had in his left; and by him the children of Israel sent a present unto Eglon, the, king of Moab, he being the leader or spokesman of the delegation bearing the proof of their subjection.
v. 16. But Ehud, before setting out on this humiliating mission, made him a dagger which had two edges, a very effective weapon for stabbing at short range, of a cubit length (about twenty inches); and he did gird it under his raiment upon his right thigh, out of sight and on the side from which he could immediately draw.
v. 17. And he brought the present unto Eglon, king of Moab, who had made the oasis of Jericho his headquarters while he held the supremacy over Israel; and Eglon was a very fat man, extremely corpulent, even for an Oriental monarch.
v. 18. And when he, Ehud,had made an end to offer the present, the audience giving him an opportunity to make the observations which he needed, he sent away the people that bare the present, for it was considered a mark of special respect to have a great many bearers for the tribute.
v. 19. But he himself turned again from the quarries, or boundary-stones, that were by Gilgal, unto which point he had accompanied the rest of the delegation, returning to the quarters of the Moabite king, and said, I have a secret errand unto thee, O king; who said, Keep silence, thus bidding Ehud wait until the room was cleared before imparting his secret message, which Eglon naturally thought to be of value to him, especially since the return of Ehud alone seemed to indicate that he did not want his companions to know what he had to say. And all that stood by him, the usual attendants of the king, went out from him, at the king’s signal indicating that he wished to be alone with the visitor.
v. 20. And Ehud came unto him, approached nearer to him; and he was sitting in a summer parlor, an inner chamber, opening on an exposed balcony, his private chamber, and a cool retreat, which he had for himself alone. And Ehud said, I have a message from God unto thee. And he arose out of his seat, probably out of respect for this word.
v. 21. And Ehud put forth his left hand, and took the dagger from his right thigh, and thrust it into his (Eglon’s) belly;
v. 22. and the haft also went in after the blade; and the fat closed upon the blade, holding it firmly inside the abdomen, so that he, Ehud, could not draw the dagger out of his belly; and the dirt came out, or, the point of the blade came out at the rear.
v. 23. Then Ehud went forth through the porch, the open balcony, and shut the doors of the parlor upon him, and locked them.
v. 24. When he was gone out, with a calmness intended to disarm every suspicion on the part of the king’s attendants, his servants came; and when they saw that, behold, the doors of the parlor were locked, they said, Surely he covereth his feet (doeth his easement) in his summer chamber.
v. 25. And they tarried till they were ashamed, these words adding the notion of displeasure and ill humor; and, behold, he opened not the doors of the parlor; therefore they took a key, another key, and opened them, the long silence having filled them with great uneasiness; and, behold, their lord was fallen down dead on the earth.
v. 26. And Ehud escaped while they tarried, and passed beyond the quarries, or the boundary-stones, and escaped unto Seirath, in the foothills toward the northwest.
v. 27. And it came to pass, when he was come, that he blew a trumpet in the mountain of Ephraim, this trumpet-blast being transmitted among the mountains, and the children of Israel, with whom he had evidently agreed upon this signal, went down with him from the mount, and he before them, as their leader.
v. 28. And he said unto them, Follow after me; for the Lord hath delivered your enemies, the Moabites, into your hand. And they went down after him, and took the fords of Jordan toward Moab, and suffered not a man, namely, of the Moabites, to pass over and thus to escape. The Moabite army was therefore trapped between the Jordan and the mountains, with their leader dead.
v. 29. And they slew of Moab at that time, in the battle which followed, about ten thousand men, all lusty, literally, "fat," in good physical condition, and all men of valor; and there escaped not a man, Moab was thoroughly vanquished.
v. 30. So Moab was subdued that day under the hand of Israel. And the land had rest fourscore years.
Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 what was evil in the sight of Yahweh
what was evil in the sight of Yahweh
The sight of Yahweh represents Yahweh's judgment or evaluation. See how you translated this in Judges 2:11. AT: "what was evil in Yahweh's judgment" or "what Yahweh considered to be evil" (See: Metaphor)
Read full note →
Yahweh gave strength to Eglon king of Moab
The abstract noun "strength" can be stated as an adjective. AT: "Yahweh made Eglon king of Moab strong" (See: Abstract Nouns)
to Eglon king of Moab to overpower the Israelites
Here "Eglon king of Moab" represents himself and his army. AT: "to Eglon king of Moab and his soldiers as they attacked the Israelite army" (See: Synecdoche)
Eglon
This is the name of a king. (See: How to Translate Names)
the City of Palms
This is another name for the city of Jericho. See how you translated this in Judges 1:16.
eighteen years
"18 years" (See: Numbers)
translationWords
people group
Israel
Yahweh
evil
king
Moab
Ammon
Amalek
possess
palm
servant
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.